• 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.

I'm not into expensive basses at all.

#261
When I started out as a Pro musician (1968) a Fender Precision was the standard, the base line for the majority of bassists. Buy one of those and you never thought about gear ever again. You just got on with making your music.

The only issue, where I was, was price. A new P bass came in at around $2000 in today's money. That was a massive amount for an 18 year old, but it had to be done. That was in the days when cheaper basses were usually badly designed and badly made. The advent of CNC machines raised the floor for less expensive basses by a million percent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pfun
#262
Cheap and serviceable is fine by me. I've been playing a harley benton as my only bass for four years now. Defretted it, modified it to hell, never let me down. Would I like a 4000€ Marleaux fretless? Sure, if I was fortunate enough to have that kind of spare cash to spend (I do not). And I'd have no problem dragging it around in bars, that's what it's for anyway. I'd also be fine with a tribute kiloton. Eh, I'm rambling now, whatever rocks your boat.
 
#264
After reading the whole thread, I'm kind of baffled why people in either the "Expensive or bust" or the "Cheap or bust" camps would limit themselves based only on price point.

Just seems rather arbitrary for both camps.

I'm not saying, or even suggesting either approach is wrong or right, just that I don't quite understand why that would be the limiting factor instead of feel, tone, playability, or quality of materials and craftsmanship.

Yes, I know that the quality of the lower priced instruments has made tremendous leaps and bounds since I got my first Samick in 1998, and as many NBD posts about Glarry have also confirmed, but so has the quality of handmade instruments.

Maybe it's because I have a middle ground bass--StingRay 5-- that I don't understand the importance of cost over other considerations when choosing a bass.

Regardless, we have tremendous options available that weren't available 20 years ago, whether its break the bank or by not busting the bank.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trouztrouz
#265
I'm lucky enough to have the following something like 6 basses, ranging in quality and value from a Pedulla Thunderbass 5 and 1963 Fender Precision Bass, down to 2 Hondo II basses and a total Parts bass that I'd COMPLETELY butchered to make work...

...ALL of which still get actively rotated for gigs.
Yes, they most certainly vary in sound and quality. However... if it sounds good... it IS good!

Cheers, you guys!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabbler
#266
In marketing lessons i had in University (normaly i am a product designer), what did they teach to us first was:

Brand is the power to be able to sell the same or inferior product for an increased price compared with the others in the market. Certain brands does the marketing thing very successfully, so that they sell more and for higher prices than they normally worth.

They made the expensive instruments with the best part of the woods. So the rest of the excess materials also has to be sold for even more profit. So in order to use the excess of inferior quality of wood and equipment, they created different sub-brands like Squier and etc. If we are lucky enough we find and instrument made up of best piece of those excess materials and we call it a "Gem". What i am trying to tell here is not all cheaper instruments are that good and they are not intended to be.

Back in the days, there werent artificial or technologic drying machines for the wood and urethane finish and etc were not such a thing. There was a P bass and there was a J bass. With the technology, they realized they can produce instruments easier and faster, even with inferior components. With growing production the quality control became harder and inconsistent. So even an American made instrument can be bad, with a lesser chance compared with the others of course.

The quality of the wood matters mostly. Thats what we are payin mostly other than the brand. It doesnt mean anyting if you put the best components in the a bass with below average quality wood.
 
#267
skaine said:
In marketing lessons i had in University (normaly i am a product designer), what did they teach to us first was:

Brand is the power to be able to sell the same or inferior product for an increased price compared with the others in the market. Certain brands does the marketing thing very successfully, so that they sell more and for higher prices than they normally worth.

They made the expensive instruments with the best part of the woods. So the rest of the excess materials also has to be sold for even more profit. So in order to use the excess of inferior quality of wood and equipment, they created different sub-brands like Squier and etc. If we are lucky enough we find and instrument made up of best piece of those excess materials and we call it a "Gem". What i am trying to tell here is not all cheaper instruments are that good and they are not intended to be.

