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.
Fixing up 1963 Precision Bass
- Thread starter DavidBassista
- Start date
I have been playing this bass A LOT. It plays great and sounds even better. It has amazing tone. It picks up so much more than the fundamental note, but all kinds of harmonics. It's very rich sounding. My Stingray sounds good but doesn't even compare in the tone department. The thing is, I don't have a lot of experiences playing other P basses because the P bass didn't really appeal to me until recently and my only interest was in a vintage one. Now I'm curious to see if I could find a modern P bass that has similar tone to this 63 bass. Because the skeptic in me doesn't want to believe the hype that vintage instruments are better than modern one. But I've never played a modern one that has this sound, though I don't feel like I've played enough to draw that conclusion. Also keep in mind that most of the time I play this thing I play it through a B-15.
Twangster101
You gonna pull them pistols or whistle Dixie?
Get you one of these AVRI 63's and check it out.
I've never played an original 63 but this one is mighty sweet.
I've never played an original 63 but this one is mighty sweet.
Being as you have the "real deal" see if you can check out a re-issue. Compare those and give us your thoughts.
BTW twangster... I want that...
BTW twangster... I want that...
Thanks for putting up some fascinating pictures and a great story. Really nice to see a lovely instrument restored faithfully to it's former glory.
I'm still waiting to own my year of birth Jazz (69's are very thin on the ground!)
I'm still waiting to own my year of birth Jazz (69's are very thin on the ground!)
I posted the following in another thread where a guy is looking for a Pre-CBS type bass for less money:
I went to Guitar Center today, the one on 14th Street in Manhattan. My main reason was to try out American Standard Telecasters because I'm thinking about getting into 6 string. I actually really liked the American standard Telly, I played one with a rosewood neck. I might get one.
Then I remembered that I need to try an AVRI 63 since I wanted to compare it to the actual 1963 P bass that I own. They had a sunburst AVRI 63 that they let me try. I'll explain my thoughts in detail, but my conclusion was one of disappointment. My mentality going into this was that I really wanted to like the AVRI because I believe that one shouldn't have to buy a vintage instrument to get a really good sound (I still think that's certainly possible, but unfortunately not with the AVRI - or at least the AVRI that I played today)
First with regards to the aesthetics of the AVRI, I was unimpressed. The most glaring issue was the tort pick guard which looked more like a smear of mud than a tortoise shell design. Next the nitro finish. It was ok, the colors are not as impressive as an original or the re-fin that my bass got, but my main appointment's with the sunburst was there there was no visible wood grain in the yellow part, or even anything that would visually clue someone into knowing that the body of the bass was wood. It was just yellow. One of the reasons I like a sunburst is that you can see wood grain in the middle. That is attractive and was missing on this bass. Those were the two main cosmetic issues I had.
Next to playability and feel. This was the best part of the bass. The one I had was set up nicely and the neck felt good. It had a lacquered neck and some of the lacquer seemed to run into the rosewood a bit which kind of bothered me but not a huge issue. My 1963 has a completely worn neck with no lacquer on it so this was a different feel than my bass, but not anything bad per se. Although I think I would prefer a satin finish. The fret board felt good and I did a lot of two handed tapping on the frets which was easy enough to do on this bass.
Now I get to the biggest disappointment with the AVRI and that is sound. It's hard to describe sound, so I'll do my best. I played the bass through two different amps, an Ampeg V4B connected to a 1X12 cab and then later an SVT through a 4X10. Both tube amps. I first played through the V4B, and honestly it sounded so thin and brittle that I thought something was wrong with the amp. I adjusted knobs and tried different techniques for playing, finger style, tapping, pick, strumming, harmonics. The upper register on the bass was brittle, slappy sounding, harmonics dead sounding. The notes are not smooth and melodic like on the original. Overall the notes are very one-dimensional. They lack the harmonic richness of the original. This was most apparent on the high notes that were coarse and grating to listen to, especially when two hand tapping. For example when I play a two note interval on my original 1963, it produces very round harmonic overtones. The sound could be described as rich, full, soothing. I play an A and a D on the the 12th fret of the A and the D string of my 1963 as a simultaneous strummed chord, the bass produces a sub-sonic overtone of a low D (the note you get when tuning down your E string) in addition to the upper registered A and D. This is a quick test that I do on a lot of basses to see if that have "that sound" that I get from my 1963. I have a 1998 Music Man Stingray 5 that I bought new and has been my main bass. I love that bass but it does not produce these same harmonic overtones.
With regard to the low notes I found them to be rather flappy sounding. Less round. Again, I initially thought it was an issue with the amp. So I switched to the SVT and 4X10. This improved the sound, but it only improved the Amp, not the bass. The bass sounded more or less the same. The same issues were still there.
My conclusion is that the AVRI does not even remotely SOUND like a 1963. It sort of looks like a pale comparison of one and it plays ok and feel sort of like one with the big C neck, but the sound is not there, not at all. There is no way in my mind that this AVRI is a $2,000 bass, let alone a $1000 bass. Is it a bad bass? Well that is relative to the cost. For $1000, yes it's a bad bass. For $400 or so, its a fine bass, but even then it's not a bass that would inspire me to play it a lot. I would have to continue my quest.
I went to Guitar Center today, the one on 14th Street in Manhattan. My main reason was to try out American Standard Telecasters because I'm thinking about getting into 6 string. I actually really liked the American standard Telly, I played one with a rosewood neck. I might get one.
