NBD - A bit miffed

[DJ Bebop]

Isn't OP's bass indicative of most tops used by Spector in that price range? It obviously varies but on Sweetwater there's a pretty noticeable difference in average flame tops between the ~$3k models and $5k+ models.

Spector Euro 4 LT Bass Guitar - Blue Fade Gloss

 

[ole Jason]

Spector Euro 4 LT Bass Guitar - Blue Fade Gloss

If you look at the basses Sweetwater actually has in stock most (not all) of them have tops similar to OP's. Spector Euro 5 LT Bass Guitar - Copper Burst Gloss - Sweetwater Exclusive

 

[FretlessTodd]

That's not how bait and switch works. Looks are subjective, any court in the land would throw a bait and switch claim out immediately.
B & S is when they advertise a low price on one item to lure you in. Then they tell you that the model in the ad is out of stock then they try to sell you something more expensive.

Perhaps I used the term wrong. With my retail experience, an example of bait and switch would be a salesman shows up with a really nice quality garment at a decent price. We'd purchase it, then when 6 dozen of those garments are delivered a few weeks later, you could easily tell that what he showed you and what you got were not the same thing (stitching, quality, fabric, size), often meaning you had to discount the product to get rid of it or try to return it.

In this case, I would say fabric and wood are somewhat the same thing. If the fabric doesn't match what you were shown, within reason, I would say you have a claim.

 

[sonic 7]

Still a great bass. But it’s 2022, you can’t sell expensive instruments, particularly ones with figured tops like this. Sweetwater shows each individual bass and weight so you order the one that you want. GC in just using a stock photo, and it’s luck of the draw .

 

[Nakoatron]

I would be really let down paying new prices for a bass with such an inconsistent and weak grain pattern. Spector have always been known for their great tips and they’ve been letting a lot of blade mismatched pieces out lately.

I’d return it, because it would bother me.

 

[tmvt]

Look at the angled grain coming off the E string corner of the GC photo versus the same place on the OP's photo. Not the same at all, low resolution or not.

Edit: The newer photos from the OP really show the drastic difference in grain between the GC photos and his.

Never tried to claim or argue its the same bass as I have commented on here its was obviously a different bass clearly by the figuring. I think you didnt see any of my other comments on this thread. I was pointing out the person that tried to doctor up the OPs photos like the stock photo cant even get close to result of the stock photo as the OPs photo is so low quality. And the new ones still wouldn't be good enough to do a doctored up comparison, but they are better.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

Instead of GC, next time give your business to places that actually take real photos of the instruments - Sweetwater is the biggest one that does it, but smaller shops will do this as well.

That's not to say the bass shown on the website is a picture of the actual bass (serial number) they ship you. That's not always reasonable to do. It is one more thing that adds to their cost of doing business, and in a new sale they often can't pass that extra cost on, due to restrictions that manufacturers put on pricing in ads. At some point everyone pretty much uses the manufacturer's stock photos.
SW does take photos of the actual bass they are shipping to you, but that may be for other reasons. It is part of their 55 point inspection. (BTW, that inspection also does not include a full setup, as some might assume.) Even an in-house photo won't measure up to what the manufacturer's marketing department will churn out. It's more likely that something sold used will have the actual photo posted, but still no guarantee on many dealer sites.
If the SW says, here is a picture of the actual bass we are shipping to you, then you can likely believe them. But never just assume that regardless of who you are dealing with.
Maybe not so much "Buyer beware" but more the case of the buyer having reasonable expectations that the marketing hype doesn't match with the reality. Most of the dealers and manufacturers are well aware of how far they can push the limits of marketing before crossing a legal line. The buyer doesn't need to know where that line is, but he at least should be cognizant of its existence.

Many discussions of the 55 point inspection on the web. Do your own search.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

A Whopper doesn't cost 3k.

 

[Old Garage-Bander]

Perhaps I used the term wrong. With my retail experience, an example of bait and switch would be a salesman shows up with a really nice quality garment at a decent price. We'd purchase it, then when 6 dozen of those garments are delivered a few weeks later, you could easily tell that what he showed you and what you got were not the same thing (stitching, quality, fabric, size), often meaning you had to discount the product to get rid of it or try to return it.

In this case, I would say fabric and wood are somewhat the same thing. If the fabric doesn't match what you were shown, within reason, I would say you have a claim.

Wood on a guitar is a natural product and has large variations. Cloth is manufactured. Much less likely to be variations.

 

[Gregc57]

If it were me, they'd be taking that back..... or, if I really liked the bass, they'd have to fill my hand with cash to make up for the (your choice of) lying or not knowing *** they were selling.

 

[logdrum]

Use a DSLR camera with a portrait or 50mm lens with correct lightning and then saturate it a bit and up the contrast. Here. I did not even use my photo editing software, just stock google photo editor

Your bass looks better already. That's just a screen grab -- while I am editing of your not so great photo.

 

[gazzatriumph]

I'd be disappointed too

 

[MDBass]

The people commenting that it’s just a lighting difference haven’t seen many Spector basses in person.

The bass in the stock photo has exponentially darker and more figured wood grain on the body wings: check out how much lighter the neck through in the center is relative to the wings than the bass the OP received.

