Fender Precision from 60s and 70s: years to avoid?

[Machiavelli]

Just think this through: do you really think the production changed that much year to year? This isn't wine where temperature and weather changes impact the product. The only things that would change the product would be:

-material quality
-production procedure changes
-changes in personnel


If you're obsessed with predicting if a bass would be good or not, you would need to look at these. My guess is that the changes were slight and did not abruptly change every January 1.

Or, you know...you could just try playing the bass.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Light doesn't necessarily mean better, but weight can be an instant deal breaker. I go from my Lull at under 9lbs to my 70s Fender at over 11, and one lift is enough. When I was 18 years old the weight wasn't a big deal, but now it sucks by the second set.

 

[The Bass Clef]

Just think this through: do you really think the production changed that much year to year? This isn't wine where temperature and weather changes impact the product. The only things that would change the product would be:

-material quality
-production procedure changes
-changes in personnel


If you're obsessed with predicting if a bass would be good or not, you would need to look at these. My guess is that the changes were slight and did not abruptly change every January 1.

Or, you know...you could just try playing the bass.

Here's my $.02...
During the '70s the wood selection changed.. for better or worse is debatable, but there's no denying that the Northern ash that Fender used in the mid-late '70s was much heavier and denser than the alder and swamp ash used in the '50s, '60s and early '70s. Some people love the sound of the '70s heavy ash, but I personally much prefer lighter woods, partly because my back isn't what it used to be, and also because I prefer the resonance and tone of lighter body wood in general.

Also, all the tooling and jigs that were used to make the guitars/basses really started to wear out by the '70s, which made for sloppy tolerances in the '70s (i.e. big neck pocket gaps, sloppy routes, crooked/unaligned bridges, etc..). IMO, those are the main reasons that mid-late '70s Fenders have a bad rep with many people (and it's justified as far as I'm concerned). HOWEVER.. there are most definitely some Fenders that somehow made it out of the factory during the '70s that are excellent, pro-grade instruments.. just not nearly as high of a percentage as in the previous decades, IME.

So it's not so much a year by year thing, but more that Fender really just needed to update, maintain and revamp their factory by the mid-'70s, so quality just became more of a crap shoot. And keep in mind, Fender was also owned by CBS at this time.. who really only cared about the almighty dollar at the end of the day - not pride and quality in their guitars. And that way of thinking caught up with them when players just started giving up on them by the thousands. Fender finally figured it out in 1982.. when they decided to listen to their customers and start "making 'em like they used to again"... and they introduced the American Vintage Series. That was the 1st step in turning their reputation around, and the next step was CBS selling the company to the employees in '85. The moral of the story is.. when a TV station buys a guitar company to exploit it for all it's worth, sh*t goes south.

 

[JimmyM]

I've owned two 70's Precisions (76 and 79), and played many others, as well as a fair amount of Jazz basses of the 70's. And while I'm never one to buy into conventional Talkbass wisdom, this is one area where I buy into it. They are perfectly usable basses, no doubt, but it seems to me that the closer you get to the Leo era, the better they are, and the ones from 75 till CBS sold Fender are not to my liking at all. Lots of them have badly cut neck pockets that cause the neck to shift alignment (my 76 is finally getting neck bolt inserts to stop that), and the pickups are not very good.

Now if you're willing to replace the pickups (did in my 76 30 years ago, wasn't willing to in the 79 so I sold it for a tidy profit) and get one where the neck doesn't shift, they can be absolutely terrific. Hated the pickup in the 79 and I prefer a flatter radius to the fretboard so I actually like newer ones better than vintage, but it was a player with no neck shift and excellent action, and it stayed in tune like a rock. Probably shouldn't have bought it, but it was black and maple, I got $250 taken off the price, and looked just like the one Roger Waters used to use so I got a little excited But the SX P I bought for $110 new a month before the 79 sounded better, believe it or not.

Oh, I almost forgot that you have to say this or a bunch of angry people on here get mad and write scathing rebuttals questioning your entire existence on the planet...

In my opinion.

Yes, I know it should be understood that this is only my opinion...welcome to Talkbass.

 

[godofthunder59]

Here's my $.02...
During the '70s the wood selection changed.. for better or worse is debatable, but there's no denying that the Northern ash that Fender used in the mid-late '70s was much heavier and denser than the alder and swamp ash used in the '50s, '60s and early '70s. Some people love the sound of the '70s heavy ash, but I personally much prefer lighter woods, partly because my back isn't what it used to be, and also because I prefer the resonance and tone of lighter body wood in general.

