• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

R warwicks heavy?

I gassed for years, (early 90's) about getting a Warwick Thumb 5, then I actually got to play a few other models as well. All were much to heavy for me.

I also noticed they tended to be neck heavy, as when unsupported, the neck tends to drop to as low as it can go. That was the only thing that stopped me from getting one.
 
I was going crazy for a Thumb 5 a few years back - then I actually tried one. It was great but I hated the neck dive. It was so terribly uncomfortable that I started looking for something better with similar woods. A guy offered me a trade for his ABII 6 and I've never looked back. Comfort is too essential for me to just go on looks and tone alone.
 
R the bubinga bodies heavy??

Compared to Kramer or Travis Bean aluminum necked basses? Probably not. I owned two Kramers, and nothing gives you Jimmy Page shoulder stoop faster on a four-set night - especially the 8-string.

I don't notice a weight or neck dive issue with my Vampyre SN 5, but it has a flamed maple body with the ovangkol/wenge neck combo - might be preferable in some situations over the bubinga.

:bassist:
 
I've got a light Warwick; it's an ash bodied Corvette. All the others
that I've owned/played have been pretty heavy, though.

+1. My ash Corvette 5 is the lightest 5 I've ever owned... it even has a bit of neck dive (not so much that it bothers me at all).

But my experience of other Warwicks with the bubinga bodies has been that, yes, they tend to be on the heavy side.