Identify the SX vs. Fender in the mix thread

[Eric Perry]

The only people bitching about the "unfair comparison" are the resident headstock whores who refuse to acknowledge that tonally, Fenders and SXs are VERY similar!

Kudos to you, Savit! They sound too similar to my ears to discern.

 

[savit260]

.
The one person who I hope benefits from this thread besides Savit getting some well-deserved exposure for his music, is Jason Lollar.

I can't really take any credit for the music as those are Mark (Unloved) and Jeff's (D&T) songs,(I'm just the bass player) and Jason Lollar is a great guy to deal with in my experience.

 

[Eric Perry]

3. STOP ANALYZING the music and just enjoy it!!!

I was listening to some new release with my ex-girlfriend years ago, and was really dissecting various parts of the music / musicianship. She looked at me dead serious and said: "You must really hate your life, don't you??? Can't you just enjoy the music for the effing music???"

 

[Brad Johnson]

The only people bitching about the "unfair comparison" are the resident headstock whores who refuse to acknowledge that tonally, Fenders and SXs are VERY similar!

Kudos to you, Savit! They sound too similar to my ears to discern.

Headstock whores. This stuff just gets deeper and deepr.

 

[THand]

I can't really take any credit for the music as those are Mark (Unloved) and Jeff's (D&T) songs,(I'm just the bass player) and Jason Lollar is a great guy to deal with in my experience.

Who wrote the bass lines?

IMO, the bass makes many of those songs...ex: I can't imagine "Revolution Song" w/o that cool bass lick at the begining...I've hit the "back" button many-a-time to hear that

 

[THand]

Headstock whores. This stuff just gets deeper and deepr.

You're Right!

 

[lucas vigor]

So let me get this straight: Anyone not liking a budget bass like an SX is a "Headstock whore"?

Yeah, this does just get better and better!

The internet is just great for weekend warriors, monday morning quarterbacks and armchair generals. But I already knew that opinions were like ********!

I still notice that not one instrument maker has chimed in on this thread.


Link Removed

 

[lucas vigor]

The only people bitching about the "unfair comparison" are the resident headstock whores who refuse to acknowledge that tonally, Fenders and SXs are VERY similar!

Kudos to you, Savit! They sound too similar to my ears to discern.

Tonally Fenders and SXs are very similar?

So is a real Hammond organ and so is a Hammond organ patch on a cheap casio keyboard. I wonder which one people drool over more? Which one gives a player a more visceral pleasure? Which one is more fun to play? Which one is more musically inspiring?

I love how all you "experts" are so adamant that no one can tell the difference. I can tell the difference. Not from King Savit's recording, of course. But then again, none of you would be able to tell the Casio from the Hammond in a recording.

Link Removed

 

[mongo2]

So is a real Hammond organ and so is a Hammond organ patch on a cheap casio keyboard. I wonder which one people drool over more? Which one gives a player a more visceral pleasure? Which one is more fun to play? Which one is more musically inspiring?

Thank god we don't have to haul a B3 and Leslie around anymore.

I love how all you "experts" are so adamant that no one can tell the difference. I can tell the difference. Not from King Savit's recording, of course.

Isn't that the point of the thread?

 

[dougjwray]

Exactly what I was getting at - all this microanalysis stuff regarding pickup replacement, whether we didn't get to play the instrument for ourselves , etc., does it really matter? It's interesting, perhaps even fun for a while, but ultimately resembles something closer to a desperate denial or at least a calibrate distraction. The fact that these 2 instruments sounded remotely close at all in the first place would have been quite an accomplishment, the fact they sound as close as they do is amazing given the task at hand (sounding like a vintage '64 P-bass). The micro-dissection of parameters only serves to detract from the larger picture. You can miss a whole forest if you're only focused on one tree.

Finally... some sanity!
My SX has been mistaken for a Fender by more than a few veteran, high budget soundmen who didn't bother to look closely enough at the headstock (it has the original headstock ) and who complimented me on the tone. And it has the stock pickups. That's close enough for me!

