• 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.

SX Pino Palladino precision anyone?

#61
Dr. PhunkyPants said:
I don't think there's anything unethical about it-there's no patent I know of for a certain color scheme on a bass. It's wierd how certain schemes become the "proprietary thing" of some artist, think:

Geddy Lee
Chris Chaney
Pino Palladino
Steve Harris

It's like Fender wants you to think that just because a jazz bass has blocks, or tort + LPB, it's a signature item. If you like the color, you TOO can own that bass. No need to ask permission....
Click to expand...

It's not just the color and tort pickguard, it's that the headstock is just like a Fender's. The SX basses at Rondo at least have a slightly different headstock. This is a pretty unusual color, too. I dunno', it just feels like a rip off to me.

BTW, I really don't think Fender expects anyone to think that blocks in the fingerboard or tort pickguards are an artist or Fender signature item. When you copy the headstock, body shape, pickguard shape and match colors exactly, though, that sure seems like a propietary rip-off.

I guess it's not like Fender will lose sales becasue of this bass, though. Obviously anyone who was thinking of buying a $3,000 Fender is not going to be lured away by a $120 copy.
 
#62
DeanT said:
Some SX basses don't need all the mods you mentioned. For example, on my fretted Jazz, the frets were fine and didn't need any work. The tuners are fine the way they are (they're not the best, but they work and stay in tune) so they don't necessarily need to be replaced. New pups and a bridge will work wonders to transform the SX into a much better bass. That is the minimum I would do to it.
Click to expand...

I have four SXs now with one more on the way. A few months ago I sold my MIM Jazz-5 because I really didn't like the sound of it. My "copy" of the same thing that I recently received (black SX Jazz-5) feels almost identical and sounds better, including hotter pickups which I appreciate. No mods needed, this bass, along with my others SXs are great on their own. And I am no novice here either. I also could care less about the name on the headstock and I know a good bass when I see one.
 
#64
Rocinante_x1 said:
Are Jim Deacon Basses the same as SX? This bass, doesnt seem to be an SX. It says CLEARLY that its a Jim Deacon...?
Click to expand...

that's not perfect logic...

for example, I have a cheapo chinese bass that CLEARLY says "BC Rich Bronze Series"...yet the design of the headstock CLEARLY says "Silvertone" :hmm:
(by the way, I've worked 90% of the issues out of this thing and it's really a pretty cool number)
 
#66
Jack said:
I do remeber being told a while back they were availible in the UK under a different brand. And earlier in this thread someone says its Jim Deacon. Hasnt been refuted yet.
Click to expand...

I was wondering about this too. They do have very similar model numbers (PB57, PB62, PJ62) for the P-basses, but it would be nice to have it confirmed that they're the same basses.

There is a lot of positive feedback on the SX models, but none that I have seen on the Jim Deacons.
 
#67
Rocinante_x1 said:
Are Jim Deacon Basses the same as SX? This bass, doesnt seem to be an SX. It says CLEARLY that its a Jim Deacon...?
Click to expand...


If you look back through the history of Electric guitars/basses, you will see many examples of "house brands" A manufacturer makes the instrument, and then it's marketed under mulitiple names.
The most obvious example would be Danelectros sold in the Sears Catalog as Silvertone, and Harmony instruments also sold through Sears as Silvertones. Silvertone was the Sears "House" brand.

Other examples would be Valco stuff sold under the names, Supro, Airline(Mongomery Wards) Bronson, McKinney, Ouahu, etc. etc.

I'm fairly sure Samic makes stuff for a bunch of different companies.

I wouldn't be supprised to see SX basses with a different name on the headstock.
 
#68
Link Removed
Jim Deacon is SX in the UK.
Also on there website it states:
"As part of the Euromusic group, in addition to the Jim Deacon and SX branded guitars, we also offer our Pro-Formance range of amplifiers, guitar accessories, and P.A. accessories and microphones, SX drumkits, and Montreux woodwind and brass instruments."

I'm pretty sure SX is Jim Deacon in the UK. Just a different name on the headstock.
 
#69
BassDudeSA said:
Why is a bass that is manufactured with the same colors as Pino's bass make it a Pino bass? I understand about the Geddy Jazz as it is made with the same specs and modified to be just like his, but the SX Pino? C'mon. It's just a P copy with PP colors. That is not a PP bass.
Click to expand...
The SX has the same colours, and the same (But not as good) materials.
 