Back in the days, there werent artificial or technologic drying machines for the wood and urethane finish and etc were not such a thing. There was a P bass and there was a J bass. With the technology, they realized they can produce instruments easier and faster, even with inferior components. With growing production the quality control became harder and inconsistent. So even an American made instrument can be bad, with a lesser chance compared with the others of course.

The quality of the wood matters mostly. Thats what we are payin mostly other than the brand. It doesnt mean anyting if you put the best components in the a bass with below average quality wood.
Click to expand...

I think there might come a time where the imprints (Squier, Sterling, and Epiphone) surpass the quality and craftsmanship of the marquee brands (Fender, Ernie Ball Music Man, and Gibson, respectively).

This will cause one of two (or more) things to happen:

1. The marquee brand spins off the imprint into a separate brand, such as Squier removed any reference to Fender, Sterling removing any reference to EBMM, etc. This would make the imprints full on sub-brands, which would also house R&D and maybe lead to new designs and concepts for those manufacturers, all while the marquee brand retained control. I don't think Squier, Sterling, or Epiphone will ever be wholly separate companies, but then again, I don't know anything about business.

2. The marquee brands will start to bring down the quality of their imprints to maintain the justification for the pricing of the marquee brand instruments. This could be the introduction of inferior woods, components, craftsmanship, or all of the above at once. Going this route would reverse the pattern of the imprint brands gaining market share due to increased quality and perception that the "budget brand" is actually a good value compared to the marquee brand. This could in turn hurt sales more abruptly, but I think that would depend on what kind of quality changes were made and how quickly they were made. If the changes are slow and few, the public may not notice, but all of a sudden and people will notice that one model year over another is quite different, which could possibly lead into buyer push back and other consequences.

3+. Something else that I can't think of because I don't understand business very well will happen.

I don't think Fender and EBMM can keep making instruments of improving quality under their imprint brands without starting to see an encroachment on the sales of their marquee branded instruments. Sure, a buck made on an investment of twenty five cents is great, but when those sales start to eat into marquee branded instrument sales, the big question is--how long will Fender, EBMM, and Gibson allow that to happen before they put an end to it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jebberz and skaine
#270
Admiral Thrawn said:
I think there might come a time where the imprints (Squier, Sterling, and Epiphone) surpass the quality and craftsmanship of the marquee brands (Fender, Ernie Ball Music Man, and Gibson, respectively).

This will cause one of two (or more) things to happen:

1. The marquee brand spins off the imprint into a separate brand, such as Squier removed any reference to Fender, Sterling removing any reference to EBMM, etc. This would make the imprints full on sub-brands, which would also house R&D and maybe lead to new designs and concepts for those manufacturers, all while the marquee brand retained control. I don't think Squier, Sterling, or Epiphone will ever be wholly separate companies, but then again, I don't know anything about business.

2. The marquee brands will start to bring down the quality of their imprints to maintain the justification for the pricing of the marquee brand instruments. This could be the introduction of inferior woods, components, craftsmanship, or all of the above at once. Going this route would reverse the pattern of the imprint brands gaining market share due to increased quality and perception that the "budget brand" is actually a good value compared to the marquee brand. This could in turn hurt sales more abruptly, but I think that would depend on what kind of quality changes were made and how quickly they were made. If the changes are slow and few, the public may not notice, but all of a sudden and people will notice that one model year over another is quite different, which could possibly lead into buyer push back and other consequences.

3+. Something else that I can't think of because I don't understand business very well will happen.

I don't think Fender and EBMM can keep making instruments of improving quality under their imprint brands without starting to see an encroachment on the sales of their marquee branded instruments. Sure, a buck made on an investment of twenty five cents is great, but when those sales start to eat into marquee branded instrument sales, the big question is--how long will Fender, EBMM, and Gibson allow that to happen before they put an end to it?
Click to expand...

