Fender fanned fretboard. Bets accepted...

[mrperkolator]

Fender is handcuffed by their success and their risk averse behaviors.

This.

They're not stupid. They are a huge company and can afford to sit back and wait to see which technologies stay in the niche and which ones get heavily adopted before they dive in.

Big companies are not immune to stupidity. Have yall heard of Kodak? They were big in the 90's.... has anyone seen them lately? They sat too far behind the technology curve and got phased out.

No matter how many times Harley tries to make an electric motorcycle, they will never sell enough to make the retooling and development costs worth it. It's hard when you are a "heritage" company to know how much innovation is enough to stay relevant but to not innovate before your customers are ready for the change. I think Fender is smart enough to stay out of the fanned fret game unless it became much more popular.

+1

Nope, Fender will not do fanned frets. Fender is a boomer heritage company. Perhaps a fender subsidiary, but not fender itself.

 

[FretBuzzer85]

if they're ever going to do it as a proper Fender product (and it's a big if), it's gonna come out of Japan.

 

[rogerbmiller]

For my money I say it's not gonna happen. People who buy and play Fenders aren't looking for the latest "technology" if you catch my drift.

 

[HaphAsSard]

Certainly not fanned!

Certainly? I'm not a Novax fan (multiple puns intended) but I wouldn't be so sure: Ralph Novak is one of the key figures in the reintroduction of the multiscale fingerboard concept (after centuries-old, Early Modern antecedents and later attempts), about which he filed a patent application in 1989. Plus, IIRC he is the inventor of the phrase "fanned frets", on which he AFAIK still holds a copyright.
Him making retrofit FF necks for Fender-type basses and guitars since the '90s doesn't strike me as odd in the least. It is an argument in support of your thesis that such a market exists, if it turns out it has for 30 years. (That it is anything beyond niche, as markets go, remains to be seen.)

 

[lfmn16]

Never.

Fender is selling every bass and guitar they can make right now. Why take ANY of that production capability away from what is selling? Judging by their actions, they are not in business to innovate but to sell as many guitars (and some basses) as they possibly can at the best margin/volume number they can do it at. There's just no financial incentive for them to do it.

+1

Don’t you love when people who have never even run a lemonade stand talk about what a highly successful company is doing wrong?

 

[Avezzano]

This is so wrong. It's actually more like the opposite, in these particular cases. Fender, or at least Leo Fender, was the first, or at least very early, to mass produce the innovations that you name...which others then went on to refine over the decades.

1. Factory fretless Fenders were released in '69/'70. They were also offered by Music Man in the '70s, and G&L. First, the only person who really knew of Jaco at that point was Wayne Cochran. Second, Jaco didn't even de-fret his bass until after Fender had just released a fretless model. Hmmm. Who's the innovator in that case? The development of the fretless electric bass had absolutely zero to do with Jaco. It's popularity? Yes. But not its innovation.

2. The Fender Bass V was released in 1965. It was tuned E–C, and featured a normal width bass neck (i.e. cramped string spacing). It was modified over time by other companies, for B–G tuning and wider necks. It is the not-so-distant ancestor of the modern-style 5-string electric bass. Fender innovated; others refined.

3. A Leo Fender owned company, CLF Research, working for Music Man, designed and mass produced the "+1" headstock – a design that later became the norm for five string basses. Again, Leo and his team innovated; others liked the idea and adapted it.

Fender took a shot on some of this stuff early, and can be called innovator, despite their designs being rather primitive. Others improved and refined an existing idea; they didn't innovate.

I get what you're saying, because the modern day Fender company is basically just coasting on Leo's and George's (and several other important company players') innovations...but "technological innovation" is the wrong angle to attack from. The Fender company, and the other companies Leo Fender ran, were among the most innovative companies of all time in the field. If you feel the modern-day Fender company is "conservative," then I can get behind that statement...but not that they have not traditionally been an "innovative" company. They have traditionally been quite innovative...just not very refined, a lot of the time.

The bottom line is that if Fender feels that something is worth a lot of profit, they'll do it. I would venture to guess that there isn't a huge market for fanned fret basses...but they might stick their toe in that water at some point, just to try to cash in a bit, if feasible.

Personally, I like Fender as a fairly traditional, conservative manufacturer. Obviously there is enough demand for such a thing to support it, so...whatever. Let them do what they do best, and turn to other companies if you don't want the traditional "Fender thing."

