Misdee

Put one string on each and you've got a Rickenbacker 8 string.

When Forest Gump said "Life's like a box of chocolates, you never know what your gonna get" he could just as well said "Life's like getting a new Fender..." You definitely get good ones and not so good ones. My experience though, is that some( not all) super-Fender boutique basses lose the essence of what makes a Fender so good. It's that grit and grunt thing.

I can see your reasoning, but one of the beauties of Fender basses (and Leo's other designs, for that matter)is that they're inherently robust. And they still looks alright when they've got some wear on them. Like a pair of jeans, if you want an appropriate clothing analogy.

I'd have one decent bass over several cheap crap ones. That's just my preference, and I respect other people may make different choices and have different priorities in their lives. Each to their own, but I'm often surprised by how many folks seem to acquire lots of entry level basses rather than progress to better quality instruments. It's the opposite of my own sensibilities. For a long time I only had one bass, or two at the most, but they were always pretty good ones and sufficient for my needs. Whatever held me back, it wasn't the bass.

I'm feeling a lot better about not buying an Alembic now.

That's the first thing I thought when I played an Alembic bass. But back then I thought the fault was with me, because it's an Alembic and if JPJ, John Entwhistle, Stanley Clarke et al can play them then so should I be able to, too.

An old Streamer LX is still the best Warwick I ever played. Good choice. I also took the train down to the Bass Centre at Wapping to buy a "budget" Alembic. Must have been 1992 and it was an Essence. They had two, but they sold the one I wanted the day before. I didn't fancy the maple one, and I was less than enthusiastic about the neck profile anyway, so it's not just you. I too left empty handed.

Regards customer service, we're talking about more than thirty years ago, pre-internet ect. Transatlantic communication was a lot more difficult and a lot more expensive. I think the issue with Alembic basses inherent complexity is essentially that of durability. Despite the undoubted quality there's a lot to go wrong or wear out. When it does sometimes only Alembic can fix it properly if you want your bass to stay at factory spec. I suppose it just depends on how careful you are and what kind of use the bass is getting. The proprietary electronics and overall design are by their very nature esoteric and if you want a full-tilt Alembic that's part of the deal. FWIW, Wal basses are similar in certain respects regarding serviceability. That's a whole other thread.

That must be a Paul Herman-era bass. Without wishing to cause controversy or upset anybody, the more recent Wal basses are a different proposition to the vintage ones. Yes they cost more, but they are better made with more attention to fine detail. That's why I can't say the new basses are ridiculously overpriced. Their cost and overall quality is in line with other builders offering the best instruments money can buy. And FWIW, for my taste only Alembic basses can rival Wal in terms of tone.

Like it says in the Old Testament, thou shalt not covet thy neighbours Wal. I was brought up with the understanding that a deal is a deal. Both parties are honour-bound to stick to what's been agreed. Before you agree a deal by all means thrash out the best terms for yourself that you can, but whatever you finally agree on you've got to stick to. This whole thing with Wal basses has got a bit daft. They're great basses with a unique tone and great history but they're not worth getting involved in a blind auction with spiraling prices just because of dwindling supply and burgeoning demand. I remember when Wal basses were fairly commonplace. No one was gazumping each other to get one back then. Buying a bass is one thing, selling your soul is something else entirely. There's plenty of other nice basses out there. I'm not having a go at the new owner particularly, I think his only real crime is over-enthusiasm. Good people often make errors of judgement, doesn't make them wicked. And the American chap still has his money intact to buy something even better when he sees it.

I remember that review! It was Rob Burns, a devoted Wal enthusiast from what I recall, who got to try it out and he was well impressed. I played a nearly identical example at the Bass Centre in Wapping around that time. It was epic, but heavy. Still, I would have bought it if I'd had the money at the time. I seem to remember the late and fondly remembered Pete Academy of this parish recounted how he bought a 20th Anniversary from the Bass Centre and had an ongoing problem with the pickups, which after much tooing and froing had to be replaced. Apparently it was a right carry-on lasting months and he was not best pleased, quite understandably. Maybe I had a lucky escape. That's one of the down-sides of a fairly complex design that can be quite temperamental, I suppose.

I've wanted an Alembic since I first started playing when I was twelve years old. It's always been the ultimate bass to me. I've never had one but that's no tragedy in the scheme of things. Sometimes it's better to travel hopefully than arrive and all that. The practical reality is that I find the ergonomics of the classic LSB a bit difficult to get on with, and the weight would also a bit much for me nowadays. That doesn't mean however, that I don't still get excited whenever I see an Alembic bass and occasionally think about getting one. There's a mystique to them that no other brand can match, quite rightly too because they have been such an iconic and innovative bass maker for so long.

If it's a vintage P Bass you find it might be twice the price of the Lull rather than half the price. I've got a nice USA Lakland PJ that I play more than anything else. It's probably the equivalent of your Lull. It sounds great, but not really different to a good Fender bass. I've had it a long time and it's a superb amalgamation of the best things about old Fender basses and modern construction. Just a very very useful bass. It's much better made than a Fender but in sonic terms it's essentially the same. That's no bad thing because Fenders sound good, but contrary to a lot of what I see on YouTube from supposed experts, if there is a better rendition of the Fender tone then it's a subtle difference with all of these basses. I'm talking about basses like Moolon and Olinto et al. I'm not including Sadowsky because that's all about the preamp and how it compliments the bass overall.

