Exactly.And you misrepresented his position by turning it a "my opinion doesn't count" deal. So it fits quite well, IMO, and it wasn't a guess.![]()
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.
Exactly.And you misrepresented his position by turning it a "my opinion doesn't count" deal. So it fits quite well, IMO, and it wasn't a guess.![]()
Jaco didn't play an 08he played a pre CBS
It's just a few screw holes, no one knows if any routing was even done and I doubt it was.
It's a 2 piece ash body with a one piece maple neck, not quite a golden calf in my eyes.
Yeah, but only in very generalized terms of basic construction.Add one more piece to the body and you have the description of a Fender, pre-CBS or not.It's a 2 piece ash body with a one piece maple neck, not quite a golden calf in my eyes.
All basses with pickups would fall under that rule. Are you against all pickup swaps?
Yeah, but only in very generalized terms of basic construction.
Fender never went through the careful wood selection Mike does, they don't care nearly as much about fret levels, neck pocket tightness, etc.
None of this may matter to some folks, and if there are those out there who would truly compare a mass produced Fender to a hand made MTD, that's fine, but I definitely don't share that opinion at all.
DOH! Sorry about the misread.I really wasn't doing what you think- I'm on the side of "you do to a Fender what you want". I'm definitely aware that an MTD is a better piece of craftsmanship than a Fender. He's (however slightly) implying that Jaco modding a Pre-CBS Fender is somehow worse than this guy modding an MTD. IMO, the real sin -if in fact there is any sin in either case- is modding the MTD.
It wasn't intended to be. The debate just kinda' got out of hand due to some somewhat antagonistic posts.So why is it such a big deal?
Actually, IMHO, your analogy is a good one. FWIW, anyway.It's not quite the same analogy in all respects, before it's jumped on as apples and oranges
Not a darn thing. It's just academic. No "results" could come from this thread, but none were expected, either. The owner will never know about any of this, and even if he did, I seriously doubt he'd care, and I'm completely cool with that, too.I'm not sure what all the questioning will prove.
Because even though some things can initially seem stupid, and even though I was openly critical, I also know sometimes things can be explained or understood better with additional info, which I'm currently actively gathering. FYI, I'm open to that. That's where.It being "academic" would imply that you were, no more no less, curious of the reasoning and answers purely for the sake of explanation. The OP has a 'thumbs down' mark attached to it that rides on the side of the whole thread. Where in academia does that fit in?
Sure I was critical, and of course I never had any plans to deny that. I'm just open to explanation, and it IS intellectual curiosity. You're assuming I'm totally closed minded about this, and that's a BAD assumption.Yes you are admittedly being critical of the guy, which would've been hard to deny anyway (and that's perfectly fine in itself), but please don't try and couch it as intellectual curiousity.
Now see what you started Vic?![]()

Yeah, for a moment I forgot about how Forums often go on stuff like this. Oh well.![]()
No, he didn't.Obviously, the guy wanted a different/better sound for his bass.
No, he didn't.
Read my more recent post. It was not at all about tone. All he cared about was replacing pickups that seemed to be failing for him with anything he could get his hands on that would work, so he could sell the bass without anything failing.
I've been in touch with him. Seems like a great guy, but it was pure chance these pickups ended up in the bass.