Nash P-Bass Necks

[SJan3]

If you could take a minute from posting/editing your posts, you would see I clearly explained that I was pointing out the neck specs are out of Nash's control. It isn't like they decided "let's start using stiffening rods." Their supplier started using them and that is what they got.

Do you think a builder who has gone through so much painstaking detail to correctly copy vintage Fender's just decided to call it a day and give them modern necks/profiles?

Have you considered that many think vintage spec Fender necks are difficult to play with their 1 3/4" nut widths and 7.25" fretboard radius. Perhaps Bill simply chose to distinguish his instruments by making them more playable for most people. In fact, his necks more accurately represent the American Pro line via specs. So, for many the best of both worlds. Modern playability in a relic instrument.

 

[MascisMan]

So, for many the best of both worlds. Modern playability in a relic instrument.

I wish he would adopt modern truss rod accessibility if the goal is best of both worlds. My only hesitancy on the Nash basses. But I digress...

 

[SJan3]

I regret to inform you that I did not come up with the definition of a parts builder. This is an industry term that is applied specifically to builders who use outside bodies and necks. As such, Nash is a parts builder - which nobody said is negative. I'm not sure why you are so offended by this.

I wish he would adopt modern truss rod accessibility if the goal is best of both worlds. My only hesitancy on the Nash basses. But I digress...

On that, we agree. If he and some other manufacturers would simply cut out a reasonable access slot, I'd be a lot happier.
That said, so far my NASH has become my favorite P Bass and I have 3 Fenders. It feels great in the hand, weighs 8 lbs 3 oz, balances better than the Fenders, sounds amazing with the Lollar Pups and has very sturdy hardware. It's a winner for me.

 

[MascisMan]

On that, we agree. If he and some other manufacturers would simply cut out a reasonable access slot, I'd be a lot happier.
That said, so far my NASH has become my favorite P Bass and I have 3 Fenders. It feels great in the hand, weighs 8 lbs 3 oz, balances better than the Fenders, sounds amazing with the Lollar Pups and has very sturdy hardware. It's a winner for me.

Yeah. Now that the profile question is resolved I think I will just have to suck it up with the vintage truss rod access.

 

[SJan3]

Yeah. Now that the profile question is resolved I think I will just have to suck it up with the vintage truss rod access.

I'm thinking of having a slot cut but haven't made up my mind yet. The neck has been very stable.

 

[morebass!]

I have a 2017 American Pro P, a '72 Fender P (b neck) and a Nash 63P. All are 1.625" or thereabouts but they differ considerably. The American Pro is the narrowest and easiest to play, the Nash is in-between, and the '72 Fender is the largest by a good bit.

 

[DiabolusInMusic]

Yes, because the internets and Google prove any or ever claim you've made here to be fact. (facepalm emoji goes here)

Dude, why are you being so aggressive? I came here for some conversation about bass, you came here for a fight. Nash being a parts builder is well documented and not some kind of industry secret. Hell, have you reached out to Nash to see what they have to say? I highly doubt they deny being a parts builder (or claim to manufacture their own parts) because it isn't a negative. You clearly are not interested in facts, logic, or research so why bother debating my claim?

Have you considered that many think vintage spec Fender necks are difficult to play with their 1 3/4" nut widths and 7.25" fretboard radius. Perhaps Bill simply chose to distinguish his instruments by making them more playable for most people. In fact, his necks more accurately represent the American Pro line via specs. So, for many the best of both worlds. Modern playability in a relic instrument.

That is a fair point and very possible. However, considering his past using off-the-shelf parts I find it unlikely. I am also pretty sure he uses All Parts and Warmoth because then he can legally sell basses with the Fender headstock shape - they have been officially and legally licensed. A builder cannot start a line with those headstocks without facing considerable legal action. I think you need to buy a LOT of necks to get them to re-tool the machines and get custom pieces.

For the record, I never said Nash basses are bad. I am sure they play awesome. I almost bought myself one a few years ago. Hell, a good fit and finish is what sets instruments apart.

 

[DiabolusInMusic]

I'd be surprised if NASH couldn't request necks made to their specs. And I doubt Sadowsky just settles for what's in stock either.

I think Sadowsky isn't using off-the-shelf stuff from a supplier. They have an outside shop that does their building, don't think you and I can place an order. It is closer to what Ibanez does than what Nash does.

 

[SJan3]

I think Sadowsky isn't using off-the-shelf stuff from a supplier. They have an outside shop that does their building, don't think you and I can place an order. It is closer to what Ibanez does than what Nash does.

I think practices have evolved over the years and some builders used off the shelf parts initially. Moving forward, established companies like NASH and Sadowsky who are providing big business to these manufacturers must have sway over parts specs.

 

[Type-55]

Lull, Nash, Sadowsky and Lakeland all use outside sources for their necks an body’s.
But the are machined to their specs.

The only difference I can tell between graphite and no graphite is to my ears a graphite rod neck has a slight hardness to the attack of the note and a little more clarity. Non graphite necks sound a touch smoother. It’s like the first time I played a Zon bass. Supreme clarity and note definition but a little brittle and hard sounding.
Just my thoughts. The steel rod Warmoth necks are thick and bulky feeling. Not to appealing.

 

[phillipkregg]

Dude, why are you being so aggressive? I came here for some conversation about bass, you came here for a fight. Nash being a parts builder is well documented and not some kind of industry secret. Hell, have you reached out to Nash to see what they have to say? I highly doubt they deny being a parts builder (or claim to manufacture their own parts) because it isn't a negative. You clearly are not interested in facts, logic, or research so why bother debating my claim?



That is a fair point and very possible. However, considering his past using off-the-shelf parts I find it unlikely. I am also pretty sure he uses All Parts and Warmoth because then he can legally sell basses with the Fender headstock shape - they have been officially and legally licensed. A builder cannot start a line with those headstocks without facing considerable legal action. I think you need to buy a LOT of necks to get them to re-tool the machines and get custom pieces.

For the record, I never said Nash basses are bad. I am sure they play awesome. I almost bought myself one a few years ago. Hell, a good fit and finish is what sets instruments apart.

Everything you have said is perfectly reasonable and good for discussion.

Some people just "want" to be angry (especially on the internet), and there's simply nothing you can do about that. I sort of wish moderators would start cracking down on people who are obviously trying to cause trouble.

We have enough trouble in the world as it is... it would be nice to be able to talk about bass guitars without people becoming outraged.