Old or new? What is the consensus?

[St Drogo]

Just a question I've been wondering about;

The holy grail for basses seems to be like sixties-era fenders. I hear the wood is "played in" or "dried correctly" or I hear they just have an unbeatable feel. on the other hand however, the overall quality of basses has been rising thoughout the years. Things like CNC machines are now in common use at even the budget companies, which have to increase consistency in a line. Contrary, all these vintage basses are made when Fender was new to this whole bass game. Surely they didn't know what they were doing as well as they do now? Trial and error and all that, you know?

Now I'm wondering, since the cheaper basses are getting better and better, it only seems logical the top of the line instruments are getting even more betterer even. More better. With this being the case, what is that elusive quality that makes people take out a third mortgage on their house just to get their paws on a '63 Fender P or something? And I want a real answer, not a "you-have-to-play-one-to-know-one" or a "it's-got-more-years-of-mojo". As I've stated, I've heard the explanation that the wood has been dried more thoroughly, but that seems silly. If that is the only factor that makes world-class basses, why wouldn't that be done at the factory these days? Also, the nitrocellulose finish can't be the defining factor, because then Highway Ones (1's) would be the best selling line of instruments like, EvAhR. So what is it?

Btw, I've done the search thing 'n' such, yaddayadda...

 

[superfunk47]

The simple answer?

All of those things you listed, and stir in a heaping helping of nostalgia. For better or worse, that's pretty much it, at least from what I've observed of the vintage craze (and experienced as one of its infected ).

 

[M.R. Ogle]

A new Toyota Camry is a better car than a 63 Corvette...rides better, gets better mileage, more reliable, no rattles, just more comfortable and better engineered.

But who lusts after a new Toyota Camry?

 

[michael_atw]

A new Toyota Camry is a better car than a 63 Corvette...rides better, gets better mileage, more reliable, no rattles, just more comfortable and better engineered.

But who lusts after a new Toyota Camry?

I suppose the reason in that is, except for the "better engineered" part, each of those "better" things is subjective. Some people think big-block "bad-mileage" engines are better; some people think a '63 corvette drives better. "More reliable" is a matter of how good one takes care of their car, as is rattling. I have had a '73 Torino for the last 3 summers and NOTHING beats the comfort of those bench seats. Period.

So, which one is "better" almost totally is subjective to each person. That's why a '63 Corvette wins so often.

 

[St Drogo]

A new Toyota Camry is a better car than a 63 Corvette...rides better, gets better mileage, more reliable, no rattles, just more comfortable and better engineered.

But who lusts after a new Toyota Camry?

I hear ya. But that depends what you lust after. Do you want a reaaaaaally cool car? Or do you want an efficient, cheap and reliably way to get you from A to B (however non-sexy that sounds)?

So you're saying it depends on what you want. I can dig that. But I get the impression the people who buy the late-fifties-Fenders still defend their purchase with reasons that aply to their function, i.e. making music. Like a '59 Fender is better in making music than, say, a '91 Ibanez.

Which may be true, I just want to know why. And I understand all the romance and nostalgia. But really, just come out and say that is th reason you bought that particular bass. Because it was made under supervision of Leo, or because your dad had one or whatever. Don't claim they are better at what they do than modern basses. Unless they are, and in that case, enlighten us as to why?

 

[M.R. Ogle]

Who thinks that?
You gotta be kidding. In almost every way, except perhaps straightline acceleration (and it would be close) a new Camry is a superior machine. Period.

 

[michael_atw]

Things like CNC machines are now in common use at even the budget companies, which have to increase consistency in a line.

Yes, that's true...but since CNC machines don't program themselves, its more about the person who's running it as opposed to the machine itself.

Contrary, all these vintage basses are made when Fender was new to this whole bass game. Surely they didn't know what they were doing as well as they do now? Trial and error and all that, you know?

Well, by the mid-60's Leo Fender had been making them for 20 years by hand - so I guess it depends on your definition of "new to the game".