What about the phenomena of the boutique P Bass? There was a time when you bought a boutique bass specifically because it wasn't a P Bass, i.e it gave you a sound that you couldn't get existing mass-produced instruments. Now that exotic hifi-sounding basses are out of fashion ( have been for a long time now) the high-end bass market is flooded with new versions of the Fender Precision Bass, in one guise or another. Bass makers are lying awake at night trying to think up new ways to sell bass players costly new versions of that venerable design. Lots of the folks buying boutique P Basses already have a P Bass, but they want a better rendition, presumably. I find this interesting because I love a good P Bass myself. I have played and owned some very good boutique P Basses. But no matter how good they were/are in certain respects like overall construction and playability, I just can't get away from the fact that they all sounded like a Precision Bass. In sonic terms none of them offered any advantage over a good mass-produced version. Don't get my wrong, some of them were great basses but if they were/are qualatively better than a good Fender in terms of sound then it's lost on me.

Definitely an Alembic.

I agree, but a cheaper Fender-style bass sounds more like a Fender than a cheap would-be exotic wood boutique style bass sounds like a Fodera or Alembic ect. There's that identifiable characteristic Fender-style tone, even if it's nowhere near as good as a decent Fender. I'm a Fender fan myself, by the way. Just wanted to make that clear.

There's some expensive basses that have a unique sound -Alembic and Wal for instance - and if you want that sound you have to spend that kind of money. There's also lots of expensive basses that, to my ears,don't have a particularly distinctive or unique tone. That's a whole other discussion/Basschat argument. Expensive Fender-style bass can be the most perplexing sub-category in so much as, strictly in terms of tone, a decent inexpensive model can be hard to distinguish from a boutique example, or indeed a genuine vintage bass. I think it's a mistake though, to assume that all people get from buying a bass is something they need to perform a practical task with. Throughout history musical instruments have been regarded as beautiful objects, imbued with magical properties in many ancient cultures. Not aspiring to the best quality basses for practical reasons doesn't justify dismissing the aesthetic dimension of high-end basses. Also, one of the defining characteristics of modern society is that the things we buy or want to buy are symptomatic of our wider aspirations and how we want to imagine ourselves. If you identify yourself as a bass player then buying basses is very much part of that psychology.

Funny thing is, the way trends in bass tone on mainstream pop records have gone recently, a less expensive bass can actually get you a better lo-fi retro kind of sound than a top quality bass. If you turned up to a recording session with a vintage cheap crap bass that looks cool lots of producers nowadays would be absolutely delighted. The more clunky the better. I am not saying for one minute,by the way, that playing cheaper basses is any less enjoyable or fulfilling than expensive ones. Just that some folks are inescapably compelled towards quality instruments. I've got a Harley Benton Shorty that I love, even if one of the tuning pegs fell off the first time I changed the strings. It cost £80 and I've had a hundred times more fun playing it than some expensive basses that I've owned in the past.

I can't tell!😀 I'm a mystery to myself nowadays. I totally agree that there are plenty of expensive basses that are not worth the money and not particularly desirable regardless of price tag. Fashion plays a part too. It's all about choosing the right ones. I very rarely see a bass nowadays that I really want to buy, or even investigate further. Choice has narrowed. Lots of nice basses are no longer new, albeit for a variety of reasons. I'd like a Wal, a Kubicki, a Pedulla, a Vigier with a graphite neck like they were back in the 1980's, an L Series Steinberger. In reality what I've got is a choice of is mostly the usual Leo Fender-derived designs in one form or another. There's very little that wets my appetite. Probably a good job because I'm not a rich man.

I don't know, I can't drive. I've got good taste in basses though. Most folks would think so, anyway. There's no accounting for other folk's eccentricities.

Very true, but an indicator of what's the consensus on good taste is how much people want your cast-offs. I've never had a bass I couldn't sell for decent money and they always sell fairly quickly. Sometimes I've sold basses I bought new for a profit because of their rarity and desirability. The last bass I sold on Basschat was a custom USA Lakland JO that I had made for me. That must be nearly five years ago. In the current market the new owner would be able to sell it for more than he paid me, and good luck to him. Everybody has done well out of the deal, the way it should be. I haven't bought a used bass myself since 1997, in case your interested.

Very true, but I've got good taste too.

When it comes to basses, I'm one of those people who have been cursed with good taste to the extent that the vast majority of basses I would consider owning are pretty expensive. Very few less expensive basses appeal to me, though they might come in useful at certain times. The instruments I mainly gravitate towards tend to cost a fair bit. That's been true right from when I started playing and my bass teacher explained to me about Alembic basses. (I've still never owned one). If I've got the money, I'm perfectly prepared to spend more than £1500 on a new bass. But that doesn't mean I won't pass on buying a bass if I think it's grotesquely over-priced for what it offers. To some extent we're all talking at cross-purposes in so much as what people want from a bass differs greatly from person to person. Some folks want a tool to do a job, i.e playing some songs with a few friends down at the Dog and Duck on a Friday night. That's great. Some people are happy just playing at home for their own entertainment. That would be me nowadays. That's great too. Some folks are aspiring to be professional players. Good for them. In all of these circumstances some folks want expensive instruments, others less pricey ones, and there's no wrong choice, just differing points of reference.

Hi Lozz, I've read your posts about the JMJ with great interest. Unfortunately I'm looking exclusively at a Daphne blue one.