Opinions Please on a 1964 Jazz Bass

not sure
but if your avatar is GlassJoe from super punchout ,
i will make an effort.

 

It devalues it a bit as a collector piece.

Sounds like an o.k price. I'd try and get it a little lower if possible.

Do you want it as a "player" or "collectable"?

Original covers and case as well?

Are you positive it's the original finish as well?

 

Blimey,looks a bit tatty. Cripes... you good get a couple of new one's for that price.

 

The re-fret does not hurt it that much( common for a bass that old)

If new fret-job was done, well with vintage style frets.

12k seems a little high for that bass.

9k-10k would be more like it.

 

DBopp-
Just a thought (and I'm no expert).....
Whenever I see a bass with that much bare wood, I think of the 'aging' process that seems so popular today. I've got a bass I've been playing for 27 years, and it doesn't one hundredth that much wear. Please be careful since it's such serious money.

 

A couple? You could buy 15 new basses for $12,000. Why waste your money? Are you a "baby boomer" trying to relive your childhood?

 

Are you a "teenager" with some kind of class envy?

In 10 years, there's a more than fair chance that will be worth quite a bit more.


IMO, that's about what I'd expect to pay for a custom color, Pre CBS J bass, w/ the case and covers, and a very well done refret.

Maybe just a bit on the high side, but definitly in the right ball park IMO.

Less for a 'burst.

 

IMO, it looks like a bad vintage work.

 

+1 odd looking wear pattern on the back and there should be more wear by the pups depending on the playing style and at the top where its already worn and the neck doesn't look worn at all.

the insane prices on the vintage instruments are ridiculous I'd say 3-4k tops

 

I'd want verification of originality before I forked over the $$$

 

The wear and tear looks a little unrealistic to me... there seems to be none on the back of the neck?

 

hahaha everyone is saying it doesnt look real etc from a 300x300 photo..

What you need to do is ask for them to take it apart in front of you check for neck dates, check for pickup dates, pot dates.

The wear does not look unrealistic at all, if it was played hard in the 60's-70's when big ol' gaudy belt buckles were the thing then that wear would be rougher on the back of the body and not so much on the neck..

The neck does have wear I can see it even in that little photo.

16k is High, 12K is still a bit high considering a refret good or not, I would say 8-9k range since there is heavy wear, and some mods done.

But with out verifying the pots, neck, body, pickups etc it may not be 100%

my 2 cents.

 

I think it has an awesome appeal to it, and I wouldn't say the wear seems unrealistic, on the contrary!
but I would check the bass well! pups, serials, pots, the works!
and then offer 10k tops!
but still seems like a beautiful piece!


my 2c

 

when I click on the pic, I get a hosting ad...

 

I disagree. My 63 P-bass which I'd bought in 72 ended up having the same sort of wear and tear by the time I sold mine by 76. We wore some mighty big belt buckles back then with our brass button fly Lee bell bottom jeans. The old Fender nitro finishes didn't take long to booger up, as for the neck wear, it's hard to tell from the photo that was posted but I'm willing to bet this bass is legit.