[quote name='EliasMooseblaster' timestamp='1451502008' post='2941060']
I know plenty of you hate it, but I love the Precision design for its simplicity. The one thing that does irk me about it, however, is the control cavity. I've just had to remove 13 screws (well, 12 since I lost one) in order to pop off the scratch plate and find out why my tone pot's crackling. Leo and co managed to solve this problem on the Jazz (and even the Telecaster before that) by having a separate control plate - so why didn't they think to update the Precision's design for ease of access?
Alternatively, tell me what grinds your gears about your favoured axes.
[/quote][quote name='Roland Rock' timestamp='1451503398' post='2941075']
Having to take the neck off to adjust the truss rod is pretty annoying. That was a 70s P, thankfully it never really needed adjusting.
[/quote]
Both of those baffle me about Precisions and other Fenders. Particularly the truss rod bit, how difficult is it to route an additional notch at the heel and in the pickguard so you can fit a truss key in?
Any bass that cannot accommodate a right-angled jack in their output is frustrating, no particular offender there.
Oversized headstock on a Gibson Thunderbird causing it to be neck heavy.
Dingwall Combustion string tree not having gaps to take the strings off, meaning awkward threading or removing the tree to change strings.
On a similar note, any bass with a bridge that is not top loading and you have to thread through (Fender mainly again, but many others)
Loads of aspects of Rickenbacker basses, but most are part of the look of the bass. However, the bridge needs a complete redesign and could still look the part.
Wal 4 string - again perhaps part of the iconic look, but the pickup surrounds are awful for thumb anchoring, a problem they sorted with the 5 string versions but never updated the 4.
Im sure ill think of more!