For you SX haters!!!

[stanger503]

You get the same thing outside of TB as well. Until very recently I drove a 1993 geo prism for years. a few weeks ago I "upgraded" to a camry/laklandskyline. At work, one of the first comments I got was "why didnt you get a bmw/audi/lexus/whatever. Well, uh, why bother? The Geo served the EXACT same function as the BMW 700 series that the A-hole at work brags about incessantly. Fact is my geo/sx gets better mileage, requires, less maintenance, and cost about 35 times less than his bmw/sadowsky. And I cant justify spending that much money on a car/bass when all it does it get me from point a to point b.

Or I cant afford it. IN which case, does belittling the camry or geo make you feel better?

You can fill in the rest of the analogies that I left out. Its the same thing.

Shame on those who belittle my geo.

not to take this off track..but my buddy had a geo metro in highschool....we beat the hell out of that thing. and it still drove just fine.i think its funny how all these people bend over backwards to have a sports type car with more hosepower than they will EVER need or use. unless youre ready to pay for tickets, the average person with those cars will never take the tach to where it COULD go...i know my truck...i drive it like a truck and use it..like a truck... granted i dont really need a 1 ton diesel monster, i just love diesels of all kinds and they do more for me than gasoline engines can do. w/e thats way off topic but i love my sx anyhow. its not my #1 but i think i will always have an sx in my possession

 

[HelloJerk]

You get the same thing outside of TB as well. Until very recently I drove a 1993 geo prism for years. a few weeks ago I "upgraded" to a camry/laklandskyline. At work, one of the first comments I got was "why didnt you get a bmw/audi/lexus/whatever. Well, uh, why bother? The Geo served the EXACT same function as the BMW 700 series that the A-hole at work brags about incessantly. Fact is my geo/sx gets better mileage, requires, less maintenance, and cost about 35 times less than his bmw/sadowsky. And I cant justify spending that much money on a car/bass when all it does it get me from point a to point b.

Or I cant afford it. IN which case, does belittling the camry or geo make you feel better?

You can fill in the rest of the analogies that I left out. Its the same thing.

Shame on those who belittle my geo.

Are you suggesting that sadowsky players are compensating for something? That's not cool.

 

[selowitch]

It seems to me that for TBers, SX basses are like movies people haven't seen: not having played them doesn't prevent them from having an (entirely uninformed) opinion!

Well, I have played them, and I'll say this: You do get a lot of bass for money, no question. The trouble is, for all but the most indifferent or deaf player, you simply aren't, in that case, spending enough money to produce a solid sound and get solid playability. As I've said elsewhere, if the price-to-value ratio for SX basses remained constant and they produced a $500 SX, you'd have a custom-shop quality instrument for a song. The trouble is they only make sub-$200 instruments. Most of them are not to my taste, and they have awful bridges (then again, the MIM bridges are nothing to write home about, either), scratchy electronics, odd-sounding pickups, and weird nuclear-orange (amber?) finishes on the maple necks.

So to me, SXes are quirky, fairly well-made imports of decent quality. No, SXes do not, as a rule, "suck" -- but let's face it: they ain't "Secret Sadowskys" neither. Certainly fine for a beginner, for someone seek a cheap mod platform, or for a distant backup instrument. But those folks who think an SX belongs as your main gigging bass are probably kidding themselves. They really think they're happy, and that's great to a point. But then, a lot of folks think they are happy running Windows on their computers until they try Mac OS or Linux. Lots of people think they love their abusive/drunk/indifferent significant other, too, until they are free of them. I do think Kurt Zentmaier has achieved something special from a business perspective: he has managed to get his costs down low enough that he can offer decent, low-cost instruments and a low cost to the domestic market. He deserves applause for that.

