New spector

[bassboy01]

I think its a bit funny they're calling it "the Spector Coda body shape" in the specs ... finally turning the tables after being ripped off so hard all those years ago.

The other thing that caught my eye is Aguilar pickups!!! Is that a typo or is Aggie jumping into the pickup market?

I wonder if there will be a 5'er.

Yes, they are actually Aguilar J pickups. Aguilar will announce them at NAMM this year. As far as I know these basses are the first to have them.

I asked PJ on Monday if they are planning on making a 5 but he said that they need to see how the 4 string does first. Just trying to get a feel if there is any demand for them first.

 

[benjonesonbass]

As a Spector endorser, i totally see the need for a jazz style bass in their lineup. Just because I really love the Spector sound doesn't mean everyone does. So, should I (1) turn down a touring/recording gig with a Grammy winning national artist because they want a traditional sounding bass and I am a Spector endorser or, Should I (2) not follow the guidelines of my endorsement and play a competitor's bass on a show that is being broadcast internationally and seen by thousands of people or, should I (3) play a competitors bass on a national recording session because that's what the engineer/artist wants but continue to list that I am playing Spectors...ie: lying or, should I (4) be thankful that Spector produces an instrument that allows me to please the engineers/artists i work with while playing a Spector instrument (as per my endorsement) that is just as good quality wise as all other Spector basses...the choice is crystal clear!!!

I don't seem to recall anyone having a problem with Spector producing a thunderbird style bass. Should we all be mad that they 'copied' Gibson?? The problem isn't that Spector is making a J-bass, it is that people are very narrow minded as to why. Spector isn't trying to go Jazz bass but rather offer an instrument for ALL needs not just those that are into the true Spector sound.

After all, at the end of the day, aren't all basses Fender copies...he did start it all, remember?

 

[rockstarbassist]

As a Spector endorser, i totally see the need for a jazz style bass in their lineup. Just because I really love the Spector sound doesn't mean everyone does. So, should I (1) turn down a touring/recording gig with a Grammy winning national artist because they want a traditional sounding bass and I am a Spector endorser or, Should I (2) not follow the guidelines of my endorsement and play a competitor's bass on a show that is being broadcast internationally and seen by thousands of people or, should I (3) play a competitors bass on a national recording session because that's what the engineer/artist wants but continue to list that I am playing Spectors...ie: lying or, should I (4) be thankful that Spector produces an instrument that allows me to please the engineers/artists i work with while playing a Spector instrument (as per my endorsement) that is just as good quality wise as all other Spector basses...the choice is crystal clear!!!

I don't seem to recall anyone having a problem with Spector producing a thunderbird style bass. Should we all be mad that they 'copied' Gibson?? The problem isn't that Spector is making a J-bass, it is that people are very narrow minded as to why. Spector isn't trying to go Jazz bass but rather offer an instrument for ALL needs not just those that are into the true Spector sound.

After all, at the end of the day, aren't all basses Fender copies...he did start it all, remember?

The more I've thought about this bass/thread, I more agree with this. The same thing goes for the revamped MTD USA Saratoga line, for those who need a more "compressed" tone as opposed to the big meaty tone of the regular MTD 535 dual-humbucker setups (which I have, and indeed love).

I only play P/J's on my 4 strings which usually isn't overpowering, but I definitely understand the need tonally, especially for discriminating band leaders (for major acts, among other people) who want "that" Jazz tone.

The NS2 line ain't goin' anywhere, and as long as that's the case I'm on board from here on out w/ Stu's decision to do this. I'm sure they'll be pretty smokin', too.

 

[anonymous073020132]

I'm a Fender Jazz freak & a Spector Freak I own one of each. If I ever have the money to buy one of these "$3199 list" I'm goin 4 it! I could care less what Bass Nazi's think. www.spectorworld.com/spectornews.htm

 

[LCMBassist]

Hmmm, interesting. I see they've just brought out a Thunderbird style bass (it's not like the Rex, it is EXACTLY the same in bodyshape as a T-Bird). I'm pretty pleased, as I love the Thunderbird look, but don't get on with em in tone.

A jazz styled Spector could be cool.

 

[MoonDoggy]

BOB is only jazz from spector I wish they reissue.

I completely agree. I actually emailed PJ Rubal back in September to ask him questions about my USA BOB-4, mainly, why they stopped making them and if they ever have plans to make a Jazz-inspired bass again. He got back to me with the big secret that they were going to release a Spector J bass at Winter NAMM 2010. He didn't divuldge any details about it to me though.

