Fender's weaknesses?

[Stranger Danger]

Guys, guys, this string is not about Fender guitars and basses. It is also not about complaints. And, it most certainly is not about Leo. The OP asked what weaknesses The Company has. The Company is not the product, and it has not had anything to do with Leo for 50 years, and every company has weaknesses. Through the 90's, GM was making many times more money every year than Fender has made through its entire existence, and a decade later they were in bankruptcy. The market changes, the competition changes, everything changes, and identifying a company's strengths and weaknesses is how a company prepares itself for that changing environment.

Thread not string

 

[6stringpanda]

Lack of total dynamic articulation. It's a lot to ask from such a large company to make a bass sound even from lowest E to highest G.

Too few color options. Gloss. Heavier gloss. And clear gloss...

Getting what you pay for. Playing a Squier (by Fender) CV Pbass versus an MIA Fender Pbass sidebyside, it's alarmingly close in quality. A few differences being tight pockets, nut material, and rout quality. For $350 vs $1250, it's too little difference.

+1

I do not hate Fender-quite the opposite but you have to see the point of this statement-a squier and American fender should differ greatly considering the 1000 price difference.

Funny-everyone comments of the Asian basses (Ibbys) but look at the quality of some of the stuff coming out of Asian for the price vs. the American companies-oh-by the way, how many of the components of the "American" basses are made offshore-A higher percentage than most people know-I have been in manufacturing for almost 20 years and am amazed by the "Made In America" statement made by companies when only final assembly takes place in this country from foreign components.

 

[TonyP-]

There 5 strings in general are not the best.

If they offered a P and J with different wood options for both body and fretboard in a 35" they would have a another whole part of the market.

 

[georgestrings]

+1

I do not hate Fender-quite the opposite but you have to see the point of this statement-a squier and American fender should differ greatly considering the 1000 price difference.

Not really - it's a case of diminishing returns, and opinion/ perception... The rest of that post is purely ill informed opinion, which I couldn't disagree more with...


- georgestrings

 

[6stringpanda]

Basswave is also right one with this one. Of the Fenders I have owned-the 5 string's B is just -blah-

Also, 1500-2500 for a bass that doesnt even have any real wood or finish options-

I understand that Fender is Fender but they actually had some real nice stuff in the late 80s early 90s (zone basses were sweet and my heartfields) but the last 10 years or so they seem to be missing the mark.

 

[blue4]

There 5 strings in general are not the best.

If they offered a P and J with different wood options for both body and fretboard in a 35" they would have a another whole part of the market.

I don't think I've ever met anyone in person who wants a 35" scale bass. I know that you guys are out there due to this website, but I don't know if the overall market is that big for Fender to make a bass for it. And to be even more honest, ive only met one or two other people besides myself who know what their bass is made of. They ony know the neck is maple. Again, I know people who want these things are out there, but not in the numbers to make it worthwhile. I dont think Fender would make any money putting out a 35" exotic wood bass.

 

[TonyP-]

I don't think I've ever met anyone in person who wants a 35" scale bass. I know that you guys are out there due to this website, but I don't know if the overall market is that big for Fender to make a bass for it. And to be even more honest, ive only met one or two other people besides myself who know what their bass is made of. They ony know the neck is maple. Again, I know people who want these things are out there, but not in the numbers to make it worthwhile. I dont think Fender would make any money putting out a 35" exotic wood bass.

I'm not talking exotic woods....Ash/Alder and Rosewood/Maple/Ebony for boards with the players choice.
Maybe do a Koa for extra whatever....

Most of the gigging guys I know, know exactly what their basses are made off. Also a 35" B can be addicting so to speak and are significantly more uniform then a 34".

 

[6stringpanda]

+1 basswave.

Sorry-Fender's low Bs are not the greatest-and I like Fenders.

Plus-besides scale length (34 or 35") there are other ways to make the low B more articulate-bridge-tuner-string trees-I have played 34" scale 5 and 6 string basses with excellent low B strings-just not on a fender.

 

[kohntarkosz]

NO, but it was probably because you couldn't afford a good Fender.

Brand loyalty is a strange concept.

 

[blue4]

I'm not talking exotic woods....Ash/Alder and Rosewood/Maple/Ebony for boards.
Maybe do a Koa for extra whatever....

Most of the gigging guys I know, know exactly what their basses are made off. Also a 35" B can be addicting so to speak and are significantly more uniform then a 34".

1. You probably hang with somewhat pro players. I would guess the majority of people who play bass, not necessarily just regular giggers, buy the level of bass they can afford from their favorite manufacturers. Whether it is ash, alder, or agthais, I argue most people couldnt tell or care. A Koa extra would require them to update their supply chains for not a lot of payoff.
2 That may be true. I could see where drop tuning metal player would want a 35" bass, or a jazz player who doubles on DB who wants better tone off his B would want one, but thats not Fender's market to began with. Thats like Chevy putting out a luxury car. The people who buy luxury cars wouldnt touch a Chevy regardless of the exotic wood on the dash. That's how I see Fender. JMO.

