We're all big boys and girls here.
We can certainly have a discussion, or even a heated debate without considering it a fight.
Even the posts that I personaly find foolish, are still enlightening in many ways.
I know my feelings aren't hurt.
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 is Fender so Popular?
- Thread starter ArpeggiFish
- Start date
- Status
We're all big boys and girls here.
We can certainly have a discussion, or even a heated debate without considering it a fight.
Even the posts that I personaly find foolish, are still enlightening in many ways.
I know my feelings aren't hurt.
The bolded part is true, but it's also a bit misleading. Those bassists did not choose Fender from a pool of hundreds of competing manufacturers- they chose from what was available at the time, which was Fender and, to a lesser degree, Gibson and Ric.
Rics may have been more expensive, don't know for sure. I doubt that they were as available as Fenders, tho. Gibson shot themselves in the foot, first with weird scale lengths (IMO) and then with with neck dive (from putting bass necks on gutar bodies with no thought of balance).
That early lack of electric bass choices has influenced the way we now think about everything bass-related, including (especially?) the way producers learn to get a sound out of a bass and the way musicians decide whether a particular bass "fits" the music. I don't know why this doesn't get more consideration when threads like this pop up.
The ears of "experienced, professional players" are every bit as subject to being conditioned by the recordings of the past four decades as anyone. To attribute their choice to "mature judgement" alone when there are several posts in this thread alone about what happens when a musician walks into a recording session with something other than a Fender is intellectually dishonest. They are making that decision based on what producers want and on what they've grown up hearing every bit as much as they are making it on what they "think fits best"- which, again, is influenced by what they've heard.
I want to say that it doesn't diminish Fender's contribution one iota to acknowledge that their iconic status is due in no small part to their early role in getting the electric bass into as many players' hands as possible (and, consequently, onto as many records as possible) before anyone else did.
I like Fenders cause they sound good, hell I'd play a B.C. Rich at a Jazz Band concert if it sounded good, I don't care what others think about me.
I'm sorry, but this business about Fender being first and that's the reason they're iconic is nonsense. Almost immediately after the 51 Precision, other companies started putting out electric basses. And in the early 60's when electric bass finally started to take off on recordings, there were a heck of a lot of choices out there. It wasn't just Fender and Gibson. It was them, plus Gretsch, Danelectro, Baldwin/Burns, Framus, and a whole host of other companies, especially in Japan. Every other product has had a fair chance to compete with Fender, and so far, the only one that's come close to being in the same league for usage as Fender is MusicMan. It has nothing to do with being first, nor does it have a thing to do with limited choices, because by the time electric bass caught on, there were tons of choices.
Exactly. Fenders used to be by far the most workable basses going, which was why studio pros chose to play them.
Well, sure - that was supposed to be a kind of corollary, following from the first observation. I was commenting on the reasons for Fender's continuing popularity.
Why is it so hard to grasp that some (o.k. lots) people just like the sound of a P or J?
It's really not any more complicated than that. Why do I prefer the sound of a Tennor Sax to Oboe, or Trumpet? Why do I prefer the tone of Lester Young as compaired to John Coltrane?
I'm wearing a Fender tee shirt at this very moment. My wife bought it for me as a gift.
I like P bass necks. I dislike Jazz necks with a passion! Too damn skinny at the nut. I made one of my five strings with the same spacing as a P bass at the nut and bridge... that was a mistake! It's a little too wide.
I had a really nice Hondo II P bass copy that one of the touring guitar players from Kool and the Gang gave me. It had awful hardware, but the rest was nice.
I had hardware left over from my '74 P bass on hand
(before it's ghastly transformation into this:
)(this was once a P bass)
I put on the Fender hardware, added a J pickup, and a kahler tremolo.
Oh and I made it fretless. That was a cool bass.
Well, you're right, but you're picking nits with the letter of the post to make a point in what you think is a debate rather than taking the post in its intended spirit. Burns and Framus were small European companies not able to compete in a large, American-dominated market. Gretsch didnt offer an electric bass until the mid-60s. I won't even discuss Danelectro other than to say their basses didnt come along until the late 50s. Japan didn't really get involved in the mass production of exported basses until the mid-60s or so.