Yes, the pro lighting and camera used definitely make it pop a little more than a cell phone camera with diffused natural light, but that’s actually what that bass looks like in person.

There is a very wide variance in the amount of figuring on the body wings of Euro basses: one of the reasons why ordering from a place like Sweetwater, where you actually do get to see the exact bass you’re ordering, is helpful.

Whoever it was at GC that told the OP the photo was of the bass he was getting was either mistaken or intentionally misled the OP.

 

[basslayer]

They definitely should have said it was a stock photo, but it looks the same to me; it you're bass was pictured in an all white background with really good lighting like in the stock, the grain would jump out more.

 

[Callused Finger]

I got a new Spector Euro LT and just opened it up to find it wasn't what was in the picture. I asked the guy at GC, "Is the photo of the one I'm getting or a stock photo." His reply was, "Oh it's the bass you're getting." There was one left in stock. The first pic below is the stock photo. The next two are what I got. It's pretty much not even close. While finish isn't THAT important to me, this one looks super dull. I guess I'm not surprised coming from where I got it.

Stock

Look how many times the same photo shows up with a reverse image lookup.

 

[Katoosie]

Use a DSLR camera with a portrait or 50mm lens with correct lightning and then saturate it a bit and up the contrast. Here. I did not even use my photo editing software, just stock google photo editor

Your bass looks better already. That's just a screen grab -- while I am editing of your not so great photo.


View attachment 4772849

We need photoshop glasses so that when you wear them and you look at basses, they look better!

 

[India_Sierra]

I call this 'Kiesel syndrome'. The image you see online is heavily retouched, colour corrected, sharpened and the contrast is increased. The saturation is increased. The colour looks brighter. The shades look deeper. The image jumps off a screen at you. Then you see it in real life and it just isn't the same as what an ultra bright 4K monitor shows you.

Kiesel are known for this and have been called out for it but it goes on across various brands. Anything where figured wood is shown leaves and opportunity for some post-processing to tidy it up. This route is all the more attractive to manufacture since really great figured wood is now harder than ever to find and more expensive to boot. Long gone are the days of lucking into an 'exhibition grade' top on a production instrument.

The Spector will no doubt sound and play great but the mismatch between the wings would bug me. I feel your disappointment. I will always have a Spector as my main bass, however, mine has a solid finish so I couldn't care less what the wood underneath looks like.

 

[JohnnyBottom]

The color is Blue Fade Gloss....the picture doesn't look Fade although spectors site as similar pic

 

[Jeff Scott]

Same model and finish IS the definition of the same bass.
Just like the same make, model, options and color in automobiles IS the same car.
If you want the -same same- exact one, you need to be asking about serial numbers.
You buy a brand new car from the dealer and even if it has the same VIN number as the one in the slick sales brochure, it won't look the same when you see it at the dealer.
And this doesn't happen because of digital imagery. It happens because of photographic differences in general. Sure being digital makes it easier to manipulate, but it happens with film too. These days they can "photoshop in" the steam coming off that juicy burger. Used to be they set a pot of steaming water just below and out if the shot. Ever get food at an eatery that looked as good as it did in the TV ad?
Is it lying, or a matter of not asking the right question?
Sweetwater photographs the actual instrument you get if that's important to you. They may not put it in the ad, but you can probably see what it looked like before it was shipped.

Sorry, but your can analogy doesn't hold up in this case.

That's not to say the bass shown on the website is a picture of the actual bass (serial number) they ship you.

THE GCDroid® told Knavery the pic was of the same bass they were shipping him.

Wood on a guitar is a natural product and has large variations.

And, this is why GC should be held accountable (and, why your car analogy doesn't hold up). Knavery was expecting the bass that was in the photo that the GCDroid® said was the same bass, not the same model and finish, but the same bass.

 

[g-dude]

That's not to say the bass shown on the website is a picture of the actual bass (serial number) they ship you.

I have yet to receive an instrument from Sweetwater that isn't the one pictured, for any instrument where they specify the exact serial number you are purchasing.

That's not always reasonable to do. It is one more thing that adds to their cost of doing business, and in a new sale they often can't pass that extra cost on, due to restrictions that manufacturers put on pricing in ads. At some point everyone pretty much uses the manufacturer's stock photos.

How do they verify that the item they received has not been damaged in shipping? Also, you don't understand the manufacturer restriction on pricing. Manufacturers set a FLOOR, not a CEILING. You can price an instrument as high as you like, but don't you dare advertise it below the lowest price that everyone else is offering.

SW does take photos of the actual bass they are shipping to you, but that may be for other reasons. It is part of their 55 point inspection. (BTW, that inspection also does not include a full setup, as some might assume.) Even an in-house photo won't measure up to what the manufacturer's marketing department will churn out.

And yet the photos accurately depict the instrument, with the exception that sometimes the instruments look better in the flesh when the lighting isn't causing as much glare.

Marketing photos look better not because the photos are better, but because they make sure to pick an instrument that has the best looking top that they'll ever sell at that price point.

I'm not sure who assumes that a setup is part of the SW inspection, especially since they will gladly sell you a setup.