Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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 free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Warwick vs. Fender
- Thread starter routasydän
- Start date
warwick is out. maintenance headache. the last thumb i had warped continually. (twisting of the neck + neck "laminate" had differential expansion, causing the glue joints to crack).
warwick germany exchanged a new bass for me (admitting their quality issue). i immediatelly sold the new one they sent to me.
heard of other users with the same problem.
fender has its fair share of quality issues too.
go with a lakland or sadowsky or spector.
it's in the same price range of the thumb.
(lakland if you want the fenderish tone, spector if you want
a more hifi warwick-like tone)
warwick germany exchanged a new bass for me (admitting their quality issue). i immediatelly sold the new one they sent to me.
heard of other users with the same problem.
fender has its fair share of quality issues too.
go with a lakland or sadowsky or spector.
it's in the same price range of the thumb.
(lakland if you want the fenderish tone, spector if you want
a more hifi warwick-like tone)
I own a thumb and i can honestly tell you its the best bass i've ever played...that said..you're talking about the Bleached Blonde Edition....which is made of different woods...i have never played one but im guessing the weight issue won't be as bad as people are saying here....definetly try it...but make sure you try it out sitting and standing and moving around...get a real idea of how it's going to feel
Personally, owning the Thumb I have(the one you mentioned) was the greatest thing that ever happened to me bass-wise. I play SO much more than I ever did with my old Fender, and even better than with my Conklin. Pardon the length, but since I have extensive knowledge on one of the basses he is asking about, I'd like to inform him of my thoughts on it, before he plops down the dough for it. Just trying to be helpful.
The Review
----------------
The Bleach Blonde does not suffer from what some of these guys say is downfall of Warwick. I find that the swamp ash and maple allow a great variety of tones, even with only a 2 band EQ. More versitile than the ovangkol warwicks i've played.. then again you don't buy a traditional Thumb for variety. I also find it has some of the sweetest highs I have ever heard in my life, and I've played a multitude of Warwicks, Fenders, Pedullas, Ernie Ball products. You pay for those highs by losing the defined low end of a heavy-wood thumb. It still has enough punch to break your neck though. It is certainly very light, probably the lightest Warwick I've played, though the Hot Rod(having a chamber) gives it a run for its money. I've never had neck-dive issues. I do, however, have very small hands, and it took a while to work my speed back up as compared to the amazingly contoured Conklin neck I played on for 2-3 years. It has a very very soft and thin finish on it, with the swamp ash being some of the softest wood I've ever seen. So if you obsess over nicks, this bass will break you pretty fast. It is not oiled, so any nick will stay there.
It keeps its tune forever. The hardware is either a dream or a nightmare. Why? Well the bridge allows full 3-D adjustment. The spacing between each string can be adjusted, along with the usual height. If you get the strings set up, but need all of them higher or lower, you can raise and lower the whole bridge as well. The Adjust-a-nut 2 is great for getting low buzz-free action, being able to raise and lower the nut is probably my favorite tinkering thing.
I definately think the ergonomics are hit or miss with people. I happen to think it fits me like a glove, I do not think I'll find a bass shape more comfortable to me. Many people that don't like the ergonomics also like to sling their bass at waist level. I prefer mine closer to my chest, since I have short arms. The Thumb is MADE for this position, and really shines there. I also have a fetish for thick leather straps, I get the feeling alot of these guys use nylon straps with super slick coatings or something on their basses lol.
Basically, with Warwick, there are 2 kinds of people on this forum. Ones that love it, and ones that can't get past the neck and weight issues to hear the beautiful tone you get. Both types are very vocal. Its body is just one of those innovations that fills a certain niche, and if you weren't looking for that niche, you're likely to hate it.
I know my review seems overly positive to some of the Warwick haters out there, but then again, us Warwick lovers see the complete bashing of Warwicks as overly negative. Especially with the variety of basses Warwick has. You can't judge the whole line of basses from fiddling around with a Corvette standard or a Thumb for 5 minutes. Its all persepective.
The Review
----------------
The Bleach Blonde does not suffer from what some of these guys say is downfall of Warwick. I find that the swamp ash and maple allow a great variety of tones, even with only a 2 band EQ. More versitile than the ovangkol warwicks i've played.. then again you don't buy a traditional Thumb for variety. I also find it has some of the sweetest highs I have ever heard in my life, and I've played a multitude of Warwicks, Fenders, Pedullas, Ernie Ball products. You pay for those highs by losing the defined low end of a heavy-wood thumb. It still has enough punch to break your neck though. It is certainly very light, probably the lightest Warwick I've played, though the Hot Rod(having a chamber) gives it a run for its money. I've never had neck-dive issues. I do, however, have very small hands, and it took a while to work my speed back up as compared to the amazingly contoured Conklin neck I played on for 2-3 years. It has a very very soft and thin finish on it, with the swamp ash being some of the softest wood I've ever seen. So if you obsess over nicks, this bass will break you pretty fast. It is not oiled, so any nick will stay there.
