I should add that Fender as the ability to make different base models than what's on the sheet. So you can order a '75 Jazz, '57 P, '51 P, Custom Classic Jazz, etc. You just have to ask.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
First of all, congratulations on your basses! Really nice pair!
I think you are right about your CS P being the same as the one in post #401; pickguard pattern is the same, relicing too as far as it can be seen.
I should add that Fender as the ability to make different base models than what's on the sheet. So you can order a '75 Jazz, '57 P, '51 P, Custom Classic Jazz, etc. You just have to ask.[/QUOTE}
I tried to order a PJ from them, basically using the same specs as the FCS PJ they made for a few years, only differences really was a maple board, black B&B and the Jazz pickup in the ‘70s position...they wouldn’t do it without sending it to a Master Builder..just because of the ‘70s spacing..sucks so bad..
I tried to order a PJ from them, basically using the same specs as the FCS PJ they made for a few years, only differences really was a maple board, black B&B and the Jazz pickup in the ‘70s position...they wouldn’t do it without sending it to a Master Builder..just because of the ‘70s spacing..sucks so bad..
I have heard other stories like this but don't have the time or energy to go back and sift through all of TB to find them. This is part of the inconsistency issue I was trying to communicate about Fender the other day when I was on my soap box. It's confusing and sends a double message. At least for me.
I have heard other stories like this but don't have the time or energy to go back and sift through all of TB to find them. This is part of the inconsistency issue I was trying to communicate about Fender the other day when I was on my soap box. It's confusing and sends a double message. At least for me.
I have heard other stories like this but don't have the time or energy to go back and sift through all of TB to find them. This is part of the inconsistency issue I was trying to communicate about Fender the other day when I was on my soap box. It's confusing and sends a double message. At least for me.
Being inconsistent is consistent at the CS. I was once told that a Masterbuilder would not be needed if Fender had recently produced the bass as a standard offering. So for the PJ example, if they had a PJ with 60s spacing, it could be team built. If they only had 60s spacing but you wanted 70s spacing, then it would have to go to a Masterbuilder. Makes sense, right? However I inquired about a PJ Jaguar (they offered an American Standard Jaguar a few years back) and was told it would have to be master built. So that blew everything I was previously told out the window.
I was looking a Jaguar PJ, alder body, maple neck and fretboard. Graffiti yellow with a matching headstock, white pearl block inlay, white pearl pickguard. 1.5" nut 12" radius. Hand wound pickups with the J being slightly overwound. RSD bridge. Standard jaguar preamp. Slider controls would be P on/off, J on/off and series / parallel. Knobs were volume and tone.
Once the mentioned it having to be Masterbuilt, I requested a quote for the same however it would be in Blue Agave with an all rosewood neck and board and without a painted headstock.
Once the mentioned it having to be Masterbuilt, I requested a quote for the same however it would be in Blue Agave with an all rosewood neck and board and without a painted headstock.
Sounds like a neat build. You might talk with TB’s John Kallas about a jag build. He’s a very knowledgeable Fender guy and has made a few jazzmaster builds already. He could probably do a Jaguar if you asked.
johnk vintage basses
Isn't JohnK in Thousand Oaks, CA? I hope he's OK with that devastating fire.
After seeing that photo again, the color looks a little more yellow than it is (although, I've read somewhere that Fender added yellow tinting back then). I think the case shag influenced the camera. Here's another pic that's a little more accurate.
After seeing that photo again, the color looks a little more yellow than it is (although, I've read somewhere that Fender added yellow tinting back then). I think the case shag influenced the camera. Here's another pic that's a little more accurate.
Last edited:
Speaking of JohnK, I just read the "About Me" on his website about his purchase of '69 P. Same thing happened to me (almost) back then. I went to Rondo's in Union, NJ and the price was the same. Unfortunately, I didn't have the $75 for the case, so I ended up with a Hagstrom Bass (body like a Gibson ES335). Five years later, I had my P.
Still hard for me to tell from that photo. This is a Fender 58 3TSB finish.
