• 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.

Precision "upgrades" that should be stock on new model - poll

Select a max of 3 that you think could/should be stock on a Pbass.

  • 21 (or more) fret neck

    Votes: 70 26.9%

  • Truss rod wheel at heel

    Votes: 122 46.9%

  • Drop tuner on E string

    Votes: 40 15.4%

  • Reverse P pickup option

    Votes: 67 25.8%

  • Better string tree for ADG strings

    Votes: 79 30.4%

  • Upgraded nut material

    Votes: 76 29.2%

  • Make Jazz profile necks optional

    Votes: 128 49.2%

  • 2 Jazz pickups on the P body

    Votes: 19 7.3%

  • A bound Aerodyne style P

    Votes: 15 5.8%

  • Put the jack on the side of the body

    Votes: 63 24.2%
  • Total voters
    260
#121
MarkoYYZ said:
I'm sensing a little backtracking here after being called out on your own bad manners, way to try to put that on me ;)

You say yourself "Fender tries a lot of stuff" which is exactly what this is poll is about, not making changes to the historic or established models you got needlessly defensive over.

It was in the text of the OP, but I've modified the thread title to be even more clear.


I guess a whole different question would be "should the J neck be standard and the P neck be optional?". I had thought to make the poll option "Put a J neck on it" since this is about what features should be stock on the bass.
.
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure why you insist on coming across as a jerk in your posts. I'm not sure why you sense any backtracking. I believe my comments have been consistent. If I have been rude to anyone here - aside from returning in kind the treatment I am getting from you - then I apologize for that.

I did disagree that everyone who knows anything instantly throws away the factory strings. I questioned why the string tree is considered a design flaw, and I commented that I don't see any issue with the A string lacking a string tree. I believe I also said I don't like the strength compromise that a tilt headstock usually offers. I said that Fender has tried many options - including many of these - and abandoned them, presumably because they don't sell. I will go one further and suggest that some of these thing may push profitability past an acceptable price point.

It may also be that there is some strategy here. If you can't get a P bass with a J neck, you have to buy two basses to get one. I'm not sure I would accuse Fender of being that well-thought-out a business, but it is possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Stealth Fighter
#126
That's the thing though, there doesn't have to be an issue with something for someone to prefer something else. It's all about preferences and getting an idea which of them may be popular enough to warrant being catered to.
 
#127
I agree. There does not have to be an issue. Calling it a "god awful HMV bridge" kind of implies that he sees an issue with it, though. I was just curious about his reasons, even if it is as simple as "I just think the new bridge looks awful."
 
#129
I've never had a bass with the newer HM Fender bridge. Styling wise I think it it looks pleasing enough, but from a functional standpoint, I have a preference for top loading of the strings rather than having to feed them through holes on the tailpiece or through the body. A quick release design is vastly preferable to me.

I own over 10 such basses, all of them Fenders, and most will retain the bent-plate bridge they have because I want to keep those basses in their stock form - but that is one thing I think Fender could/should consider in the design of any new bridge, when they eventually go down that road again.

Another option I considered including was "different tuner shape". I quite like lollipops and really like the old Ibanez hearts, but it's surprising to me how little creativity or willingness to change there can be with things like this. The clover is certainly an iconic, bass-defining shape, but 99% of basses use either the clover (elephant ear) design, or the Gotoh GB7 type compact tuners. Someone needs to venture outside the sandbox a little, IMO. It;s done with bodies and finishes and even exotic bridges and electronics, just not tuners...
.
 
Last edited:
#131
Fun Size Nick said:
My only addition would be the thumbrest that came on them in the '70s. Do you guys that like the tug bar actually use it for thumbstyle playing (not sarcasm - I'm actually interested to know)? I find the thumbrest useful for reggae and ballads, and I'd personally add one to an instrument that didn't have one.
Click to expand...

I started with a pick and now alternate between that and fingers depending on the style of music. I personally tried resting my tumb on the pickup but the tugbar is all i can use now, i dont have a bass without one.
 
#132
wvbass said:
I like bent plate bridges, too, but don't know of any issues with the current bridge design. What do you not like about the current bridge?
Click to expand...

Because the added mass serves zero purpose other than to gratify those mystified by high mass bridge mojo. They fixed something that wasn't broken. It's functional, but I'd prefer something lighter and much less bulky. It's certainly not a deal breaker for me though.

Also, it is capable of both top load and string through. I do not use the string through option, so I'd do away with that as well.
 
#133
petrus61 said:
Because the added mass serves zero purpose other than to gratify those mystified by high mass bridge mojo. They fixed something that wasn't broken. It's functional, but I'd prefer something lighter and much less bulky. It's certainly not a deal breaker for me though.

Also, it is capable of both top load and string through. I do not use the string through option, so I'd do away with that as well.
Click to expand...

Totally understandable. I do like string through though...wish they made MIMS like that.

And for the record, I have the vintage threaded bridge on my MIM P-bass which works so well and doesn't have the notorious saddle-moving annoyance.
 
#135
gfen said:
It's a P bass. You know what you're getting. If I wanted a P, I wouldn't want any of this nonsense that effectively changes the insturment or adds options I don't want to pay for or deal with (ie, drop tuners, an additional complication in hardware I actively don't want as tehre's more to fail).
Click to expand...

Actually, I've installed Hipshot D Tuners on several basses and they're very reliable. Unless you're talking about user error, like forgetting to flick the lever back to regular tuning. That's a different story!
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkoYYZ
#136
awilkie84 said:
I love the vintage saddle bridges, but those HMVs are quite nice, too. :) Nothing to scoff at, that's for sure. :D
Click to expand...

I'm a fan of both as well personally... I enjoy the threaded vintage and HMV... I'd take either... But then again I enjoy my BAII so I guess I'm not that picky...

I think too much emphasis is placed on bridges... If my strings don't slide and it's aesthetically pleasing, I'm good to go and it's time to boogie


Geddy Lee Jazz Club - Member #222
 
  • Like
Reactions: awilkie84
#137
Esoge said:
I'm a fan of both as well personally... I enjoy the threaded vintage and HMV... I'd take either... But then again I enjoy my BAII so I guess I'm not that picky...

I think too much emphasis is placed on bridges... If my strings don't slide and it's aesthetically pleasing, I'm good to go and it's time to boogie


Geddy Lee Jazz Club - Member #222
Click to expand...

Hi fellow Geddy Lee jazz club member
 
#140
awilkie84 said:
They did:

40762_l.jpg
Click to expand...
I am aware of the 5 string Squire Precision, but I was referring to a 4 string Fender bass.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back