Anybody else like Fenders or not like Fenders or like something about Fenders but not everything or hate everything about Fenders well almost? Are we done now? Can we close the thread and never have another one like it ever again?
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
Amen Bill.
In closing, just because it irks me so to read people endlessly hung up on the whole "looks" angle, saying Fenders look boring, and for want of something more "special" I say
I'd rather look "ordinary" and play special, then look "special" and play ordinary, or worse, play like crappola albeit with flash gear...there IS a difference...
I bid you adeiu. Lovely day outside...
In closing, just because it irks me so to read people endlessly hung up on the whole "looks" angle, saying Fenders look boring, and for want of something more "special" I say
I'd rather look "ordinary" and play special, then look "special" and play ordinary, or worse, play like crappola albeit with flash gear...there IS a difference...
I bid you adeiu. Lovely day outside...
True... but it is one of the goals for many. The sound typically isn't what people feel needs to be improved on, it's things like fitment/finish/ features instead.
Most IME have fallen short as far as getting the Fender sound. As a musical instrument, that should be at the top of the list.
No doubt. If you're more hung up on looks than playability and tone, throw your bass into a wood chipper. I guarantee it'll look completely unique.
Yes. Sound should be at the top of the list. But not necessarily getting the "Fender sound" It's one good sound of many.
There's plenty of ways to make your bass look "unique" Making it look good, and unique is a different story, and though sound should be top of the list, who would argue that it's nice having a bass that looks cool. If not, just blast a sloppy flat black paint job over unsanded wood, or maybe just sand the parts you touch, if you think it'll affect the playability.
if you dont feel the need to debate or dont like people bashing fenders, dont click the thread or dont reply.. So many people trolling posts clicking on the post called "i hate guitarists" then somone posting god, im so sick of hearing this post just close the thread. What did u think he was gonna say in the thread? how he just got his new Ric?? If your a fender fan, unless u wanna defend ur brand or read a bunch of flaming.... dont click the damn link.
Yes. Sound should be at the top of the list. But not necessarily getting the "Fender sound" It's one good sound of many.
Then what's the point of making a bass that looks identical to a Fender and doesn't sound like one? Might as well buy a bass that doesn't look like one either.
And the Fender sound encompasses more than "one" sound.
Just to add a couple points (since I do own two MIA Fenders):
It's crazy that this discussion seems to come up every couple weeks. That said, there's a reason for it. Walk into a music store, and 9 times out of 10, Fender (or Squire) will be the first thing you see in the bass section. Turn on your TV to a live band performance or rock music video, and 9 times out of 10, the bass player is using a Fender, or Fender-like instrument. It's neither good or bad...it just is what it is. Fender has probably been more successful than any other manufacturer at getting their basses into the hands of the customer.
I like both of my Fenders. Neither of them are perfect, they both have their flaws. I bought a Bongo last year, and it is probably more versatile and a little more solid, build-wise, than either of my Fenders. However, there's a reason you hear various versions of the Fender sound in more recordings than probably any other bass instrument, and I don't think that's all just marketing and hype. They're good at what they do, generally.
It's crazy that this discussion seems to come up every couple weeks. That said, there's a reason for it. Walk into a music store, and 9 times out of 10, Fender (or Squire) will be the first thing you see in the bass section. Turn on your TV to a live band performance or rock music video, and 9 times out of 10, the bass player is using a Fender, or Fender-like instrument. It's neither good or bad...it just is what it is. Fender has probably been more successful than any other manufacturer at getting their basses into the hands of the customer.
I like both of my Fenders. Neither of them are perfect, they both have their flaws. I bought a Bongo last year, and it is probably more versatile and a little more solid, build-wise, than either of my Fenders. However, there's a reason you hear various versions of the Fender sound in more recordings than probably any other bass instrument, and I don't think that's all just marketing and hype. They're good at what they do, generally.
Better yet tremor, why not use the search function and revive one of the million carbon copies of the same thread instead of being one of many predisposed to starting new threads on tired old topics? And why so huffy anyway?
And to quote Arx:
"There's plenty of ways to make your bass look "unique" Making it look good, and unique is a different story, and though sound should be top of the list, who would argue that it's nice having a bass that looks cool. If not, just blast a sloppy flat black paint job over unsanded wood, or maybe just sand the parts you touch, if you think it'll affect the playability"
Um, you missed my point. No big, but there are millions of fine and dandy looking Fenders on the market for those who don't care about being flashy, so why bother with flat black paint when the basses are already painted? Alo of people think THESE "look cool" already. The point wasn't Fender players don't care about looks, they like them just fine as they are and don't go out of their way to get something flash looking just to be different or "unique" that crap should be secondary. I'd rather listen to Rocco Prestia on a Fender P than Joe Q Fumblefingers on a quilt-top dayglo Frenchcurve-o-caster any day.