 

[stingray69]

Glad you are enjoying the C.D.

Definitely enjoying the CD, great tunes...and while good to listen to any time of day, I find a lot of the songs sound particularly good while driving home at 2-3am.

I'm also glad you mentioned the Fender strings on the recording. I haven't used a set of those in a long time & they kind of fell off my radar. I do recall I liked them a lot, but never got around to seeking out more sets - probably had several sets of other strings laying around to get through. Anway IIRC, what I liked about them seemed to be a certain richness in the lower mids (something similar to Rotosounds) - had some definite character happening.

<Note to self - give them another spin>.

Finally... some sanity!
My SX has been mistaken for a Fender by more than a few veteran, high budget soundmen who didn't bother to look closely enough at the headstock (it has the original headstock ) and who complimented me on the tone. And it has the stock pickups. That's close enough for me!

Thanks dougjwray, although I think the jury here is still out on that...

 

[savit260]

Tonally Fenders and SXs are very similar?

So is a real Hammond organ and so is a Hammond organ patch on a cheap casio keyboard. I wonder which one people drool over more? Which one gives a player a more visceral pleasure? Which one is more fun to play? Which one is more musically inspiring?


Link Removed

A Hammond and a Casio aren't constructed of the same basic materials, and assembled more or less the same way are they? Nope.

Are the Fender and the SX both 3 piece alder bodies with a maple neck and rosewood board, in the same basic shape and construction, save for the logo on the headstock? Yup, pretty much. They are very similar. The SX and the Fender have MUCH more in common than a Cassio and a B3.

Sure, my Fender was assembled from the factory with a bit more care, but that's nothing that can't be remidied by the purchaser after the sale with the SX.

I'd go so far to say that my SX and Old Fender have more in common than my New Fender and the Old Fender.

 

[lucas vigor]

Let me get something straight with you Savit: Are you and the other people in this discussion asserting indirectly that all the great Fenders (MIA 2008+, pre-CBS, Corona custom shop, some Japanese models) and all the "boutique" fender style instruments (Celinder, Lakland Bob Glaub/Joe Osborne, Sadowsky, etc...) are basically an example of all of us being deliberately overcharged? That basically what we are paying for is an expensive piece of wood?

I am trying to make some sense of what all of you are saying. How much does it really cost Fender for the wood that goes into an MIA 2008+ versus the cost to the people who own SX? Because if it is basically the same wood (as you are saying) and the Fender costs 1200 dollars, and the SX costs 129 dollars......then the answer is obvious. Fender and all the rest are ripping us off. These companies apparently know that the 129 dollar bass will sound the same, and is so close in design and construction that there is no discernable difference to a pro bassist such as yourself, or the audience. Yet they continue to push swamp ash and cocobolo on us and use slogans like "it's the wood".


Are you all in agreement, then?


And not being a luthier myself, I would REALLY like to hear one of the instrument makers themselves chime in and defend their prices. Because they are charging 90% (or higher) more for the same product, according to you people.

I disgree very strongly with the criteria for your test, Savit. I do know that I like to rotate my basses when I practice, and I usually use the Tascam CD player with headphones, and I can tell the difference not just in feel but in TONE from my cheap basses to my good basses.

But let's see about something: On my myspace there is a song I performed called "Muito e Voltando". On it is an Organ sound, and I am using an electric bass.

1. Is the organ I am using a real Hammond or a Keyboard?
2. Is the bass I am using a P-bass or a J-bass?

Link Removed

 

[mongo2]

Because if it is basically the same wood (as you are saying) and the Fender costs 1200 dollars, and the SX costs 129 dollars......then the answer is obvious. Fender and all the rest are ripping us off. These companies apparently know that the 129 dollar bass will sound the same, and is so close in design and construction that there is no discernable difference to a pro bassist such as yourself, or the audience. Yet they continue to push swamp ash and cocobolo on us and use slogans like "it's the wood".

A conspiracy theory?