 

[pacojas]

i don't care what you think, i'm with the "play one" crowd!!! if something still puts out after all those years,... why be all analytic and scientific?

 

[St Drogo]

i don't care what you think, i'm with the "play one" crowd!!! if something still puts out after all those years,... why be all analytic and scientific?

Because I can't afford one. But beside that, because people don't just say what you say: "I like this bass, it's awesome", but they are using analytic and scientific arguments like the finish or the wood dryness or the pickups whose windings have been corroded just enough (seriously, I've heard that) or whatever. I mean, dude. If you want an old bass, thas cool, it's your money. But just say that. Don't be all high and mighty and say your bass is objectively better than mine because of it's age. It's better because mine is crap, sure, but don't give me that "basses then were more sophisicated" horsecrap.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

I have a 1956 Fender Precision. In many measurable ways, it is not as good an instrument as my 90's Mexican Jazz bass... not much range in sound, kinda crude fit and finish (what's left of it), thicker neck, it's a bit of one-trick pony by sonic comparison. This is not subjective, it's just being honest.

I'd probably NOT want to play it all four sets in a crappy bar somewhere, or throw it into the back of a cold truck to go to the hotel.... like I would my other basses. As Tony Campos (Static-X) told me, when we were discussing basses "Yeah I have some real nice pieces, but I'd never take them on tour!"

But it's cool, I like it. I enjoy the little piece of the early Fender heritage I now own with it. If we're sitting around in a cozy home studio with a pot of good coffee brewing and the old guys start diggin' out the nostalgia tunes... guess what I go grab out of the case?

 

[Zebco]

A new Toyota Camry is a better car than a 63 Corvette...rides better, gets better mileage, more reliable, no rattles, just more comfortable and better engineered.

But who lusts after a new Toyota Camry?

Ah, the Vette spit window!!! Carburetor and a distributor with breaker points

At least in the car world they don't argue that the Vette is a better car, they understand it's just a hell of a lot more fun. They don't have all the mythology about how bias ply tires handle better and drum brakes are superior to disks if you're hip enough to be able to tell the difference.

I've played many pre CBS instruments and to me they should cost a few hundred at the most. I've never played one as good as my Peavey Foundation. IMO.

 

[eggfan]

"What is the consensus?"

Seriously?

 

[St Drogo]

"What is the consensus?"

Seriously?

I'm super serial.

 

[tplyons]

What is the consensus?

Obviously, there isn't one.

New instruments are a dime a dozen. Old instruments are finite and won't be produced anymore. If you like them, there aren't anymore being produced, so people hold onto them longer. They're harder to replace.

I'll take old over new any day. But my needs in a bass were met in 1957 with the split-coil P. Anything made in the past 50 years will meet my needs. Some other people have different requirements of an instrument, but I can work with just about anything.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

No kidding.

I've said this on here before, but I think it's so blatantly phony that guys seek every vintage screw, pot tube and capacitor for that "authentic" old-school tone, but then string the instruments up with a brand NEW pack of Ernie Ball strings!!!!... excuse me, but isn't that the part that actually MAKES the sound?
And modern string manufacturing techniques you'll freely acknowledge as vastly superior, but somehow the instruments themselves did not improve? Bullstuff. If "authentic Vintage tone" seekers were in 100% being honest, they'd be paying HUGE dollars for old packs of Black Diamond strings.

My old black plastic Zebco 202 I used as a kid is a better reel than....

 

[Gibenbackerbass]

What is the consensus?

Obviously, there isn't one.

New instruments are a dime a dozen. Old instruments are finite and won't be produced anymore. If you like them, there aren't anymore being produced, so people hold onto them longer. They're harder to replace.

I'll take old over new any day. But my needs in a bass were met in 1957 with the split-coil P. Anything made in the past 50 years will meet my needs. Some other people have different requirements of an instrument, but I can work with just about anything.

You bring up some good points.

