Gibson kind of operates on the same model, to a lesser extent with their guitars. People have been making the same complaints about design flaws in their basses for years (because they need to replace parts or get repairs made) and their response has essentially been "People keep buying them, why would we change anything?".
I've gotten very cynical about some guitar/bass companies that have been innovators and leaders in design and now essentially coast on "Hey, our instruments look this way and look who's played them". In contrast, Fender has consistently tried to modernize and innovate with their designs and people hate them for it almost every time and demand vintage reissues. So I guess musicians can take a good chunk of the blame ourselves.
Pretty much that last bit.
The fact is, people complain about the tail lift issue (which is relatively rare) on Rickenbackers, going "why don't they fix this?" but they did. In the 1980s. With a couple of screws. And it not only fixed the issue, but made the connection between bridge and body better. But people complained because it was different and "ruined the vibe" or whatever and wasn't exactly the same. They moved the pickup route away from the neck to strengthen the joint there, and people are still complaining and going on about how the old spacing was better. On the 4004 basses, they fixed pretty much every physical issue you see people complain about (hum, sharp binding, quirky bridge, pickup cover, complicated controls, ugly pickguard) on here. But those don't sell nearly as well, because people want the old-school looking design. They made the 4002, another excellent bass, but it didn't sell. The 2000 series, cheaper than the 4000 series due to being a bolt-on, but still a good bass, also didn't sell, even though it addressed a bunch of things people complain about. So I think maybe they kinda gave up on doing anything different than what they usually do, except for the 4004, which I think they still make just because the CEO is stubborn and that's probably his favorite model.
The same with Gibson, to some extent. "Gibson basses aren't as good as Fenders blah blah," people whined in the 70s. So Gibson made the Victory, by pretty much all accounts a great bass. And it didn't sell well enough to continue cause it wasn't what people expected from them. They make the EB bass (which is a stupid name, admittedly), and people slam them for it and say it looks ugly.
Fender has made quite a few forays into different designs, but people always go "no, give us more P-basses and jazzes," essentially. The Cabronita and Dimension are their current "interesting" basses, but I bet they don't sell nearly as well as P-basses and jazzes.
MusicMan I think only get to make their weirder stuff because they're not answerable to shareholders, and also I think because people actually expect them to be weird. I still bet Stingrays outsell Bongos and Big Als and everything else they've ever made, though. And people complain that the three band preamp isn't as good as the two band on the early models (which, if that was true, why wouldn't they just use the two band and rake it in?).
G&L makes some weirder things as well, but I think the traditionally Fender-ish designs are probably what they sell most of.
Lakland has the Decade, which doesn't really resemble any other bass and I think is damn cool, but I think it's safe to say they sell more of their "traditional" models.
How many times has Ampeg tried to break into the guitar amp market now? I had a guitarist friend who was considering one of their small guitar amps that they had recently. He ended up going with an amp from a company seen more as traditionally for guitar, instead... even though honestly I think the Ampeg was a better deal.
It seems that musicians, despite our reputation as free spirits, are actually pretty damn conservative. Companies try to change up their formula, but unless they get lucky, they're usually not successful at doing so. When they do what they've always done, they get rewarded, and when they change things, usually they get punished for it.
And honestly, I admit to being part of this. I could go buy a 4004... but what I want is a 4003S, cause, well, it's cooler. I don't have a functional reason, really. If you'd been selling the active version of the T-bird, I wouldn't have been interested, cause I wanted the traditional one. When I see posts about new amps on the Amps and Cabs forum, I pretty much don't post unless it's tube or at least a tube pre. I have to be especially bored to comment on a solid state head or a micro or anything "modern."
We're the problem.