Also, all the tooling and jigs that were used to make the guitars/basses really started to wear out by the '70s, which made for sloppy tolerances in the '70s (i.e. big neck pocket gaps, sloppy routes, crooked/unaligned bridges, etc..). IMO, those are the main reasons that mid-late '70s Fenders have a bad rep with many people (and it's justified as far as I'm concerned). HOWEVER.. there are most definitely some Fenders that somehow made it out of the factory during the '70s that are excellent, pro-grade instruments.. just not nearly as high of a percentage as in the previous decades, IME.

So it's not so much a year by year thing, but more that Fender really just needed to update, maintain and revamp their factory by the mid-'70s, so quality just became more of a crap shoot. And keep in mind, Fender was also owned by CBS at this time.. who really only cared about the almighty dollar at the end of the day - not pride and quality in their guitars. And that way of thinking caught up with them when players just started giving up on them by the thousands. Fender finally figured it out in 1982.. when they decided to listen to their customers and start "making 'em like they used to again"... and they introduced the American Vintage Series. That was the 1st step in turning their reputation around, and the next step was CBS selling the company to the employees in '85. The moral of the story is.. when a TV station buys a guitar company to exploit it for all it's worth, sh*t goes south.

Pretty much corroborates everything I have stated.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

Yes it does.
The subject of the quality of 1970's Fenders always comes down to two camps: the guys who were around through that era, saw firsthand the decline in quality, versus the guys who currently OWN a 70's bass and want to defend its honor.

 

[ShoeManiac]

I had a pretty solid '73 Jazz bass. And like lots of others have said, the CBS era instruments vary a lot in terms of tone and playability. It comes down to finding that special one, not getting caught up in any one particular production year.

 

[BrotherMister]

I personally tend to think that people who say to avoid bases from year 197x to 197y are talking nonsense. Sure there is always going to be a decline in overall quality when you move from hand crafted instruments to mass produced factory things. Like every bass on the planet it is a matter of personal preference and what you want from your instrument. If you take 10 high end handcrafted basses such as Alembic or Fodera and had hundreds of people play them you will no doubt hear many of same complaints people have about 70's Fender, it is purely a matter of personal taste. It has nothing to do with those bases or the companies it is how you respond to such things. If you like the instrument and you are getting exactly what you want from it how can anybody tell you it is a bad instrument? Try out everything you can and see what one suits you the best.

 

[Machiavelli]

Here's my $.02...
During the '70s the wood selection changed.. for better or worse is debatable, but there's no denying that the Northern ash that Fender used in the mid-late '70s was much heavier and denser than the alder and swamp ash used in the '50s, '60s and early '70s. Some people love the sound of the '70s heavy ash, but I personally much prefer lighter woods, partly because my back isn't what it used to be, and also because I prefer the resonance and tone of lighter body wood in general.

Also, all the tooling and jigs that were used to make the guitars/basses really started to wear out by the '70s, which made for sloppy tolerances in the '70s (i.e. big neck pocket gaps, sloppy routes, crooked/unaligned bridges, etc..). IMO, those are the main reasons that mid-late '70s Fenders have a bad rep with many people (and it's justified as far as I'm concerned). HOWEVER.. there are most definitely some Fenders that somehow made it out of the factory during the '70s that are excellent, pro-grade instruments.. just not nearly as high of a percentage as in the previous decades, IME.

So it's not so much a year by year thing, but more that Fender really just needed to update, maintain and revamp their factory by the mid-'70s, so quality just became more of a crap shoot. And keep in mind, Fender was also owned by CBS at this time.. who really only cared about the almighty dollar at the end of the day - not pride and quality in their guitars. And that way of thinking caught up with them when players just started giving up on them by the thousands. Fender finally figured it out in 1982.. when they decided to listen to their customers and start "making 'em like they used to again"... and they introduced the American Vintage Series. That was the 1st step in turning their reputation around, and the next step was CBS selling the company to the employees in '85. The moral of the story is.. when a TV station buys a guitar company to exploit it for all it's worth, sh*t goes south.

This makes sense to me. Although, I think it's hard to generalize to this degree.

 

[JimmyM]

I personally tend to think that people who say to avoid bases from year 197x to 197y are talking nonsense.

