bassbora Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Hi guys, I have an 89 Thumb and the battery cover is broken. Does anyone know where it is possible to buy a new one? I tried Warwick but I think that is newer versions that wont fit, I might be wrong. Any help appreciated. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyerseve Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 Yes you can but you have to buy the whole battery box. About £20 IIRC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyerseve Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 http://shop.warwick.de/?&lang=en&modul=shop_new&site=shop_overview&&ctree=D0405358001321517424A43801|D0407846001321517424A43802|D0577478001321517424A43844&modul=shop&site=article_details&article_id=D0168603001472733876A48822&article_category=D0577478001321517424A43844 Should be this one I think... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted November 2, 2016 Share Posted November 2, 2016 You'll not find a period correct one... they're all feckin broken! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassbora Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) Thanks guys I will give this a go. I trust it wont be a massive hassle to install it? I know what you mean about them all being broken. I have been trying to be so careful over the years and I have managed to do just that for 20 and I cried all night when the cover broke. I am also looking for tross rod cover from the same period and I know the chances of finding one is zero. It was just on the off chance of someone having a broken Thumb and would not mind selling me the cover. Stranger things have happened. Warwickhunt, I started a thread over on the warwick forum about stage 1s. You are the man everything Warwick related. I am thinking of trying to find and old Stage 1 and I am dying to know how it compares to Stage 2 and Thumb. You must be able to shed some light on that after owning every model under the sun. How do old Stage 1s compare to new? Edited November 3, 2016 by bassbora Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 [quote name='bassbora' timestamp='1478165077' post='3167173'] Warwickhunt, I started a thread over on the warwick forum about stage 1s. You are the man everything Warwick related. I am thinking of trying to find and old Stage 1 and I am dying to know how it compares to Stage 2 and Thumb. You must be able to shed some light on that after owning every model under the sun. How do old Stage 1s compare to new? [/quote] Stage I v Stage II or Thumb - The low mid focus of the SSII and Thumb is the main tonal difference to the SSI. I've found that the maple SSI basses (anything post 89/90) tend to be more open in comparison to the SSII/Thumb and the early (cherry body predominantly wenge neck) SSI is very mellow in comparison to all. The Thumb is (IMHO) the most focused (almost nasal) and the other end of the spectrum is the early Cherry SSI. Old v New SSI - See above re. the evolution of body wood+neck wood (not fingerboard as they are all wenge) cherry+wenge (early) / maple+wenge (transition late 80's) / maple+maple (89/90 onwards) they have differences but then there are further (maybe) lesser variations with pup make; EMG / MEC quite similar and a blindfold test would be hard pushed to differentiate, Bartolini/Alembic/SD all give variation BUT the essential SSI 'ness' comes from the body/neck combo + PJ pups. Final consideration is that from about 1990 onwards SSI's have been all maple body/neck (other than thin stringers/laminates) BUT the body thickness, neck thickness and quality/density of wood has varied and this throws up some anomalies where tone can vary a bit. I had a 94 Streamer (wax/natural) that seemed to be made of balsa wood and you could indent the body wood with your finger nail and it gave a very soft SSI sound, whereas a 91 bass I had was rock maple (if there is such a thing) and it was very solid/dense yet the body dimensions were quite slim but that bass sang like a piano! Hmmm have I covered it all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoirBass Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 [quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1478126680' post='3167048'] You'll not find a period correct one... they're all feckin broken! [/quote] Yep, mine is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguacollas Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Mine too. 87 Streamer. Pity they don't use Cherry wood anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bassbora Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 [quote name='warwickhunt' timestamp='1478195571' post='3167489'] Stage I v Stage II or Thumb - The low mid focus of the SSII and Thumb is the main tonal difference to the SSI. I've found that the maple SSI basses (anything post 89/90) tend to be more open in comparison to the SSII/Thumb and the early (cherry body predominantly wenge neck) SSI is very mellow in comparison to all. The Thumb is (IMHO) the most focused (almost nasal) and the other end of the spectrum is the early Cherry SSI. Old v New SSI - See above re. the evolution of body wood+neck wood (not fingerboard as they are all wenge) cherry+wenge (early) / maple+wenge (transition late 80's) / maple+maple (89/90 onwards) they have differences but then there are further (maybe) lesser variations with pup make; EMG / MEC quite similar and a blindfold test would be hard pushed to differentiate, Bartolini/Alembic/SD all give variation BUT the essential SSI 'ness' comes from the body/neck combo + PJ pups. Final consideration is that from about 1990 onwards SSI's have been all maple body/neck (other than thin stringers/laminates) BUT the body thickness, neck thickness and quality/density of wood has varied and this throws up some anomalies where tone can vary a bit. I had a 94 Streamer (wax/natural) that seemed to be made of balsa wood and you could indent the body wood with your finger nail and it gave a very soft SSI sound, whereas a 91 bass I had was rock maple (if there is such a thing) and it was very solid/dense yet the body dimensions were quite slim but that bass sang like a piano! Hmmm have I covered it all? [/quote] Thank you so much. I knew you would clear it up for me. what a brilliant answer. Now I am in two minds about looking for one. I like the fact that I can go mellow to aggressive with the Thumb and I find the stage 2 very much in that area but has something different to offer. I worry that Stage 1 would be too mellow and could not get aggressive and in your face if needed. But thanks again this has given me a lot to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warwickhunt Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 A Streamer Stage I will defo get aggressive (esp Maple ones) but they don't have that 'honk' the SSII & Thumbs have, difference is that it doesn't always work the other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tertiumquid Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Call PMT Birmingham and ask to talk to the guitar tech Phil Docker. I have two 80's Warwicks and he somehow always has original parts? Leon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.