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.
Fender decals on not-really-Fender basses
- Thread starter Habilis
- Start date
For me this debate is obsolete. Nobody has to be ashamed of playing a Squier. Its all about sound, and the sound does not change with the decal. The audience does not see, what the headstock says. They only hear your playing.
OK, swapping decals is not fine if done for selling the bass for extra money. This is fraud. But if it is your instrument..... Does it really matter if the deadstock says n o t Fender?
The best P-Bass I ever held in my hands is a Frankenbass, made of a Harry Haeussel - Body and an Allparts neck. Schaller-bridge and Di Marzio - PU. No decal at all...
My instrument-dealer assembled it by parts he had in his shop. He made me an offer, only the price of the parts: Euro 700,--, about USD 920,--.
Hey, and if the headstock would say "Kawasaki", I have to get this bass! I don't care of the brand of an instrument - as long as it fits like this bass does!
I'm, not a fanboy of any brand. I have some fine instruments, a 1964 Fender P, a Tokai Jazz Fretles of unknown DOB, a 1995 MuMa SR 5, a 1989 Warwick Streamer Stage I, a 2008 Ibanez K5, a 1992 Haeussel Jazz 5, a 1968 Fender Mustang and a 1955 Hoshino Gakki. All of my basses, except the 2 Fenders, the Tokai and the Hoshino Gakki, came brand new to me. I played them once and fell in love. And there was a very fine 1982 Sqier Jazz Fretles that would be with me if it not was stolen after a gig.
I Don't care what the decal says. Its all about playability and sound.
OK, swapping decals is not fine if done for selling the bass for extra money. This is fraud. But if it is your instrument..... Does it really matter if the deadstock says n o t Fender?
The best P-Bass I ever held in my hands is a Frankenbass, made of a Harry Haeussel - Body and an Allparts neck. Schaller-bridge and Di Marzio - PU. No decal at all...
My instrument-dealer assembled it by parts he had in his shop. He made me an offer, only the price of the parts: Euro 700,--, about USD 920,--.
Hey, and if the headstock would say "Kawasaki", I have to get this bass! I don't care of the brand of an instrument - as long as it fits like this bass does!
I'm, not a fanboy of any brand. I have some fine instruments, a 1964 Fender P, a Tokai Jazz Fretles of unknown DOB, a 1995 MuMa SR 5, a 1989 Warwick Streamer Stage I, a 2008 Ibanez K5, a 1992 Haeussel Jazz 5, a 1968 Fender Mustang and a 1955 Hoshino Gakki. All of my basses, except the 2 Fenders, the Tokai and the Hoshino Gakki, came brand new to me. I played them once and fell in love. And there was a very fine 1982 Sqier Jazz Fretles that would be with me if it not was stolen after a gig.
I Don't care what the decal says. Its all about playability and sound.
JAUQO III-X
Inactive
Below is a pic of my very heavily modded Fender Jazz.
I got the bass new old stock in 1981 or 82.
It's a 71 or 72 but I have done so many mods to it over the years.
It originally had a chocolate finish.
Black pickgaurd.
A maple fb.
Blocks and binding.
As time went on the mods started.
I ended up stripping the finish. It even had my girl friend at the time name carved into the upper horn.
I had the fingerboard taken off and a gaboon ebony fb attached. The luthier who put the fb on it messed the skunk stripe up by dropping some type of chemical on it. So I had to have a new skunk stripe added.
Then I had Pat Wilkins put a high gloss finish on the neck except for the front of the head stock.
I added Bart pickups.
A Audere pre and a Hipshot D- Tuner.
And the marble finish on it was done by Jens Ritter of Ritter guitars.
Along with the Hipshot D-tuner, I replaced the remaining three machine heads with Hipshots as well.
And in the early 80's I added a Badass II bridge.
The last mod was done about 4 years ago, when I installed the Audere pre amp.
I got the bass new old stock in 1981 or 82.
It's a 71 or 72 but I have done so many mods to it over the years.
It originally had a chocolate finish.
Black pickgaurd.
A maple fb.
Blocks and binding.
As time went on the mods started.
I ended up stripping the finish. It even had my girl friend at the time name carved into the upper horn.
I had the fingerboard taken off and a gaboon ebony fb attached. The luthier who put the fb on it messed the skunk stripe up by dropping some type of chemical on it. So I had to have a new skunk stripe added.
Then I had Pat Wilkins put a high gloss finish on the neck except for the front of the head stock.
I added Bart pickups.
A Audere pre and a Hipshot D- Tuner.
And the marble finish on it was done by Jens Ritter of Ritter guitars.
Along with the Hipshot D-tuner, I replaced the remaining three machine heads with Hipshots as well.
And in the early 80's I added a Badass II bridge.
The last mod was done about 4 years ago, when I installed the Audere pre amp.
Attachments
See this is where some people differ. What is often failed to be noticed in our fury of competitive thread building, is the simple fact that we are all different.
