1. Please take 30 seconds to register your free account to remove most ads, post topics, make friends, earn reward points at our store, and more!  
    TalkBass.com has been uniting the low end since 1998.  Join us! :)

Warwick Streamer - Stage I or II?

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by peteroberts, May 19, 2003.

  1. Stage I

    12 vote(s)
  2. Stage II

    18 vote(s)
  3. bolt-on Streamer (Pro-M, LX, etc)

    1 vote(s)
  1. what's the difference in tone between the Stage I (mostly maple) and the Stage II (afzelia body, wenge neck)? Which do you like better?
  2. My personal choice was the Stage II. I found it to be the more versatile and articulate of these two Warwicks. That said, I found the Stage I to be a bit more thumpy and P-Bass like, if that's what you're after.
  3. Deep


    May 8, 2002
    Yea, the Stage II seems a bit more modern sounding (articulate,great clarity, etc).The Stage I has that also but it does have more of a traditional character to it. More "booty"? To me anyway. Also, the Stage I has a wider neck and string spacing. I've had them both so those are my thoughts.
  4. alexclaber

    alexclaber Commercial User

    Jun 19, 2001
    Brighton, UK
    Director - Barefaced Ltd
    They sound completely different. Basically a SS1 is a Warwick for people who don't like the Warwick sound - being all maple it sounds more Spector/Fender-ish, less growl and more thunder. I think the SS2 is the best of the modern Warwicks and if I had to buy a new one, that's what I'd get.

  5. herrera


    Feb 15, 2002
    tm stevens used the stage 1
    stuart zender used the stage 1 on the space cowboy and traveling withouth moving
    then he used the stage 2

    p nut the stage 2

    i like both but if i had to chose now and keep the thumb 5 nt that i have
    i would choose the stage 1
  6. Fuzzbass

    Fuzzbass P5 with overdrive Gold Supporting Member

    My choice was forced because the SS2 string spacing is too narrow for me. I think they both look nice, though. I prefer the clean fretboard of the SS1, but I must say that the yin-yang inlays on the SS2 are very cool. I definitely prefer stained flame maple though (mine's burgundy red).

    Most of my basses are "wide 5", and my SS1 is the widest of the bunch; it also has the chunkiest neck profile. I can understand how a lot of players wouldn't be comfortable on it, but even though it gives me a bit of a workout (especially after playing one of my "fast" fivers) I dig it a lot.

    As for tone: it could well be true that the SS1 isn't as "Warwick-y" as the others due to mostly-maple construction. That said, to my ears it still has a nice chunky Warwick-y tone.
  7. oldirtymoney

    oldirtymoney Banned

    Jul 16, 2002
    california, carslbad
    stage 2, way better
  8. Woodchuck


    Apr 21, 2000
    Atlanta (Grant Park!)
    Gallien Krueger for the last 12 years!
    Gotta go with the Stage 1, although, you'll get a better lowend prescence with the bolt ons, IMO.
  9. I have 2 bolt ons and they rawk! Never played a neck thru Streamer though.
  10. jasonbraatz


    Oct 18, 2000
    Oakland, CA
    i picked the stage 2 for the reason fuzzbass picked the stage 1. i've got pretty small hands and play mostly fingerstyle so the close spacing fits me best.

    and i also LOVE how she sounds :D
  11. neptoon

    neptoon Supporting Member

    Jul 25, 2000
    Melbourne, FL
    *lookin' around for a SSII*
  12. Chris_AtariDoll


    Dec 8, 2001
    I have a Stage II.... and i have to say i love its sound..... i also have a maple bodied LX which has a more snappy classic tone.

    I think that streamers look great with the wide board.... but i just cant get used to it :(
  13. David Wilson

    David Wilson Administrator Staff Member Administrator Supporting Member

    Oct 14, 2002
    Lower Westchester, NY
    I'd have to say Stage II, the wide spacing on the Stage I is a bit too much for me.

    I've been playing a Thumb5 for 10 years now, I'm so used to the 17mm spacing that anything wider just feels odd. So the Stage II just feels better to me, although I do really like the Stage I sound with the neck soapbars giving a nice thumpy sound.
  14. Figjam


    Aug 5, 2003
    Boston, MA
    Stage 2 is better, but 1 is good too.
  15. Stephen Soto

    Stephen Soto

    Oct 12, 2003
    i would have to say the stage II just by looks alone. i'll be sure to play one of these at NAMM later on today. but while they both look awsome, the stage II looks amazing!
  16. Chris_AtariDoll


    Dec 8, 2001
    Well... i know own a Stage I, i sold my stage II. My fears over the with of the neck were totaly unjustified... to my hands the broaderneck feels a lot better... as for sound. the stage i is a lot crisper, not as growly, probably more versatile... im actually thinking about getting a stage ii made with a broadneck. then i should have the best of both worlds.
  17. Grahams Groove

    Grahams Groove Can we please just groove for a while? Supporting Member

    Apr 13, 2001
    Boulder, CO
    What does the LX sound more like...The SSI or the SSII??
  18. Chris_AtariDoll


    Dec 8, 2001
    my LX is def more growly than my stage I, it has its own sound, due to the combination of the maple and the ovangkol. nothing sound like a SSII. but the LX does a good imitation (im wondering what a LX would sound like with a afzelia body, that mite be interesting to compare with the SSII).
  19. Shri


    Feb 25, 2003
    France, Paris
    the stage 2 cos the stage 1 reminds me of my spector us which has a too bright sound. I don't like maple for what i play. i prefer the growl.