• 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.

Vintage Old Fender - I don't get it.

I use old stuff because it works. I wouldn't pay extra for it. It is very easy to laugh at Fender prices, especially '70s Fenders, since they are poorly made, especially the mid to late 70s. Bad neck pockets, bad routes, ill fitting parts, you name it. Let somebody else pay $3K for a 1976 J-Bass. I'll take a new Mexi that's a better made instrument for 15% as much money.

Of course, if you offered me a '50s vintage Gibson ES125, I would spend money. Likewise, I would probably spend money on a Fender of that vintage, too. If it is pounded into the ground, never mind, but everything I own is "road worn," whether it is fashionable or not. That's what happens when you use stuff for long enough. The whole "you get it or you don't" thing makes me laugh. Harley Davidson owners say the same thing, and oddly enough, they are right.
 
I still have my '73 P which is 40 years old this year, maybe I should throw it a party.

That ^^ is wicked funny!





The whole "vintage" concept is laughable to me.

Vintage is fun, as long as people don't get carried away with it. I own some old basses just because they're old. It's fun, like owning an old car that doesn't break down a lot.

But when people start talking about "resonance of wood aged over time" or how trees back before 1961 were better trees than they are now, or how quality at Fender slipped the second Leo signed the sales agreement with CBS - that's where it really irks me. Christ... where do people come up with that stuff??
 
Something wrong with a party?

Guess I'm not in the "cool crowd"!

I will be having a birthday party next month for my pretty little shell pink princess.
She's turning 51 this year, & you're ALL invited. YAY!!!! Is right!

SMCD; we will have TONS of Goober Dust, & fairy flakes for all, no BYOG needed.
And she even farts sparkles, and streamers when she's really excited.
(Trying to get her trained but, she still sprinkles sparkles on the floor whenever we come home) it's actually a little gross!
 
OP here - yes, I'm still here, still reading.

BUT, I'm offended (just a little somewhat) by those who are calling me a "hater". Please folks, read the original post. Read that last sentence. I think you'll see I'm trying to learn and understand; I am NOT getting on your case because you like / love the old bass. "I don't get it" does not necessarily mean "I think you're wrong". Sometimes it means "I don't get it" like in math class when the teacher showed you something and you got lost. You said "I don't get it.".

It is interesting, that most of the hate I've seen in this thread is from the pro-old-Fender crowd not toward it. Maybe there are some raw nerves due to many Fender critics?

OK, sorry for the rant. I'll go back to reading and learning.

- Keith -
 
Obviously plenty of people believe in vintage value...otherwise these instruments simply would not command the prices they fetch, period.

It's strictly supply and demand, more people want vintage instruments than there are vintage instruments. How they justify the price of the purchase to their spouses and friends is another issue altogether.

If you don't think they are worth it, well, you are in the majority of the pool of instrument buying folk and you are in great company too, with those that think spending over $500 on any electric stringed instrument is a waste.

You'll feel righteous while you dole out your meaningless opinions because you are in this majority and plenty of others will rally to your cry. Go ahead and have your fun bitching and making fun of people who enjoy these relics but it won't change the fact that these folks that do dig these pieces will potentially keep driving the prices up.

You may as well ask why water is wet.
 
most of the hate I've seen in this thread is from the pro-old-Fender crowd not toward it.

That pretty much sums up talkbass.com.

Don't question anything Fender. Only Fender praise is accepted. Don't say that a flaw may exist with any Fender. Just say "I've never had that problem. I've never even heard of that problem."
 
That pretty much sums up talkbass.com.

Don't question anything Fender. Only Fender praise is accepted. Don't say that a flaw may exist with any Fender. Just say "I've never had that problem. I've never even heard of that problem."

It's just so fashionable to beat up on Fender here that people get irritated and feel obligated to rush in and dispel some of the crap that get's posted.
 
It is interesting, that most of the hate I've seen in this thread is from the pro-old-Fender crowd not toward it.

