• 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.

signature bass fail...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have you played one? Just asking.

No, but you are missing the point - charging more for someone's name, especially when many of the alterations are merely cosmetic, is what I think is wrong. Fender is hoping to sell these because someone is going to A/B them with a standard model and find it worth the additional $$$, they are hoping to sell them because a fanboy/girl is going to buy it for the name.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SanDiegoHarry
No, but you are missing the point - charging more for someone's name, especially when many of the alterations are merely cosmetic, is what I think is wrong. Fender is hoping to sell these because someone is going to A/B them with a standard model and find it worth the additional $$$, they are hoping to sell them because a fanboy/girl is going to buy it for the name.

Ouch - and folks are calling *ME* negative!

But I agree. I don't know about it being "wrong" to charge more money - if the public wants to pay, who is Fender to say no? Silly - yes. Wrong? Nah.
 
Yes, qc has improved (and it WAS pretty bad), but it's pretty consistent that we get those two complaints. Other companies strive to innovate, progress, and improve - Fender keeps talking about what they used to do.
That's because pretty much every time they come out with something new, it stiffs in the marketplace, and then people like you say, "How come Fender doesn't just stick to what they do best?" Seen it on here a million times.

Understand, all I play is Fender and Fender-style basses, but I think they are dropping the ball. Any time a company puts out something like this, be it a car or guitar, it's pretty clear that they are pushing an image.
They should hire you. All their problems would be taken care of overnight, I'm sure ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iridescentone
That's because pretty much every time they come out with something new, it stiffs in the marketplace, and then people like you say, "How come Fender doesn't just stick to what they do best?" Seen it on here a million times.

They should hire you. All their problems would be taken care of overnight, I'm sure ;)

The issue is rather than "sticking to what they do best", they come out with this @#$!@.

My beliefs. Such is life. You know what they say about opinions...
 
on one hand these threads are sad. on the other i tend to look forward to them for entertainment.
I misread your post's last word...I thought it was "entitlement." I think that would have been a better choice of words, too, as this thread is full of entitled people who apparently think that they should be selling out stadiums the world over instead of Adam. Like him or not (ain't my favorite band in the world by a longshot, BTW), he's out there doing it and we're not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I am Soma
Haterism is unbassmanlike. I'd love it if you smack-talkers would jump in a lake together.
Do you see the irony here? Hating on haters is haterism squared. I'll save you a spot in the lake, the water's nice.

I don't hate U2 or Adam Clayton or Adam Clayton's bass playing. It's perfect for U2s music. If I were making/selling basses and I was going to make a "signature series" bass, it would be for a bassist who is more influential in the bass playing community. That is all.
 
When it comes to sig instruments you should research what sets them apart from standard models. I thought the Noel Redding Jazz bass was a good idea for those who wanted a dot neck '65 Jazz at a fraction of the cost of the real thing. Granted, it was pretty much a stock '65, but isn't that what most players like anyway? At the other end of the spectrum you may have a sig model that was re-designed, customized, or heavily modded by the celeb whose name graces the headstock. In these cases you hope the company got it right in regards to correct hardware, pickup output, electronics, et cetera. Why try to pawn off a run of the mill copy as the real thing? I don't care if there's someone's name on the headstock as long as the bass is great. When you're spending enough extra cash to buy the stock version and an amp, the bass ought to be fantastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocker949
I misread your post's last word...I thought it was "entitlement." I think that would have been a better choice of words, too, as this thread is full of entitled people who apparently think that they should be selling out stadiums the world over instead of Adam. Like him or not (ain't my favorite band in the world by a longshot, BTW), he's out there doing it and we're not.

When did this thread morph into a "slam the player"? My original point was that having two signature basses released by two different companies so close together is... goofy, and in effect a "marketing fail". I don't really care either way about Adam Clayton but if this was a player I really liked - say like Marcus Miller - I'd say the same thing.
 
When did this thread morph into a "slam the player"? My original point was that having two signature basses released by two different companies so close together is... goofy, and in effect a "marketing fail". I don't really care either way about Adam Clayton but if this was a player I really liked - say like Marcus Miller - I'd say the same thing.
Maybe it turned into a "slam the player" thread when you started slamming the player. You seriously are asking that?
 
No, but you are missing the point - charging more for someone's name, especially when many of the alterations are merely cosmetic, is what I think is wrong. Fender is hoping to sell these because someone is going to A/B them with a standard model and find it worth the additional $$$, they are hoping to sell them because a fanboy/girl is going to buy it for the name.
Blocks, binding, a matching headstock and a different finish--like many cosmetic alterations--cost more money. Are they worth a $400 premium over the American Standard J? Maybe. Doesn't strike me as an outrageous premium.
 
When did this thread morph into a "slam the player"? My original point was that having two signature basses released by two different companies so close together is... goofy, and in effect a "marketing fail". I don't really care either way about Adam Clayton but if this was a player I really liked - say like Marcus Miller - I'd say the same thing.

Funny, Marcus now endorses Fender and Sire. Someone should start a thread on that.

I currently own two 4-94s (about to sell one) and will be shortly receiving my very first "signature" instrument, bought here on TB - a Bob Glaub PJ. Yes, a bit ironic.

So, you're going to pay $2000+ dollars for a signature P bass?
 
  • Like
Reactions: joebar
Status
Not open for further replies.