That's what keeps life interesting.
I myself at times neglect this same simple fact. Just because you, (as in anyone) can see only this 1 or 2 bad reasons, or that 1 or 2 illegal/immoral reason, does NOT mean that the other guy wasn't still able to come up with a reason that was nothing more than a simple tribulation to a Brand name that means something to him/her.
It's expression, plain & simple. We all, excuse me, ALL do it in our own ways, with numerous things our lives are associated with.
As far as analogies! I thought I'd give it a shot.
Would it be much different if one were to get a Tattoo saying "Fender"?
This is also use of a trademarked name.
Maybe they decide to airbrush "Fender"
On their favorite hoodie, sweat/T shirt.
Fender sells clothing and this would be essentially the exact same thing.
Maybe like that picture of the big coffee table online that is in the shape of the Fender headstock.
And says Fender Jazz Bass (I believe)
Would it be just as bad to build your own table?
Is that form of expression any different?
I think we ALL agree the guys doing this for monetary gain are some pretty disgusting people, no question about it.
But it's not so much of a stretch to imagine there are plenty out there that want noting more than to relate with something they care for.
Oh, and before you fire off about everyone should just buy a Fender, well many do, what do you say to a great deal of the people who have, and have had plenty of name brand Fender products?
Or the ones that, (like me) accept the fact that Fender, & Squier are both one in the same, and you're simply accenting the Fender name on their own product.
What about the countless famous artists who have done, & continue to do this very thing?
That's what keeps life interesting.
I myself at times neglect this same simple fact. Just because you, (as in anyone) can see only this 1 or 2 bad reasons, or that 1 or 2 illegal/immoral reason, does NOT mean that the other guy wasn't still able to come up with a reason that was nothing more than a simple tribulation to a Brand name that means something to him/her.
It's expression, plain & simple. We all, excuse me, ALL do it in our own ways, with numerous things our lives are associated with.
As far as analogies! I thought I'd give it a shot.
Would it be much different if one were to get a Tattoo saying "Fender"?
This is also use of a trademarked name.
Maybe they decide to airbrush "Fender"
On their favorite hoodie, sweat/T shirt.
Fender sells clothing and this would be essentially the exact same thing.
Maybe like that picture of the big coffee table online that is in the shape of the Fender headstock.
And says Fender Jazz Bass (I believe)
Would it be just as bad to build your own table?
Is that form of expression any different?
I think we ALL agree the guys doing this for monetary gain are some pretty disgusting people, no question about it.
But it's not so much of a stretch to imagine there are plenty out there that want noting more than to relate with something they care for.
Oh, and before you fire off about everyone should just buy a Fender, well many do, what do you say to a great deal of the people who have, and have had plenty of name brand Fender products?
Or the ones that, (like me) accept the fact that Fender, & Squier are both one in the same, and you're simply accenting the Fender name on their own product.
What about the countless famous artists who have done, & continue to do this very thing?
Those are bad analogies. The point her is putting a Fender logo on a Fender look-alike instrument in order to fool others into thinking it's a real Fender. No-one's going to look at a guy with a Fender tat, or a T-shirt with a Fender logo and think it's a Fender bass.
That post is way too informative and thought out. 
I don't really care what folks do when it comes to the decal. I have to wonder though how many fakes are passed off on unsuspecting, non-TB using noobs. We've all seen the "is this real?" threads. The last one I remember seeing was the worst fake ever. It even had 2+2 tuners on a 4 inline headstock. The poster really wasn't sure if it was real or not.
I don't care if sock stuffers continue that practice either.
I don't really care what folks do when it comes to the decal. I have to wonder though how many fakes are passed off on unsuspecting, non-TB using noobs. We've all seen the "is this real?" threads. The last one I remember seeing was the worst fake ever. It even had 2+2 tuners on a 4 inline headstock. The poster really wasn't sure if it was real or not.
I don't care if sock stuffers continue that practice either.
Mr. Danielak's focus of concern is also mine: the point of re-sale. If you are not completely forthcoming about the instrument's provenance to the best of your knowledge when you are selling, you are committing fraud. I see absolutely no problem when a Squier son takes the name of the Fender father or putting a Fender decal on a clone made with parts from ten different countries. Just be honest if you sell it...
To the original point - I've owned and modified three of the recent batch of Squiers. I would want to intonate and tune any bass I just removed from a shipping box before gigging, but they were otherwise ready to go. I did replace the nut on two of them. One was poorly cut but, the other was serviceable but changed to suit personal preferences. The stock pickups are fine. Pickups swaps were made only for the purpose of experimentation and satisfying curiosity. They are wonderful basses in their own right and fun to tweak but don't obsess about turning it into a Fender.
If I could make another suggestion, buy one that already has a Jazz neck on it. If it needs fret and nut work, get it done right and you'll have all the bass you really need.