It keeps its tune forever. The hardware is either a dream or a nightmare. Why? Well the bridge allows full 3-D adjustment. The spacing between each string can be adjusted, along with the usual height. If you get the strings set up, but need all of them higher or lower, you can raise and lower the whole bridge as well. The Adjust-a-nut 2 is great for getting low buzz-free action, being able to raise and lower the nut is probably my favorite tinkering thing.
I definately think the ergonomics are hit or miss with people. I happen to think it fits me like a glove, I do not think I'll find a bass shape more comfortable to me. Many people that don't like the ergonomics also like to sling their bass at waist level. I prefer mine closer to my chest, since I have short arms. The Thumb is MADE for this position, and really shines there. I also have a fetish for thick leather straps, I get the feeling alot of these guys use nylon straps with super slick coatings or something on their basses lol.
Basically, with Warwick, there are 2 kinds of people on this forum. Ones that love it, and ones that can't get past the neck and weight issues to hear the beautiful tone you get. Both types are very vocal. Its body is just one of those innovations that fills a certain niche, and if you weren't looking for that niche, you're likely to hate it.
I know my review seems overly positive to some of the Warwick haters out there, but then again, us Warwick lovers see the complete bashing of Warwicks as overly negative. Especially with the variety of basses Warwick has. You can't judge the whole line of basses from fiddling around with a Corvette standard or a Thumb for 5 minutes. Its all persepective.
There's a reason that everyone plays a fender, they sound good.GSRLessard14 said:
As the other people say try them both and pick which one you like better.
spectors r definitely cool too. but a nice warwick is a nice thing.
then again, so is a dingwall..
then again, so is a dingwall..
I go away for three months because of dumb threads like this and dumb threads like this STILL keep popping up. Amazing, if not incredibly.....sad. I mean no major offense to the original poster, but really, make up yer own mind.
Long story short: play what you like, and actually play the thing in lieu of starting more threads like this.
See you in another 3 months.
Long story short: play what you like, and actually play the thing in lieu of starting more threads like this.
See you in another 3 months.
I know *WHY* this thread exists, but really, it's been done 10,000 times already, in one incarnation or another. Hence,my "litany of boredom, and frustration" (thnx Sting)
As I said, I mean no real offense,but if you can't understand the obvious, complete, utter opposites that the Fender and Warwick represent coming in, then I have to conclude that you should really make up yer mind WHAT it is you want in a bass guitar, try them, and make up yer own mind. It's the only logical course of action.
Asking here is like getting a bevvy of bias. It's ultimately unhelpful IF you truly know what will work for you and aren't easily swayed. I'm curious as to why the poster settled on only Fender OR Warwick. It's really curious to me.
But honestly,it all comesdown to post #2. THAT is what makes my eyes roll to the back of my head. And if you'll notice, I offered advice among my "sour grapes".
As I said, I mean no real offense,but if you can't understand the obvious, complete, utter opposites that the Fender and Warwick represent coming in, then I have to conclude that you should really make up yer mind WHAT it is you want in a bass guitar, try them, and make up yer own mind. It's the only logical course of action.
Asking here is like getting a bevvy of bias. It's ultimately unhelpful IF you truly know what will work for you and aren't easily swayed. I'm curious as to why the poster settled on only Fender OR Warwick. It's really curious to me.
But honestly,it all comesdown to post #2. THAT is what makes my eyes roll to the back of my head. And if you'll notice, I offered advice among my "sour grapes".
Hi, I have both. I have a 2001 MIA Fender Jazz Bass (my main bass) and a Brand spanking new Warwick Thumb.
The Thumb's tone is second to none...(crushes my Jazz bass)....it's really friken good. But I don't like the thick neck and long scale. I'm a Fender guy...and am very used to my Jazz bass's thin, shorter neck.
So, my Thumb Bass has been for sale for two months now.
Definitely play both and decide for yourself.
I don't think you can go wrong with either in the tone department...but ergonomically, in my experience, The Fender wins.
Good luck!
The Thumb's tone is second to none...(crushes my Jazz bass)....it's really friken good. But I don't like the thick neck and long scale. I'm a Fender guy...and am very used to my Jazz bass's thin, shorter neck.
So, my Thumb Bass has been for sale for two months now.