That said, on average, a Squier is only marginally more expensive and will be of much more consistent quality than an SX, especially the Vintage Modified or Classic Vibe series. Do yourself a favor, prospective bass buyer: Get yourself the beautiful 60s Classic Vibe P-Bass in Sonic Blue or the Article White 60s Classic Vibe J-Bass for just a few dollars more and skip all the expensive modding. You can even sometimes get away without filing the frets.

 

[troyus]

That said, on average, a Squier is only marginally more expensive and will be of much more consistent quality than an SX, especially the Vintage Modified or Classic Vibe series. Do yourself a favor, prospective bass buyer: Get yourself the beautiful 60s Classic Vibe P-Bass in Sonic Blue or the Article White 60s Classic Vibe J-Bass for just a few dollars more and skip all the expensive modding. You can even sometimes get away without filing the frets.

I'll have to disagree, for less than half the money going the SX route you get a bass made out of Alder instead of basswood. Being someone who has owned and taken apart/reassembled the whole line up and down, Squier, MIM, MIJ, and American, the place SX occupies in that line up would be something like Squier+, but for much less money.

They both have lousy body routes and average paintjobs, pickups and tuners. I'll give the Squier the nod for a better bridge but that is about it.

 

[oldrookie]

It seems to me that for TBers, SX basses are like movies people haven't seen: not having played them doesn't prevent them from having an (entirely uninformed) opinion!

The trouble is, for all but the most indifferent or deaf player, you simply aren't, in that case, spending enough money to produce a solid sound and get solid playability.

The trouble is they only make sub-$200 instruments. Most of them are not to my taste, and they have awful bridges (then again, the MIM bridges are nothing to write home about, either), scratchy electronics, odd-sounding pickups, and weird nuclear-orange (amber?) finishes on the maple necks.

So to me, SXes are quirky, fairly well-made imports of decent quality. No, SXes do not, as a rule, "suck" -- but let's face it: they ain't "Secret Sadowskys" neither. Certainly fine for a beginner, for someone seek a cheap mod platform, or for a distant backup instrument. But those folks who think an SX belongs as your main gigging bass are probably kidding themselves. They really think they're happy, and that's great to a point.

That said, on average, a Squier is only marginally more expensive and will be of much more consistent quality than an SX, especially the Vintage Modified or Classic Vibe series. Do yourself a favor, prospective bass buyer: Get yourself the beautiful 60s Classic Vibe P-Bass in Sonic Blue or the Article White 60s Classic Vibe J-Bass for just a few dollars more and skip all the expensive modding. You can even sometimes get away without filing the frets.

Sigh.

So we are to continue to ignore the testimony of gigging professionals who voluntarily attest to the quality of their basses...AND our own ears/hands because we have ALL deluded ourselves?

And we are supposed to ignore the fact that many solid players have written post after post saying that mods were NOT necessary for most, but just add to the fun of owning an SX?

I have played the VM Squiers that are "marginally more expensive" and they left me cold. Nice enough, I suppose, I just didn't like them even "marginally more."

 

[dave120]

I'm not sure how people who gig these basses on a regular basis can be "kidding themselves."

Guys like Savit have played more gigs to bigger crowds than 98% of us on here and don't seem to have any issue. And it's not like he doesn't have any better basses to choose from. People with much less experience telling him what is and isn't a good bass is pretty good entertainment.

People can play whatever they want, and they will. I highly doubt anyone changes their mind about their own gear because some ignorant people insult it on a web forum like this.

 

[selowitch]

I'm not sure how people who gig these basses on a regular basis can be "kidding themselves."

My point exactly. You don't see how it's possible, and neither do they. And I'm happy for those who are satisfied with these substandard instruments, I really am. It's great that they get so much joy for so little money. It's just not there for me, and I think the SX-teria around here is misplaced. This Chinese Emperor has no clothes.

Show me a typical modded SX on which someone spent $400 and I show you a Squier I bought for $300 that, on average, plays, sounds and feels better. One bassist's opinion is all this is. But I would like people to take seriously my contention that SXes are vastly overrated here at TB. Big time.

