• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Let's be completely honest here about vintage basses...

Having played many vintage instruments and many more newer ones I can honestly say that the only thing I envy about the old basses is the wear they have. Play-wise, they're no better. Soundwise, they're virtually identical. I don't see all the hype. Would I own a vintage Fender bass? Sure. Would I pay through the nose for it like most people seem to? No. When a newer MIM Classic 50's P plays and sounds just as good as an actual 50's P, I ain't shillin' out thousands more for the history.
 
A good bass is a good bass. I've played 50 year old basses that were great. And 5 month old basses that are great.
Is there a mojo, or magic in a well made bass that ages for say 40 years. maybe so.
In 35 years they might say the 2008 Amer. Standard Precision Bass was as good as the 1962 Precision Bass. Who knows.
If you get a good bass, just enjoy it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: awilkie84 and TMARK
62.png
 
Let's put aside mojo, collectability, value, colour, quality of tort, etc...

Allow me to narrow down to this example (just to get things started, obviously we can talk about anything that's on a bass) Pre-CBS Kluson tuners, better, worse, equal to the Gotoh/Hipshot replacements?

How about Pre-CBS Klusons vs. In-house Fender tuners?

Discuss.

Seeing as you asked.
My 56 has the original slot head Klusons (the whole bass is completely original for that matter- apart from the strings).
I also have two much more recent basses with Gotoh reverse tuners. All three hold tune pretty well- the Gotohs might be a little better at getting the instrument into tune, but the Klusons are almost 60 years old.
I have an 82 Fullerton 57 P RI with whatever Kluson or Kluson knock off Fender put on them originally and they work fine as well.
My 69 Telecaster Bass has the original "non R Fender tuners". 73 Telecaster Bass, 73 P Bass and 75 Jazz all have their original "R Fender tuners".
These all hold really well. I tune with a Petersen Stroborack and these basses rarely require adjustment during a 4 hour gig.

None of the basses mentioned above are neck heavy so the weight of the tuners isn't an issue for me either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nerkoids
Recently we went with my friend to buy an old Jazz Bass. The seller had three naturals, one with rosewood fingerboard, two with maple ones. We took two modern Jazz Basses with us. Fresh strings, good setup. After few hours of testing oldies we decided to plug the US Deluxe and US Limited from 94. In my opinions the crappiest old one was WAY better than new ones, there was no comparison. Not apples and oranges, more like rotten apple vs fresh one.

But when I took my US Vintage 62 P-bass made in 97 to compare it with friends old P-basses (look for restauracjagitar on youtube) I found that mine was worse, but not THAT much. And it was cheaper.

My 60th anniversary P-bass was kinda mediocre sounding, but I still mis it - it was nice.
My two Mexican Standard were very nice, Roger Waters Signature too! But post 2008 US Standard Jazz Bass V was one of the crappiest sounding bass I have ever heard.

I think there are many good sounding modern bases, better made basses, but the old ones that survived to our times are in most cases just plain better.
 
I've been back and forth: vintage vs. new, passive vs. active, this vs. that so many times over the decades. For me, vintage basses feel and sound right. You have to dig a little harder to find the gems, I suppose. Only two of mine are "collectible" the rest are mongrels and road dogs that feel and sound right to me.

Looks are secondary. I find most relic jobs off-putting and I am occasionally irritated with a certain "relic builder" who can call an instrument a Fender '63 style and use the wrong tuners, uses a neck with an obvious Warmoth type fat slab board and can't figure out that black guards didn't replace tort until well into the 70s. Legions of his customers couldn't care less, so It's all good.

Everybody needs to find what they dig and enjoy it. With the vintage stuff, I'm always reminded that you can't make another '66 Jazz, '59 maple or rosewood neck Precision, etc... I will admit you can get very close, and doubtless surpass the vintage guitars in technical terms, but whatever it is that makes me smile when I hear my bass make the sound that reminds me of the records I love most, happens most often and most easily with my old Fenders. Works for me. Whatever works for you is best for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrRobert
mrbell321 said:
However, given enough time, bad examples or abused instruments will be discarded/destroyed. It's a bit of natural selection that leaves the "best" genes to the next generation for those that we consider "vintage". New basses may be good, or bad, but there's a lot of them still around, some are bound to be removed from the gene pool before too long, and that's more likely if they're bad.

