I get that old basses are cool. I don't get the point of view that American manufacturers and luthiers are somehow so stupid the only thing they've been able to do in the last 50 years is screw up Leo Fender's bass designs.
You like cool old antique stuff? More power to you--but please stop insulting our intelligence by claiming the Fender bass has been perfect and un-improvable since 1958.
I wasn't insulting anyone's intelligence, just calling out some ignorant statements. Ignorance does not denote inherent lack of intelligence, though it often results in what one might perceive as such.
Ignorance is a lack of awareness, not an insult.
I said the original designs were just fine, not perfect. Clearly you and other feel they are imperfect and perhaps unacceptable. OK. When I want something different from a vintage Fender, I use it. That's why I own other instruments. Most of the time, I prefer a vintage Fender.
Lots of American, and other, manufacturers do all kinds of wonderful stuff. I love my Steinberger and a number of other instruments that are mighty un-Fender like. I think guys like Mike Tobias, Greg Curbow, Ned Steinberger and Ken Smith didn't need to screw with Fender's designs and still managed to come up with some equally valid and brilliant designs. I've owned them all, still own a few and still prefer my vintage Fenders in MOST cases. In a session situation, what sounds best is what sounds best. I don't waste a cent of my clients' time arguing some "vintage is superior" point of view. One listen usually decides, and more often than not,
my clients pick the vintage instruments, which is why I keep them. Also don't make the mistake of thinking vintage instruments can't make modern tones. This is up to the player and production values/techniques. The bass world doesn't end with flat wounds and old tube amps. It just feels better when it starts with a nice vintage bass, IN MY OPINION.
I still maintain that most "improvements" to Fender's vintage designs are really subjective more than objective. Badass/hi mass bridge? Some say yay, some say nay. Graphite rods? My opinion is that if the wood is properly aged and cut, the graphite is unnecessary. I have a few rock solid 50+ year old necks that bear this out. I have no doubt that some dogs were manufactured, too. I've also seen an inordinate number of modern high end graphite necks go south. In fact a highly respected Fender-ish USA manufacturer had a run of completely suck quarter sawn, graphite reinforced necks a few years back. No sign of this on their import line using flat sawn, graphite feee necks. Go figure. I've also seen plenty of recent graphite reinforced Fender necks that are just a rubbery as the worst of their 70s output. Poly finish? Great for resale, your call on tone, I think the feel is meh. I prefer nitro with all its flaws. I have a bass that I built over 30 years ago and finished in nitro in my back yard that still looks as good as any new bass. I guess modern durable coatings are better than this...Whatever.
Not insulting your intelligence, just stating my preference.
By the way, the '65 CAR P-bass sounded lovely on the gig last night, didn't crumble into sawdust when I hit it hard, stayed in pefect tune and the neck didn't flop around wildly due to a lack of graphite. Your mileage and experience may certainly vary
Have a great weekend! I already am!