#73
Jack said:
I do remeber being told a while back they were availible in the UK under a different brand. And earlier in this thread someone says its Jim Deacon. Hasnt been refuted yet.
Click to expand...

Rondo sells their SX brand to other companies, who in turn resell them under their own label. Jim Deacon's are SX basses, just with the JD name on it. They may use slightly different model numbers as well.
 
#75
Dragonlord said:
Why do so many people here "hate Behringer policies" and won't buy Behringer stuff for that reason and at the same time nobody seems to have a problem with SX? That's more identical to the original than any Behringer product I've seen.
Click to expand...
Relative morality? But there are some people that don't like the SX clones, especially the Stingray ones. A rationalization often offered for the Fender ripoffs is so many other people are doing it it becomes OK.
 
#76
DeanT said:
That assumes Fender uses higher quality wood than SX. It's probably a safe assumption. But I wouldn't be too surprised to find out otherwise.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's a safe assumption. Notice how many people simply say better wood but no one ever says what makes some alder better than others. It's foolish to assume one's prefered company is better in ways one can't even define.

I've bought both MIM and SX basses and I find them both substandard. The SX is 1/3 the price of the Fender and I find once you've spent the same amount on an SX than you would on a MIM the SX will be a better bass and customized to your specs. Flaws on my MIM include pickguards that don't fit and you can see the electronics through the gap, necks that don't fit the pocket, pickup screws installed at ridiculous angles, tuners badly installed pointing in different directions, crap plastic nut with slots so deep you can't play the open string.

If you want to compare SX to Fender you should compare the SX to the Fender that's only a bit more expensive and that's the Squire. A bass that costs 3 times as much is not a fair comparison.
 
#77
WoodyG3 said:
I guess it's not like Fender will lose sales becasue of this bass, though. Obviously anyone who was thinking of buying a $3,000 Fender is not going to be lured away by a $120 copy.
Click to expand...
I think that's true mostly because people who want to spend $3k will spend $3k because they want a $3k bass. Not the best bass but the $3k one. Numerous studies across many product lines have shown that price paid is one of the largest factors in the perception of quality. Just look at the dozens of posts here that say things like there is no way some $300 bass will ever sound as good as a $3000 one. I would say that it can :)
 
#78
The Penguin said:
I think that's true mostly because people who want to spend $3k will spend $3k because they want a $3k bass. Not the best bass but the $3k one. Numerous studies across many product lines have shown that price paid is one of the largest factors in the perception of quality. Just look at the dozens of posts here that say things like there is no way some $300 bass will ever sound as good as a $3000 one. I would say that it can :)
Click to expand...

I agree completely, and very well said. That is why I always try to get the most bang for my bass buck when I make my purchases. A $3,000 bass may be great, but it is not three times as good as a $1,000 bass and not ten times as good as a $300 bass. The name on the headstock means NOTHING to me other than for some nostalgic reasons. Now that I have discovered SX, I will happily say that there is no reason that I would ever buy a new MIM Fender again since the quality between the two is very comparable. I'd maybe buy a used MIM Fender for $250, but a new Jazz at $450 or the same in an SX at $150 or less? The smart shopper buys the SX. And let me tell you, now that I have five SX basses (4 Jazz and 1 P) I will say that they pickups on these are top notch. BETTER than MIM Fender pickups and the last thing I'd ever want to replace on one of these basses.
 
#80
BassDudeSA said:
I agree completely, and very well said. That is why I always try to get the most bang for my bass buck when I make my purchases. A $3,000 bass may be great, but it is not three times as good as a $1,000 bass and not ten times as good as a $300 bass. The name on the headstock means NOTHING to me other than for some nostalgic reasons. Now that I have discovered SX, I will happily say that there is no reason that I would ever buy a new MIM Fender again since the quality between the two is very comparable. I'd maybe buy a used MIM Fender for $250, but a new Jazz at $450 or the same in an SX at $150 or less? The smart shopper buys the SX. And let me tell you, now that I have five SX basses (4 Jazz and 1 P) I will say that they pickups on these are top notch. BETTER than MIM Fender pickups and the last thing I'd ever want to replace on one of these basses.
Click to expand...
+1
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back