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 vs. Fender

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by routasydän, Apr 25, 2006.

  1. routasydän


    Apr 25, 2006
    Oulu, Finland
    First, as a new member, I'd like to say hello to everyone. And then to the problem. I' ll buy a new bass this summer and I'm having a hard time cos I can not not decide whether to buy Fender or Warwick. From Fenders I'm thinking about American Deluxe Jazz Bass FMT with maple fingerboard and from Warwics Thumb "Bleached Blonde" LTD 2003. I know that the Fender is good but I don't know so much about the Warwick. Please gimme some opinions.:help:
  2. Name Changed

    Name Changed Banned

    Apr 22, 2006
    LOL, Warwick for any bassist that wants playability and tone and looks is ten times better than any fender especially if your goin for the bleached blonde. that bass is not part of my arsenal, but i have played a used one and it was growly and aggresive and had the tightest and sweetest highs of any bass that i have ever played almost. go WARWICK.:hyper: :hyper: :spit: :spit: :hyper: :hyper:
  3. 95JettaCity


    Feb 13, 2004
    Las Vegas
    Being a Fender owner myself... I second Warwick!! :bag:

    Fender...Warwick... Ladies and Gentleman...Let's get ready to rumble!!!!
  4. lefty007


    Jan 19, 2004
    Miami, FL
    Those two models are quite different.

    -Comfortable design, versatile sound, 3-band EQ, thin neck.

    -Quite uncomfortable because the upper horn is very short, so the neck sits away from your body and can make it uncomfortable after playing for awhile.
    -Very particular (agressive) sound that works best for certain types of heavy music, or funk. 2-band EQ.
    -Much thicker neck profile is not instantly inviting - although that is a very personal preference.
    -They are usually heavier.

    In sum:

    If you are looking for a unique-sounding bass with a super-modern and bright sound, and you don't mind bad ergonomics (poor weight balance, etc.), then try the Thumb.

    If you are looking for a modern bass with a more traditional and recognizable sound (altohugh still pretty bright and agressive) that will work in many styles of music, and you play long sets standing up, and are older than 30-years old, have back problems, or are overweight, I would go for the Fender Deluxe.

    All that said, I have had both. The Thumb I sold many year ago and is in my permanent black list of "worst bass designs ever." The Jazz Deluxe is still one of my favorites and I play it 80% of the time.

    Don't buy the Warwick based on looks - make sure you play it first.

    And finally, they are both pretty good in quality, so in that aspect, you won't go wrong with either.
  5. guy n. cognito

    guy n. cognito Secret Agent Member Gold Supporting Member

    Dec 28, 2005
    Nashville, TN
    The Warwicks have a very particular feel and tone that some like, some don't. Personally, I didn't like the neck and thought the tone sounded good, but wasn't versitile enough for what I needed. I ended up with the Fender.

    No one can tell you which is better for you. They are both great basses, but you will have to decide for yourself which better fits your needs.
  6. clavefa

    clavefa Te Traigo El Tumbao

    I 've had both and now have only a Warwick F.N.A. Jazzman
    Fender MIA dlxs are nice , versatile basses.
    The Thumb very very nice, not as versatile as the jazz.
    So if your playing heavy rock or funk type music get the Thumb, also it has better resale value.

    If your playing all styles more or less than definately get the Jazz. Or check out the Jazzman , like I did .
    They can do all styles very well.

    Happy hunting and TRY BEFORE YOU BUY.:)
  7. Tom


    Sep 7, 2005
    Davis, CA
    I like both.

    In the looks department, I usually prefer the Jazz, but the bleached blonde Thumb wins this one.

    Nothing feels better to my hands than a good Jazz bass, but I don't find Warwicks anywhere near as uncomfortable as some people assert. Many here regard their opinions on this matter as fact (see above). Just make sure you're okay with a thick neck and relatively heavy weight.

    The sound... I'd choose Warwick's sound, based on my own ideal bass tone, but there are some situations in which I'd prefer to have a Fender.

    And now, the TB cliche response:

    You asked for our opinions, and I gave mine. But don't order one just based on what we say! Take every opinion here with a grain of salt and then go try out some Jazzes and Thumbs before you order.
  8. 1stOfficerRiker

    1stOfficerRiker Supporting Member

    Mar 5, 2004
    I have both, and if I had to give up one, I'd give up the . . . . well . . . I guess I'd . . . . that's too tough to think about. Just buy both, they both have their own unique tone.
  9. lefty007


    Jan 19, 2004
    Miami, FL
    I own the truth, therefore, I don't state opinions, but fact. Fenders are better than Warwicks, and that is a fact. Period.