Does your finish look similar to this?
EDIT: I’m not sure what city John is in. I know he’s in SoCal.
Last edited:
Yes pretty much, but without the red band, of course. You can see a lot more grain in mine since it's Ash. The COA calls it a '59 as did the ad when I bought it. I bought it online with no problems.
That is a 2TSB which was replaced by the 3TSB in 1958. So it sounds like you have a 59 but with the maple C shaped neck and the 2TSB you would find on the 57.
Ask for your Shop Floor Traveler, best way to find out.
Nobody can stop one from ordering a '59 P in 2TSB or Candy Tangerine, period-accurate or not. Color doesn't mark the year-model of the bass.
I bought this "off the rack". Very interesting. I didn't know they discontinued the 2TSB after '58. Thanks for the great info.
One of my favorites, too, along with my 3TSB/Alder/Rosewood '60 P. I go back and forth between the two. They sound very different from each other, just enough.
Ooops, make that '60 P not '62.
One of my favorites, too, along with my 3TSB/Alder/Rosewood '60 P. I go back and forth between the two. They sound very different from each other, just enough.
Ooops, make that '60 P not '62.
Last edited:
Hey Everybody,
Let me first start off by apologizing to the group. If I have offended anyone by being rude or by saying something insensitive, I sincerely apologize. Unfortunately, I sometimes loose self awareness when I'm passionate about what I'm talking about or in trying to make a point. However, there’s nothing I would like more than there to be good vibes with everyone here.
Regarding the comments: “Nobody can stop one from ordering a '59 P in 2TSB or Candy Tangerine, period-accurate or not.”
and...
“Color doesn't mark the year-model of the bass.”
I would like to state that I would never intentionally impose my will or views on anyone regarding what bass they can purchase or what features they should have on their bass. If there is somewhere in the thread I did that or communicated that, it was wrong and I sincerely apologize.
The intention of my comment to slick_tu about the changing of 2TSB to 3TSB in 58 was solely for a historical reference, and was not an attempt to tell him what he could or couldn't have. However, my suspicion is I have failed at that, and if that's the case, I apologize.
So what the heck was I doing and why did I feel it necessary to state any history?
Here was my thinking: As I'm sure everyone knows, relic basses and guitars were started to mimic vintage Fender guitars and basses, and unfortunately there are those who swindle others with fakes. Whether it be viewed as good or bad, I like to share what I know about the history of these instruments if for no other reason than to prevent someone from getting ripped off in the future. I am thankful to those who have shared information freely here at TB like John Kallas and The Bass Clef, who are a wealth of knowledge. It is for this same reason that I share what I know as a sign of thanks for all that has been shared with me. Pass the baton so to speak.
In the FCS thread there's the benefit of knowing we are talking about CS basses, but if someone where to be looking for an original 59, it would be good to know what appointments to expect. Also there are members here who own vintage instruments, so the comments to history hopefully will benefit some who may be also in the market for a vintage bass.
So just to reiterate, I support 100% the idea that anyone should be able to purchase a bass with whatever combination of features they wish. After all, it is in the spirit of what the Fender Custom Shop is all about.
As you know, I had recently written about what I have considered (and no one else has to agree with me) inconsistencies in Fender's product line for no other reason than it makes it difficult (for me) to speak about a model when there are exceptions in specs and appointments. This is a good thing for us players as everyone can get what they want, but not so easy when trying to explain features of a model to someone else.
I would refrain from calling these differences in appointments inconsistencies, if it was what the costumer or dealer ordered. But if there is something like forearm wear on a Lush Closet Classic finish, it would be helpful to see photos on Fender's or dealer websites, showing variances so customers may know what to expect. It may be off putting for a customer who purchased a Lush Closet Classic finish, having never seen an example with forearm wear, to receive their long awaited bass that had it. This may not bother some customers, as someone previously mentioned that this is the state in which the bass will end up over enough time. But for others who want a lighter relic look, this could potentially be a problem.