Epiphone catalogue offers way more choice that Gibson catalog, whis is restricted to only 2 or 3 models.

Fender, otoh, offers more or less the same thing under it's brand than under Squier. Same with Music Man.

Seems that the have a different business plan, but I'd like to have your insight in the subject (i find economics very interesting, I just don't have formal knowledge).
 
  • Like
Reactions: TylerJ
#272
Jebberz said:
Epiphone catalogue offers way more choice that Gibson catalog, whis is restricted to only 2 or 3 models.

Fender, otoh, offers more or less the same thing under it's brand than under Squier. Same with Music Man.

Seems that the have a different business plan, but I'd like to have your insight in the subject (i find economics very interesting, I just don't have formal knowledge).
Click to expand...

I never took and economics course, or business course for that matter, in my life.

What I wrote was speculation based on what limited knowledge I have of the brands I mentioned, and from what I've seen happen with basses over the last 20 years. I didn't realize the depth of options from Epiphone surpassed Gibson, though that doesn't exactly surprise me.

But I do think that we're heading to a place where the budget instruments will taper off in quality or be spun off as fully as possible separate brands with their own design identity.

I can easily see a day where Squier has $2k American made guitars and basses that have designs that look nothing like Fenders. Same with Sterling and Epiphone. The brand recognition and reputation these three have, as well as Ibanez, will allow them to make these changes and justify a possible shift in that direction.

Not making a prediction that this will happen, just something that I'd be on the lookout for.

If people are into budget basses of high quality, the getting is good now. I'm just not confident that it will last.
 
#273
Admiral Thrawn said:
I can easily see a day where Squier has $2k American made guitars and basses that have designs that look nothing like Fenders. Same with Sterling and Epiphone. The brand recognition and reputation these three have, as well as Ibanez, will allow them to make these changes and justify a possible shift in that direction.
Click to expand...

That likely won't happen. The Squier is Fender's lower cost brand. No matter how good the instruments get, the reputation is already set. Why would anyone spend $2k on a Squier when they can get a Fender?

In your theoretical future - the "Fender" name STILL HAS decades of history and reputation behind it. Even with how good Squiers are today, there are people who stay away because they remember the early Squier branded instruments from many years ago and how poor they were. Of course, you also have people who will tell you that Squiers are good for what they cost but nowhere as good as the Fender branded models. Certainly depends on who you ask.

Squier prices will definitely keep rising, but prices go up every few years for all brands/manufacturers. I bought a Fender American Standard in 1988 that was $580!

The difference will always be there to justify a bargain and a higher level brand. Higher quality wood (can be debated, I'm sure, but it's definitely more consistent at the higher price points - also, it can definitely cost more depending on where it's sourced from), better hardware, better pickups, MORE EXPENSIVE LABOR; these will always be on the American made Fenders. Making basses in China or Mexico with lower quality or lower cost materials will always be less.

Also, they will not reduce the quality of the Squier brand because they need it to compete with the lower cost offerings from competitors such as Ibanez who make a killing in that lower price bracket.
 
#274
I am a cheapo too.
For many years I used to play big names like MusicMan, Neuser, Fender CS,... now I m fine with my Squier VM and I use it every day for recordings.
High end instruments are great but they are luxury items and luxury can be far from the basic you need in many situations.

M2C
 
#275
Relayer71 said:
That likely won't happen. The Squier is Fender's lower cost brand. No matter how good the instruments get, the reputation is already set. Why would anyone spend $2k on a Squier when they can get a Fender?

In your theoretical future - the "Fender" name STILL HAS decades of history and reputation behind it. Even with how good Squiers are today, there are people who stay away because they remember the early Squier branded instruments from many years ago and how poor they were. Of course, you also have people who will tell you that Squiers are good for what they cost but nowhere as good as the Fender branded models. Certainly depends on who you ask.

Squier prices will definitely keep rising, but prices go up every few years for all brands/manufacturers. I bought a Fender American Standard in 1988 that was $580!

