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.
Fender started there:
Link Removed
Sadowsky brought it here:
Invalid Link Removed
Ok, even Roger is laughing now![]()
I know I know.
It's a stretch, but still funny!!!![]()
OMG at least read what I've written. I've said that SADOWSKY WERE GREAT BASSES AND MY JUDGEMENT WAS ONLY ETHICAL.
I like Sadowsky basses. I love their tones, their consistency and all. But I hate the fact that they simply have copied. and remember:
THIS IS AN ETHICAL POINT OF VIEW.
P.S.: And cheap doesn't mean bad, it means inexpensive.
It's unfortunate that so many people here (the haterZ and nut swingers) solely get their information and opinions on basses from the internets. There's a camp of people who dislike Sadowsky just because of the price and their own perceived value of an instrument, and others who see them as the pinnacle of Jazz basses just because of their price.
I've spent hours with quite a few different Sadowsky basses (Metro and NY) demoing them. I don't even claim to know that much about them. I know enough about them to know they're not my cup of tea sound wise. However, every one I've ever played has immaculate details, perfect fretwork and the signature sound. I understand that until you've personally owned an instrument you can't even begin to form a competent opinion of an instrument.
The whole parts bass debate is stupid too. Yes they're parts basses, however aren't all Jazz basses parts basses? Reguardless of what level of customization is made to them, they're all still CNC'd bodies and necks. Does it really matter if the wood is CNC'd in house or across country? The fact about Sadowskys is there's a long waiting list to have one made so there's something right about them.
oh yeah you're right, 4 years... that's quite long... and it was when the company was co-owned by Ned Steinberger Spector and Hans, then Hans Peter bought all the parts he needed to be the owner (by having the majority of parts) and then designed the thumb NT.
oh yeah you're right, 4 years... that's quite long... and it was when the company was co-owned by Ned Steinberger Spector and Hans, then Hans Peter bought all the parts he needed to be the owner (by having the majority of parts) and then designed the thumb NT.
I never heard that story before. Seems Warwick hasn't either.
Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Where did you hear it?

From Warwicks site said:The Washburn "Bantam" further influenced the original design. Hans Peter later realized that Ned Steinberger's headless design was the original source of much of Nobby's inspiration. The final design is an amalgam of influences from Washburn, Aria, Steinberger, Nobby and Hans Peter Wilfer.
I thought you went to bed![]()
Yeah, didn't Spector sue Warwick over the Streamer shape and headstock????
Hmm......one of their best selling basses and a complete rip off of a Spector......weird......![]()

)![]()
Even Peter Duncan owns one.
.
.
.
.
.
.
[sic]Why shoud I pay $3200 for a Warmoth bass w/an Aguilar pre-amp?
.![]()
.
.
.
.
.
.
.