I'm wish I could title this post "On the origin of Basses"
I don't see it that way at all. Why would an instrument just be destroyed? Surely dogs are more likely to be put in a case and forgotten until enough time has passed that they become old and suddenly desireable and, as a result, highly valuable. The ones which get played, the ones you suggest are the good ones, are far more likely to be exposed to the effects and consequences of aging, playing, bar fights, nights in cold vans, sweat, theft, accidents with drunken dancers, parts worn out and replaced, refinished, fallen off stands, fights with band members, flying drumsticks and microphones etc etc etc. They're the ones most likely to have not survived. If your fifty year old bass still has its fragile nitro skin intact, then it hasn't seen that much real world action, it doesn't lend itself to the theory that it was loved and had the living bejesus played out of it.

There were some truly great instruments made back in the days of yore, quite clearly, and I don't think anyone disputes that. However, they quite clearly weren't all magic. Just like now. There are spectacularly good instruments being made this very day by people with decades of skill and experience drawing upon sixty years of knowledge of what's good about the electric bass guitar. A 1959 dog is worth a hell of a lot more than the best of 2015 though. Pristine models in unplayed condition tend to be worth more than worn and battered, refretted and pots replaced ones from the same year. Logic would suggest that the battered one is the one which had the mojo, got all the sound vibrations through the wood fibres and aged more than the one locked in its case under the bed. How much does wood age in an intact nitro skin locked away in a case anyway?

It's interesting to see Aria SBs getting a mention earlier. I agree, they're a great design generally made to a very, very high standard but, up to just a few years ago, they were largely ignored. They were always great, though, despite the low price tags for twenty years. MIJ Fenders are now getting some recognition too. Funny things happen to the perception of instruments once they pass thirty years of age.

Funny things happened to my knees too, once I passed thirty :D

i
 
Last edited:
Let's put aside mojo, collectability, value, colour, quality of tort, etc...

Regardless if it's a Fender, Gibson, or a Rickenbacker... are the vintage basses inherently better quality than newer stuff?

Allow me to narrow down to this example (just to get things started, obviously we can talk about anything that's on a bass) Pre-CBS Kluson tuners, better, worse, equal to the Gotoh/Hipshot replacements?

How about Pre-CBS Klusons vs. In-house Fender tuners?

Discuss.
I think new ones are generally 'better'.
Old ones to me don't have much apart from 'mojo' going for them.
There are exceptions, of course and once in a while one will meet a good 'vintage' bass, measured by todays standards of built quality etc.
 
This question appears to be asked frequently. However, it seems that no one asks "Which is better, old bass players, or new bass players?" It seems intuitive that you would judge the player individually. It must be less intuitive that the instruments need to be judged individually as well.

Pick a bass, any bass. Play it. It's either good, or not good. No other details change that.
+1

You pick six new identical basses off the wall at a guitar shop and they all sound a little different, yet some people continue to act as if there is 'a' vintage bass or 'a' new bass.
 
I actually prefer newer basses because I like the flatter fretboard radius they use now. And I don't give a crap about mojo. There was a time I thought it meant something to have a pre-CBS Fender, but that all ended once CBS sold and Fender upped their game. Not a slam on the pre-CBS stuff by any means, though. I've played a few really beauty pre-CBS Fenders and they're often quite nice, no doubt about it. But I don't think I'm missing a thing with my 09 AmStd Precision now that it has a good pickup on it and not that piece of crap it came with.
 
Well I had a 67 Rickenbacker 4005 bass, I recorded with it and it definitely had a unique voice. Eventually I sold it, it was good but it wasn't me....I've found instruments 1 month old to a 100 years old either have 'it', or they don't. And even that is subjective depending on what your looking for. But I have noticed, especially on acoustic instruments, wood aging does have a tonal quality that is very satisfying (resonating). I've played 30s Martins, and 100 year old parlour guitars that are tone cannons, and make you want to play for days!