I thought Warmoth did a pretty good job of matching my pieces, but now I realize my bass is worthless!
Thanks for nothing, Warmoth!!
Should have bought a five string. The A would align perfectly with the seam.
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.
Hey Fender- This is NOT cool!
- Thread starter rogerbmiller
- Start date
Should have bought a five string. The A would align perfectly with the seam.
Boy, oh boy! Good luck ever trying to find a buyer for that piece of work!!I thought Warmoth did a pretty good job of matching my pieces, but now I realize my bass is worthless!
Thanks for nothing, Warmoth!!
Gaolee
Official leathers tester and crash dummy
Just for the heck of it, I just looked at the grain on my RW Precision. It looks like one big piece of ash. Same with the grain on the 2013 Gibson EB. So much for QC problems on either of those. I hadn't really thought about it much for a long time, but thinking back, I spent quite a while looking for the joints on both back when I got them.
There is also the chance that the top grain on the MIA Fender is actually wood, while the grain on the Squier, etc. were actually veneer.
Fender did this with the MIJ FotoFlame series (have a strat from this series) and Ibanez did it frequently with their mid-level instruments (had a BTB 6 that was a basswood body with a flame maple veneer), would think many other manufacturers have done the same for the sake of achieving a high end looking instrument for low grade costs.
Wood veneer, yeah?
PhotoFlame, I believe, was an actual photo of figured wood, hence the name, not a veneer. See 2nd post here - Invalid Link Removed
I'd expect those who really care about it would prefer a photoflame, photoburl, photospalt, etc. since top woods, like the visible grain of a body wood, are purely cosmetic.
What, really? Why can't you just accept that others have different standards than you and let it go.
It's not standards, it's opinions. Because some people don't like the way that looks they feel it should be a quality issue. It's not...there's nothing wrong with the bass. Since some people like it (and prefer it) and other people think it's so bad it should be repainted it is an opinion on what is ugly.
This sounds to me like your opinion on other people's standards...
Just for the heck of it, I pulled my Schecter J5 out of its case and checked it out. Though it's a swamp ash body, if I didn't already know it was a two piece body, I'd swear that it was a one piece just by viewing the front. But I suppose swamp ash pieces are easier to match than alder.
I thought Warmoth did a pretty good job of matching my pieces, but now I realize my bass is worthless!
Thanks for nothing, Warmoth!!
Very nice wood grain! Also my gecko 6 (two piece swamp ash body) is not bad at all:
Oh, not to mention the nicely matched two pieces of ash on my ebmm stingray bass:
(3 tone sunburst mmmm)
And of course, here is my wood grain king again, the blizzard pearl alder monster am std jazz bass:
Last edited:
So here is the latest video from Anderton's in the UK which got posted today. It is a run through of TSB Squier Jazz vs. TSB MIM Jazz vs. TSB USA Jazz. Note that at around 14:15 they call out the poorly matched Squier wood as something you get in a cheaper instrument. They also weigh the pros and cons of spending 199 sterlings vs. 1300 sterling. Guess who wins. Clue: this should get everyone nice and riled up:
Some high end Les Pauls would make you guys crazy with their mismatched tops. And there are lots of people that love them that way. Gibson has actually done special runs with mismatched tops.
Perhaps it is coincidental, but Gibson's sales of guitars have tanked in recent years. According to customers, they cost too much and are off too poor a quality.
Also, the company's debt has been twice downgraded this year, now deep into junk territory.
I'll actually attest to this.
TBT, Gibson has been doing a *lot* of weird stuff over the past two decades or so - IMO, that is - and I would tend to believe that some of it was just throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. This statement is coming from someone who is a huge fan of the brand in general.
Me and a couple of my friends who collect guitars alway email each other about recent acquisitions or acquisition targets. A few weeks ago one of them found a recent Gibson LP model at a very good price. The others in the group immediately poo-pooed it because of the poor wood matching and that was the end of the conversation.
Heh...I'd be interested in finding out how the guitar actually felt and played.
I've actually given away a fabulously-sounding-but-horrendously-mismatched LP Standard somewhere around '89 or 90. I know it sounds insane but it's true. There's a good bit more to the story than what I just said, but that was the bottom line.
And of course top-wood, which the MIA Fender Jazz pictured doesn't have, hides a multitude of mis-matched grain on sometimes 5 pieces of wood of mixed species on other non-MIA Fenders. So top-wood would have hidden that if they'd used it. But they don't use top-wood on MIA Fender Jazz.
You should see the perfectly matched natural grain under the Olympic White of my 77-78 (or perhaps 1982) MIA Fender Jazz. Looks like a single piece of wood It's amazing!!!
(tongue planted firmly in cheek here in case you're wondering)
Now seriously, I wasn't completely enamored with the color of my bass when I bought it. However, it had the neck that I'd been searching for almost 10-years to find, and had the same sound with more sustain than my 1965 Jazz (sunburst w/ tort pickguard) had. So color and finish was not a big deal to me. Playability and sound were paramount. It has, of course, grown on me since and now it is my pride and joy! I've yet to see another one just like it, though I expect there are a few out there somewhere.
You should see the perfectly matched natural grain under the Olympic White of my 77-78 (or perhaps 1982) MIA Fender Jazz. Looks like a single piece of wood It's amazing!!!
(tongue planted firmly in cheek here in case you're wondering)Now seriously, I wasn't completely enamored with the color of my bass when I bought it. However, it had the neck that I'd been searching for almost 10-years to find, and had the same sound with more sustain than my 1965 Jazz (sunburst w/ tort pickguard) had. So color and finish was not a big deal to me. Playability and sound were paramount. It has, of course, grown on me since and now it is my pride and joy! I've yet to see another one just like it, though I expect there are a few out there somewhere.