Don't recall asking

 

[Thombas]

I can only base my $.02 on one bass; a 75 P I looked after for 20 years. It was apparently supposed to be a dog, but it played well, was quite light, very stable - and - to my ears - sounded great! I played it out quite a lot, but found the original owner a couple of years ago - and handed it back. Miss it!

 

[king_biscuit]

Yes it does.
The subject of the quality of 1970's Fenders always comes down to two camps: the guys who were around through that era, saw firsthand the decline in quality, versus the guys who currently OWN a 70's bass and want to defend its honor.

I was around from the early 80s on, and worked in a music store in the 80s -- and have played and owned a bunch of Fender from every era (50s - 201xs). A lot of this 70s Fender stereotyping is BS. It's true that many had imperfect neck pockets, but overall most of them could be set up to play and sound great. As far as the weight goes, there certainly are some heavy ones, but there is a good spread sheet floating around of a good sampling of of 70s Fender from the whole decade, and most were under 10 pounds. btw, I could just as easily argue that most of the strongest 70s haters in these parts are just pissed because they let theirs go before they became chic. I can just picture it in my head, guy in the late 70s/early80s having to hear about how his 70s Fender sucked and only preCBS Fenders were worth having; flip to today, now his former 70s fender is desirable and the world doesn't make sense anymore

 

[staindbass]

the instruments should be considered on a bass by bass basis. i have not tried as many as some of these guys, but my speculation is that from the late 60's to 74, 8 out of 10 are good, and 2 are dogs. and in the late 70's, 8 out of 10 are dogs and two are good. they cannot be generalized, its like saying all blondes are dumb.

 

[guymanndude1]

An observation, and your mileage may vary, but it seemed to me, the sloppy neck pockets in the '70's didn't seem to affect the Precision basses, as much as the post 74 Jazz basses. The 3 bolt, micro tilt neck attachment system, combined with the narrow nut, and thinner necks, caused issues with lateral neck twisting.

Mostly, I remember the weight of the later 70's Precision basses being the biggest consideration. But, seemed heavier was better, back during that era.

 

[veebass]

Yes it does.
The subject of the quality of 1970's Fenders always comes down to two camps: the guys who were around through that era, saw firsthand the decline in quality, versus the guys who currently OWN a 70's bass and want to defend its honor.

I should be somewhat conflicted because I am in both the camps described, but I am not- I was playing in the 70s and have some 60s & 70s Fender basses.
It isn't about defending honour, the OP asked for advice.
The QC issues mean it should be a bass by bass decision, if you want to buy one- vintage doesn't always = good, even for 60s Fenders.
Actually, I have had more serious issues with a couple of early 90s Fenders I bought than my old ones.

 

[bluesdogblues]

Yes it does.
The subject of the quality of 1970's Fenders always comes down to two camps: the guys who were around through that era, saw firsthand the decline in quality, versus the guys who currently OWN a 70's bass and want to defend its honor.

It's a ridiculous statement.
In my case, it's far from that. In fact, it's the the contrary, I will be very happy if I can find a P-bass (or anything) that is better than mine. Always like that in almost all aspect of my musical life.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

...you realize you're exemplifying up my point, right?

 

[wvbass]

...you realize you're exemplifying up my point, right?

Too funny. There are plenty of great mid- to late- 70s Fenders out there. However, Fender earned its reputation for inconsistency in the late 70s. For every great bluesdogblues P bass out there, there is a dumpster full of just plain dog Pbasses from the same era.

I have a '74 "parts" bass. It is a fine playing instrument with okay construction, but it is heavy not T40 heavy, but it is the heaviest of my four P basses.

 

[bluesdogblues]

...you realize you're exemplifying up my point, right?

Not at all, sorry.

 

[wvbass]

Not at all, sorry.

Your 1978 Precision may in fact, with no sarcasm intended, be one of the finest P basses Fender has ever produced. No one is saying that Fender didn't make great basses in the mid to late 70's. What they are saying is that the mid to late 70's Fenders are definitely try-before-you-buy-basses. What has been said is that, since CBS was just milking Fender for profit, equipment wasn't being maintained and was wearing out. So, there were lots of issues with basses from that era. Also, CBS wasn't as selective with its woods as Fender has been (and Fender isn't known for being overly picky about body woods anyway). So, while you found a great late 70's P bass, there are more bad than good from this era. Fortunately for us now, though, enough time has gone by that a lot of the bad ones should be gone by now. It should be easier to find a good 70's P bass now than it was in the 70's.