Tried and true classics. Copied by everyone. You can get a boutique p bass.
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's lack of bass evolution
- Thread starter lucas303
- Start date
I have no issues with Fender following their own lead.
What I do have a problem with is other companies (Schecter, ESP, Dean,etc) that just stop trying to innovate and give in to Fender style designs.
Fender is already doing it, and doing it well.
On the other side of the coin, you have Peavey, who tried for years to give bassists very viable options to Fender and were essentially relegated to the "beginner to intermediate" classification of their offerings.
Peavey had some of the best offerings through the 80s and 90s. They were offering incredible, American-made basses (and guitars) that were severely overlooked.
What I do have a problem with is other companies (Schecter, ESP, Dean,etc) that just stop trying to innovate and give in to Fender style designs.
Fender is already doing it, and doing it well.
On the other side of the coin, you have Peavey, who tried for years to give bassists very viable options to Fender and were essentially relegated to the "beginner to intermediate" classification of their offerings.
Peavey had some of the best offerings through the 80s and 90s. They were offering incredible, American-made basses (and guitars) that were severely overlooked.
To add to my post, they could always bring back shorter-run models (Roscoe Beck, Am Deluxe Zone, etc.) that were successful, and improve them - this worked pretty well for G&L with their CLF Research basses.
The simple options I mentioned would be quite easy for Fender to offer without re-tooling or introducing new lines. Based on a lot of what I've read all over TB, they would sell. Same basses, slightly better options, low overhead, more sales.
I do think they innovated with things like the Player line, which is good gear for reasonable prices.
Last edited:
Drums don't evolve much (I think). Nor pianos, violins, trumpets.
If bassists would buy more, they would make more
Drum hardware has evolved but the evolution is practical. The stuff is lighter and does its job better and is easier to break down and set up than it was 60 years ago. Then you have the whole subcategory of electronic drums, which are pretty popular.
Funny thing is that MIDI triggers using stringed instruments is also a thing, but it's certainly not something that sells the way e-drums sell.
Last edited:
*cough* Dimension *cough*
Great basses, and nobody bought them, because they weren't P's or J's. Fender buyers tend to want that 50's - 60's aesthetic.
I think they've adapted well over time. It's just that those adaptations have been less perceptible, such as bridges, tuners, pickups, electronics, preamps and so forth. In the 80's and 90's, they modified their line rather extensively. They still produce the Aerodyne, as far as I know. It's just that in the last 20 years or so, vintage has been the big demand. Consequently, they modified their line to suit those things. They have classic-looking and functioning instruments like the Vintera series. They have a modern-functioning but classic-looking and sounding Bassman tube amp series.
Whenever a company known for something consistent comes out with something radical, it's widely perceived as a gimmick. I know that I as a bass player am not looking for something really wild. I gravitated toward Ricks, Jazzes, Precisions and Thunderbirds pretty immediately, and I've played some pretty far-out music.
Where I really appreciate musical innovation these days is in amp and cab simulation and effects. I don't need the instrument to be anything more than a device which does what it already does.
Whenever a company known for something consistent comes out with something radical, it's widely perceived as a gimmick. I know that I as a bass player am not looking for something really wild. I gravitated toward Ricks, Jazzes, Precisions and Thunderbirds pretty immediately, and I've played some pretty far-out music.
Where I really appreciate musical innovation these days is in amp and cab simulation and effects. I don't need the instrument to be anything more than a device which does what it already does.
Fender knows what sells and their evangelists will burn them at the stake from deviating from "tradition." Just look at the comments in this and the hundreds of other threads discussing the same thing. Of course Fender has tried new designs - the Dimension line, Prophecy basses, and adding 24 frets all immediately come to mind. None performed well.
At the end of the day, and as much as some people will ignore it, Fender makes mass-produced instruments that are cheap to manufacture, easy to piece together, and can be hammered out relatively quickly. Diversifying their offerings slows things down and increases their costs, which hits their bottom line. One way to overcome this is to raise prices, but people already complain that they're overpriced for what they are. The other option is to limit their offerings to a handful of base models with limited options, many of which come with upcharges. This has proven to be effective and efficient, so combining that with their customers' resistance to change they have little incentive to diversity.
At the end of the day, and as much as some people will ignore it, Fender makes mass-produced instruments that are cheap to manufacture, easy to piece together, and can be hammered out relatively quickly. Diversifying their offerings slows things down and increases their costs, which hits their bottom line. One way to overcome this is to raise prices, but people already complain that they're overpriced for what they are. The other option is to limit their offerings to a handful of base models with limited options, many of which come with upcharges. This has proven to be effective and efficient, so combining that with their customers' resistance to change they have little incentive to diversity.
This is a long thread, I haven't read everything in it, but Fender tried some new stuff with the American Jaguar bass and the Dimension. I loved the former and own one, I did not like the latter but see how some folks would. Neither sold well enough for the lines to be maintained. Fender tried, the market spoke, the end. Meanwhile, Fender Japan does seem to have success doing new things.
There may be some politics involved with this history. There were rumored issues with Bill Lawrence who designed the pickups also the bridge used on the five became unavailable and Roscoe didn't want a different bridge, some such thing. Maybe someone can fill in the complete story. The bass was not without its issues either. Fender quality was not what it is now. It would be good to see a reissue with current quality standards but I think it is unlikely.
Fender does Fender and they do that better than anybody else. I would not go to Alembic and demand a single bobbin pickup 4 string bass. If you want something different go buy another brand.
Fender epitomizes tradition. People will buy from other builders for something more modern or innovative. However, I would like to see a neck through American Jazz bass.
Not too sure about that. Isn't that exactly how Roger Sadowsky got his renown?
Latest posts
-
Brand new EBMM Stingray with very unleveled frets from the factory- Latest: Iridescentone
-
-
-