I must say, I couldn't be more disappointed (although I obviously haven't played one yet, so I can't vouch for the tone). The BOB was just the right bass at the wrong time. This Coda bass looks like most of it's parts are off-the-shelf J parts (pickgaurd, control plate, bridge, etc..) I realize this is the most cost-effective solution for Spector, but for a $2000 street price, I would have liked to have seen them AT LEAST use their heavy-duty brass bridges.

This is what I like best about the BOBs of the mid 90s: They are the PERFECT blend of the Spector tone and a J tone. They can quite frankly do it all. The EMG DCs and 3-band pre w/ mid freq sweep allow you to get the ballsy Spector tone, thin Jazz/Jaco tone, fat P tone, and even the bell-like Ric tone. They have the J body shape, but it's obvious that it's not a typical Fender clone. They have an obvious Spector 2+2 headstock. It's slightly different, but obviously 'Spector'. They have a slightly chunkier neck, true to Spector. And they had 24 frets w/ a 6-bolt neck. They are just the perfect blend of what you'd expect out of a Spector and what you'd expect from a J bass. The BOBs' ONLY downfall as far as I'm concerned was the limited upper fret access due to that massive 6-bolt neck heel!

I have a very hard time believing that this Coda can sound anything like a true 'Spector'. There are so many J clones out there, I think making another one nearly identical to a J bass is a huge mistake. As mentioned earlier, the BOB was just the right bass at the wrong time. I think if they released the BOB now (exactly how they used to be), it would be a huge success.

And yes, benjonesonbass, you are correct when it comes to your situation, but I don't think Spector (or any company) is going to release a new line of basses to please just a relatively small amount of endorsers. They are making what they feel will sell to the masses. I wish Spector mounds of luck with this Coda bass, but I can't imagine it will prosper when there's so many basses out there that are JUST like it.

I guess I could've just summarized this whole rant by stating this opinion: These Coda basses don't resemble 'Spector' AT ALL!

 

[mas502arc]

I wouldn't mind if they added a few of their signature 'Spector trademarks' into it. This is just too boring.

 

[Moe Monsarrat]

I certainly think they have a perfect right to make a J style bass. On the other hand it leaves them open to all the jokes. You know "Guaranteed the dead notes will be in the same place as a Fender !" & "Spector announces new line of bargain Vintage Reissue Basses.....Sqector !"

 

[LCMBassist]

I know the real reason behind why this bass exists.....

Fender tried to sue anybody who had ever made a double cutaway bass. Obviously Sadowsky, Spector and tons of others opposed this lawsuit, and they won. In honour of how awesome the Jazz bass is, they decided they'd make a Jazz bass! Rubbing Fender's nose in it a bit, but that'll teach them for being a bunch of money grabbing bullies.

 

[El Raro]

I'm sure its got that Spector warmth to it. No one seems to complain about Sadowsky's Jazz bass copies...so why start with Spector? Save your rage for those dodgy Jazz knock offs.

 

[JPSBassist]

What I don't get is that Spector has made several NS models with the J-bass pickup arrangement. Do these basses not sound jazzy enough?
I agree that it looks like a Fender clone. And the unique thing that's always made me a Spector fan (I currently own three) is the design that Ned Steinberger did for the NS bass.
It's the most comfortable bass I've ever shouldered. So why not bring back the J style pickups, adjust neck width/scale length appropriately and keep the one thing that's always set them apart in tact... the curved NS body. Unless they just cant get the right tone from that body.
I don't know. I hope it doesn't dilute their brand.

 

[NS2A]

So why not bring back the J style pickups, adjust neck width/scale length appropriately and keep the one thing that's always set them apart in tact... the curved NS body. Unless they just cant get the right tone from that body.

They did with the NSJR reissue series. And it flopped.

 

[MoonDoggy]

I agree with you JPSBassist. They should have done SOMETHING to make this bass recognizable as a Spector. They could have done a Jazz body shape and incorporated the convex top and concave back, kinda like the Fender Aerodyne series, but with contoured backs too. I think a 2+2 headstock would've also been a good 'Spector signature'.

But I digress. Cosmetics and 'company signatures' are only a part of what makes a great bass. There's also tone, construction, feel, and more. I know they will be well built, so the construction shouldn't be an issue. And it says they're modeled it after a '62 Fender J, at least the neck, so the feel shouldn't be a surprise. As for the tone, they're using Aguilar guts w/ alder bodies, so I'm sure it sounds good too. I guess my only beef is regarding cosmetic issues. But, that 'Spector-ness' is a big deal to me!

 

[LCMBassist]

I agree with you JPSBassist. They should have done SOMETHING to make this bass recognizable as a Spector. They could have done a Jazz body shape and incorporated the convex top and concave back, kinda like the Fender Aerodyne series, but with contoured backs too. I think a 2+2 headstock would've also been a good 'Spector signature'.