It's worth mentioning, though, that there's no doubt that a lot of the SX players around here are fabulous musicians, much better than me, and they probably sound better than me no matter what equipment I've got. Just for some context.

And BTW, I think it's not fair to characterize my critique as an "insult," especially since I feel I've given SXes their due. They've made a positive contribution to the marketplace. For cheap, low-value instruments, they are a good buy. I also think your ad hominem attack on me as "ignorant" is plainly false. Please don't take this personally. We're talking about inanimate objects here, not people.

 

[SRT80]

People can play whatever they want, and they will. I highly doubt anyone changes their mind about their own gear because some ignorant people insult it on a web forum like this.

WERD!

And here's a quote from Bob Babbitt to me when talkin' about my SX...

"SRT80....It makes no difference what model you play, how much it cost, what it looks like, etc. etc. As long as you love the sound and the feel of the Bass that's all that matters...Bob"

'nough said!
Steve

 

[oldrookie]

My point exactly. You don't see how it's possible, and neither do they. And I'm happy for those who are satisfied with these substandard instruments, I really am. It's great that they get so much joy for so little money. It's just not there for me, and I think the SX-teria around here is misplaced. This Chinese Emperor has no clothes.

I'm pretty sure the portion quoted doesn't support your argument. Quite the opposite, actually.

 

[dannster]

Every bass is different. Even the same make-model-featured bass varies. The 2 SX I bought got sent back as they just weren't for me. I've spent a lot of money on some and very little on others. I've never found that money spent equals a great bass every time.

If you found and SX that works for you? Great! More power to ya.

I was impressed with the overall look and the resonant tone of the wood. I thought they fell short in the hardware dept. mainly. Easily remedied but I couldn't justify it for myself.

 

[jmain]

WERD!

And here's a quote from Bob Babbitt to me when talkin' about my SX...

"SRT80....It makes no difference what model you play, how much it cost, what it looks like, etc. etc. As long as you love the sound and the feel of the Bass that's all that matters...Bob"

'nough said!
Steve

Right on!

 

[bassrique]

It seems to me that for TBers, SX basses are like movies people haven't seen: not having played them doesn't prevent them from having an (entirely uninformed) opinion!

Well, I have played them, and I'll say this: You do get a lot of bass for money, no question. The trouble is, for all but the most indifferent or deaf player, you simply aren't, in that case, spending enough money to produce a solid sound and get solid playability. As I've said elsewhere, if the price-to-value ratio for SX basses remained constant and they produced a $500 SX, you'd have a custom-shop quality instrument for a song. The trouble is they only make sub-$200 instruments. Most of them are not to my taste, and they have awful bridges (then again, the MIM bridges are nothing to write home about, either), scratchy electronics, odd-sounding pickups, and weird nuclear-orange (amber?) finishes on the maple necks.

So to me, SXes are quirky, fairly well-made imports of decent quality. No, SXes do not, as a rule, "suck" -- but let's face it: they ain't "Secret Sadowskys" neither. Certainly fine for a beginner, for someone seek a cheap mod platform, or for a distant backup instrument. But those folks who think an SX belongs as your main gigging bass are probably kidding themselves. They really think they're happy, and that's great to a point. But then, a lot of folks think they are happy running Windows on their computers until they try Mac OS or Linux. Lots of people think they love their abusive/drunk/indifferent significant other, too, until they are free of them. I do think Kurt Zentmaier has achieved something special from a business perspective: he has managed to get his costs down low enough that he can offer decent, low-cost instruments and a low cost to the domestic market. He deserves applause for that.

That said, on average, a Squier is only marginally more expensive and will be of much more consistent quality than an SX, especially the Vintage Modified or Classic Vibe series. Do yourself a favor, prospective bass buyer: Get yourself the beautiful 60s Classic Vibe P-Bass in Sonic Blue or the Article White 60s Classic Vibe J-Bass for just a few dollars more and skip all the expensive modding. You can even sometimes get away without filing the frets.