 

[lucas vigor]

well, according to you guys, yes. It must be. I mean, 1200 versus 129 for the same thing, right? Sounds kind of criminal when you look at it that way.

Link Removed

 

[mongo2]

well, according to you guys, yes. It must be. I mean, 1200 versus 129 for the same thing, right? Sounds kind of criminal when you look at it that way.

I think you can rest easy, it's highly unlikely that there is a conspiracy.

However, people have been known to pay for a name brand.

 

[higgi]

Let me get something straight with you Savit: Are you and the other people in this discussion asserting indirectly that all the great Fenders (MIA 2008+, pre-CBS, Corona custom shop, some Japanese models) and all the "boutique" fender style instruments (Celinder, Lakland Bob Glaub/Joe Osborne, Sadowsky, etc...) are basically an example of all of us being deliberately overcharged? That basically what we are paying for is an expensive piece of wood?

....

But let's see about something: On my myspace there is a song I performed called "Muito e Voltando". On it is an Organ sound, and I am using an electric bass.

1. Is the organ I am using a real Hammond or a Keyboard?
2. Is the bass I am using a P-bass or a J-bass?

Link Removed

I think you are right on the money with that first paragraph.

I actually couldn't tell which bass was a Hammond, sounds good though.

Music is in the soul not the wood. Oh what ever...

 

[Jim Dep]

How much does it really cost Fender for the wood that goes into an MIA 2008+ versus the cost to the people who own SX? Because if it is basically the same wood (as you are saying) and the Fender costs 1200 dollars, and the SX costs 129 dollars......then the answer is obvious. Fender and all the rest are ripping us off.

Paying more for stuff made in the states means paying the higher operating costs. I have no idea what kind of pride or experience the SX company has or how long they've been in business. Their satisfaction rate currently seems pretty high.

Outside of the string retainer , the SX does not sound, look or feel like a cheap bass to me.

 

[THand]

well, according to you guys, yes. It must be. I mean, 1200 versus 129 for the same thing, right? Sounds kind of criminal when you look at it that way.

Link Removed

I think 1200 for a new MIA Fender is a rip-off, yes. I believe 750-850 would be fair.

I think SX is a huge value for the money, and with some(sometimes a lot) TLC, it can do the same job as Fender, with very few people able to know the difference. But there are differences, tone just isn't a big one.

The wood is the same, if we are talking alder bodies and not Sadowsky's chambered bodies. IMO, IME, SX keeps the price low with cheap labor, cheap,cheap,cheap screws, cheap pots and wiring, and minimum attention to fretwork & nut work. If SX were MIA(paying for American labor), and improved these shortcomings,which are at the present-time up to the buyer to fix, they would probably cost what a MIA Standard Fender should cost...$750-850.

OTOH, the SX bodies alone are worth the price of the whole bass, and truthfully, the tuners alone would probably come close to making it worth it. IME, the tuners are very good, eventhough the chrome plate on them looks a little cheesy.

So, IMO, the price of the SX is justified, but the current MIA Standard Fender price is not. Is Fender ripping you off? No, you argree to that price when you buy one, no one is making you do that.

I don't own a Sadowsky, so I can't speak from experience about them, but I do know that time = money. And IME, it can take a lot of time and care, and skill to make any bass it's absolute best all-around. So, if you think Fender's price for the MIA Deluxe series is fair and you buy one and then take it to a luthier for special upgrades,(like custom shaped neck, chambering the body to make it lighter, an EQ made to spec, etc.)how much would this extra work add to your initial investment of $1700? Probably close to Sadowsky's price, if not more.

I come from the time when everyone modded their Fender's w/o a 2nd thought. I think the point is you get that same foundation to build on w/o as large of initial investment from SX. They are very similar to CBS Fender's, some are even better out of the box.

 

[higgi]

I have owned a lot of cheap basses and I have always had to set them up, smooth frett ends and various other touches that the expensive ones have. I don't mind doing a little finish work to save money, but I am cheap.