For the man in the street or in the studio, it was "go get a Fender, Ric or Gibson, or have fun trying to find something else". After five, ten years of that, the die is cast.
savit260 said:
I like them myself- see my sig and profile. But I have access to the recordings of the past just like you do, and we both know what's on those records. I don't discount the influence of those recordings on my tastes the way so many others seem to do. As far as Fender-influenced basses go, I'd immediately take a Lull, Sadowsky or Grosh over any Fender if I had the cash to drop on such an instrument. As for Fender Custom Shop, I do admit to a bias against them, as they are boutique basses made under the aegis of a huge corporation. Not exactly in the Fender "assembly bass" spirit.
I can honestly say I've NEVER had anyone relay to me that they like something, ANYTHING for that matter, because of it's name. That would hold true for Fenders too. If they like it for the normal reasons (tone, playability, looks, etc.) they usually say that. If they don't they say that too.
OTOOH there are people dumb enough not to like things simply because of a name. Funny how that works.
Of course, nobody admits they bought it just because it was a Fender. A lot of people buy them for the right reasons, but how many people go into the guitar shop really objectively? Some, certainly. But the brand recognition can often outgrow the product. A lot of people will buy one because they really don't know what they're looking for and have heard that "Everyone should have one", etc. And there certainly there are some fanboys out there who do buy just for the name. So we have category A, which is the people who try a bunch of stuff, decide they like the Fender and buy it. We have category B, who doesn't really know what they want (often beginners?), and Category C The guy who either wants to be cool, and Fenders are cool so buys a Fender.
A says: This bass is awesome. I really like it. (Because he does)
B says: This bass is awesome. I really like it. (Hasn't got much to compare to, but doesn't want to sound like a noob)
C says: This bass is awesome. I really like it. (Probably doesn't have any more clue than B, but doesn't want to look like a clueless fanboy.
If you want to see some huge examples of this, check out some Hi-fi audio forums. How many people will rave about their "Ultra-Fi Whizbang aero-core oxygen-free silver" speaker cables. Because they hear a difference, or because they don't want to look like a dumbass who spent $500 for a set of speaker cables.
It happens everywhere. How many people drink Coca-cola, but have never even tried the store-brand. You never know when it might be better if you don't give it a try.
It's just as dumb to dislike something just from the name. No doubt about that. That probably either means A. you want people to think that your stuff is better than theirs, so you talk trash. B. You want to be special. If everyone has the same bass as you, you can't be special. Get something else, then talk trash about theirs. C. You're a troll, and you don't really even dislike it, but you just want to piss off people on the internet.
I guess some of us just like to stick up for the underdog too. I mean really, I'd just like to see people look at a bass for what it is. I think that some of the other manufacturers are selling less basses than they ought, just due to not saying "Fender" on the headstock. Unfortunately, most of the internet tends to hear "Be open minded and try a variety" as "Your stuff sucks and mine is better"
-Nick
Yeah. I'm assuming you're not talking about me in the first part, since I've neither trashed, nor dismissed them.
I don't think it's particularily pompous. If I were to say "You probably just bought your bass because you're unsure of your own opinions" that would be pompous. I don't think that's something I'd ever say, though, because I have no way of knowing.
But when we're talking about the general population, It's pretty hard to argue that a large percentage of the population's purchasing choices aren't mostly controlled by brand recognition and marketing. Coke, Levis, Microsoft, Nike, Chevrolet. Sure some of them may have some great products, but does Coke make the best cola, Levis the best jeans?. Do you believe that everyone who goes to the grocery store and buys a bottle of Coke does it because they've tasted a bunch, and like it the most? Ever tried the store brand sitting next to it? I think I'm more open minded than most, but I still find myself drinking a pepsi, and wearing Nike shoes. I sometimes drink the store-brand from where I usually shop, and it's just as good really. If I'm shopping somewhere else, I'll just stick with pepsi to be on the safe side.
Unless you have a reason to think I was talking about you, assume otherwise.
I'm just trying to stick up for independant thought, suggesting that if anyone realizes that they're making a decision without any specific reason, they should consider alternatives. There might be a better choice right at hand. There may not be, but at least consider it before you fork over your money.Am I explaining it better this time? is the irritate-O-meter leveling off a tad?
I find it pretty ridiculous how much people argue about this kind of thing, especially about a bass. I'll leave out playing live, as that would just be too easy, but even on a studio recording, how much of your bass tone is actually heard?
