• 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.

What is the difference between these 2 Sx basses?

#46
For what it's worth to the OP I've owned the cheaper basswood model and I currently own the SS ash model. I don't know if it's still for sale or not. But the one with the better wood definitely has better tuners and fit and finish then the cheaper. I sold the basswood one for next to nothing, but the ash one my daughter uses and it performs as well as any other bass I've seen for under $400-500 bucks. The only fault has been the input jack replacement, but I've had to do that for most basses.
 
#47
20170415_104951.jpg


That's it, along with the Douglas SS hard case which is a great buy as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabbler
#50
bassbenj said:
Only for those infidels who do not believe in tonewood.
Click to expand...

bassbenj said:
PS. And I don't believe you can make working gunpowder from common minerals found on the ground either.
Click to expand...


Gorn said:
But until large scale double blind studies regarding perceivable differences in "tonewood" have been conducted, repeated and peer reviewed, you're making unfounded assertions based on insufficient anecdotal observations, and for all time time left in the cosmos, the plural of anecdote will never be data.
Click to expand...

LOL! :woot: :roflmao:

I hesitated about clicking a gear thread when I should be practicing, but I'm glad I did. ppl are out of their minds (not in the literal DSM V way). BTW, the P.S. refers to Invalid Link Removed, and the idea was also looked at Invalid Link Removed.

TB should have a Best of posts-responses thread.

Going back to reading the rest of this thread...
 
#54
pcake said:
i don't care for bright, and i always prefer a basswood body with a rosewood fretboard. coincidence? who knows. most of my basses, btw, are short scale.
Click to expand...

Which only proves that you believe in tonewood and that no given tonewood is "bad" but depends on what you want in your bass. I can easily see how someone would find my ash body basses too bright and "harsh" the same as I find most EMG pickups too bright and love Barts which many find too "dull". So if a person loves the Basswood tone and feel, they have an advantage because being cheaper what they want saves them money!
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabbler
#55
DrummerwStrings said:
Monkey wrench: Basswood is softer, & it puts less wear on tools so it costs less to shape than Alder.
Click to expand...

I VERY much doubt that this is even slightly true. I'm sure the cost most revolves around the cost of the wood which involves many things from availability to demand for MANY things not just musical instruments. It's great to keep thinking up "plausible" arguments, but that isn't the same actual reasons. Just like you somehow think that science is needed to "prove" tonewood matters. Science is not Art. You have no idea if science is sensitive enough to actually measure the things that artist say they sense. In fact it does not matter if artists ACTUALLY can sense the things they say they do. IF they think they can, then it can play a role in their art. Art is not science and science is not art. This is little different than the arguments raging between science and art over whether ESP is real or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dabbler and DrummerwStrings
#58
bassbenj said:
I VERY much doubt that this is even slightly true. I'm sure the cost most revolves around the cost of the wood which involves many things from availability to demand for MANY things not just musical instruments. It's great to keep thinking up "plausible" arguments, but that isn't the same actual reasons. Just like you somehow think that science is needed to "prove" tonewood matters. Science is not Art. You have no idea if science is sensitive enough to actually measure the things that artist say they sense. In fact it does not matter if artists ACTUALLY can sense the things they say they do. IF they think they can, then it can play a role in their art. Art is not science and science is not art. This is little different than the arguments raging between science and art over whether ESP is real or not.
Click to expand...
We have no idea if science is sensitive enough to measure what artists say they sense? By that rationale any "tonewood" can sound like anything. If I prefer alder because it sounds more kerfrenkulpricht, then that's my position as an artist and science can't say anything against it?
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back