...just because it's just a pleasure get deep into the bass matter (are we crazy or what?):

1) I highly doubt Jaco developed his fretless BECAUSE he saw the fretless Precision. He even once said to one of his students: "you have a Precision? Get rid of it immediately" due to his renown preference for the bridge pickup, a slimmer neck and also for the fretlines. He simply wanted to reply the upright smooth fretboard possibilities but in a more comfortable way/instrument. His words: "the upright? Too much effort for so low result"

2) the Fender bass V was just a sterile attempt to reply the 4 string notes with a shorter fretboard. Nothing else. It was in no way an "innovation" and there were no refinement on that way after that by anybody. The first real fiver instead was the Jimmy Johnson Alembic. He took the idea from the classic upright five string instrument. Immediately after there was Anthony Jackson with his need for a six strings " contrabass guitar" and then all the others. Nothing related to the Fender V

3) the 3+1 headstock was NOT invented at Fender. Leo was in the Music Man already, at all the effects.

Fender took a shot on some of this stuff early, and can be called innovator, despite their designs being rather primitive. Others improved and refined an existing idea; they didn't innovate.

with the exception of inventing the Precision and the Jazz (hats off and all my gratitude), I do not see huge innovations from Fender but cosmetics, colors or new models immediately dropped (please educate me if I am wrong!)

P.S.: don't shoot me, I'm only the bassplayer!!!

 

[Avezzano]

Certainly? I'm not a Novax fan (multiple puns intended) but I wouldn't be so sure: Ralph Novak is one of the key figures in the reintroduction of the multiscale fingerboard concept (after centuries-old, Early Modern antecedents and later attempts), about which he filed a patent application in 1989. Plus, IIRC he is the inventor of the phrase "fanned frets", on which he AFAIK still holds a copyright.
Him making retrofit FF necks for Fender-type basses and guitars since the '90s doesn't strike me as odd in the least. It is an argument in support of your thesis that such a market exists, if it turns out it has for 30 years. (That it is anything beyond niche, as markets go, remains to be seen.)

See that. Point taken. Anybody knowing the first Novax fanned fretboard Fender compatible year?

 

[Avezzano]

For my money I say it's not gonna happen. People who buy and play Fenders aren't looking for the latest "technology" if you catch my drift.

Miles Davis was used to say that you must always be one step beyond the current crowd taste, to educate and raise the bar...

 

[sleepingEB0]

It would be like GM having a Buick badged corvette. Sort of silly and defeats the point of their big brand umbrella

 

[rogerbmiller]

Miles Davis was used to say that you must always be one step beyond the current crowd taste, to educate and raise the bar...

And Roger Miller says that Fender hasn't done this since the 90s., unfortunately

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

This is so wrong. It's actually more like the opposite, in these particular cases. Fender, or at least Leo Fender, was the first, or at least very early, to mass produce the innovations that you name...which others then went on to refine over the decades.

1. Factory fretless Fenders were released in '69/'70. They were also offered by Music Man in the '70s, and G&L. First, the only person who really knew of Jaco at that point was Wayne Cochran. Second, Jaco didn't even de-fret his bass until after Fender had just released a fretless model. Hmmm. Who's the innovator in that case? The development of the fretless electric bass had absolutely zero to do with Jaco. It's popularity? Yes. But not its innovation.

2. The Fender Bass V was released in 1965. It was tuned E–C, and featured a normal width bass neck (i.e. cramped string spacing). It was modified over time by other companies, for B–G tuning and wider necks. It is the not-so-distant ancestor of the modern-style 5-string electric bass. Fender innovated; others refined.

3. A Leo Fender owned company, CLF Research, working for Music Man, designed and mass produced the "+1" headstock – a design that later became the norm for five string basses. Again, Leo and his team innovated; others liked the idea and adapted it.

Fender took a shot on some of this stuff early, and can be called innovator, despite their designs being rather primitive. Others improved and refined an existing idea; they didn't innovate.

I get what you're saying, because the modern day Fender company is basically just coasting on Leo's and George's (and several other important company players') innovations...but "technological innovation" is the wrong angle to attack from. The Fender company, and the other companies Leo Fender ran, were among the most innovative companies of all time in the field. If you feel the modern-day Fender company is "conservative," then I can get behind that statement...but not that they have not traditionally been an "innovative" company. They have traditionally been quite innovative...just not very refined, a lot of the time.

