For anybody that believes that's a '65 I have one of Jaco's basses for you.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
OMG! ... he's got a '65 Jazz also !!!
- Thread starter Lizooki
- Start date
those block inlays didn't appear until late 1966. Same with the white binding on the neck. The '65 had clay dot markers in early 1965 and Mother of pearl (pearloid or faux-MOP) dots later in '65. I had a 1965 Jazz with the MOP dots on the neck that I bought in 1966. I toured with it in the early 70's for three years and then did weekend gigs until 1976 when it was stolen.
Those pickups also are not original. It had black pickups. The spacing looks a little off to me too. Looks like the wider spacing between pickups to me. My current jazz has the wider spacing between pickups, which is a 4" spacing. I see he's left a light spot where the tug bar originally was, but I only see one screw hole there, not two.
And NO, the ashtray pickup shield certainly did not hang off the end. And, oh yeah, Fender didn't offer a maple neck on the '65. It was on the precision but not the Jazz. Also the rosewood fingerboard in 1965 was a lighter colored rosewood than I've seen before or since.
This is definitely NOT a 1965 Fender Jazz Bass, at least not in original condition. I would really like to see the heel of the neck to see if there's a date stamp on it.
Here's a shot of my 1965 Jazz when I was touring with it in ~1972. What looks like scratches on the body above and in front of my thumb are actually scratches in the print.:
Holy cow! That's a beauty! And where did you get that matching Tort bridge pickup? Sweet!
My local guy has this '59 for only $6,500. It looks like a pretty narrow radius neck but still playable. Probs needs new strings. Maybe I'll try some flats.
I since posted that I enlarged the headstock image and found the D string looks to be under the tree but slack so you are correct that it isn't properly under the tree.
Holy cow! That's a beauty! And where did you get that matching Tort bridge pickup? Sweet!
View attachment 3722465
It just had that pickup cover on it when I got it. The neck pickup was original, the bridge pickup was of unknown provenance. Sounded fine, but I pulled them and put in Fralin Split Jazz to manage the usual JB buzz. I liked the burgundy cover with the tort pickguard though, so kept it.
I tried a couple of 60's Jazz Basses and they sounded like Jazz Basses, then I tried some 2010's Jazz Basses and they sounded like Jazz Basses but didn't cost 6 big ones...
I had a local shop call me and tell me they had a mid 60's something or other P Bass, I went and had a look at it and to be honest it wasn't in good shape so I bought a new P.
At the end of the day I can't really see the mojo in these instruments.
I had a local shop call me and tell me they had a mid 60's something or other P Bass, I went and had a look at it and to be honest it wasn't in good shape so I bought a new P.
At the end of the day I can't really see the mojo in these instruments.
That happens. When I picked up my '63, the neck was worn smooth from 55 years of playing and was perfect. Immediately felt more right than any other J-Bass I've played. I got rid of a couple other J-Basses upon its acquisition. Was that instant connection that sometimes happens. There was a 65 P-Bass there as well and it was in good shape, felt good, but I like my $600 2012 USA P-Bass better. I had an old late 70s P-Bass years ago, but think I like the 2012 better too. It was good, but P-Basses were uncool in the 90s so I got rid of it.
A lot of it, I think, comes down to the setup and that first impression when you pick up an instrument - expensive or inexpensive. A bad setup is like a smile with broken teeth.
