Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
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.
Why do all basses seem to look so uninspired and the same (in a bad way)
- Thread starter Liamberry9
- Start date
- Status
Speaking as a recovering Industrial Designer, it is obvious to me that the Leo Fender designs didn't benefit from ID skills. Modern Yamaha & Ibanez basses have a fundamentally similar profile to classic Fender designs, but have benefitted from professional design skill sets (based on my observation, I haven't looked into their teams or process). There's nothing wrong with loving the classic shapes as they're burned into our consciousness, but for me many have very awkward profiles and proportions. I love many early Matsumoku designs (including my cheap Vantage) as someone there was really good with proportion & symmetry (and yes, that symmetry = neck dive). I also struggle with almost any bass with the tuners on one side, as the heads get huge in proportion to the rest of the bass - especially considering the neck length.
It's a basic fact (from an Industrial Design standpoint): basses have challenging proportions compared to guitars, it's hard (but not impossible) to make them look beautiful. But I have an entire board on Pinterest of beautiful basses, they exist. But look at a basic Yamaha TRBX bass of any flavor - it's hard to say that's anything other than a professionally designed, modern version of a 'classic bass'.
It's a basic fact (from an Industrial Design standpoint): basses have challenging proportions compared to guitars, it's hard (but not impossible) to make them look beautiful. But I have an entire board on Pinterest of beautiful basses, they exist. But look at a basic Yamaha TRBX bass of any flavor - it's hard to say that's anything other than a professionally designed, modern version of a 'classic bass'.
Can I see an URL? I like seeing examples of well-designed basses. I have my opinions but I want to learn from others too.
I can simplify my point above: Leo Fender created the Precision in 1951, and it looks it. That's good if you want an instrument that expresses its heritage, that's bad if you want something that doesn't look vintage. And unlike a cello or equivalent, the specific shape isn't required for the acoustics - it doesn't have to look like that to sound great.
The essence of social media, boiled down to its purest form
We'll, this is just me, exploring what I've found from an Industrial Design perspective. For all I know, many of these basses could be unplayable crap, and I expect most aren't cheap: but they're visually interesting to me (I expect many here would hate most of these).
https://pin.it/3Y0En7e
(Note: clipping isn't endorsement, I have ID issues with details on many of these basses as well)
It's appreciated. In my idle moments I'm making sketches for a bass I'd someday like to build, and things like this are helpful!
I consider Leo Fender's designs to be among the greats of mid-20th Century American design.
What's a recovering Industrial Designer?
I've never been an industrial designer but in my experience as a former graphic designer, recovery involves moving to a less stressful job that pays better and has a clearer path to promotions.
Bingo: ID has been moving offshore for the past couple decades, I'm a UX Design leader now. But my DNA stills says "ID".
I'm sure someone brought this up already but the majority of Alembics are quite inspired looking.
I guess the Spector NS-2's curved body is less obvious in a photo. But in person it's pretty striking, and I'd have a hard time categorizing a nice Spector as being uninspired.
I guess the Spector NS-2's curved body is less obvious in a photo. But in person it's pretty striking, and I'd have a hard time categorizing a nice Spector as being uninspired.
I agree, but the designs are vintage. Most products we buy today were designed recently, I love a Hudson Hornet but don't expect to find a new one at a dealership.
Actually, the Hudson Hornet is a good example of what I mean. The 1950's were the era of lazy curves & bulbous forms, cool looking but kinda "Rubenesque" compared to what followed.
Last edited:
It seems to me an Eames LCW chair (or Tandem Sling seating), for example, would be make a better comparison. Herman Miller and Vitra both still produce them and people still buy and use them, including me.
Right, but they were designed by Charles & Ray Eames. I wouldn't put Leo at their level when it comes to form & proportion, they are hall of fame level. To me (just my opinion), those early Fenders are more equivalent to the Hornet.
Oh my God, can you imagine if Charles & Ray designed an electric bass for Fender?! This entire thread probably wouldn't exist, and I'd be trying to convince my wife to get a second mortgage to buy one.
Musician's Friend | Bohemian Guitars Oil Can Moonshine Electric Bass
They have many other Oil Cans to choose from.
Bohemian Guitars | Musician's Friend
Was going to also recommend the reverse flying V but they are out of the price range.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. In the world of Industrial Design and ID history, I don't believe Fender ever received the recognition he deserved and I don't see a problem with the forms and proportions, particularly between '57 and '64.
A 34" scale bass guitar is what it is and the weight distribution/balance of P and J basses is fine. As far as the contours are concerned, they comfortable, practical--from the player and production standpoints--and the test of time has proven them often copied and classic. I don't see where Fender was playing any clams in the form and function department, particularly considering all the context of the times from whence they originated. Rickenbacker would be much more deserving target for critique in that regard.
- Status
