What is it about Fender?

[lpdeluxe]

But when something is first and very good, it develops a reputation. But instrument making like computer building is not a static thing. Time marches on. And at times founders don't march with the times.

I'm not convinced that times marches on as fast as the exhibitors at NAMM, say, thinks it should. The violin was perfected in the 17th century, and the only "new" developments have been either highly specialized or trivial (5-strings, and fancy finishes, for an example of each).

The electric bass is much the same. My AV '57 does everything I need it to. Active electronics? Some of us aren't sure that's any kind of advance for anything other than battery marketing. Weird body shapes? My P fits me fine, thank you. More strings? Well, here, the bass has evolved to keep up with the times -- with the advent of digital recording and synthesizers, really low frequency notes can be reproduced (of course, I have a 5-string, myself, so perhaps I'm not impartial). Bells and whistles are what some people want, but if that fire truck doesn't have a motor the siren don't mean much.

Gibson has been straining mightily to bring their Firebirds and Les Pauls into the computer age, and the resulting instruments are expensive, unwieldy, and simply not as useful as the traditional guitars, according to the reviews I read.

But some people gotta have new trinkets. As William Gibson (no relation) wrote, "the future is here, it's just unevenly distributed." So it may just come down to personal taste after all.

 

[JimmyM]

It's not Fender basses that I dislike.

It's the loud, obnoxious Fender snobs that keep me away from Fender. I've heard it so many times over the past 34 years that I just can not buy a Fender. "Dude, get a real bass. Real bass players play Fender." Engineers, soundmen, band mates, sales people. It's like a cult :scowl:

I get how ridiculous that is: staying away from a product because of a few fan-boys. But it's my nature- whether it's sports teams, music, TV shows or anything. The minute someone tells me I HAVE to use or play or buy something, my immediate and chronic reaction is to never use, play or buy it.

Same thing with amps. But that's another brand and another forum

There better not be any slamming of my beloved Ampeg coming from you!



If every product suited everybody, there would only be one of everything. Fortunately, we live in a world where we can own any dopey product we want for any dopey reason we believe. And that's a good thing. I may not get the logic, but I don't have to.

 

[NWB]

I'm 54 and yes, back in the day, Fenders were everywhere. So....they are iconic.

I played a Precision for a time, long ago, and it was cool but I always lusted for a Jazz. Last year, I got a Jazz and fell hopelessly in love. The feature that stole my heart is the ergonomics. The body just sucks itself to my torso, a slight right leg lift secures the instrument during challenging riffs, the position of the neck-side strap pin controls neck dive and the neck.......oh, the neck. The neck makes many other basses feel like a piece of firewood with strings attached, by comparison. Thin, narrow at the nut and allows proper thumb position for maximum finger-access to the fretboard.

And finally, the tone. Correction: tones. Wide tone range and if I want.....it growls.

I love your description of the jazz. Warms my heart to read these words.

 

[sadasar]

Let me clear something up here...I have no problem if people like something else besides Fenders. I totally get that not everyone likes them. Everyone should get a bass that lets them be what they want to be. But to think that because you won't touch a Fender that you're going to always be a more unique player than another guy with a Fender is absolute hogwash...it really is. Doesn't mean you won't be more unique and creative, but it doesn't mean that you will, either. My basses just sit on a stand until I do something with them. Nothing unique about that

I always enjoy reading your posts. Well said

 

[swspiers]

There better not be any slamming of my beloved Ampeg coming from you!

he he he

We need an emoticon for 'Fish on'

 

[DougD]

I don't blame them. As a former sound guy, I loved Fenders, as I knew how to EQ and compress them. I hated high tech basses, as the people who played them were more likely to fight us throughout the whole set.

Nobody in the audience really cared either way as long as they could dance.

I hate to toot my own horn, awe who the hell am I kidding? toot, toot And here we have the number one reason Fenders are loved so much IMHO.

 

[SurferJoe46]

I hate to toot my own horn, awe who the hell am I kidding? toot, toot And here we have the number one reason Fenders are loved so much IMHO.

Did danroche say that people with a 'tude bass also have a 'tude?

 

[eqvolvorama]

I should clarify my comment. I know I don't speak for the global population of sound-people, but our job was always easier when someone plugged in with one of the basic Fender DESIGNS, whether the name on the headstock say Fender, SX, Nordy, whatever. A simple, passive P-bass is familiar and easy to get a good sound with. It's the sonic equivalent of peanut butter and jelly. It's not sushi, but it's cheap, easy to make, and will never, ever taste bad (unlike some sushi).

What's worth mentioning is that players who wore a simple passive P or even J were more likely to plug in and go. By and large, they wouldn't be messing with the bass or outboard controls all that much, nor would they be stepping on a bunch of pedals throughout the set. If we could convince someone to plug their P-bass directly into a SansAmp Bass Driver, we could basically guarantee they would sound good and fit well into the mix.

