• 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.

Fodera Club Part V

Status
Not open for further replies.
#509
Since many of you know and play our instruments, I have a question for you. As you are probably already aware, over the past 24 months we have made a number of refinements to the NYC line to bring them ever closer to the custom instruments.

Here is the question...

If you were us, would you stick with the same headstock that we have been using for the NYC, or would you begin using the traditional Fodera headstock on them (the narrower modern Fodera headstock)? Why?

All else about the instruments would remain the same...they would still have one piece Maple neck without the back angle that we use on the custom instruments...only the shape of the headstock would change. This would mean a 2+2 configuration for the 4's and a 2+ 3 for the 5's.

Looking forward to your answers...
 
#510
Pure IMO here... I view this line as competing more with the other boutique J Bass models, and (again IMO) most who want that sort of thing (like me!) are looking for at least a somewhat 'J look', which means the typical modification of a classic Fender headstock. So, I would leave it alone.

Also, from a marketing and branding perspective, you really (again IMO) don't want to blurr the lines between the NYC and 'traditional' Fodera brands. The 'butterfly' logo is plenty to tie that line to the rest of the brand franchise.

I look forward to playing one of the more recent NYC's. They look very nice!

Edit: And again, what a wonderful job you did getting the business end of the Fodera house in order. Really impressive!
 
#512
Ken -- Thanks so much for the feedback and kind words. You are welcome to come visit the shop any time!

KJung said:
Pure IMO here... I view this line as competing more with the other boutique J Bass models, and (again IMO) most who want that sort of thing (like me!) are looking for at least a somewhat 'J look', which means the typical modification of a classic Fender headstock. So, I would leave it alone.

Also, from a marketing and branding perspective, you really (again IMO) don't want to blurr the lines between the NYC and 'traditional' Fodera brands. The 'butterfly' logo is plenty to tie that line to the rest of the brand franchise.

I look forward to playing one of the more recent NYC's. They look very nice!

Edit: And again, what a wonderful job you did getting the business end of the Fodera house in order. Really impressive!
Click to expand...
 
#513
Hi JT,
Great question about the NYC headstocks. You and I have spoken before about this, but I'll just state my view for the forum here. First of all, the new NYC butterflies look significantly better than the older NYC butterflies, and I'd keep them for sure. The one thing that really detracts (IMO) from the look of these basses is the text font/writing used that says N.Y.C. Something about the particular font looks sort of art deco/cheap to me. I personally would like to see the text removed or significantly modified.

As far as J bass style instruments go, I think the current headstock shape is great. But unlike Ken, I don't really see these instruments just as modern J bass clones, although they can satisfy that role, but as moving towards a more affordable line of Fodera instruments. For a traditional J look, the current headstock definitely works. But given that they can now come with beautiful tops, dual coils, and upgraded preamps, I would favor (for those builds) the custom instrument Fodera headstock (which is the most elegant one ever designed, again IMO). Again, for me, the text is what I like least about the design, not the headstock shape. On the new 4 strings, the butterfly location is a little off-putting, although I'm not sure there's a better solution (smaller butterfly at the headstock tip oriented normally rather than rotated?)
 
#514
climb said:
Hi JT,
Great question about the NYC headstocks. You and I have spoken before about this, but I'll just state my view for the forum here. First of all, the new NYC butterflies look significantly better than the older NYC butterflies, and I'd keep them for sure. The one thing that really detracts (IMO) from the look of these basses is the text font/writing used that says N.Y.C. Something about the particular font looks sort of art deco/cheap to me. I personally would like to see the text removed or significantly modified.

As far as J bass style instruments go, I think the current headstock shape is great. But unlike Ken, I don't really see these instruments just as modern J bass clones, although they can satisfy that role, but as moving towards a more affordable line of Fodera instruments. For a traditional J look, the current headstock definitely works. But given that they can now come with beautiful tops, dual coils, and upgraded preamps, I would favor (for those builds) the custom instrument Fodera headstock (which is the most elegant one ever designed, again IMO). Again, for me, the text is what I like least about the design, not the headstock shape. On the new 4 strings, the butterfly location is a little off-putting, although I'm not sure there's a better solution (smaller butterfly at the headstock tip oriented normally rather than rotated?)
Click to expand...