I think sometimes it gets to a point of affordability. Do people have the money to spend on an expensive piece of vintage gear? Are they wiiling to part with 8 to 15 thousand dollars, or more, for a collectable? Which is another point. Why are they buying it? For investment, as a collectable, because it's thier hobby and they enjoy acquiring something most people don't have, or is it something to play, or any combination of these things?

People buy what they do because they precieve value in it and it fills a need or desire.

I think vintage stuff is cool....

.... and so is the new stuff.

I think ya gotta have both.

 

[bassclef112]

Here's the bottom line - any bass that really speaks to you, old or new, is the one to get period.
Example - take 10 identical versions of any CNC'd model, like a Jazz, and play them. They will all sound like a Jazz. But you will definitely find differences, some subtle, some not so between them with definite preferences. All the bits have tocome together, and the primary pieces are the wood. You can control everything except that - you can't tell a tree how to grow or how to sound. There are dogs and gems in every line - MIA, MIJ, MIM, etc. You have to look a little harder as the price point drops (there is a reason it gets cheaper), but you can find good instruments.

Now, as to older.

Part 1 -I'm going to start by saying I am old enough to remember my mentors (who were established players) telling me NOT to buy any Fender's made during the 70's, that they were crap on a good day, and if I was going to get one I should make the store bring out at least 3 or 4 to pick from. The general consensus at the time was the QA was a crapshoot. There were decent ones around, but you had to look for them. I know I'm not the only one around here that remembers that because I saw my contemporaries post the exact same sentiment. That's why I find it so ironic that these very instruments I was warned about have now become item to lust for as "vintage" pieces. It just makes me shake my head over the whole "older is better" thing since it seems to suddenly apply by default. (I'm not trying to stir the pot, I'm calling it the way it was for me).

Part 2 - I've been playing a long time and nobody was more skeptical than I was about the vintage thing. I had/have a slew of really nice basses and I thought as you - what's the big deal? Well, several years ago I was finally in a position to seriously shop for a 60's Jazz. A trusted friend is a licensed dealer and at the time he had 5 60's J's in his posession ('65, '66, 2-'67's, and a '69). I sat for 2 hours and took my time playing them all, and over and again the '66 kept coming back to me, clearly rising to the top. It was not the cleanest, but it played the best. That's the one I bought and I will not part with it. It absolutely sings on every fret. Wherever I play it I am told to never sell it. Okay -the point. The other basses were nice, sure, but they didn't have the "magic" for me. Just having one from that era doesn't guarantee anything. There were great ones, decent ones, and dogs just like at any other time, and I consider myself very fortunate that I got really good one.

I have 6 Jazz basses with several variations of woods, guts etc that sound great. They all have a voice and none of them come anywhere near the voice of that '66. Can it be duplicated with modern materials/techniques? I don't know. I do know that what comes out of that '66 is made of a whole lot of things that I don't have to look for anywhere else. It totally cops the vibe and tone of the era effortlessly, and it's post-Leo. I can't explain it and I can't compare it to a modern one.

If you can find a bass from any era/brand/style that makes you feel that way about it - I'd say get it or regret it, because clearly, out of all the great instruments out there, it's doesn't seem to be as common as one would expect, or we'd all have one.

Having said that, here's the bottom line. I try to acquire the best example I can find of any type of bass I like. If it doesn't make me want to play it a lot and I find it sitting in a case more often than not - it's gone. That's the yardstick, regardless of what it is. Get the best one you can.

 

[king_biscuit]

People are not buying 50s/60s Fenders because they are great musical tools, they are buying them because they are cool to own -- like a first issue of Batman. But the more honest Batman owner will admit that his original first issue has no more utility than a reprint; the vintage guitar owner no so much.

 

[M.R. Ogle]

Bassclef... I agree. You are right on with so many of your observations.

You're also quite fortunate to have found "your" 66 Jazz.
Yes, those great vintage pieces exist, but those are the exceptional few, not the norm... the exceptions that drive the vintage mythology and price point right off the reality scale.

 

[mcm]

NEW