Now, there are also players that would come in with "fanicer" basses - Dingwalls, high-end Ibanez'es, Lakland 94's, etc. This by no means speaks for all of these players, but they were generally more inclined to mess with their onboard EQ and pickup selection throughout the set. Additionally, they were MORE likely to have a suite of pedals and/or sound-shaping gear with them on stage with knobs they would mess with. Whenever any of these things happened, it carried the POTENTIAL to mess with the band's mix through the monitors and PA.

Within this subset, usually things were fine as they were good players and good people. Extra work but no big deal. Every so often, you'd spend the set fighting with a would-be Eric Johnson tonefreak. I'm by no means suggesting everyone playing a high-tech bass is one of these people, but it would rarely happen with someone wielding a straight up P-bass.

 

[Lowbrow]

A bass really does not have to do too much. That said, Fender basses have filled the bill with simplicity, elegance, and dependability for more than 60 years. High regard for Fender reflects a long-standing reputation and gold standard for bass-instrument sound and performance.

 

[Staccato]

What sounds good to your ears, Fender? Some basses (or most) will sound unremarkable through a small practice amp. If you haven't, spend some time with a variety of basses through a full-size amp-outside of a small room, and you might like Fender, and non-Fender basses!

 

[DougD]

I should clarify my comment. I know I don't speak for the global population of sound-people, but our job was always easier when someone plugged in with one of the basic Fender DESIGNS, whether the name on the headstock say Fender, SX, Nordy, whatever. A simple, passive P-bass is familiar and easy to get a good sound with. It's the sonic equivalent of peanut butter and jelly. It's not sushi, but it's cheap, easy to make, and will never, ever taste bad (unlike some sushi).

What's worth mentioning is that players who wore a simple passive P or even J were more likely to plug in and go. By and large, they wouldn't be messing with the bass or outboard controls all that much, nor would they be stepping on a bunch of pedals throughout the set. If we could convince someone to plug their P-bass directly into a SansAmp Bass Driver, we could basically guarantee they would sound good and fit well into the mix.

Now, there are also players that would come in with "fanicer" basses - Dingwalls, high-end Ibanez'es, Lakland 94's, etc. This by no means speaks for all of these players, but they were generally more inclined to mess with their onboard EQ and pickup selection throughout the set. Additionally, they were MORE likely to have a suite of pedals and/or sound-shaping gear with them on stage with knobs they would mess with. Whenever any of these things happened, it carried the POTENTIAL to mess with the band's mix through the monitors and PA.

Within this subset, usually things were fine as they were good players and good people. Extra work but no big deal. Every so often, you'd spend the set fighting with a would-be Eric Johnson tonefreak. I'm by no means suggesting everyone playing a high-tech bass is one of these people, but it would rarely happen with someone wielding a straight up P-bass.

Good points, however, I've found that sound engineers usually go for the sound that is the easiest for them to mix. This may or may not be the sound the player is happy with. There should be some give and take. Especially if it's the kind of music that is more ah modern? if that makes sense. I know that lots of studio guys and girls will take a few basses to the session to find the one that works best for the song. But most of the time, because of the ease of recording, the engineer usually pushes for a passive Fender. When that happens, the player will usually give in and use the Fender for the session, then play his/her other basses live (if they ever get that far). On the other hand, there are a few people that won't even consider you for the gig unless you bring a Fender to the audition. Thankfully those types are a rare breed

 

[DougD]

Did danroche say that people with a 'tude bass also have a 'tude?

LOL

 

[Reace George]

Fender just delivers good quality for the price. Sure, there are lots of different brands and one Fender bass is not nearly the same as the other, but the tones of a Fender are just raw and as a neutral "reference tone" for basses. That's how I look at them, at least. Starting out with a Fender doesn't seem to have done me any bad.

 

[David Jayne]

What is it about Fender? IMHO it has more to do with sound people and producers than anything else.

....says the guy with the coffee-table bass in his avatar.......

 

[deste]

Anyway, going back to track, the reason I like Fenders is the same reason I like Macs, user-friendly.

To me, it all started back in the 80's with a Classic and with an Ibanez.
Now, almost 30 years after, I've come to Fender. Still using Mac.

Fender gives you THAT sound. P is limited, ok, but its limited sound fits perfectly a lot of situations; J is the greatest and the first for many more.
Then, if you like something else, anyone has his own taste.

MIA, MIM, CIJ Squier, vintage, new, they all can be good or bad.
But Fender is still Fender.

BTW, I can be a vintage collector: not pre-CBS, sadly, but pre-Intel - I miss Tiger a lot!

 

[DougD]

....says the guy with the coffee-table bass in his avatar.......

I also have a USA 62 RI. Its THE best Fender I've had so far, and I've had a few my Marcus Miller was a close second. I would have kept it if it wasn't for the gawd awful looking pick guard. The 62 is passive and will stay that way. But my coffee table bass gets the most playing time because it just kills . It's my go to church bass