The difference will always be there to justify a bargain and a higher level brand. Higher quality wood (can be debated, I'm sure, but it's definitely more consistent at the higher price points - also, it can definitely cost more depending on where it's sourced from), better hardware, better pickups, MORE EXPENSIVE LABOR; these will always be on the American made Fenders. Making basses in China or Mexico with lower quality or lower cost materials will always be less.

Also, they will not reduce the quality of the Squier brand because they need it to compete with the lower cost offerings from competitors such as Ibanez who make a killing in that lower price bracket.
Click to expand...

As I said, it was speculation.

Though you raise an interesting point--the reputation of Fender will have increased into the future, as well as Squier as their quality continues to improve and they beat back the old reputation as the, I guess "bastard child of Fender."

Eventually, those of us who experienced the dismal quality of Squier instruments will be dead and gone, and so will the first-hand stories of those times. The stories of how bad Squier instruments were will be held up to be just that, stories, and without too many surviving examples of how bad they could be, people will start to dismiss their bad times in terms of quality--how many people talk about how relatively cheap the original Fenders were? They may not have had a cheap price point, but they weren't made of the same high grade materials people associate with Fender and other builders today. Those times are looked back fondly because Fender improved their game, same as Squier improving their game.

While I don't see Squier or any other manufacturer downgrading the quality of the components of their instruments to prevent the imprint brand increasing above the marquee brand in terms of market share, stupider things have happened in the history of business. It's highly unlikely that any CEO would authorize such a move, but then again, people are stupid and do stupid things, like me speculating about the future of instruments!

Will Fender, EBMM, or Gibson ever be replaced or superseded by their imprints? Probably not. I certainly hope not as each has their own unique traits that make them what they are today, and the instruments they produce have the je ne sais quoi only a Fender, EBMM, or Gibson can offer, try as Squier, Sterling, and Epiphone as they might to replicate them.

PS--I would have loved to snag an American Standard Fender for $580!
 
#277
skaine said:
The quality of the wood matters mostly. Thats what we are payin mostly other than the brand. It doesnt mean anyting if you put the best components in the a bass with below average quality wood.
Click to expand...
I'm a proponent of tone woods, but what happens to your common theory when you have a great plywood bodied bass? or say a Westone Rail, or a 3D printer bass, or pick your unconventional bass body which none the less sounds very good? a few of my favorite basses are of basswood, generally dissed as fodder cos it's easier on tool bits so the biz likes it. some of the best Tele guitars are of soft pine. I tend to say it all starts with the neck but then an extraordinary example comes along which easily obliterates that one lol for bass especially there are so many contrary and unknown factors in play that it's a total crapshoot, unless someone truly needs something beyond the standard P or J most players can get away with basses that can be bought today with lunch money and are made of mystery wood.

skaine said:
Not expensive bass, great playing, its the only thing it matters, sometimes i forget :)
Click to expand...
that looks like one of those starter pax Squiers!
 
#278
I have 3 expensive basses but the one I go to for a lot of times is my beater Squier P, not an original part on it outside of the body from a VM.
EECB058F-15F7-4765-B0ED-2D9CB7B904FE.jpeg
 
#279
I certainly share this sentiment. My favorite basses are my squiers. I think an exceptionally well set up squier plays just as well as any american bass. Nowadays, you can get any sound you want using the right technology.

One difference I have found is the quality in wood (also, hardware but that can be changes easily and cheaply). My brother has PRS, Musicman, and boutique guitars loose in his basement and can count on one hand how many times he had to adjust them after an inital set up. People say theres no such thing as perfect intonation, well his guitars are pretty damn close. I've purchase many used squiers and the necks are like bananas.

I bet that at least 80% of people here would not be sure if we did an A and B of a squier affinity and an american of they had the same pick ups and strings. I know I wouldn't be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alanloomis1980

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back