Ok, this thread...it's like a car crash or a fine female behind...I can't help gawking. I promise I'm out this time.
Wow, yet another Fender bashing thread...
All I can say is when you're the king everyone tries to take your place.
Do players really need to bash Fender to feel good about their own basses?
I don't mean to sound annoyed but I am a little bit, this is sooooo old already - and I haven't even been a TB member that long and I already think it's old.
Get over it guys.
All I can say is when you're the king everyone tries to take your place.
Do players really need to bash Fender to feel good about their own basses?
I don't mean to sound annoyed but I am a little bit, this is sooooo old already - and I haven't even been a TB member that long and I already think it's old.
Get over it guys.
The important question is why Fender users bash everything that's boutique. Seems that some are better at dishing it out than taking it, eh?
Now if y'all will excuse me, I'm gonna play my Conklin, which sounds like crap and will never sound as good as a Fender.
I am going to add my $.02 here (why not, everyone else has).
I began playing in the middle 60s....thats a few years before the RHCP and so on and so forth. In those days, being a kid, I couldn't afford a Fender (too damn expensive for a teenage wannabe rock star) so I played whatever the hell was available and, for the most part, what was available was junk (now considered "vintage" by the eBay crowd - junk then - junk now).
I played pro for 25 years (before moving to the recording side of the business) and, as a result endorsed a few basses during that time - none of which were Fender. You see, the "word" had gotten out that Fender's QC had "gone to hell" and they weren't any good, any longer - yet they continued to be a mainstay in the studios both in New York, LA and Nashville (I know, I worked in most of them).
Well sir, I finally decided to begin playing again (at the ripe old age of 55) and the very first bass I picked up was a MIA Fender. SUPERB build and feel. Put out GREAT music. I haven't stopped buying Fenders since. I now own a MIA Deluxe Jazz, a MIA 57RI P, a MIA 62RI Jazz and P, and, believe it or not, a MIM P bass that I picked up at GC used, but in excellent shape and would compete with any of the higher-end basses that I currently own. I also play a Rickenbacker 4003 and a 4001.
The moral (if there is one) of the story is simple. In the "stone age" of the 60s, we had little choice in "higher end" players, they were more concerned with the needs of guitar players rather than mere "bass" players. As a result, unless you were really serious, you had little choice (silvertone, Kay, you get the idea). Now, however, that isn't the case. There are a myriad of instruments that are continually being compared to one another and the "criticism" that embodies all of us bass players and out equipment.
an "expensive" bass doesn't "necessarily" mean GOOD. it means EXPENSIVE. The name plate on that instrument doesn't necessarily denote "quality", it denotes the manufacturer of said instrument. Fender basses have had a bad rep for longer than I care to remember. And, as a result, it cost me many years of enjoyment. However, Fender has brought a lot of the criticism on itself as an entity. They have thrown (IMO) way too many models out there, moved production of certain models here there and everywhere, and generally done little to silence their critics. In other words - they haven't helped themselves.
I do believe, however, that they are painfully aware (finally) that there are, indeed, other bass companies out there and they must do more to promote the "idea" of what Fender is, was, and always will be. They ARE rock and roll. Period. Just like Gibson, they are the face of every teenager who has (or will have) dreams of being the next star, the pro player who plays night after night in clubs trying to make a living out of playing, the session musician who makes his/her living in recording studios, and, the old guys who once thought that Fender wwas a washed up company that didn't have it any more....
Damn...I ought to run for office....
I began playing in the middle 60s....thats a few years before the RHCP and so on and so forth. In those days, being a kid, I couldn't afford a Fender (too damn expensive for a teenage wannabe rock star) so I played whatever the hell was available and, for the most part, what was available was junk (now considered "vintage" by the eBay crowd - junk then - junk now).
I played pro for 25 years (before moving to the recording side of the business) and, as a result endorsed a few basses during that time - none of which were Fender. You see, the "word" had gotten out that Fender's QC had "gone to hell" and they weren't any good, any longer - yet they continued to be a mainstay in the studios both in New York, LA and Nashville (I know, I worked in most of them).
