• 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.

Oh. It's not a Fender...

my favorite brand of guitars and basses I play don't even remotely look like a Fender in the headstock, so there is NEVER any questions from anybody mistaking my axes for Fenders. One look at any of mine from far away, and they already know what it is, just not the specific model.

And I have had my share of idiots "uh, why didn't you bring a Fender", I tell them you want me to play one? --then buy me one.

or " uh, we wont hire you unless you play a Fender Jazz" then I'm not going to play for your band then?..ok-bye...NEXT!!

or " here, use this Fender because we want the Fender sound".. ok where does it say in the contract you needed a bassist that played a Fender?

YMMV.
 
For the most part, the "non-playing" public have heard probably 3 or 4 names in their lives - Fender, Gibson, Rickenbacker.

That's what they know and that's what they equate as the "standard".

Frankly, I doubt that it's anything personal, just perception...

It's like, when I play my Ric, I have been told that I sound like "Rush".....well, not a bad reference, I suppose, as long as they don't think I SING like "Rush"...... :eek::D:eek:
 
This thread is sad but true :(

I just hate when people ask:

-why didn't you get a fender?
-fenders are the best instruments out there...
-Can't you make it sound more Fender-ish?
-So...if that is not a P bass ...and it is not a J bass...what is it?
-and so on....

also people who tell you ..hey why don't you buy a 4000$ bass?

Of course IF I HAD THE MONEY for a Ritter, Conklin, Fodera , etc i would buy them

...As someone said: "MARKETING is Fender's greatest instrument"
...and as somebody else said : "people like to criticise what is not theirs"
...and at last but not less important : "When you don't know what you're talking about..you'd better shut up"
 
Over the years I've owned (or still own) all of the following; I may have forgotten some as I've bought and sold a lot of basses over the years:
Cortez
Fender
G&L
Music Man (including a 5er)
Rick Turner
Rob Allen
Takamine
Tokai
Univox (I believe ... been awhile, but it was some sort of Beatle bass clone)

What a lot of luthiers have done (Sadowsky, Rob Allen with the Solid 4, Lakland, et al.) is improve on the groundwork Fender laid down. As some have pointed out, a lot of these guys have taken some of the "faults" they may have seen by repairing basses and fixed them in a way to make their own tweaks on the classic format of a P or J.

I still own my Rob Allen basses, so I'm no stranger to a boutique, well crafted bass.

Blame Fender marketing all you want, but like Gibson, even without the marketing, they've been around forever. If they made a crap product, they wouldn't be in business. Plenty of manufacturers have come and gone over the years. It's that simple. Is everything they make uniformly good? Probably not. It's no secret that they had some QC issues at times and didn't have a good reputation for awhile. The recent basses have all been pretty well received. It's rare a company listens and fixes things. Look at the criticism of some amp vendors (not stirring that @!#& pot up, but you know what I mean).

A P or J isn't the be all end all bass for each one of us, but to knock 'em is just plain silly. If you dislike the way a P or J looks or sounds, fine. Boutique basses are not the be all end all, either. Sometimes all you need is meat and potatoes. Most of us who have been around long enough have a few basses in our collection to satisfy different needs for various types of gigs.

I've never had anyone question my choice of equipment for the most part. I had one guy when I was doing the Rush tribute ask why I wasn't using a Jazz (or a Geddy Lee signature). That's about it. I've used my Rob Allen Solid 4 on gigs. No one asked me why I didn't drag out a P bass (which I do own).

I've had odd looks at the Rick Turner Renaissance (gone), Rob Allen Deep 4, and Takamine TB10 (gone), but people got rid of that quickly when they heard 'em.

If anyone asked me to be in a band and stipulated what bass I needed to use, they'd still be looking for a bass player (especially if they want me to play a J - I dislike J basses because I hate how they feel). I use the right tool for the job, period. As a player, that's your job to do what's appropriate. That's the bottom line.

I don't bitch at keyboard players because they may prefer Korg over Roland. I don't bitch at drummers because they use Ludwig over DW. If they sound good, play well, and we're locking in, IT DOESN'T MATTER.

EDIT:
Let's not forget that without a P, J, Gibson, etc., you wouldn't have any of the modern basses which may not even look or sound like a P or J. Someone had to get the ball rolling.

The next time someone asks you why you didn't schlep a 4-banger/5-banger/Fender/MTD/whatever, ask them where their baby grand or Hammond WITH a Leslie (not their $1000 keyboard that emulates everything), DW kit, etc. is since you only play with people that have "real" equipment. :)
 
Years ago I was the first guy in town to get a PRS (just before they got popular) and at some gig a chap came up and asked:
"What kind of guitar is that?"
"Its a Paul Reed Smith..."
"Oh" came the reply "Well.... I have a friend that owns an Ibanez!" (with a "beat that" sort of look on his face)
"Really? Oh, good" I replied....
He did not know any better, bless him...

Most folks just latch onto a name they can remember and that to them becomes the standard that no other measures to.

I learned long ago that it's all in the hands. The most well respected bass played in my town years ago played (and still plays) a beat to death Ibanez blazer bass and lays folks flat with his awesomeness!

As they say "If the shoe fits......."

emac.
 
yeah fender was a marketing genius not a design genius. he tricked everyone with his deviant marketing skills, what a bugger. the strat, telecaster, jaguar, jazz master, jazz bass, and the first electric bass ever the precision, all sneaky marketing fodder.
any professional bassist will tell you, Fender is crap, it's a well known fact.
 
yeah fender was a marketing genius not a design genius. he tricked everyone with his deviant marketing skills, what a bugger. the strat, telecaster, jaguar, jazz master, jazz bass, and the first electric bass ever the precision, all sneaky marketing fodder.
any professional bassist will tell you, Fender is crap, it's a well known fact.

Not to mention the Musicman Stingray and G&L.

But this misses the point. Most people aren't slamming Fender (a few are). Most are just saying; for the love of god why do I have to apologize for or explain my Lakland/Fodera, etc.
 
Yes and no.

Many of today's 'top luthiers' started by repairing instruments. Of course the bulk of those instruments were Fenders and Gibsons. Many of them saw the same repairs time after time and in repairing those things learned from the experience. They had working knowledge of why instruments failed, were undependable, etc. It makes sense that those people went on to build their own instruments that didn't have these problems. Guys like Roger Sadowsky and Sheldon Dingwall, Mike Lull have had their hands on more Fenders than most of us will ever have the chance to touch. There's no doubt that they could well tell us why and how these instruments are not the best.

Well, it's not by accident that Gibson headstocks are what feeds luthiers! It's not their prevalence, it's not Gibson owners being more negligent than the others, it's the non-existent design. Really. There are ways to make a mahogany neck more durable than the Gibson design, and by the pertinent criteria, the other brands ARE better guitars than Gibson in that respect. Does it matter whether you can depend on your guitar not breaking from being dropped 10 inches (the luthier I use demonstrated this...) and not have the headstock break? To me, it seems that reliability is a crucial point in calling an instrument a quality instrument.

There are objective criteria in hardware specs and allowed deviation from specified measurements, the prevalence of blemishes in finish, the work necesary to bring the fretwork to an acceptable level and so forth. Gibson and Fender do not try to produce the best guitars for the money, they try to maximize the price they can get for a given guitar.

It's willful ...something to say that since Gibson and Fender happened to end up the duopoly on the market for a time we should accord them respect. It's according companies in pursuit of winnings and in the process buying out the comptetition completely unfounded, misguided and historically revisionist moral justification for doing what companies do.
 

Latest posts