Wal Bass Club.

[mikeswals]

Wowzers!!!...that's $8900 CAD
Add almost $500 for shipping and taxes/duty around 13%.....
$10,550 CDN

£4590 = $7373 US.

That's doable if I give Paul everything I have saved as a down. Figure the balance and 5% tax/ship, be an 8500 bass with the options I want.

But my Geddy ain't going anywhere!

 

[mikeswals]

Wow, that's Alembic pricing.

But I'm not fond of Alembics.

 

[MarshallNole]

Are there tonal differences between a MKI and MKII? Are tehre any differences other than the MKII having 24 frets vs 21?

 

[DigitalMan]

But I'm not fond of Alembics.

I though an Alembic was a Wal that someone dressed up for the Renaissance Fair...

 

[DigitalMan]

Are there tonal differences between a MKI and MKII? Are tehre any differences other than the MKII having 24 frets vs 21?

Just a form factor thing afaik. MKII was optimized for 5 strings IIRC.

 

[mikeswals]

Are there tonal differences between a MKI and MKII? Are tehre any differences other than the MKII having 24 frets vs 21?

These MK series all use the same electronics.

 

[Janforth]

1990 MK1 Geddy FS in classifieds

http://www.talkbass.com/threads/fs-1990-wal-mk1-geddy-bass-4900.1108514/

 

[MarshallNole]

Well Phil from Wal Basses confirmed the MKI and MKII sound pretty much the same (not that I didn't trust you guys!). So it looks like I will order a MKI when I order one instead of a MKII to save a few hundred bucks. My current L2000 only has 21 frets anyway.

 

[mikeswals]

So it looks like I will order a MKI when I order one instead of a MKII to save a few hundred bucks. My current L2000 only has 21 frets anyway.

I love all mine, but from the collector standpoint I'd recommend a MkII, as while the cost difference is minimal from the factory, but they command over a grand more over a MkI down the road.

 

[MarshallNole]

I love all mine, but from the collector standpoint I'd recommend a MkII, as while the cost difference is minimal from the factory, but they command over a grand more over a MkI down the road.

I'd never sell it though.. especially a lefty.. doubt there is much of a market for it.

So if I NEVER plan to sell it, do you still suggest a MKII?

 

[mikeswals]

I'd never sell it though.. especially a lefty.. doubt there is much of a market for it.

That's what they all say!
Seriously though, I still would get a II or III. The ergonomics of the way a II hangs is nicer and a III is supposed to be even better.

Oh, and the lefty market: the 4 string basses get snatched up just as fast as their righty counterparts.

 

[Maedros]

I'd never sell it though.. especially a lefty.. doubt there is much of a market for it.

So if I NEVER plan to sell it, do you still suggest a MKII?

I've never really understood wanting multiple versions of the same bass, they're so prohibitively expensive, if I'd ever have a second I'd most definitely buy a different model. The tonal differences are so minor between fretboard woods and laminates that having two MkI's no matter how vastly different the specs are, will generally sound very similar or can be made to sound nearly identical. If you have all the money in the world and absolutely love a number of different versions of the same model, then go for it!

 

[MarshallNole]

Well it is about a $300 differece between a MKI and MKII...so I guess I will get a II. I don't like the MKIII headstocks.

Still trying to wrap my head around paying $7500+ for a bass.

 

[brconflict]

The first time I requested a quote (1996, I believe) for one of the Geddy models, Pete wrote me back and sent a price list. The Black Geddy was £1850. I can only imagine the deal he got when he bought his.

Sidenote: I ended up buying a Warwick Thumb V Neck-thru for $1950 from Memphis' Strings and Things, but I sold it 5 years later, used at $1950 to a shop in California. I kick myself for not holding on to it. Those go for $4500 now!

 

[brconflict]

Well it is about a $300 differece between a MKI and MKII...so I guess I will get a II. I don't like the MKIII headstocks. They just built their first Mkiii 6-string, and he sent me a Kodak print of it. I still have that, and the old brochure, etc.

Still trying to wrap my head around paying $7500+ for a bass.

Interesting you say that about the head-stock. It's one of the things to me that's the classic Wal "look", along with the body shape when you identify it. When you see The Pass video, when Geddy is playing the Mk I in shadow, the head-stock is so prominent and distinctive. I've always favored that head-stock, much like the Warwick puppy-ear look, and the Tobias Bass-clef look. There's others, like the OLD Ken Smith basses, Elric, amd the hideous Surine head-stocks, but again, the MkI and MkII 4-string Wal head-stocks are the bomb.

btw, does anyone know if this rumor is true? I heard, in the 90's (?) Wal showed up at some NAMM shows (or the like) and brought some mini-Wals that could actually be played in their booth. Any credence to that? Did Pete and Ian ever go to NAMM shows?

 

[rusheroo]

Interesting you say that about the head-stock. It's one of the things to me that's the classic Wal "look", along with the body shape when you identify it. When you see The Pass video, when Geddy is playing the Mk I in shadow, the head-stock is so prominent and distinctive. I've always favored that head-stock, much like the Warwick puppy-ear look, and the Tobias Bass-clef look. There's others, like the OLD Ken Smith basses, Elric, amd the hideous Surine head-stocks, but again, the MkI and MkII 4-string Wal head-stocks are the bomb.

btw, does anyone know if this rumor is true? I heard, in the 90's (?) Wal showed up at some NAMM shows (or the like) and brought some mini-Wals that could actually be played in their booth. Any credence to that? Did Pete and Ian ever go to NAMM shows?

I have heard about the mini Wals, they were replicas of Geddy's black mk1 and trans red mk2 I believe so, there's only one sorta unclear picture you can find on the internet. They were stolen I've heard. I've never heard they were playable though, that's interesting.

 

[j.kernodle]

I remember that article about the Stolen mini wal's in the first issue of bass player magazine that I bought back in 93.

Marshall I thought about getting an MKII back in the beginning, but I stuck with the MKI just because I always preferred the body shape. I feel like the MKI kinda flies under the radar and can blend in any setting. The MKII is beautiful but definitely draws more attention to itself.

 

[mikeswals]

btw, does anyone know if this rumor is true? I heard, in the 90's (?) Wal showed up at some NAMM shows (or the like) and brought some mini-Wals that could actually be played in their booth. Any credence to that? Did Pete and Ian ever go to NAMM shows?

No, they werent playable, very small but got stolen.

 

[rusheroo]

No, they werent playable, very small but got stolen.

Yeah that's the picture, I really wish there were more pictures closer up and more clear. I ask whoever has them now to post more pictures...

 

[MarshallNole]

That's what they all say!
Seriously though, I still would get a II or III. The ergonomics of the way a II hangs is nicer and a III is supposed to be even better.

Oh, and the lefty market: the 4 string basses get snatched up just as fast as their righty counterparts.

So you are saying the MKII is more comfortable to play than the MKI?

I remember that article about the Stolen mini wal's in the first issue of bass player magazine that I bought back in 93.

Marshall I thought about getting an MKII back in the beginning, but I stuck with the MKI just because I always preferred the body shape. I feel like the MKI kinda flies under the radar and can blend in any setting. The MKII is beautiful but definitely draws more attention to itself.

I do like the body shape of the MKI more now that I look at it. Geez, I hadn't even paid attention to that until this point. It looks like the MKI has a shorter top than the MKII.

GAH! I can't decide!