Where? I didn't see any Fender guys putting down anyone's choice of instrument, their taste, or how they choose to spend their money anywhere in this discussion, but I saw a lot of the opposite. My snarkiness is purely in response to being told by multiple people in this thread that we who appreciate vintage basses are delusional, and waste our money on worthless crap. It was not directed at you in particular. Although if the shoe fits, feel free to put it on.
 
That pretty much sums up talkbass.com.

Don't question anything Fender. Only Fender praise is accepted. Don't say that a flaw may exist with any Fender. Just say "I've never had that problem. I've never even heard of that problem."

Said no one ever. Except you. No brand is perfect, we all know that. You are just strictly black or white it seems.
 
But when people start talking about "resonance of wood aged over time" or how trees back before 1961 were better trees than they are now, or how quality at Fender slipped the second Leo signed the sales agreement with CBS - that's where it really irks me. Christ... where do people come up with that stuff??

Actually, there are chemical changes in wood over time. A 50 year old piece of lumber will be crystallized a bit, relative to wood that was cut more recently. I'm not sure what it does to the resonance or anything else, but I do know it will be more stable. It will also be lighter, since newer lumber will not have had time to fully dry like older lumber has. If you went back to 1961 or whenever and picked up a P-Bass and then took your time machine to now and picked up the same P-Bass, chances are it would be lighter now than it was then. Not by much, but it would be.

Wood now is typically cut younger and from less dense stands. That means the grain will be a bit coarser and the wood a bit less dense. That goes counter to the idea that older wood will be lighter, so pick your poison.

Anyway, wood does indeed change over time. Whether it is better or worse is your decision, and wood is a little different now than it was 50 years ago. It will be different again in another 50 years, so if you want, you can put a new P-Bass under your bed and then pull it out in 2065 to see what it is like. That will settle the arguments. Time is a small price to pay for winning an argument, right?
 
Actually, there are chemical changes in wood over time. A 50 year old piece of lumber will be crystallized a bit, relative to wood that was cut more recently. I'm not sure what it does to the resonance or anything else, but I do know it will be more stable. It will also be lighter, since newer lumber will not have had time to fully dry like older lumber has. If you went back to 1961 or whenever and picked up a P-Bass and then took your time machine to now and picked up the same P-Bass, chances are it would be lighter now than it was then. Not by much, but it would be.

Wood now is typically cut younger and from less dense stands. That means the grain will be a bit coarser and the wood a bit less dense. That goes counter to the idea that older wood will be lighter, so pick your poison.

Anyway, wood does indeed change over time. Whether it is better or worse is your decision, and wood is a little different now than it was 50 years ago. It will be different again in another 50 years, so if you want, you can put a new P-Bass under your bed and then pull it out in 2065 to see what it is like. That will settle the arguments. Time is a small price to pay for winning an argument, right?
This is a "wood matters" argument. One of the extraordinary means that vintage buyers justify the prices.

This is where a lot of people get lost...stop trying to use such subjective and un-provable excuses.

When someone asks why you would spend so much on an instrument, the only answer that counts is "Because I can, and I wanted too...so there. :spit:"
 
OP here - yes, I'm still here, still reading.

BUT, I'm offended (just a little somewhat) by those who are calling me a "hater". Please folks, read the original post. Read that last sentence. I think you'll see I'm trying to learn and understand; I am NOT getting on your case because you like / love the old bass. "I don't get it" does not necessarily mean "I think you're wrong". Sometimes it means "I don't get it" like in math class when the teacher showed you something and you got lost. You said "I don't get it.".

It is interesting, that most of the hate I've seen in this thread is from the pro-old-Fender crowd not toward it. Maybe there are some raw nerves due to many Fender critics?

OK, sorry for the rant. I'll go back to reading and learning.

- Keith -

That's because troll threads usually start with someone saying "I don't understand why people.....<insert anything here>". When the OP usually has no intention of learning or understanding anything. They just want to see people get defensive about what is nothing more than a personal preference.

I'm not saying that's you - if you are legitimately trying to learn something then great. But this is nothing new it happens every week.