 

[MonkeyBass]

I haven't read all the posts but here's my take on Fender's flaws:
1. Neck dive is an issue (especially on their terrible 5 and 6-string models)
2. The bridges are pretty bad
3. Chrome covers that serve no purpose
4. Some of the truss rods can only be adjusted by taking off the neck
5. Flat cut headstocks that don't give a proper string angle at the nut
6. The electronics are under the pickguard
7. Not 24 frets, and 1 fret shy of a three octave E scale (Always bothered me)
8. Notorious dead spots on older instruments
9. Stuck into two models for both their guitars (strat and tele) and basses (P and J)
10. Quality is inconsistent
11. They shunned smaller music stores by making them do a $20,000 inventory buy in a few years ago. I know several Mom and Pop stores that now sell their competition instead


And that's my problem with Fender.

But... I own a '69 P Bass and I love it... except the neck dive, the bridge, and having to take the neck off to adjust the truss rod.

 

[TonyP-]

1. You probably hang with somewhat pro players. I would guess the majority of people who play bass, not necessarily just regular giggers, buy the level of bass they can afford from their favorite manufacturers. Whether it is ash, alder, or agthais, I argue most people couldnt tell or care. A Koa extra would require them to update their supply chains for not a lot of payoff.
2 That may be true. I could see where drop tuning metal player would want a 35" bass, or a jazz player who doubles on DB who wants better tone off his B would want one, but thats not Fender's market to began with. Thats like Chevy putting out a luxury car. The people who buy luxury cars wouldnt touch a Chevy regardless of the exotic wood on the dash. That's how I see Fender. JMO.

Well I can see you both your points to a point in each (no pun intended). I will do my best to address.

1. Fender could do a something like what Musicman/EB thing does and have X amount of bodies for something like a family reserve piece. (Which by the way that term is just BS marketing to make the end fanatic to feel like they have some special relationship with the company...Sorry I digress) However Carvin is able to do with SEVERAL more options in one of the most expensive parts of the country (San Diego) again...Not a ton just a few options.

2. Some of my closest friends are working professionals so that is true. However I think your Joe Average guy has a preference and think that preference should be made more ready available. How many guys pay 3K + for a bass that could looks like a $300 bass (Insert high end J bass company right here, like a Sadowsky, ect) BTW thats not a knock I'm saying that those companies put out Fender looking instruments (mostly). The answer would be...A lot (Just look at the Sadowsky thread for instance).

If there was a higher end bass that was priced in the mid to high teens with good hardware and at 35" BANG. Fender would have a portion of that other market. The car analogy does not exactly apply and Let me give you my opinion on why.

How many top players have in their stable both High end more boutique-ish basses and a fender or fender/clone. More then you might think. Marcus Miller uses both his signature bass and will play a Smith or a Modulus Q fretless. My buddy Jimmy Earl plays Fender Js Jimmy Kimmel and does the Warwick endorsee thing...If you merge a little your going to get the crossover.

I think the P&W crowd who dig those the 35" basses would be all over this. Again IMHO.

 

[blue4]

Well I can see you both your points to a point in each (no pun intended). I will do my best to address.

1. Fender could do a something like what Musicman/EB thing does and have X amount of bodies for something like a family reserve piece. (Which by the way that term is just BS marketing to make the end fanatic to feel like they have some special relationship with the company...Sorry I digress) However Carvin is able to do with SEVERAL more options in one of the most expensive parts of the country (San Diego) again...Not a ton just a few options.

2. Some of my closest friends are working professionals so that is true. However I think your Joe Average guy has a preference and think that preference should be made more ready available. How many guys pay 3K + for a bass that could looks like a $300 bass (Insert high end J bass company right here, like a Sadowsky, ect) BTW thats not a knock I'm saying that those companies put out Fender looking instruments (mostly). The answer would be...A lot (Just look at the Sadowsky thread for instance).

If there was a higher end bass that was priced in the mid to high teens with good hardware and at 35" BANG. Fender would have a portion of that other market. The car analogy does not exactly apply and Let me give you my opinion on why.

How many top players have in their stable both High end more boutique-ish basses and a fender or fender/clone. More then you might think. Marcus Miller uses both his signature bass and will play a Smith or a Modulus Q fretless. My buddy Jimmy Earl plays Fender Js Jimmy Kimmel and does the Warwick endorsee thing...If you merge a little your going to get the crossover.

I think the P&W crowd who dig those the 35" basses would be all over this. Again IMHO.

You're probably right. But I can see where Fender would hesitate.

 

[eukatheude]

For something to be obsolete it has to be rendered useless by a better product. There is no evidence of this happening. I have worked on hundreds of P bass electronics with out having to remove the strings. You can slide the pick guard between the neck and strings, flip it over and you have access to the pots.

Not always possible IME. And it's still an additional hassle.
And you could say Fender has been rendered useless by the various Sadowskys, Alleva-Coppolos etc. though i understand the price difference.

The straight headstock is stronger than a tilt back headstock, and there is absolutely no disadvantage in using a string retainer.

I find the retainer to be a very inelegant solution, that's all.
Is there any evidence that the straight headstock is stronger? AFAIK, glued wood is usually stronger, which is the case with angled headstocks.

Ive had dead spots on tilt back neck through basses, they are not a Fender design flaw, but a physics problem that can be present in any bass.

I'm not saying it's related to the construction method per se; i'm saying pretty much every Fender bass, out of the factory, has dead spots. Which is not the case with many other brands, lots of which cost less than Fender.