The goal of any mix is to get the bass and the kick drum to sit well together. Unless you're playing slap or in a very sparse three-piece band, you'll only hear the tone of the bass when the other instruments drop out. This is why fender is so good. They're great to play on and don't break, and they put out a good fundamental tone.
I play a G&L Tribute L-2000, which i straight up traded my Stingray 5 for. After a studio session where an entire track was ruined because the immaculate modulus 5 string I was playing on put out a rumble on the low b for the whole track. It's things like that, not needing to mute a string you're not playing on, that end up being far more important than features and amazing tone. You've got to listen to the end product, not how good the bass sounds while you're playing by yourself in isolation.
I know i'll probably get hated on hardcore here, but I'm just riffing on an epiphany I've had recently. I've got a studio in the basement that can put out some decent quality amateur recordings, and I've been playing live once a week for the past year or so, and The differences between playing thru the absolute POS Peavey I've been lugging to live gigs and plugging direct in and dialing up a perfect tone in Ampeg SVX are so minute in the end product that it's really not worth sweating. Not that I won't sweat the details, as it undeniably does make a difference, but the amount of time I waste trying to get a better sound would be so much better spent actually playing my instrument.
Tone comes from your fingers. Not your bass, not your amp, not your cab. Find what works for you and play till you've got blisters, then play through the blisters. Then play some more.
Sorry about the tirade, it was St. Paddy's 32 minutes ago, and I'm irish as ****.
Link Removed <---pick out what's thru the peavey and what's DI'd ampeg. Just for fun. Sometimes the peavey actually sounds better ;-)
The goal of any mix is to get the bass and the kick drum to sit well together. Unless you're playing slap or in a very sparse three-piece band, you'll only hear the tone of the bass when the other instruments drop out. This is why fender is so good. They're great to play on and don't break, and they put out a good fundamental tone.
I play a G&L Tribute L-2000, which i straight up traded my Stingray 5 for. After a studio session where an entire track was ruined because the immaculate modulus 5 string I was playing on put out a rumble on the low b for the whole track. It's things like that, not needing to mute a string you're not playing on, that end up being far more important than features and amazing tone. You've got to listen to the end product, not how good the bass sounds while you're playing by yourself in isolation.
I know i'll probably get hated on hardcore here, but I'm just riffing on an epiphany I've had recently. I've got a studio in the basement that can put out some decent quality amateur recordings, and I've been playing live once a week for the past year or so, and The differences between playing thru the absolute POS Peavey I've been lugging to live gigs and plugging direct in and dialing up a perfect tone in Ampeg SVX are so minute in the end product that it's really not worth sweating. Not that I won't sweat the details, as it undeniably does make a difference, but the amount of time I waste trying to get a better sound would be so much better spent actually playing my instrument.
Tone comes from your fingers. Not your bass, not your amp, not your cab. Find what works for you and play till you've got blisters, then play through the blisters. Then play some more.
Sorry about the tirade, it was St. Paddy's 32 minutes ago, and I'm irish as ****.
Link Removed <---pick out what's thru the peavey and what's DI'd ampeg. Just for fun. Sometimes the peavey actually sounds better ;-)
Nah, he was seconding a reply based on a false inference from my "nonsense".
Also implies that I might be 40.
I agree mostly. except that "They're not swayed" part. Maybe they were themselves influenced as up-and coming players, and are just used to playing A P or J now, so conclude that it's right for the job.
It's certainly not wrong for the job though, so whatever works for them.
-Nick
I dunno. I've played them all: Fodera, Sadowsky, MTD, F Bass, Smith, Lakland, Warwick, Modulus. . . and I always come back to Fender.
And it's not for sentimental reasons; I didn't start on Fenders.
They just sound and feel better than anything else, to me.
Try one, today!
And it's not for sentimental reasons; I didn't start on Fenders.
They just sound and feel better than anything else, to me.
Try one, today!
And think about why that is... that was Leo Fender's next company after Fender. He designed those and Grover Jackson build them! Then of course came G&L.
If you look at both the MM and the G&L basses, you can see where Leo himself wanted to update certain things, like better bridges, humbuckers, and active electronics. These are similar mods people did to Fender basses. So here's Leo modding Fender.
- Status
