Jazz bass 1969?

[babsgerms]

Hello everyone;
I had the opportunity to buy this bass recently, for a quiet reasonable price.
It is supposed to be 1969 refined bass.
My "doubts" are mainly on the body who apparently is in very good conditions.
I would like to hear the opinion or confirmation of experts.
I posted photos where I tried to show up everyting.
The serial number is 264350 (instrument not stolen)
The pots are all dated from 03 23 67.

Thank you all (and sorry for my english and terms)

B.

 

[Longwheelbass]

Body looks to be re-finished - the drips of white in the control rout are most likely not Fender factory work, but everything else looks original! Those pots are 23rd week of 1967 I think...
Nice bass!

 

[Spinal Tapper]

Looks good to me. Sweet bass!

 

[Bluesbob]

The saddle height adjustment screws have allen-heads and the saddles themselves also look wrong. I don't like the shiny solder blobs on the pots and the control plate looks like it was rubbed with steel wool. The truss rod adjustment looks to be at its' limit as well. The 19th fret seems shorter than the others, which might indicate a re-fret, either partial or complete, or something more problematic, like a hump at the end of the neck. There's also a big space between the neck and the body at the neck pocket. I can't be sure about the body's authenticity, but I don't see anything that stands out as wrong for a '69. Better pictures would help.
None of this is a deal breaker, though, and as long as you realize you're buying a re-fin (and, possibly, a re-fret), it's a pretty instrument, so if it plays good and the price is right...

 

[stingray56funk]

Buy that sucker...everything looks to be legit. Pickguard shrinkage and all.

 

[Jojabeau]

I really doubt the bridge saddles are OME. The question how much and how does it sound?

 

[babsgerms]

The saddle height adjustment screws have allen-heads and the saddles themselves also look wrong. I don't like the shiny solder blobs on the pots and the control plate looks like it was rubbed with steel wool. The truss rod adjustment looks to be at its' limit as well. The 19th fret seems shorter than the others, which might indicate a re-fret, either partial or complete, or something more problematic, like a hump at the end of the neck. There's also a big space between the neck and the body at the neck pocket. I can't be sure about the body's authenticity, but I don't see anything that stands out as wrong for a '69. Better pictures would help.
None of this is a deal breaker, though, and as long as you realize you're buying a re-fin (and, possibly, a re-fret), it's a pretty instrument, so if it plays good and the price is right...

Here some better pictures of the neck, frets, saddles, truss and control plate.

If the bridge is not original, I can replace it for a badass? (or something like that)?

This bass sounds and plays great.
Each pickup sounds terrific, (when I use both of them, sound is tiny.
But I think it's just a phase problem)

Many thanks.

 

[Spinal Tapper]

I'd probably get that truss rod looked at if u already bought the bass...that could be maxed out, it looks pretty deep in there

 

[TRichardsbass]

The body color should be "yellower", and the play wear on the body doesn't seem to match the play wear on the head and neck, so its a refin. Could be a re-fret, but refrets generally do not effect price or value. If all the electronics and pickguard are original, its nice.

I agree, get the neck looked at as the truss rod is nearly maxxed.

 

[mikeswals]

Beautiful bass, but the pickups and pots are both dated 1970.
The pickups show 42nd week of 1970 to be exact, and the silver 'tootsie roll' tone cap also came out in early '70.
You have the pot numbers wrong, 032367 is a part number, while the 304-70-xx is the manufacture and date code.
The bridge is not original either; at least not the saddle height screws, the saddkes, the intonation screws, and the springs. The bridge plate looks okay.
So no, not a '69, but is still a very nice bass.

It's obvious someone has rewired the bass, and why is there a resistor mounted on the pickup?

 

[Jim Carr]

Beautiful bass, but the pickups and pots are both dated 1970.
The pickups show 42nd week of 1970 to be exact, and the silver 'tootsie roll' tone cap also came out in early '70...
The bridge is not original either; at least not the saddle height screws, the saddles, the intonation screws, and the springs. The bridge plate looks okay. So no, not a '69, but is still a very nice bass...

+1

Nice bass.
The neck is what worries me. Be prepared for a re-fret, de-hump and heat-treat de-warp. With binding and blocks, I wonder if this isn't more problematic? Also, the '69 I owned suffered from a very unstable neck. The truss rod tension was consumed pretty much by 1976.

BTW, that looks like a '71 or '72 case at the absolute earliest, and probably much later.

 

[Bluesbob]

If the bridge is not original, I can replace it for a badass? (or something like that)?

This bass sounds and plays great.
Each pickup sounds terrific, (when I use both of them, sound is tiny.
But I think it's just a phase problem)

Why not try and find a Fender bridge? They're out there, probably one or two on ebay right now. I had no trouble finding a replacement (with long G intonation screw) for the bad-ass that was on my '71 Fender Jazz bass.

So if you like the way it plays and it sounds great, you've got a winner!
My '71 also sounds thinner when I max both volumes, I think it's normal for that period. I love the sound of both pups with one or the other turned up about an eighth of a turn more than the other. One way gets you some thump and the other way for growl.

So no, not a '69, but is still a very nice bass.

It's obvious someone has rewired the bass, and why is there a resistor mounted on the pickup?

I'd like to know this, too.
I've never had the control plate or pups off my Jazz, so I have no idea if that's stock, but I doubt it. Maybe there's an imbalance between the two pups?

Nice bass.

The neck is what worries me. Be prepared for a re-fret, de-hump and heat-treat de-warp. With binding and blocks, I wonder if this isn't more problematic? Also, the '69 I owned suffered from a very unstable neck. The truss rod tension was consumed pretty much by 1976.

The truss rod on my '71 is also pretty much maxed out (something else that's "normal" for that era), but rather than go through the expense of all that, I just opted for a set of TI flats, which have a nice low tension and sound soooo smooth. The neck is now stable, flat, and with the low frets, plays like butter. I play it every day for home practice, and I take it out to a rehearsal studio once in a while, but I have other instruments for gigs. If I ever play Carnegie, you betcha I'd use it!