This makes sense also, and suggests almost a double 'NYC' product line... 'classic' (J oriented models) and 'modern' (the more tricked out models with soapbars, etc.). The different headstock design would work nicely to differentiate those two lines. A number of luthiers who do the boutique J thing have this sort of 'dual model' deal, with the 'moderns' having a more modern neck radius, a longer scale, and typically dual coils or soapbars, sometimes with a fancy top. The 'classics' or 'vintage' versions are the more 'Fendery' sort of thing... standard scale, rounder radius, more classic J pickups, etc.

TOTALLY agree with the NYC decal... doesn't really fit with the quality vibe of that brand. A decal is fine, but that particular execution is a bit downscale looking.
 
#515
If I may say this :

I feel for my taste that the Butterfly or how it's placed doesn't look good on the NYC headstocks... I liked the old version of the very first Empire Basses best.

I would have no problem seeing the "Fodera" headstocks or maybe a marriage of the two (the custom and the NYC headstock) on the new Empire basses.

To me they (funny) never felt like a J-Bass version :) or (If I'm honest) like a real Fodera
 
#516
Lennard III. said:
To me they (funny) never felt like a J-Bass version :)
Click to expand...

I agree, the NYC's were always in a bit of a ''no man's'' land, IMO not really competing very well in the 'boutique J' thing, but not really looking or feeling like Fodera's.

I think reviewing the design and position of this line is a good thing... are they 'Skyline' or 'Metro' Fodera's? (i.e., similar in design goal, tone, and specs, with simplified manufacturing and/or off shore builds) to the 'upper line' models, or, are they a sub-brand of the Fodera line meant to compete in the 'high end boutique J' category (e.g., classic look, bolt one, J pickups, etc.).

Either goal makes sense, and to your point, you can't really do both with a single instrument IMO. One way or the other... or having the 'classic versus modern' sub-brands within the NYC line.

Given the high price and high demand for a 'Fodera', and the VERY cluttered 'boutique J' category, with many very nice options, the 'Skyline' approach (i.e., a more affordable 'real' Fodera) with the Fodera headstock does make some sense. However, a company has to be VERY careful with that strategy, and not result in cheapening the entire franchise. As a marketing and new product consultant in my day job, that is dangerous ground for a 'high end' company. The companies that have been successful with this strategy (IMO, Sadowsky and Lakland) pretty much have completely different distribution networks for the 'high end' versus the 'off shore' brands to keep them separated in the eye of the consumer.
 
#517
I'm not firm in a particular opinion on this subject, but the one thing that comes to my mind (and forgive me if someone already mentioned it and I missed it) is not what good it would do the NYC line, but the potential for it to "devalue" the flagship Fodera line. Seems like there should be something very apparent that one gets when they pay the big bucks for a Fodera. Just a thought.
 
#518
thepontif said:
I'm not firm in a particular opinion on this subject, but the one thing that comes to my mind (and forgive me if someone already mentioned it and I missed it) is not what good it would do the NYC line, but the potential for it to "devalue" the flagship Fodera line. Seems like there should be something very apparent that one gets when they pay the big bucks for a Fodera. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Hey Mike. Yes, that was the issue I raised in the last part of my post right above yours... that becomes a slippery slope for a high end brand, and can do more damage than good to the overall brand if the company is not very careful.

Given what I do in my day job, this topic is very interesting to me, and it is rare that I can discuss these issues in the context of the music gear category that I enjoy so much... hence all the posting!

IMO, Epifani is a classic example of how NOT to enter the lower end of the market if you are a high end brand, and Sadowsky is a wonderful example of how to do it right (i.e., providing a very high quality, lower cost instrument without damaging the hi end brand).
 
#520
Not to get too off topic, but...

Don't you think that Metros have devalued NYC Sadowsky's? I think they have in many respects, and IMO a Metro and a Sadowsky NYC are much more similar to one another than a custom Fodera and a Fodera NYC. Why do you think the Metro was properly executed? It still baffles me that Metros can have blocks/binding but Sadowsky NYCs can't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back