vintage = good? why ?

[Marill]

all are examples of tones I find way more interesthing that the thud I get from old dusty bass companies that hasn't evolved for almost half a century.

i generally agree with you about your ideas in this thread, i prefer non-vintage sounding basses too.

but i just want to speak up on behalf of these companies that you speak of... i mean they are there to make such instruments because players have a need to buy such instruments. the company is only doing what it's supposed to do... make things that people want to buy!

 

[Munjibunga]

Somewhat true and to my ears the modern basses sound, modern, hi-fi and some cant ever get the vintage tones no matter how they try. Better?

Betcha the Pink Caddy can.

 

[crusie]

I think the recording equipments of the 60's are much to blame than the instruments from the 60's.
A passive bass from or mimicking one from the 60's or 70's has a delicious tone when recorded with today's equiments. Check out this clip taken from the related videos of the above link:


I haven't tried it yet but I'm pretty sure that a modern bass would sound not so interesting if recorded with the 60's equipments.

actually mørch is a dansih luthier, building costum bass and guitars on demand, you could check him out at www.morch-guitars.dk.

I bet that the bass in question is less than 10 years old. he does build VERY nice gear though - I've played many of his basses - I live like ½ an hour drive away from his workshop/showroom. I've never had one of his basses in my hands and thought "well that didn't work out" - only thing that doesn't work out for me would be the price. for the 5 banger I am - I'd have to lay down 3600£ for starters.

he also sells pickups and an outboard preamp. all of very high quality!

 

[codenamepaul]

When it comes to vintage guitars and basses, I don't get it either. I don't see how a Jazz made in the 70's is going to sound better then a jazz made today. There have been advances in electronics, machining, etc. Sure, you may not get a paper & oil cap anymore, but if that's really the biggest difference, you can buy those still from certain places. One would think that a '08 Jazz would have to sound better, or at least the same, as a 70's Jazz. Now, if you're really into the aged look, and the finishes they used back then and how they've aged, then I get it. I think old cars that have been upkept look way better then the crap put out today...but that's a matter of taste on how something looks. I guess I just don't get the point of paying 3k for a 1k bass :-/

I play both a 70's (?-might even be 60's don't really know) Jazz and a fairly new "vintage" Jazz (don't know that year either) and they have distictively different tones. Is the new one better? Who knows. I play it more than the old one because the tone is alot more varied. I suspect the guts have more to do with that than anything.I cannot get the fat bottom out of it for the Zeppelin tunes that I can the old one. The new one does have a much better balance and the action is better via the BAII bridge I installed.

One of my favorites is a late 80's early 90's era Squier P that I picked up in a pawn shop. YMMV.

 

[One Drop]

The OP is equating vintage instruments with older recording techniques and styles. His examples show me nothing other than that he likes some modern tones over some different older ones. The rest of his post is uninformed trolling and senseless generalizing.

 

[thumpbass1]

The OP is equating vintage instruments with older recording techniques and styles. His examples show me nothing other than that he likes some modern tones over some different older ones. The rest of his post is uninformed trolling and senseless generalizing.

Right on the mark! I don't however condemn him, as I'm suspecting he's far younger than I am, and he's trying to sort out this whole vintage obsession thing from his youthful perspective. Even as a vintage fan who also accepts modern developments in what has become electric bass, the whole vintage obsession thing can look crazy.

Okay, when good old Leo offered the world's first commercially successful electric bass, it was designed to cop the the tone of an upright. I had the pleasure, back in the late 70's to try someone else's early P-Bass, complete with the covers, bake lite saddles, and the foam mute in the bridge cover. It sounded pretty damned close to being one loud upright bass! It met it's intentions tone-wise. We also forget that the recording industry was also coming to terms with electric bass as a bonafide instrument in it's own right, when Leo's crazy idea wasn't going away, anytime soon back then.

By the 60's, electric bass was already moving beyond the original intentions of the concept of the instrument in terms of what it could do. Yes the thud factor was there, but many bass players began doing more with the potential of the instrument. The Fender Jazz Bass certainly opened up new tonal horizons to say the least.

I'm not mad at the OP at all. I hope as a musician he takes an interest in the history of the instrument, and realizes that a lot of bass players went beyond just going for more than the the thud factor,starting in the early days, and thankfully the instrument has evolved in many wonderful ways, but we can still go for retro tonality if we so choose.

 

[crusie]

The OP is equating vintage instruments with older recording techniques and styles. His examples show me nothing other than that he likes some modern tones over some different older ones. The rest of his post is uninformed trolling and senseless generalizing.

if it's trolling to be ignorant and not able to read other's minds - then yes - I'm a huge troll. As stated in the beginning, and also later - I'm not here to bash out at you guys who fancy retro sound - I'm just wondering why that sound has apeal.

you guys are right - I don't know how basses sounded live in the 60/70's so all I have to go on is records - and that doesn't apeal to me.
it's like I try to widen my knowledge of my favourite instrument - and people like you, One Drop, goes "beat it kid - if you don't know you are not worthy of knowing" - that's just about the most arrogant thing I've seen from a bass player.

most people in here are friendly and willing to share their 2 cents when people like me wants to know more, heck I've even chipped in where I can.