But I digress. Cosmetics and 'company signatures' are only a part of what makes a great bass. There's also tone, construction, feel, and more. I know they will be well built, so the construction shouldn't be an issue. And it says they're modeled it after a '62 Fender J, at least the neck, so the feel shouldn't be a surprise. As for the tone, they're using Aguilar guts w/ alder bodies, so I'm sure it sounds good too. I guess my only beef is regarding cosmetic issues. But, that 'Spector-ness' is a big deal to me!

I agree, a concave jazz would be amazing.

 

[JPSBassist]

They did with the NSJR reissue series. And it flopped.

Are you talking about the NS-JAR series, 83 of each color, 3-colors to choose from... 1983 reissue?

I think the reason the NS-JAR reissue failed is multi-faceted... Why spend $1500-1800 on a bolt-on Spector with none of the trademark Spector kicks (like the neck inlays, locking Spector bridge) and of course the J-Bass pickup configuration when you can get into a Euro for the same price?

The Coda's list price is $3199 per the SpectorWorld news release... and at that price you know it's going to be built well. Although something I guess one should consider is the "list price" is usually a good 40% higher than you can actually purchase the bass for. But why purchase a well-made Fender clone at that price?

The Forte is going to be another interesting experiment. $3200-3400 to get into a plain-Jane USA model? But you can get into a near-USA quality Euro, upgrade the pre-amp and still have cash to spare.

I'm just a player... a player with 20 years of executive marketing experience for large international conglomerates creating entire marketing strageties; I've never applied my experience to guitar builders. I wonder if perhaps I should.

I'd be curious to look at their target market projections, market needs ratios, competitive analysis, and any focus group information they gathered.

I love Spector Basses. My focus would always be to protect the unique nature of the brand while expanding the loyal customer base with products driven by solid metrics research; test marketed to a broad-base of potential purchasers.

And for all I know that's exactly what they've done. It's sometimes hard to see the picture when you are in the frame. And I'm a fan of the NS basses... so I really don't care about any other offering.

Regardless, I want to see them succeed and continue to make beautiful instruments that I can find myself in the doghouse on a regular basis for lusting after. My wife calls my guitars my mistresses anyway.

Cheers!

 

[Thundar]

Bring back the BOB

 

[marchone]

I think the reason the NS-JAR reissue failed is multi-faceted... Why spend $1500-1800 on a bolt-on Spector with none of the trademark Spector kicks (like the neck inlays, locking Spector bridge) and of course the J-Bass pickup configuration when you can get into a Euro for the same price?

The Forte is going to be another interesting experiment. $3200-3400 to get into a plain-Jane USA model? But you can get into a near-USA quality Euro, upgrade the pre-amp and still have cash to spare.

The first Spector I bought is the NS-2-JA-R and I'm happy with it, though part of of my decision to acquire it was the heavy discount I got. $899 from Sam Ash vs the prices you quoted above. It became an entry level no-brainer for me.

A Spector to me is an NS-2. So it appears to be for many others. The Forte is a USA NS-2 at $1000 to $1500 less cost depending on whether or not you order the HazLab option. The rest is aesthetic. You either like its appearance, or you don't. Functionally they are the same.

 

[JPSBassist]

A Spector to me is an NS-2. So it appears to be for many others. The Forte is a USA NS-2 at $1000 to $1500 less cost depending on whether or not you order the HazLab option. The rest is aesthetic. You either like its appearance, or you don't. Functionally they are the same.

I agree that the NS2 is the "poster-child" bass for Spector... really to me the name Spector and the NS2 are one-in-the-same.

I'd argue that the Forte is not an NS2 though... it's USA made, made similar to the NS2 in shape, etc...

But what makes an NS2 an NS2 to me is all of the fine details that Stuart and crew put into the finishing and detailing. The abalone inlays, the polished brass bridge, the wood choices and beautiful finishes.

Will the Forte and NS2 play the same... probably. Will they feel the same... probably. But can you really say that the Forte is going to be appealing to the consumer that wants a "Spector" meaning a NS2, but can't afford that extra couple of grand... when the Euro models are less and much more in-line with what the Spector image has come to be.

Session players or for someone who wants to play one in studio... but then again... I'm really biased. I love the NS2. I love the Euro4LX. The Forte just doesn't seem to get my juices flowing the same way.

 

[milo]

what will happen with korean made spectors?

what will happen with european made spectors?

What I hear are just big words about USA spectors(stupid new lines of basses)

Why I bought Rebop,because I get well made allmost similar to usa body and of course crown inlays .If there are still dots like they were I would bought Warwick.

 

[zeroncali]

My only issue with it is the headstock. Yuck!