• 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.

SWR = Fender

#42
As a diehard, Pre CBS, CBS, Schultz, Whatever Fender guy I can't wait to see what they come up with. I don't own any Fender amps but I did like the tone from the new bassman series and the Sunn 300T was a killer head, I think Fender was going in the right direction before the aquisition of SWR.
I'm holding off on any amp purchase untill I see what they do with the SWR line.
 
#43
Well, of course Fender is doing this for Fender. But profit can be increased in different ways. By saying Fender is doing this "for us", I take this as meaning "we aren't going to cut corners, we're simply going to offer a wider variety of quality products".

I can understand everyone's skepticism; I'm not exactly an optimist when it comes to corporate maneuverings either. However IMO Fender does now seem committed to offering quality bass amplification. Overall, I like the way the company has gone under Bill Schultz: I believe they are concerned about quality and reputation, and not just living off their logo.
 
#46
Originally posted by Richard Lindsey


Yeah, and now so are the '70s Fenders that everybody swore were crap not so long ago. Sometimes I think much of the vintage market is like having beer goggles permanently glued to your face, with the prescription getting stronger as the gear gets older. Gee, that dog of a '78 Strat sure looks pretty now ....
Click to expand...

I think the whole Pre-CBS mystique comes more from the fact that the wood has had a lot of time to open up, rather than the instruments being of any better quality. And of course, some people just have a thing for vinatage. (vintage guitars, vintage cars, vintage clothes, ect.)
 
#48
If Fender was interested in creating better bass amps why didn't they just resurrect the Sunn line again like they did in the '90s? I have one of the cabs from that era and I love it. Or why not release a new line of Bassman amps?

I'm pretty sure this is more about money than creating better products.
 
#50
Originally posted by Rick Blanc
A little off topic but when did Fender start making this
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
A 300 watt all tube? Is it new or am I late to the party again?
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I believe that's the Sunn 300T, just with the Fender name on it. (When they dissolved the Sunn name, they continued making the models, but instead, just slapped "Fender" on them)
 
#51
Originally posted by LiquidMidnight


I could be wrong, but I believe that's the Sunn 300T, just with the Fender name on it. (When they dissolved the Sunn name, they continued making the models, but instead, just slapped "Fender" on them)
Click to expand...
Was the Sunn any good? If so does that mean that this "new" Fender is also good?
 
#52
Originally posted by LiquidMidnight


I think the whole Pre-CBS mystique comes more from the fact that the wood has had a lot of time to open up, rather than the instruments being of any better quality. And of course, some people just have a thing for vinatage. (vintage guitars, vintage cars, vintage clothes, ect.)
Click to expand...

It's not just the wood. There has long been a strong, widely held supposition that when CBS bought Fender, they ran it into the ground and in fact made poorer quality instruments. I remember that well. That's why I wonder how CBS Fenders could have gotten so much better. My bias: they didn't really, except as any guitar might (or might not) with age, but pre-CBS got rarer and costlier, and people figured out ways to get good prices for what they had or could get (i.e., CBS and later). I never thought they were as horrible as people used to say, but I don't think they're worth any kind of premium price either.
 
#54
Originally posted by Rick Blanc
Was the Sunn any good? If so does that mean that this "new" Fender is also good?
Click to expand...

The Bassman 300 was introduced in Summer 2002, but it is indeed a "renamed" Sunn 300-T. Fender had bought out Sunn a few years ago, then introduced a few models of amps and cabs, and then "killed" the brand to rename the products as "Fender".

According to what someone I know (who owns a 300-T) told me, it is a killer head. It has all the warmth of an old SVT, plus many features that allow to reach some more modern tones. But basically, you have to love good'ol tube amps to get this one, which is quite as heavy as a SVT...

One spec of this head is that it delivers 300 W whatever the impedence is : 2, 4 or 8 ohm, selectable with an impedence switch.

All the best,
 
#56
A Very SAD day indeed:bawl:

We all know that Fenders going to screw with the designs and change the sound of SWR amps.........

I'm glad I have the "pre-Fender" stuff..maybe I can make some money in the coming years :D

Everything's going to hell in a handbasket!
 
#58
Originally posted by dragonbass
A Very SAD day indeed:bawl:

We all know that Fenders going to screw with the designs and change the sound of SWR amps.........

I'm glad I have the "pre-Fender" stuff..maybe I can make some money in the coming years :D

Everything's going to hell in a handbasket!
Click to expand...

I believe we all should wait and see. Sunn is the example of a brand that made good amps in the 60's and 70's, then disappeared. Fender gave this brand a "rebirth" in the 90's, and made an excellent amp in this range, even much better than the old vintage Sunn's due to its all-tube technology combined with more modern features.

As someone said before, Fender is not Gibson, and thus maybe Fender won't kill SWR like Gibson killed Tobias or Steinberger (and probably TE too).

All the best,
 
#59
Fender probably could make a decent bass amp - hire the right engineers(maybe out of work SWR people?) and crank it out, but Fender doesnt have the name recognition of an SWR. Sunn failed because it's not 1975 anymore. Although that stuff is good for what it is, not alot of people are gonna be running out and buying that stuff. Now Fender can make their bass amps and have instant market acceptance. The average joe is still gonna walk into a store and buy SWR because it sounds good to him.

From a manufacturing point of view, I believe todays Fender can make SWR stuff as least as good as SWR. They are making some decent instruments these days - maybe they arent Sadowskys but neither is their price point. This could have been alot worse; what would you'd be thinking if they were sold to Peavey?
 
#60
Originally posted by Devnor
From a manufacturing point of view, I believe todays Fender can make SWR stuff as least as good as SWR. They are making some decent instruments these days - maybe they arent Sadowskys but neither is their price point. This could have been alot worse; what would you'd be thinking if they were sold to Peavey?
Click to expand...
Peavey has the rep (at least so far) for letting the companies they aquire remain as independent as possible (Crest) I think that is what people are refering to. If Fender treats SWR in the same way that SLM has treated the Ampeg name then I think SWR will survive and perhaps even get better. Let's face it, what they have really purchased is the SWR name and reputation. They probably don't even need the manufacturing facilities. I do hope that they retain the services of the SWR engineers and keep the factory up an running for the workers shakes. jmho
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back