I just don't find any place in the "lawz of teh interwebz" that justifies people acting like arrogant pricks, just because it's not to the persons faces.

to those of you who contributed to this thread in a decent manner: thanks alot for the whole bunch of info - it's been a eyeopener, but I think this should be </thread> this way I wont ask any more stupid questions, or be "senseless generalizing" and what else I've been called through this thread, I'll just ask questions to the wall behind me and think up answers like One Drop's on my own.

 

[michael_atw]

A '70s Fender is not vintage. It's just an older CBS Fender of no distinction and commanding less ridiculous prices.

That's according to your opinion.

These will require authentication and you'll probably find that they are less authentic and original than they were represented. If they aren't original and authentic, they aren't worth any significant amount of money to a knowledgeable buyer. Part it out to crooks on eBay.

Basically, there are much. much. much easier ways to make money than screwing around with vintage instruments. It's a fool's errand if you're not a pro.

I'd say, when I can make $250, $800, and $150 respectively just flipping a 70's Fender (like I have in those 3 instances over the last 6 months) that's some pretty easy money. I won't find much to make it easier.

Besides, you make it sound much harder than it really is to identify and buy and sell vintage instruments. There are only a few key IDs to immediately look for to get a very good indication whether a "vintage" instrument is of significant value (with Fender, one can look for stamped nickel tuners, headstock decal, neckplate, etc.) and more hidden ones (pot numbers, pickup stamps, pocket stamps, neck stamps, etc.) that may hide more authentication but don't completely negate any chance of making a good deal. Sometimes when seeing the surface IDs you have to take a risk to get a chance to see the complete real thing. There are many forgeries going around...but just as many people selling something they found in their father's attic, of which they have very little idea what the true value is. Even if a vintage instrument has had something replaced doesn't make it worthless. In the case of selling, I just take it apart and make more money with the parts than the whole anyways.

 

[smcd]

The OP is equating vintage instruments with older recording techniques and styles. His examples show me nothing other than that he likes some modern tones over some different older ones. The rest of his post is uninformed trolling and senseless generalizing.

Why is it when someone brings up a (legitimate) point that another disagrees with, that person is labeled a "troll"?


I have, by any measure, an informed opinion. I also happen to find the fetishizing of vintage instruments unfounded and slightly bizarre.

 

[michael_atw]

Why is it when someone brings up a (legitimate) point that another disagrees with, that person is labeled a "troll"?

That's what I was going to get at. I see the word "troll" used so much, and most of the time it's whenever there is an opinion thrown out that A) is against the norm or B) flicks some specific person's switch and they decide they need to whine. I wonder how some people who insist on using the term "trolling" so often on threads live in the real world, where the concept of "trolling" is phenomenally more common than on tb. I wonder if they go around pointing at people at bars, their work, and family gatherings and accuse people of being trolls.

I like vintage tone. Correction, I love vintage tone. But I also really like many modern tones. Some of both sides suck to my ears as well. I much prefer vintage tone for myself but my favorite bassist is Entwistle - who pretty much invented the modern bass tone. Explain that one.

 

[Bongolation]

I'd say, when I can make $250, $800, and $150 respectively just flipping a 70's Fender (like I have in those 3 instances over the last 6 months) that's some pretty easy money. I won't find much to make it easier.

I know, but that's not a vintage instrument nor a vintage price range. You could do the same on 2005 instruments.

I'm assuming you're not talking about making $250 on flipping a $15,000 instrument.

Besides, you make it sound much harder than it really is to identify and buy and sell vintage instruments.

It is in the case of real vintage instruments that are selling for big money, not just some old bass. The higher the profit, the higher the motivation for expert fakery. Get into Gibson$ and you'd be amazed.

Even if a vintage instrument has had something replaced doesn't make it worthless. In the case of selling, I just take it apart and make more money with the parts than the whole anyways.

Yes, because that's all you have, a bunch of parts. I pointed this out earlier. This also fuels the fakes market, but that's not your problem or mine.

 

[john_martin_sai]

If anyone has a 1950's Schwinn bicycle in good condition, that still rides well,....

I'll trade you a brand new Chinese-made 18 speed mountain bicycle that looks better, rides better, and has the most modern technology built into it. I'll even throw a light and a lock in with the deal! (I can get this for about $100).

Same with a Fender. If anyone has one of those old all-original 70's Fender basses out there.

I'll give you a brand new Fender bass for it, with decades of modern improvements built in, and it will have that shiny new look too (unless you want it 'worn').

 

[Dark Horse]

Why is it when someone brings up a (legitimate) point that another disagrees with, that person is labeled a "troll"?