The bottom line is that if Fender feels that something is worth a lot of profit, they'll do it. I would venture to guess that there isn't a huge market for fanned fret basses...but they might stick their toe in that water at some point, just to try to cash in a bit, if feasible.

Personally, I like Fender as a fairly traditional, conservative manufacturer. Obviously there is enough demand for such a thing to support it, so...whatever. Let them do what they do best, and turn to other companies if you don't want the traditional "Fender thing."

"Liking" this is not enough. It needs to be re-posted.

You have hit the proverbial nail on the head.

 

[Jeremy Crockett]

[QUOTE=" Fender basses are instruments for the every man, not the boutique crowd.
So tell me about Custom Shop...

Heck! I'll say it (put my foot in it). Often it's a case of "more money than sense" in my curmudgeonly opinion.

 

[MMiller28]

I bet it never happens because there is no reason to. They don't even sell a bass with humbuckers and you think they'll do fanned frets?

 

[bassmanrocke]

Personally I think we'll see a production model 6-string from Fender (though unlikely as well and the 30" scale Fender VI doesn't count) before we'll see a fanned fret model.

The Steve Bailey signature 6 has already been in production.

 

[JimmyM]

Does anyone really give a crap about innovation anymore on bass? At the end of the day, no matter how much so-called innovation there is, it’s still the same instrument basically. Besides, fanned frets have been around for centuries. I’m not totally against innovation, but there is very little real innovation going on with Bass these days. And frankly, I don’t think it’s done much to improve basses at all.

 

[JimmyM]

I bet it never happens because there is no reason to. They don't even sell a bass with humbuckers and you think they'll do fanned frets?

Every split pick up precision is a humbucker. They have done many basses with traditional humbuckers as well.

 

[defdog99]

Fender likes doing limited runs of things. I mean no one in the world is doing cunife, and Fender is NOW. Are they making 35k guitars and 12k basses in production with it? No. But it's out there.
And I dont think Fender plans on a Meterora, or a Powercaster, or a 12-string strat to last more than 1 or 2 batches.
Fender is about variety -- which is ironic because people think all they do is the same thing. Albeit some of the parts are reused, but they are always doing FSRs and new configurations.
Make just enough to get people to salivate and buy it new fullprice day-1.

 

[Lownote38]

Why should Fender build a bass with fanned frets? I mean, how many times have we seen a bass player live using a fanned fret bass? It's a niche market at this point, and certainly not the norm. Even 5 or more strings have become less common in recent times. I don't think it would a lucrative move for Fender to jump on the fanned fret bandwagon. There's barely one to jump on!

 

[Gianni "Orlandez" Orlati]

Understand the concrete possibility. But... will they dare to push that far as fanned fretted board on a Fender?

Why should they ? I love my P-basses as they are c’mon .. say what you want but I don’t need any fanned frets board, I rather need to improve my musical hear and skills

 

[Gianni "Orlandez" Orlati]

...just because it's just a pleasure get deep into the bass matter (are we crazy or what?):

1) I highly doubt Jaco developed his fretless BECAUSE he saw the fretless Precision. He even once said to one of his students: "you have a Precision? Get rid of it immediately" due to his renown preference for the bridge pickup, a slimmer neck and also for the fretlines. He simply wanted to reply the upright smooth fretboard possibilities but in a more comfortable way/instrument. His words: "the upright? Too much effort for so low result"

2) the Fender bass V was just a sterile attempt to reply the 4 string notes with a shorter fretboard. Nothing else. It was in no way an "innovation" and there were no refinement on that way after that by anybody. The first real fiver instead was the Jimmy Johnson Alembic. He took the idea from the classic upright five string instrument. Immediately after there was Anthony Jackson with his need for a six strings " contrabass guitar" and then all the others. Nothing related to the Fender V

3) the 3+1 headstock was NOT invented at Fender. Leo was in the Music Man already, at all the effects.



with the exception of inventing the Precision and the Jazz (hats off and all my gratitude), I do not see huge innovations from Fender but cosmetics, colors or new models immediately dropped (please educate me if I am wrong!)

P.S.: don't shoot me, I'm only the bassplayer!!!

Correct but I like Fender for being the company it is ..