Then I remembered that I need to try an AVRI 63 since I wanted to compare it to the actual 1963 P bass that I own. They had a sunburst AVRI 63 that they let me try. I'll explain my thoughts in detail, but my conclusion was one of disappointment. My mentality going into this was that I really wanted to like the AVRI because I believe that one shouldn't have to buy a vintage instrument to get a really good sound (I still think that's certainly possible, but unfortunately not with the AVRI - or at least the AVRI that I played today)
First with regards to the aesthetics of the AVRI, I was unimpressed. The most glaring issue was the tort pick guard which looked more like a smear of mud than a tortoise shell design. Next the nitro finish. It was ok, the colors are not as impressive as an original or the re-fin that my bass got, but my main appointment's with the sunburst was there there was no visible wood grain in the yellow part, or even anything that would visually clue someone into knowing that the body of the bass was wood. It was just yellow. One of the reasons I like a sunburst is that you can see wood grain in the middle. That is attractive and was missing on this bass. Those were the two main cosmetic issues I had.
Next to playability and feel. This was the best part of the bass. The one I had was set up nicely and the neck felt good. It had a lacquered neck and some of the lacquer seemed to run into the rosewood a bit which kind of bothered me but not a huge issue. My 1963 has a completely worn neck with no lacquer on it so this was a different feel than my bass, but not anything bad per se. Although I think I would prefer a satin finish. The fret board felt good and I did a lot of two handed tapping on the frets which was easy enough to do on this bass.
Now I get to the biggest disappointment with the AVRI and that is sound. It's hard to describe sound, so I'll do my best. I played the bass through two different amps, an Ampeg V4B connected to a 1X12 cab and then later an SVT through a 4X10. Both tube amps. I first played through the V4B, and honestly it sounded so thin and brittle that I thought something was wrong with the amp. I adjusted knobs and tried different techniques for playing, finger style, tapping, pick, strumming, harmonics. The upper register on the bass was brittle, slappy sounding, harmonics dead sounding. The notes are not smooth and melodic like on the original. Overall the notes are very one-dimensional. They lack the harmonic richness of the original. This was most apparent on the high notes that were coarse and grating to listen to, especially when two hand tapping. For example when I play a two note interval on my original 1963, it produces very round harmonic overtones. The sound could be described as rich, full, soothing. I play an A and a D on the the 12th fret of the A and the D string of my 1963 as a simultaneous strummed chord, the bass produces a sub-sonic overtone of a low D (the note you get when tuning down your E string) in addition to the upper registered A and D. This is a quick test that I do on a lot of basses to see if that have "that sound" that I get from my 1963. I have a 1998 Music Man Stingray 5 that I bought new and has been my main bass. I love that bass but it does not produce these same harmonic overtones.
With regard to the low notes I found them to be rather flappy sounding. Less round. Again, I initially thought it was an issue with the amp. So I switched to the SVT and 4X10. This improved the sound, but it only improved the Amp, not the bass. The bass sounded more or less the same. The same issues were still there.
My conclusion is that the AVRI does not even remotely SOUND like a 1963. It sort of looks like a pale comparison of one and it plays ok and feel sort of like one with the big C neck, but the sound is not there, not at all. There is no way in my mind that this AVRI is a $2,000 bass, let alone a $1000 bass. Is it a bad bass? Well that is relative to the cost. For $1000, yes it's a bad bass. For $400 or so, its a fine bass, but even then it's not a bass that would inspire me to play it a lot. I would have to continue my quest.
Your bass came out incredibly beautiful. I think I soiled myself when I saw the picture with the B15!
I haven't played any reissues that compare to the old basses. My other p bass is a bunch of vintage parts, the body being a 70 and the neck a 66. It had a 69 neck on it and I didn't like it either. Too bad these things,even the parts are getting out of the price range for a lot of players.
I haven't played any reissues that compare to the old basses. My other p bass is a bunch of vintage parts, the body being a 70 and the neck a 66. It had a 69 neck on it and I didn't like it either. Too bad these things,even the parts are getting out of the price range for a lot of players.
- Jun 30, 2010
- 49,587
- 221,942
- Disclosures
- musician/artist/owner - Gildaxe
- Jun 30, 2010
- 49,587
- 221,942
- Disclosures
- musician/artist/owner - Gildaxe
It is unfortunate - supply and demand. To all those who continually debate the real or imagined worth of "vintage", it's hard to deny their worth if you are lucky enough to own one. But having said that, one can achieve a wonderful tone/voice (with many alternatives old or new) if their heart & soul is truly part of the mix.
Re-hashing this thread to ask a specific question about my 1963 Fender. What wood is the body made out of? Is it Alder or Ash? I feel like I was told that it is Alder and it kind of looks like Alder. Can a Fender expert chime in here? For reference, here are a few pics of the bass that were posted earlier in the thread that show the body wood. I'm asking because I'm looking at possibly ordering a CS Fender bass and I am trying to decide whether to get an Alder or Ash body.
Attachments
Yes, it looks like alder.
However another body of the same wood may or may not result in a bass that will sound close to the one you have. In short, it's a crapshoot.
However another body of the same wood may or may not result in a bass that will sound close to the one you have. In short, it's a crapshoot.
Thanks for the replies. I assumed it was alder. I was looking at getting a quote on a 1960 CS Precision build. The base model wood used for the 1960 is ash. I found that odd, I thought that a historic 1960 would be alder. When did they switch from ash to alder? Maybe I should try ash for the CS build? It seems to have a more interesting grain pattern and I'll be getting the bass with a transparent finish. Thoughts?
Ash will normally be heavier than alder. I prefer ash bodies but that’s just my personal taste.