For once I agree completely with you. I don't think the OP was trolling at all, though as I mentioned, this thread (or one similar to it) is a fairly regular occurrence here. I think the OP had a question and asked it, plain and simple. Unfortunately the questions only real answer is "opinion", so that tends to get people emotionally involved... and here on TB (and just about everywhere on the internet), people have problems when someone doesn't agree with their opinion.

People are going to like what they like, and honestly, I think that the OP was just looking for a few "reasons" as to why other peoples opinions differed from his. No harm in that, so long as everyone else is able to see that he wasn't "bashing" people for their opinions. (though I think using terms like "some old crap" to describe Fender probably raised a few hairs for some people)


Live and let live. Play what you like, and don't worry about what others think.

 

[Bongolation]

Why is it when someone brings up a (legitimate) point that another disagrees with, that person is labeled a "troll"?

It happens to me all the time here.

It's really disgusting when it's a moderator who does it, especially when you consider that it's highly probable that at least a few of the breathless fanboys here are actually professional shills. Nobody cares if you're a slavering, loony fanboy -- but mount a reasoned criticism of a piece of gear or someone's position and you're in trouble!

When stupid people are wrong and they have no intelligent recourse, they revert to name calling.

After the last time I went through this, I changed my tagline, below.

I have, by any measure, an informed opinion. I also happen to find the fetishizing of vintage instruments unfounded and slightly bizarre.

No, let me correct that: As fetishes, it makes perfect sense. As players, it doesn't.

It's possible, but unlikely, that anyone here has had more vintage instruments pass through his hands than I have, and I'm telling you they aren't anything special as players, especially when they have developed problems over the intervening fifty or sixty years or so that will degrade their collector value to correct.

 

[tobo]

here's another link for you blues guys - this has real nice tone too



here's one for you funk lovers out there

That funk one is awesome.. at 1.30 it turns into drum and bass nearly (only its mostly "drum" i dont say that as a bad thing)

yes, that blues tone is sweet, but blues bassists dont need 6 strings, he is just venturing into guitar territory..

 

[king_biscuit]

It's possible, but unlikely, that anyone here has had more vintage instruments pass through his hands than I have, and I'm telling you they aren't anything special as players, especially when they have developed problems over the intervening fifty or sixty years or so that will degrade their collector value to correct.

You may have seen more old basses than anyone else on TB, but that does not make you an expert on what others find special about an instrument. I'll bet there are more players on TB than you can shake a stick at that are great players and can figure out just fine, on their own, what they find special. Please stop being so condescending.

 

[Dark Horse]

It's possible, but unlikely, that anyone here has had more vintage instruments pass through his hands than I have, and I'm telling you they aren't anything special as players, especially when they have developed problems over the intervening fifty or sixty years or so that will degrade their collector value to correct.

Just like everything else, some are good and some are bad. At least that's my experience.

They are what they are. If you have ten 64 P Basses, one or two will be "special", one or two will be "dogs", and the rest seem to fall "somewhere in the middle".

 

[P_bass]

It's all in the fingers...

Not trying to sound short or smart but there is more to the tone or sound than the bass. You have the strings, amp, speakers and cabnet then you need to consider the recording quality and the mixdown, then the playback quality i.e. Youtube, etc then finally the system you are listening on. Enough variables to make the same recording sound different for each end user.

I can understand people feeling that the cost of "vintage" is silly and I would not disagree but you add collectors and investors to anything (cars, guitars, etc) and you get the same kind of situation where the cost of a newer one is normally less the the original.

I only bring this up because I love the sound... Here is what a Mustang bass can sound like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAIsqvTh7g

As for what a Precision can sound like google James Jamerson, I just don't think I ever heard any bad sounds out of him but as I stated earlier "It's all in the fingers"

Now back to the woodshed with one of my Precisions...

 

[Bongolation]

You may have seen more old basses than anyone else on TB, but that does not make you an expert on what others find special about an instrument.

I never claimed to be a psychiatrist.

I am an avid student of marketing and the dramatic disconnect between sense and desire.

Please stop being so condescending.

I'm not; I'm merely pointing out that people aren't being rational and what they believe is largely factually untrue, and have explained why. Why is that so scary?

 

[Bongolation]

Just like everything else, some are good and some are bad. At least that's my experience.

They are what they are. If you have ten 64 P Basses, one or two will be "special", one or two will be "dogs", and the rest seem to fall "somewhere in the middle".

Exactly.

That's been my experience as well, and the degree between "great" and "doggy" will be broader than it will be on modern instruments not only because of the far wider inconsistencies of the individual instruments at the time of manufacture compared to modern instruments, but because of their intervening care, use and deterioration in the intervening decades.

A "great" '64 Precision is great because they accidentally made an exceptional instrument that day in '64 and the years have been kind to it. It's not great because it was made in 1964.