JimmyM did a SX/Fender A/B soundclip test here, and guess what happened?

 

[bassrique]

My point exactly. You don't see how it's possible, and neither do they. And I'm happy for those who are satisfied with these substandard instruments, I really am. It's great that they get so much joy for so little money. It's just not there for me, and I think the SX-teria around here is misplaced. This Chinese Emperor has no clothes.

Show me a typical modded SX on which someone spent $400 and I show you a Squier I bought for $300 that, on average, plays, sounds and feels better. One bassist's opinion is all this is. But I would like people to take seriously my contention that SXes are vastly overrated here at TB. Big time.

It's worth mentioning, though, that there's no doubt that a lot of the SX players around here are fabulous musicians, much better than me, and they probably sound better than me no matter what equipment I've got. Just for some context.

And BTW, I think it's not fair to characterize my critique as an "insult," especially since I feel I've given SXes their due. They've made a positive contribution to the marketplace. For cheap, low-value instruments, they are a good buy.

Dude, If I put $400 in my SX, it'll absolutely blow away a Squier, and several other lines of Fenders as well I'll add.

 

[selowitch]

Dude, If I put $400 in my SX, it'll absolutely blow away a Squier, and several other lines of Fenders as well I'll add.

I meant that you spent $400 total, including the cost of the SX itself. But hey -- if you like it, that's way more important than whether I do.

I think we have to remember that I'm merely providing an opinion in the unlikely case some fellow bassist wishes to factor in that opinion in his or her choice of instrument.

I also believe that a number of people started out being impressed that SXes are not total pieces of junk and their reputation undeservedly snowballed from here. Word got out that the SX is better than a MIM Fender for a fraction of the price, and many people believed it and continue to believe it. But I think a rational evaluation of the objective criteria would lead to a much harsher verdict were there not so many who believe they've found a diamond in the rough.

But you know what? If you enjoy playing these axes and if they make it possible for you to play, make music, and enjoy yourself, who am I, a bassist absolutely nobody has heard of, to stand in the way?

 

[SRT80]

I could buy new pickups, new wiring, pots, have the frets leveled, all that and I would have under $400. A new MIM Fender P is $500.

I like the sound of the stock SX pickups. My only dislike is they must be larger than Fender/Squier pickups because I have a few lic. Fender pickguards and the pickup cavity is too tight to go over the SX pickups...

Steve

 

[bassrique]

I meant that you spent $400 total, including the cost of the SX itself. But hey -- if you like it, that way more important than whether I do.

The same holds true for $300 in mods.

 

[selowitch]

The same holds true for $300 in mods.

Suit yourself. I sent my musically inert, crudely cut, haphazardly sprayed Rondo back and put the money toward a MIM Fender, and I'm glad I did. Your mileage clearly varies from mine, and more power to ya.

It may even be that your particular Rondo is as good as my particular Fender. But I don't think that would be a common occurrence from which you can discern a trend.

 

[HelloJerk]

It seems that there are those who believe that even if they replaced all of the electronics, and hardware, slapped on a new neck, changed out the body, and replaced the strings, an SX would still be inferior to any other bass simply because it is an SX. Good for them.

 

[Limpingbass]

I was impressed by my first SX now I own two!

I changed the bridge/tuner on one of them only because I wanted black hardwares, not because I needed better hardwares. I believe SX do about 80% of what my fender does at a 1/10th of cost.

That said, I think all SX fans need to realize that we (I say we because I am a die-hard SX fan and I recommend SX to anyone and everyone I see) cannot force everyone to agree with us. The basses are much much more than how much they cost, but just like every other bass brands, it's impossible to please everyone.

 

[jwsamuel]

I could buy new pickups, new wiring, pots, have the frets leveled, all that and I would have under $400. A new MIM Fender P is $500.

The price went up. A new MIM Fender P is now $620.

Jim