    That said, I order you to buy a 12-string hollowbodied fretless bass with no fretlines, and practice in darkness until you can play it perfectly in tune, all the way to the 28th fret. .
  10. RoVaughn


    Oct 8, 2005
    Dude just go try both and see which one you like better......opinions are like b@$#@holes everyone's got one and most of the time they stink!
  11. routasydän


    Apr 25, 2006
    Oulu, Finland
    Thanks everyone, and eventually I'll buy them both, but now I can only afford one so which one to buy first, is the problem. I know that buying Fender is the more safe option, it will work in every situation, but with Warwick I don't know. Just wanted to hear your opinions how the sounds differ and how versatile the Warwick is. But ofcourse I will test also Warwick before making the decision.

    Anyway based on what you guys say they are pretty different from each others, and I hope it makes the decision easier once I have tested them both.
  12. cheezewiz

    cheezewiz Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2002

    I could not disagree more. Warwicks playability is severely lacking.
    The ergonomics are horrible, and the huge baseball bat necks are extremely uncomfortable. Some models, most notably the Thumb, neck dive horribly. It'd be a no brainer for me. Fender.
  13. Prahainspring


    Oct 22, 2002
    New Jersey
    I have to agree. As long as you have ability to A/B them both, I couldn't think of a better way of seeing which one you like.
  14. Stadic


    Apr 17, 2006
    I never messed with a Warwick, but I have a Fender. So my opinion won't really count.
  15. DaveDeVille

    DaveDeVille ... you talkin' to me ?? Supporting Member

    agreed ...

    i never played a Warwick that was comfortable , but then again ,
    i've only played four or five of them at the store ...
  16. Lonnybass


    Jul 19, 2000
    San Diego
    Endorsing Artist: Pedulla Basses
    I can't for the life of me figure out how anyone manages to play the Thumb while they are standing up. Play on a strap and see for yourself - neckdive is not something anyone should settle for! In my opinion the Thumb is an ergonomic nightmare.

  17. Jehos


    Mar 22, 2006
    DFW, TX
    I love Warwicks, and they're all I've owned for the last several years. BUT, they're more of a one-trick pony--they sound like Warwicks. The Fender American Deluxe (both P and J) are the only Fenders I've liked and had a lot of respect for. It really comes down to the kind of music you play and which feels better. If you want a great picked sound for rock or punk, the Fender is the way to go. For slap, sound is a tie--decide which you like better. For looks, I'd say Warwick all the way since a Jazz is a Jazz is a Jazz. For ergonomics, the thumb is the worst neck-diving Warwick because of the short strap horn. The neck is thick, but that's not necessarily bad--it's like Fender vs. Gibson in the guitar world. Everybody has their preference and thinner isn't necessarily better. I have a hard time playing anything *but* Warwick now that I've got years of muscle memory getting in the way of enjoying thin necks.

    In short, get your hands on them both. Play them both through your amp, or one like it. See which is better for YOU.
  18. Webtroll

    Webtroll Rolling for initiative

    Apr 23, 2006
    Austin, TX
    I'm not a fan of the Thumb basses. I like the pickup placement and little else. That being said I used to have a couple of early 70's Fender Precision basses which I've sold, now I have a couple (one fretted one fretless) Warwick LX 5 string basses. I think they balance well, look good, are relatively light (when compared to Spectors and Thumb basses), and have a good growly tone (mine both have MEC J style pickups). I don't really use the EQ on them much at all so I normally use them flat or with the puch/pull pot in the defeated position. Mind you thorugh an old SVT both the Fenders and Warwicks sounded beefy. My choice if I could only have one or the other? A 5 string LX. The LX is out of production so if you can find one it'll be used. My fretted one has a flame maple body and an amber finish.

  19. See, everyone says that the Thumb neckdive is abysmal, yet I fail to notice it when i play with mine?! When I first picked one up (atcually, the same bass im playing now) and put a strap on with it, I was ready for it to drop and smack on the floor. Instead, it kinda just sat in the position i normally play bass in, and it never drops past that (about 45 degrees to horizontal)

    Maybe i just got lucky...
  20. clanner

    clanner Token Black Guy.

    Apr 27, 2005
    ummmmm, marietta GA
    is it wrong that even though I have relatively small hands I found the thumb and jazzman baseball necks to be comfortable (just not the price)

    test them out. I have played both and bought neither. the jazz neck is to narrow for some (me) while others hate that hugely thick baseball. if all else fails try a G&L.

Share This Page