Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Basses [BG]' started by bass2020, Feb 4, 2002.
What is the better bass?
Warwick Streamer or Spector (whatever they call it)
Give me your opinions.
For slapping & highs - spector
for general purpose & LOWS (!) - warwick
the SSII is one of the best basses on earth. theres no other bass that sounds like it. i've never seen any bass that uses afzelia for the body wood or part of the neck wood.
i PERSONALLY don't like spectors because they use pretty ordinary woods (yeah it may be AAAA flame but it's still maple) they have EMG's and gloss finish everywhere. but construction and quality wise, it's a tie.
warwick wins with it's uniqueness (even if it is a liscensed body shape )
I'm gonna have to say Streamer because I dont like how Spector finishes the back of their necks.
I own three Spectors and will never go back to any other manufacturer. They are built to last and are very versatile in the sounds you can get. The pickup configs are GREAT, EMG gives you the range you need to get where you want to be.
I'll let you know when I get my Streamer LX 6 fretless. It's an older one with Basslines pickups. I'll compare with my Czech Spector. I think they're both going to be great -- just different.
I'd say AllodoX has it pretty close to right -- but Warwicks can sound great slapped and Spectors can put out serious booty (My Czech does)!
They're both great bass companies, but their basses are just.......... different.
Better at what??
Are we talking the Streamer Standard vs. the Korean Spectors or the Streamer LX's vs. the Czech Spectors or the Streamer Stage I/II's vs. the US Spectors??
I'm talking about over all performance.
What ever model you think is better.
I've played MANY Warwicks & they do nothing for me.
Spector all the way.
Spector(whatever they call them)
Go with the original. The Spector had that body style 10 years before Warwick was even around.
I'm a dedicated Spector player but I don't like the gloss finish (That all of my Spectors have) as much as the feel of wood under my hands.
This sounds like I should favor the Warwick but everytime I've tried a Warwick its felt flimsy and doesn't seem to have as much punch and sustain (through the same amp) as the Spector. However it had more midrange growl than the Spector.
Spectors are available in natural wood so I'm really considering switching to those.
Everyone's taste is different.
I was misled by the title.
I am not a fan of the Streamer. I do prefer the Spectors over these. However, a Spector's a Spector's a Spector.
Warwick as a whole offers greater variety in tone, feel, styling, flexibility, and material accross all models.
Spector (CZ or US - not the Koreans) over a Streamer.
But, brand for brand, I'd pick Warwick.
C'mon Nino, admit it - you like my Warwick. You know it, you'll admit it to me but yer not man enough to admit it to the rest of the Talkbass world. There. I ratted you out.
As fer the questiojn: If you like Warwicks, Warwicks are the better basses. If you like Spectors, Spectors are the better basses.
I like Warwicks. I think they're a lot deeper and narly sounding than Spectors. Spectors seem to have that pristine, sterile, high tech sound to them that I'm not too fond of.
Another thing - and this is just a stab in the Dark here, but I think people who go for MM/Fender basses lean towards liking the sound of Warwicks, people who lean towards Ibanez go for Spectors. Is there any truth to this. I don't know... it's early in the morning.
As a matter of fact, your Warwick is the only Warwick I've ever enjoyed playing. The neck was nice, it sounded great. <b>BUT</b>, I'll go in to any Guitar Center & play everyone off the rack & I'll wanna puke!!!!!! Super chunky necks, bad (IMO) sounds.
Me too actually. It's sad. GC seems to care less about their bass stock, and for some reasons Warwicks seem to suffer the most. I'm not sure if it's because they get played and abused the most, stay on the rack the longest because of their price, or come with rotten setups from Warwick. I bought mine from Rudy's in NYC (before Warwick was very popular) and the bass salesperson used to treat all the basses there as if they were his own babies. The room had a humidifier, only one person at a time could check a bass out, he's get it off the wall for you - and he was a great guy too, no pressure or typical salesmanship. Ahhhhh.... those were the days - and it was only bout 5 years ago.
I would never have bought a Warwick off the walls of GC had that been my only experience with them. Not by a longshot. It's a sad thing.
I'm a Spector man - got 2 so far and wouldn't expect to go for anything else in the future!!
There's just something about Warwicks that puts me right off them - I can't quite out my finger on it!!
If Warwicks do it for you, I'm happy for you -but they do nout for me! Now on the other hand Spectors........ !!!!!!!!!
For me, it's all about the necks. I hate Warwick necks, especially the Thumb models. I love Spector necks to death however.
Also, I like EMG's. IMO, MEC suck the big one. Warwicks have that nice growly tone, especially on CD's and in live performances, but though your crappy amp at home they suck. I like Dirk Lance's tone- but I don't own an SVT or any Classic 8x10's.
I like the hi-fi sound, a little sterile. I can then tailor that with amps or effects to how I wish.
Joe, I like Ibanez too. And I am a Spector man. I hate Fenders and Warwicks. Your theory may be correct.
I'm still waiting to try a Sadowsky though Nino.
My preference? I think you know which one
Let's just say that I haven't met a Spector I didn't like
I don't know to much about Spectors, What is their site?
I do have a Warwick and I love it, but I have played some Spectors (American,CZ) and I liked the sound. I didn't like the feel.
They sound great for slap(I don't do much).
But, for finger style WARWICK'S!!!!!!!
What ever floats your boat, or sinks your submarine.