• 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

#41
The Thumb Bolt On I have holds it sustain for days. The active/passive tone controls go from deep thump to wooly growl.

The Thumb is a great counterpart to my MIA Jazz bass and Birdsong Cortobass - My Holy Trinity.

The only caveat is that it has an odd neck that fits perfectly in my hand but is not for everyone.
 
#44
I really need to see some of these newer ones WarwickOfficial mentioned, what with their extra effort devoted to QC. I would never say that IME Warwick QC was bad by any stretch, but I have come across some older models that seemed like they could have been polished up on final production just a bit more.
 
#45
When it comes down to it, we really need to be thankful that we've got so many options to choose from! If an instrument allows you to speak as a musician, then its the right instrument for you! We are passionate about the instruments we make, and for those that choose Warwick as their bass of choice - we thank you for your support!
 
#46
Right after I got my first WW(98), QC seemed to go out the window. I was hooked on the sound & played every one I came across- and the vast majority were not well-finished. I eventually stopped looking- I had wanted a 5er to *match/complement* the BO-4, but after trying a few Vettes, FNAs & Thumb, I realized such a beast does not exist. That & my perception of so-called *quality* or the lack thereof led me to stop shopping. I have played some more recent models(including RB's)and have been somewhat impressed- they've all been good, but the ones I had played years before were so bad(IMO)that it could only get better.
As far as ergonomics, my physical build is far more comfortable w/Fender. YMMV
 
#47
What's an ex-pat?

gibsonbassguy said:
My opinion and my opinion only , God bless everyone elses . To me playability is no.1 , with sound a very close second ,aesthetics bringing up the rear , within reason . Warwick to me are the most drop dead ugly around , something tells me somebody somewhere at Warwick is laughing real hard that we are buying anything that loks so ridiculous . I've been real close to buying a nt thumb but just can't get by the looks . I'm an ex-pat who's been backing up different artists in Scandinavia , occasionally Germany and without a doubt find the people there the most difficult on earth to deal with which any American working overseas will tell you . That is the other reason I won't buy one , it's much better to be thinking about Americans at Gibson and Fender . Again , only my opinion .
Click to expand...

Oh nvm, Googled it. Expatriate.

If what the official Warwick guy says is true about their production line, I'd sure rather give them my money than a company like Rickenbacker who leaves glaring design flaws and QC issues in their instruments to retain "vintage" aesthetics.
 
#48
Revolver said:
Ummm . . . No.
Click to expand...

The most ergonomic design Warwick has produced is the Streamer - and that's not even their design. The Thumb? With it's short upper horn? Really? I played my Thumb BO for two years straight as my main bass. It was a good instrument but ergonomically friendly it was not. And due to the relatively small bodies of most Warwick designs their 34" scale feels like playing a 35" to 36" scale. Then they went and introduced their baseball bat necks. I have large hands and even I find those necks incredibly uncomfortable. As for Dolphins, have you ever tried playing one sitting down, with it resting on your leg? :help:
 
#49
Had a Warwick Streamer LX - the body and neck were gorgeous pieces of wood, really beautiful, nicely shaped, PJ pickups, light weight... I had the Warwick bass and their 150w combo amp, its definitely not purely a metal bass, really nice clean tones. The "look" was pretty applicable to any band as well, so it would have looked fine in a metal band but in my pop band with two female singers it still looked the part! I regret selling it, but it was never quite perfect for me.
I would definitely buy another Warwick but probably with a bubinga body for a little more "growl" rather than maple.
 
#50
Toastfuzz said:
What's an ex-pat?



Oh nvm, Googled it. Expatriate.

If what the official Warwick guy says is true about their production line, I'd sure rather give them my money than a company like Rickenbacker who leaves glaring design flaws and QC issues in their instruments to retain "vintage" aesthetics.
Click to expand...

Very true. Some of the basses that left the factory in older times would never make it past our rigorous quality control tolerances today. We take pride in our belief that the basses made today are the highest quality instruments in our 30 year history, and we are committed to making only the best. Thanks for your comments!
 
#51
WarwickOfficial said:
When it comes down to it, we really need to be thankful that we've got so many options to choose from! If an instrument allows you to speak as a musician, then its the right instrument for you! We are passionate about the instruments we make, and for those that choose Warwick as their bass of choice - we thank you for your support!
Click to expand...

Some reciprocity would have been great back when I had problems with a defective Thumb NT 5. Three cracks in the wood and Warwick didn't want to deal with me. Finally, after I complained enough the company agreed to see the bass. I had to pay for the shipping (both ways) and I got a patch up job on a bass that cost me over three grand. No apologies from Warwick, no show of good will via a set of strings (or anything) for my troubles and frustrations. Nothing. And when I subsequently tried to contact Warwick my emails were ignored. That is not good customer service and at that point I lost all faith in Warwick as a brand. I now deal with people such as Roger Sadowsky, Mike Lull, Mike Tobias and Rob Allen - folks who listen if I have a problem with one of their products and folks who actually treat me as if they give a damn. Warwick will never see another dollar from me.
 
#52
Love my Wick. Say what you want about the looks, but this thing is a tone beast. Has plenty of fretless-like qualities to it tone wise and everyone who has heard it has always been impressed. YMMV, but this bass brings it for me. And it fits me better than any jazz bass I've ever played.

a72f6d61.gif
 
#56
bass12 said:
The most ergonomic design Warwick has produced is the Streamer - and that's not even their design. The Thumb? With it's short upper horn? Really? I played my Thumb BO for two years straight as my main bass. It was a good instrument but ergonomically friendly it was not. And due to the relatively small bodies of most Warwick designs their 34" scale feels like playing a 35" to 36" scale. Then they went and introduced their baseball bat necks. I have large hands and even I find those necks incredibly uncomfortable. As for Dolphins, have you ever tried playing one sitting down, with it resting on your leg? :help:
Click to expand...

I'd argue that the most ergonomic Warwick shape is the Fortress, IMO. It's a shame they don't offer it as a standard German model anymore.
 
#58
To the OP, I'd definitely consider getting a Warwick to go with your Fender. I think the Thumb is the definitive Warwick. I've got a '99 neck-through 5-string, as well as a Fender Precision 5. They couldn't be more different, which makes them each a great complement to the other. The Fender definitely has superior ergonomics and sits in the mix a bit more easily. The Thumb makes you work for it a bit, but it's worth it for that sound. Nothing else like it. I put Hipshot Ultralite tuners on mine and got a 4" wide strap, and now it balances perfectly.
 
#59
I play a Corvette 5 active and use it for everything from jazz (neck pickup passive mode) to funk (bridge pickup active mode with eq boosted) to reggae (pan slightly to neck, active mode bass boosted treble cut) and more. It's a very versatile bass that can achieve just about any tone you're looking for. It is a bit hefty though and can wear your shoulder out. Also the neck is a bit chunky. I find it hard to believe that people flat out don't like this bass as I can get just about any sound I want out of it.
 
#60
jmattbassplaya said:
I've had a few Warwicks - included a slightly coveted '91 Warwick SS1 (same as Stu Zenders). Personally, they aren't for me. They feel nice (especially that Streamer), but their stock electronics are horrible compared to other basses in their price range. I recently picked up a Spector Eurol 4LX and, IMHO, it's a far superior bass in every way.
Click to expand...

I found the opposite to be true for me. I owned a couple of Spector Euro's, loved the feel, but hated the sound (they were both PJ's). I have a Corvette Proline now and love it. I do want to try the Spectors with the TW pups though.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back