Well sir, I finally decided to begin playing again (at the ripe old age of 55) and the very first bass I picked up was a MIA Fender. SUPERB build and feel. Put out GREAT music. I haven't stopped buying Fenders since. I now own a MIA Deluxe Jazz, a MIA 57RI P, a MIA 62RI Jazz and P, and, believe it or not, a MIM P bass that I picked up at GC used, but in excellent shape and would compete with any of the higher-end basses that I currently own. I also play a Rickenbacker 4003 and a 4001.
The moral (if there is one) of the story is simple. In the "stone age" of the 60s, we had little choice in "higher end" players, they were more concerned with the needs of guitar players rather than mere "bass" players. As a result, unless you were really serious, you had little choice (silvertone, Kay, you get the idea). Now, however, that isn't the case. There are a myriad of instruments that are continually being compared to one another and the "criticism" that embodies all of us bass players and out equipment.
an "expensive" bass doesn't "necessarily" mean GOOD. it means EXPENSIVE. The name plate on that instrument doesn't necessarily denote "quality", it denotes the manufacturer of said instrument. Fender basses have had a bad rep for longer than I care to remember. And, as a result, it cost me many years of enjoyment. However, Fender has brought a lot of the criticism on itself as an entity. They have thrown (IMO) way too many models out there, moved production of certain models here there and everywhere, and generally done little to silence their critics. In other words - they haven't helped themselves.
I do believe, however, that they are painfully aware (finally) that there are, indeed, other bass companies out there and they must do more to promote the "idea" of what Fender is, was, and always will be. They ARE rock and roll. Period. Just like Gibson, they are the face of every teenager who has (or will have) dreams of being the next star, the pro player who plays night after night in clubs trying to make a living out of playing, the session musician who makes his/her living in recording studios, and, the old guys who once thought that Fender wwas a washed up company that didn't have it any more....
Damn...I ought to run for office....
And who says it's not secondary? Maybe they've already got their sound the way they want it, so now they're trying to make it look good too.
The important question is why Fender users bash everything that's boutique. Seems that some are better at dishing it out than taking it, eh?
Now if y'all will excuse me, I'm gonna play my Conklin, which sounds like crap and will never sound as good as a Fender.
Most Fender users I see simply say that the boutique sound isn't for them....that they are happier on their P/J. That is hardly bashing as far as I'm concerned. I definitely think Fender gets more bashing than they "dish out". Maybe I'm not opening the right threads.
They ARE rock and roll. Period. Just like Gibson, they are the face of every teenager who has (or will have) dreams of being the next star, the pro player who plays night after night in clubs trying to make a living out of playing, the session musician who makes his/her living in recording studios, and, the old guys who once thought that Fender wwas a washed up company that didn't have it any more....
Damn...I ought to run for office....
Fender & Gibson are rock and roll, but All rock and roll is not Fender & Gibson.
You've never seen/partaken in a thread where people proclaim that only a P or J bass will sit right in the mix?
I've partaken in threads where I have personally said that I prefer the way a Jazz sits in the mix. That's why I own one. I've never owned, or recorded with, a regular P-bass. I have used a P/J in the studio though, but it recorded more like a J than a P. Just related my own experience. I don't know about others, I just think they are doing the same thing. Relating their own recording/live experiences. People who've tried other things and found that the Fender worked better for them. Obviously, there are some fanboys out there but I think they are in the minority.
There are obvious examples of basses besides a P or J sounding great for studio and live work. I personally have gotten really recorded tone from a Dingwall. I think Fenders are kind of dummy-proof for engineers and FOH guys because they aren't as "full-range" for lack of a better term as some boutiques are, so there aren't any unfamiliar frequencies being put out there. But, I think Vic sits in the mix pretty well with his Fodera. Lots of Sadowskys being used in country and lots of Ken Smiths in R&B. They all seem to sit in the mix ok. I can't really say whether there was extensive tweaking to make them sit in the mix like that or no tweaking at all.
I don't have the coin for boutiques, but I would probably have a Lull or Sadowsky in the fold if I could afford it. But, at the same time, I don't know that I would absolutely prefer those basses to my Jazz. So, I choose to be content with what I have. If you like your Conklin, thats all that should matter. And you shouldn't have to feel the need to slag on Fender owner's in order to enjoy your own bass (not saying that you were, just in general).
I've seen both sides of the debate get heated. I've seen some people say some pretty nasty stuff. It's really not worth it.
- Status