Definitely play both and decide for yourself.
I don't think you can go wrong with either in the tone department...but ergonomically, in my experience, The Fender wins.
Good luck!
the scale length is the same on both basses, it's just the body design on the thumb that makes the neck feel longer.
First I know that Fender is good, have tested it. Warwick, I've heard a lot good things about it and I love the way it looks. Well why not others, I know there are a lot of other good basses also, like Spector, Rickenbacker, Musicman and Neuser and so on. Well some of them, I don't like the looks, some of them I don't have access to test (can not say the sound based on materials) and some of them I can't afford. This is going to be my first good bass (I have one 5-string Ibanez, it is playable, but nothing special) so I wil stick with safe brands.
And why I'm asking and not just go to test, is because I can not find this limited edition Warwick in every musicstore. The one I'm thinking about is located 500 km away from my place, so I just wanna know if it is worth testing.
So very much thank you everone for your patience, especially Rick_no7 for your comments. Now I will definately test the Warwick also. And Mon Rominee, I'm sorry if this thread bothered you so much, but I'm glad I posted it
I played a Fender Deluxe FMT the other day, it was very, very nice. It could be a great all around full-time bass. The Warwicks are a unique beast.
Lonnybass said:
I agree. I'm not a HUGE fan of the tone of the Fender deluxe series basses (I think you pay more for less tone), but I have to put the Thumb up in the Hall of Fame as the least ergonomic bass I've ever played. So of those two, Fender.
Seriously, I used to own a Corvette Standard and the upper horn placement put the first position so far away I used to get rotator cuff soreness just practicing scales. Never happened on any of the 40+ other basses I owned/have owned.
Lastly, for what you are describing (agressive tone, good looks, and some flexibility) you might be well advised to consider:
1. Ernie Ball Music Man Sterling or Stingray basses
2. Lakland Skyline 44-02
Either would be a nice middle ground between the Fender and the Warwick.
flatwoundfender said:
Exactly. They look boring, and they only sound good at best. Warwicks can sound awesome.
My current main bass is a MIA Jazz (ash body\maple neck, equipped with S1) with SD Antiquity II pickups and strung with chrome flats. It is a bass I cannot ever imagine letting go of. The tone is just to die for, with lots of versatility. The neck has a perfect feel to me and I personally dig the classic look.
Like others who've posted here, I also had a Thumb. I was seriously disappointed. I wanted one for a long time after hearing it on a CD (and loving the tone). I like the look\feel of naturally finished basses and the neck didn't bother me (4 string, mind you - I found the 5s to be extremely awkward). The quality was not good - it had virtually no shielding to speak of and one of the pickups went bad fairly quick. Very noisy. I found the tone to sound good on its own, but could never get a decent tone in the mix with a variety of amps. The highs were terrible in my view - lots of honk and not clear, smooth, glassy like I like. It also lacked the warm, fat, musical lows I've grown to love on my Jazz.
I've made the switch and am not looking back...
Like others who've posted here, I also had a Thumb. I was seriously disappointed. I wanted one for a long time after hearing it on a CD (and loving the tone). I like the look\feel of naturally finished basses and the neck didn't bother me (4 string, mind you - I found the 5s to be extremely awkward). The quality was not good - it had virtually no shielding to speak of and one of the pickups went bad fairly quick. Very noisy. I found the tone to sound good on its own, but could never get a decent tone in the mix with a variety of amps. The highs were terrible in my view - lots of honk and not clear, smooth, glassy like I like. It also lacked the warm, fat, musical lows I've grown to love on my Jazz.
I've made the switch and am not looking back...
Try them both and get what you like most.routasydän said: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.
They are both awesome instruments...but the Thumb is better.
The tone is better, the preamp is better, the pickups are better, the construction is better, the wood is better and the frets are better.
Neck dive? Yeah, some basses have neck dive and the Thumb is one of them. Do you get used to it? Yes. Is it ever really a problem? No. Most of it is mental. If you like the bass, you will put up with it. If you don't like the bass you will whine about it.
But ultimately you will be the one that needs to be happy about it. Try them both. Choose the one you like, you will not go wrong with either of these two choices.
All this is IMHO, of course.
Joe.
I've had both jazz deluxe and thumb basses, and I think they are both nice basses, but they are completely different. The thumb body doesn't work for a lot of people, I didn't have any issue with it but you might. If I were in your shoes I take the fender, you can use a fender in any situation and sound great, the thumb is more aggressive sounding which can be hard to tame when you need to. But ultimately you'll sound like you no matter what bass you play, all the fancy wood/electronics/amps etc can't stop your fingers from really defining your sound.
