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 fodera

Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by joel, Oct 6, 2002.

which do you think is better?

Poll closed Aug 12, 2003.
  1. Warwick

    70 vote(s)
  2. Fodera

    126 vote(s)
  1. joel


    Sep 21, 2002
    i currently own a warwick streamer stage II that
    i am very very ...very fond of.
    i was just curious of whaT OTHER bassist thought was better(both looks and sound)

  2. ldiezman


    Jul 11, 2001
    I would say a fodera... I'm not much for warwicks.. they are great basses.. but they aren't for me at all... I love the overall feel and tone of fodera basses.. but I don't know if foderas are for me either.. but if i were to choose.. i would go with a fodera
  3. snyderz


    Aug 20, 2000
    AZ mountains
    Man that's a tough one. I've had my Streamer Stage I for about 9 months, and really love it. Out of all my basses, it was my #1 player. It has the tone I like, a great neck, good balance, and looks bitchen with the flame maple and ebony. I just got a Fodera Monarch about 2 weeks ago, so it hasn't had the play time, but holy crap, it is one mutha of a bass. Lightning fast neck, fantastic tone out of the Fralin pickups and Pope preamp, light weight and BETTER balance. Black burst over flame maple and ebony board. If I HAD to pick one, it would be the Fodera. But I don't have to. :)
  4. jasonbraatz


    Oct 18, 2000
    Oakland, CA
    i'd like to try a fodera, but it'd have to be better than i imagine it being to make me give up my warwicks. they have the exact sound i want, and aren't the kind of serious investment like foderas are.

    if i were a millionare, i'd probably get one. but until then...
  5. well, I think it depends on what you're after, but given the choice I'd play Fodera. I had a pair of Anthony Jackson Contrabasses (one fretted, one fretless) for the better part of 15 years and until I got my Conklins, they were the best I'd played.

    I think (perhaps erroneously) that there's a trademark Warwick sound, but I felt that the Foderas but me in a better position to find my own tone. mind you, I still think Warwick makes a great bass, but this was about opinion, right?

    hope that helps some,

    from the low end,

  6. DigMe


    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    Fodera. I have a Fodera NYC Empire and it may not be reflective of most Foderas because it's their version of the jazz bass and distinctly different from the better known Fodera models but man, it's straight buttah. Dripping with classic, chunky tone and feels so nice. My only beef with it is the weight. The 10 pounds or so really gets my back sometimes after playing for a while. If this bass weighed about 7 pounds it would be the perfect bass IMO. Not personally a big fan of the warwick vibe but it seems like they do make quality stuff.

    brad cook
  7. Jerry J

    Jerry J Supporting Member

    Mar 27, 2000
    P-town, OR
    I've only played 3 Foderas and have been in awe of their feel and tone. The Foderas have been lighter in weight, an easier playing neck and just looked better to me.

    I don't know what it is but all the Warwicks that GC has must be being sold by the pound as they could anchor a fairly big boat. Plus the necks have just seemed too big for me. They just haven't done anything for me.
  8. j.s.basuki

    j.s.basuki Supporting Member

    May 14, 2000
    Both stands in different league. Warwick is mass produced bass like Fender, while Fodera is custom built. Also they are in different pricing structure.
    I bought my Dolphin Pro neckthru for less than US 1000, while Thumb bass 4 is US 800, direct from Mr. Hans Peter Wilfer [ Warwick owner], I think Fodera will cost at least US 3000.

    Tone ? = taste
  9. Amoilbasso


    Apr 22, 2000
    Not to be offensive with you and your Warwick(I owned both a 1991Thumb5 and '89 Streamer4 once),
    but I hope you are kidding!

    Fodera,may be is compareable to Ken Smith,Alembic,older Tobias.....not to a warwick.
    Warwick high-end basses are nice;they have that unmistakeable "sound of wood",they are good for modern slap tones,they growl.....but I feel they are overrated,expecially in the U.S.
    While Fodera,at least to me, is the best modern sounding bass in the world.
    Sorry!!! :(
  10. what is your favorite car ? a porsche or a humvee ?

    you cannot compare warwick with fodera.. they're on a totally different scale..

    warwick = factory bass with standard looks

    fodera = hand made bass with custom look / phunky wood tops.
  11. j.s.basuki

    j.s.basuki Supporting Member

    May 14, 2000
    I think you cannot consider Warwick like a Porche;)
    Look at their quality of the bolt on models:(
  12. I think they are both worth what you pay for them. If money were no object, I think the Fodera is a better made/sounding bass. But they don't both cost the same. Fodera's I've seen and played usually cost quite a bit more than even the top of the line Warwick. If you are trying to make up your mind between buying the Warwick or the Fodera, let you hands, ears, and wallet answer the question.
  13. Wrong Robot

    Wrong Robot Guest

    Apr 8, 2002
    I own a Fodera...I can't stand warwicks....every warwick I've played has sounded crummy and played crummy(I've played some high ends all the low ends and a couple in between kinds) the body is too small on Warwicks for my taste, and the necks are to thick...for me at least...my fodera has a thin neck and a really well sized body that is very smooth and comfortable.
    I wouldn't put warwicks in the same class as fodera either....I've heard good warwicks, but generally have always been dissapointed.
  14. jasonbraatz


    Oct 18, 2000
    Oakland, CA

    ok let me go look

    (goes and plays his fretless thumb b-o 6 string, 1998 vintage)

    well...that's one of the best fretlesses i've ever played in my whole life. vs. elrick, zon, musicman, roscoe, etc...

    in fact, the only one better i've played was a 91 dolphin 4 string fretless.

    i do think that the bolt ons are a little down from the n/t's, especially now, but they're both really really nice basses.

    if we're using the car analogy, i would say warwicks are like BMW's. stout, well made, sporty and aggressive, maybe have gone down from the quality that made them famous, but still prestigious and very capable. the neck thrus would be ///Mpower :) still production line cars though, built by a big company so there are a few cost cutting measures.

    vs a fodera being a bentley. every car hand built to the customers specs, with a pricetag to match.
  15. Joelc73

    Joelc73 Supporting Member

    Nov 13, 2000
    New York
    They're two totally different instruments in two completley different leagues. Warwicks are nice production basses, but Fodera is a completley different animal. Fodera's are hand-made, custom instruments.
  16. great analogy dude. Foderas are very, very expensive. You can get a decent Warwick for under $2000. Can't even think Fodera at that price.
  17. Onesidezero


    Mar 13, 2002

    So if I call Hans, he'll send me a neck-thru Thumb for 800 bucks?

    Considering they're 2000+ new, I'd say that's a damn good deal.
  18. j.s.basuki

    j.s.basuki Supporting Member

    May 14, 2000
    Perhaps ;) Just sold my old Streamer SS 1 5 strings last week for approx US 1600 , after using it still make US 500:D
    Hans consider me as a friend:)
  19. AJ Love

    AJ Love

    Oct 8, 2002
    Madison WI USA
    in my opinion, Fodera basses are a couple levels up from Warwick (as nice as Warwicks are)

    I found a used Fodera for $2500...good deals are out there if you look
  20. joel


    Sep 21, 2002
    fellow bassists

    thankyou for your opinions .i think i know what bass will be my next......i think i'll go pre 1998
    fretless warwick thumb, then i'll get myself a


Share This Page