• 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.

Wal Bass Club.

Is that true? Wow...
I mean, for the buyer that's great...but for Wal that seems just slightly short-sighted. I know a lot of other custom/boutique builders (of various products, not just basses) whose policy is that the deposit simply locks in your place in the queue, but the final price is determined at the time of the actual build, not the time of the deposit.

well it ain't fake news thats for sure!! prob old news since alot of us here has been harping fellow Wal-nuts to "just do it" the past couple years.

5f315d12f8e1fc23adc4f25b32120550.jpg


my Blue was build #1 that I locked in a 2015 rate.....should've locked it when I got my first quote which was a £700 difference.
 
Good points! A written quote is a written quote. Spec sheet provided and all. Of course some things you can change over the course of a two year build, but that’s up to you.

Wal pretty much raises prices every year anyhow, so I don’t think it’s a problem financially for Paul to lock buyers in.
 
Is that true? Wow...
I mean, for the buyer that's great...but for Wal that seems just slightly short-sighted. I know a lot of other custom/boutique builders (of various products, not just basses) whose policy is that the deposit simply locks in your place in the queue, but the final price is determined at the time of the actual build, not the time of the deposit.
It’s probably a mix of Paul thinking “Well, that’s what we agreed on...” and UK consumer law where exceptance of the order forms a legally binding contract between buyer and seller (unless requested changes to spec of the service/purchase novates the contract!).
 
Got asked this elsewhere but thought it sat best here... and I’m sure others will want to chip in...

Hey, I was going to ask this at the wal club thread but just wanted to see your opinion. So what do you think is the biggest difference between the Ian & Pete era wal basses and the new Paul era basses we're in now? I know he claims to have made a couple subtle changes in the basses but what leaps out at you if anything? Thanks.

Quality wise... not much at all... I know some who would say that Paul’s basses are a smidge better! Shock horror! Paul’s very keen to preserve the Walness of Wal so any changes will be subtle tweaks. He’s probably a bit less open to wacky variations than Pete and Ian were but I’ve seen solid body basses that he’s done, for example. I understand that he doesn’t like maple fingerboards and won’t do them. But I have seen some with additional inlay etc.

Given the hand build nature of Wals there was always subtle variations and departures from the norm with Ian and Pete... viz the transition Pro/Customs with coachlining, subtle headstock shape differences etc.

Paul does take a lot of care with wood choice. Good quality shedua is getting hard to fed so Paul has made it an upcharge wood and made zebrano a standard wood. However, that means that any new shedua basses tends to be a bit spectacular since, If Paul’s going to offer it and ask extra money for it he’s going to choose the best examples. He’s also looking at weights of wood . Back in the 70s and 80s when men were real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri weight wasn’t such a big thing. I tried a Mk 3 a year or so ago that he’d made so light I almost threw it through the roof when I lifted it off the stand. Still sounded full and fat but he’d clearly chosen the woods carefully for weight and resonance. Just to show that a great Wal doesn’t have to be a boat anchor.

Basically, in my view any cachet from an Ian/Pete Wal is purely romantic feeling and nostalgia. Paul makes great basses. Every bit as good,

And who taught him his trade? Ian and Pete!