Not now since Shaq is their spokesperson after he was fired from his own company.
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.
Roger's take, in a nutshell
- Thread starter TyBo
- Start date
Not now since Shaq is their spokesperson after he was fired from his own company.
You could possibly say that he is doing this for profit if he said that the most expensive fingerboard is the best. But he didn't say that any fingerboard is better, just if this is your goal try maple. If you want immediacy, try ebony. Bloom is rosewood.
have you ever tried the same model in front of you, one with maple one with rosewood? how many times? how much time?
Back when I was in my early 20's I had my first real job and had just gotten my first ever big annual bonus. I was going to buy a new bass with at least part of it.
This was well before i knew anything about tonewood, or the best bass for rock, or whatever. I had zero preconceived notions - I wanted a bass that played and sounded great, and I was going to use it for a variety of music so I wanted flexibility.
I went to Wray's music in Central Pa - it was the biggest music store in the area. I played every single bass that they had at least twice. I don't remember how many it was, but at least a good two dozen.
I ended up with two finalists - an ash/maple Fender Jazz and an alder/rosewood Fender Jazz. Both were USA models, passive, brand new, same strings, same pickups, set up the same, made the same year in the same place, everything identical except for the fingerboard wood and the body wood.
The difference was very clear and unmistakable, even to untrained me. The ash/maple was livelier, snappier, had more bite and brightness, while the alder/rw was darker, deeper, less attack but more body.
Today, I have four Sadowsky's (down from six): two fours - one ash/maple, the other alder/rw, and two fives, and, you guessed it, one ash/maple and the other alder/rw and yup, they are different sounding and different playing instruments. Identical other than the wood used.
I know we all have anecdotes and of course my anecdotes are more better than your anecdotes
But the fact remains is that there are clear differences amongst these otherwise identical instruments. What could cause them, if not the wood?
This was well before i knew anything about tonewood, or the best bass for rock, or whatever. I had zero preconceived notions - I wanted a bass that played and sounded great, and I was going to use it for a variety of music so I wanted flexibility.
I went to Wray's music in Central Pa - it was the biggest music store in the area. I played every single bass that they had at least twice. I don't remember how many it was, but at least a good two dozen.
I ended up with two finalists - an ash/maple Fender Jazz and an alder/rosewood Fender Jazz. Both were USA models, passive, brand new, same strings, same pickups, set up the same, made the same year in the same place, everything identical except for the fingerboard wood and the body wood.
The difference was very clear and unmistakable, even to untrained me. The ash/maple was livelier, snappier, had more bite and brightness, while the alder/rw was darker, deeper, less attack but more body.
Today, I have four Sadowsky's (down from six): two fours - one ash/maple, the other alder/rw, and two fives, and, you guessed it, one ash/maple and the other alder/rw and yup, they are different sounding and different playing instruments. Identical other than the wood used.
I know we all have anecdotes and of course my anecdotes are more better than your anecdotes
But the fact remains is that there are clear differences amongst these otherwise identical instruments. What could cause them, if not the wood?
yeah, there's nothing like some yahoo online making accusations against someone's character for no reason, especially when said person's character has been shown to be nothing but outstanding and supporting of bassists for decades. That doesn't make me question Roger's character at all, but it certainly make me question that other poster's character.
You are pretty close to being out of line.
No one impugned anyone's character until your post.
if accusing someone of lying (and/or being delusional/believing their own lies) isn't attacking someone's character then i don't know what is. I didn't "impugn anyone's character" in that post, i said that attacking someone else character for no reason makes me question someone's character.
I don't see any reason as to why giving my opinions on a subject and "sticking up" for someone when they are being unfairly attacked - especially when they aren't around to defend anything - is stepping close to a line. IMO accusing a businessman - who's business is partially built on reputation and trust - of this kind of junk is what's over the line.
I'm pretty sure that this is the kind of response they were expecting ....
Smooth_bass88
vaxx!
- Oct 31, 2006
- 12,122
- 16,795
- Disclosures
- have been on nationally released albums, charting on the Billboard 200
agree with Roger 100%, also respect his opinion far more than random internet user
Roger is an authority on the subject but he is not infallible. His experience is not objective no matter how great his reputation is. Expressing skepticism should not be construed as ill will or a sign of character flaw.
If there were a rigorous, well designed study on the subject it may or may not reveal that Roger is correct in all his opinions with respect to that subject. There has never been such a study.
A sacred cow is just a cow to the milk-maid.
I never respect opinion, but I have paid for it plenty of times. When opinion is all there is, opinion decides.
I see more than just "skepticism" in the comment in question - saying that Sadowsy says what he does "largely for profit" actually is impugning his character. Especially since there's no way in which his opinions can reasonably be take to favor options which make him more money ... I mean, rosewood or maple, not a lot of difference in profit either way.
I get that you wanted to work "well designed study" into your post
, but that kind of misses the point of the comment to which you're objecting.
when did I say that Roger is infallible or that expressing skepticism is a character flaw? There is a HUGE difference between expressing skepticism and attacking someone's character.
What would a study like you suggest look like? Heck, folks can't even agree as to what should be measured and how!
I mean, the poster literally said that he was either lying for profit or he is delusional ... also for profit. Both of those are pretty serious IMO.I see more than just "skepticism" in the comment in question - saying that Sadowsy says what he does "largely for profit" actually is impugning his character. Especially since there's no way in which his opinions can reasonably be take to favor options which make him more money ... I mean, rosewood or maple, not a lot of difference in profit either way.
I get that you wanted to work "well designed study" into your post
My friend Tim was good friends with RS and would often purchase wood from him. He said he learned Roger really knows his stuff, but at the end of the day a lot of his bread and butter is making custom instruments, and if the customers have big ideas and are willing to pay for what they wanted, and he is happy to accept their business. Tim (from Callowhill BTW) used to call these "dentist basses" because often the clients were not professional musicians and had a lot of money to blow.
The smiley face doesn't mask the stink of the bait....
I get that you wanted to work "well designed study" into your post
. Anyway, that is it for my contribution on this thread.No bait. Just a quip about the introduction of the unrelated phrase while you were addressing someone else's comment. Anyway, no hard feelings on my part.The smiley face doesn't mask the stink of the bait
If you're talking to me (You talkin' to me? You must be talkin' to me ...
), then my "point" is simply what I stated. Cheers.
