...before I make the wrong choice.
I have my eye on a couple of 70s RI Jazzes. For example, there is the Fender Japanese line and the Fender Mexico. I'm determined to get the aesthetics and the tone as close to the real deal as possible. I have noticed the Japanese RI's seem to have the close pickup spacing of the 60's Jazzes, and the MIM RI seems to have the pickup spacing wider, with the bridge pu closer to the bridge. I think Fender first moved the bridge pu 1/2 inch back so it wouldn't stick out from the pu cover, and then people realized that this gave the bass a different (and desirable for some) tone, the characteristic brightness of 70s slap and pop.
So what do you think? Is there any truth to this? Should I avoid, say, a great deal on a Japan 70s RI with the closer spacing, and hold out for an American or Mexican RI with the wider spacing?
And what about the 3-bolt neck on the Japan RI? Is it stable compared to a 4-bolt? Could I convert it to a 4-bolt with two new holes and neckplate? (MIM on left, Japan on right)
I have my eye on a couple of 70s RI Jazzes. For example, there is the Fender Japanese line and the Fender Mexico. I'm determined to get the aesthetics and the tone as close to the real deal as possible. I have noticed the Japanese RI's seem to have the close pickup spacing of the 60's Jazzes, and the MIM RI seems to have the pickup spacing wider, with the bridge pu closer to the bridge. I think Fender first moved the bridge pu 1/2 inch back so it wouldn't stick out from the pu cover, and then people realized that this gave the bass a different (and desirable for some) tone, the characteristic brightness of 70s slap and pop.
So what do you think? Is there any truth to this? Should I avoid, say, a great deal on a Japan 70s RI with the closer spacing, and hold out for an American or Mexican RI with the wider spacing?
And what about the 3-bolt neck on the Japan RI? Is it stable compared to a 4-bolt? Could I convert it to a 4-bolt with two new holes and neckplate? (MIM on left, Japan on right)