To the original point - I've owned and modified three of the recent batch of Squiers. I would want to intonate and tune any bass I just removed from a shipping box before gigging, but they were otherwise ready to go. I did replace the nut on two of them. One was poorly cut but, the other was serviceable but changed to suit personal preferences. The stock pickups are fine. Pickups swaps were made only for the purpose of experimentation and satisfying curiosity. They are wonderful basses in their own right and fun to tweak but don't obsess about turning it into a Fender.
If I could make another suggestion, buy one that already has a Jazz neck on it. If it needs fret and nut work, get it done right and you'll have all the bass you really need.
Nope, that doesn't reveal anything. You asked a very specific question and received a very vague (and grammatically strange) response.
I'm not sure how what he said validates anyone being about to fake Fenders. How strange.
I've got an autobot logo on the hood of my BMW. I wonder if the next person that buys it will be really pissed when they realise the car they bought doesnt convert into a big kick ass robot, and just stays a boring repmobile
Those are perfectly fine analogies, unfortunately you're either far too pressed on proving your feelings are correct.
Or you're far too hung up on one simple detail out of a much bigger picture.
No of coarse a T-Shirt wouldn't look like a bass.
It doesn't need to, Fender sells T-Shirts for profit.
Where you managed to commingle a T-shirt analogy and a Bass is beyond me.
It's two completely separate things and as I pointed out, it in most cases would NOT be looked at the same.
However they are not just similar in what is being done it is the EXACT same thing.
Using Fender's name to decorate a T-shirt is no different than using it to decorate a bass, a keychain, a wall in your house, and so on. It's all unauthorized use of their name on ones own personal property.
No nobody will buy the T-Shirt thinking its s bass but they could buy it thinking its an official Fender product.
I'd bet the guy with the shirt doesn't catch near the same amount of flack for it.
I bet he certainly wouldn't be called names and ridiculed which MANY have done here, calling these guys lame, fraud, phony, and whatever other derogatory remarks have been tossed at these members in this thread, and others.
I'll give you the Tattoo one that one may have been a little off, but the shirt example is fine.
But I'm sure with an analogy that can't be overcome by logical reasoning to be so morally horrible, some will resort back to name calling, or will now claim they lead the crusade against counterfeit clothing too.
You guys can argue until you're blue in the face, but your argument really holds no water.
It's NOT fraud.
It's NOT counterfeit.
It's NOT illegal.
It's NOT immoral.
It's NOT anything but an irritation to you guys, (an understandable one sure), but why not just accept it/own it, instead of trying to justify your positions by labeling it as something it's not.
Well it's about damn time we disagreed on something else, do you have your dueling attire on?
Shall we make this classic like our first or will we simply just agree to disagree?
The suspense is horrendous, awaiting your next move MR. ATW
Anyway, it validates plenty.
And honestly a little on each side of the puddle!
You can tell in his first section they really don't agree with people doing it, they don't understand what was ever wrong with the Squire to need the decal changed to begin with.
But they do at least acknowledge that they have no legal ground to stop a private owner from doing what they'd like with their own stuff because their is no such law.
If their were Fender could drag anyone into court over any use of their name.
I really don't want to dig up all the links, but someone went back and fourth earlier where people are protected under the freedom of expression clause.
Even over a simple T-shirt, Tattoo, whatever.
They know that they can't, most of the posters here know they can't, the laws know they can't, we are still working diligently on the last few stragglers though.
C'mon Michael, admit it, it's a pain in the butt yes, but it's not illegal.
Just accept defeat lol.
No seriously, if someone can link anything that says otherwise I really do want to see it.
I'm actually very curious about it which is why I went to Fender directly to begin with.
And for the record my initial email was addressed to their legal department, or something along those lines. I'd have to go look it up again.
It is exactly those things. Look up the definition of each.
Your argument really holds no water.
Without intent NONE of those things exist.
Please explain to all of us how you've managed to somehow know what these guys plan to do with their basses?
Or if you'd like please explain how w/o intent these definitions apply or even start to fit what the members here have expressed they would like to do?
You can't because your attaching a definition to something that requires the intent factor and I'm sorry ol' wise one, we've not had a single member pop up and claim any intent to do any of those things.
In fact I believe every member here has agreed that anyone selling these basses in the attempt to misrepresent Fender, or Squire would be wrong, and has completely agreed with you.
You can't just pull facts out of the air and attach them to some definition to make them whole and applicable.
Unless you can show intent you are wrong.
You can't just pull facts out of the air and attach them to some definition to make them whole and applicable.
Unless you can show intent you are wrong.
There's nothing vague when Steve Danielak from Fender's Consumer Relations Department wrote "Basically, do what you like… we make ‘em you own ‘em, but if something gets out in the market for sale and is misrepresenting the guitar, it can turn ugly."
You're just rejecting any point that doesn't backup your argument. Very close minded, my friend.