My hope here is that we could all have an honest conversation about the basses we love without strife, even when there may be differences in opinion. These are just my thoughts, and I don't necessarily think anyone should agree with them - although my hope would be that people could at least can see how I arrived at my perspective, whether they agree with it or not.
My comments were never meant to take away from the quality of Fender products or diminish the value and enjoyment of what they have brought to the world. I am truly a huge Fender fan.
Hopefully this explanation has not nullified my apology in anyone's eyes. If it has, or if there is any remaining unrest I can help resolve, there is nothing I would want more than to mend it. You can't please everyone, but if there is something I can do to clean up my side of the street, I'm all for doing it.
Best wishes to all.
Let me first start off by apologizing to the group. If I have offended anyone by being rude or by saying something insensitive, I sincerely apologize. Unfortunately, I sometimes loose self awareness when I'm passionate about what I'm talking about or in trying to make a point. However, there’s nothing I would like more than there to be good vibes with everyone here.
Regarding the comments: “Nobody can stop one from ordering a '59 P in 2TSB or Candy Tangerine, period-accurate or not.”
and...
“Color doesn't mark the year-model of the bass.
”I would like to state that I would never intentionally impose my will or views on anyone regarding what bass they can purchase or what features they should have on their bass. If there is somewhere in the thread I did that or communicated that, it was wrong and I sincerely apologize.
The intention of my comment to slick_tu about the changing of 2TSB to 3TSB in 58 was solely for a historical reference, and was not an attempt to tell him what he could or couldn't have. However, my suspicion is I have failed at that, and if that's the case, I apologize.
So what the heck was I doing and why did I feel it necessary to state any history?
Here was my thinking: As I'm sure everyone knows, relic basses and guitars were started to mimic vintage Fender guitars and basses, and unfortunately there are those who swindle others with fakes. Whether it be viewed as good or bad, I like to share what I know about the history of these instruments if for no other reason than to prevent someone from getting ripped off in the future. I am thankful to those who have shared information freely here at TB like John Kallas and The Bass Clef, who are a wealth of knowledge. It is for this same reason that I share what I know as a sign of thanks for all that has been shared with me. Pass the baton so to speak.
In the FCS thread there's the benefit of knowing we are talking about CS basses, but if someone where to be looking for an original 59, it would be good to know what appointments to expect. Also there are members here who own vintage instruments, so the comments to history hopefully will benefit some who may be also in the market for a vintage bass.
So just to reiterate, I support 100% the idea that anyone should be able to purchase a bass with whatever combination of features they wish. After all, it is in the spirit of what the Fender Custom Shop is all about.
As you know, I had recently written about what I have considered (and no one else has to agree with me) inconsistencies in Fender's product line for no other reason than it makes it difficult (for me) to speak about a model when there are exceptions in specs and appointments. This is a good thing for us players as everyone can get what they want, but not so easy when trying to explain features of a model to someone else.
I would refrain from calling these differences in appointments inconsistencies, if it was what the costumer or dealer ordered. But if there is something like forearm wear on a Lush Closet Classic finish, it would be helpful to see photos on Fender's or dealer websites, showing variances so customers may know what to expect. It may be off putting for a customer who purchased a Lush Closet Classic finish, having never seen an example with forearm wear, to receive their long awaited bass that had it. This may not bother some customers, as someone previously mentioned that this is the state in which the bass will end up over enough time. But for others who want a lighter relic look, this could potentially be a problem.
My hope here is that we could all have an honest conversation about the basses we love without strife, even when there may be differences in opinion. These are just my thoughts, and I don't necessarily think anyone should agree with them - although my hope would be that people could at least can see how I arrived at my perspective, whether they agree with it or not.
My comments were never meant to take away from the quality of Fender products or diminish the value and enjoyment of what they have brought to the world. I am truly a huge Fender fan.
Hopefully this explanation has not nullified my apology in anyone's eyes. If it has, or if there is any remaining unrest I can help resolve, there is nothing I would want more than to mend it. You can't please everyone, but if there is something I can do to clean up my side of the street, I'm all for doing it.
Best wishes to all.
Last edited:
