Belka

The saddles are not original. The originals had grub screws that would be adjusted with a flat head screwdriver, not an Allen key. This is what you want: Pure Vintage '70s Jazz Bass Bridge

Weren't the serial numbers on the bridge as well for a good while? My '96 StingRay 5 has it there. If you can find it it will tell you the date it was made, model and colour, so you'd have a pretty good idea of how original the body is at least. Perhaps also some replacement necks come without a decal as they could be for multiple models; StingRay, Cutlass, Sabre, etc. Definitely needs more better/photos to make any informed decision.

The presentation is awful but it could be real. It has the compensated nut thing that Sterlings/Subs don't have, and everything else looks right apart from the lack of a decal. A look at the tuners on the back would help in identifying it more.

After reading these exchanges one thing that interests me now is the actual age of Jaco's bass of doom. It's widely reported to be a '62, and that Jaco removed the stack knobs and installed a three knob control set as he preferred the sound. Does this mean it's actually a '61? Do we only have Jaco's word for it that it's a '62 - I'm guessing he wouldn't be the most reliable narrator (although I'm guessing the likes of Kevin Kaufman and Rick Suchow have had the neck off and seen the neck stamp, if any of it remains)? I've always heard it had a slab board, but in this picture of the restoration it looks like a veneer (of course, this could be an illusion).

I saw an interesting video from Rob Harris - the Jamiroquai guitarist - about making it as a pro. He said that for guitarists and bassists, the session world is pretty much gone now. Apparently there are 2-4 guitarists who make a living doing nothing but sessions in places like Abbey Road, but it's a very closed-off world and almost impossible to enter - I'd imagine for bassists it's the same. Most of the people namechecked in this thread are not session bassists per se, but pros who do some sessions. I'd guess the bulk of their income comes from West End shows/touring/gigging. Interestingly, he also mentioned music colleges are selling students a dream which is nigh-on impossible to achieve. Yes, you can get a degree, learn to sight-read and buy an Overwater, but you have to be really good to actually make it to the top - as well as have the right personality, look, etc. Most of my gigs are doing wedding/corporates, and it's interesting meeting some of the pros that still dep on those gigs for £250 on a Saturday night, as well as actually meeting some 'pros', who got their degree, do make a living from music (mostly through gigging and teaching), but actually aren't that great as players.

I've enjoyed quite a few of Rick Beato's videos over the years, but I think he's totally embarrassed himself with this - either because he's completely missed the point of both the documentary and the original Yacht Rock skit, or because he was deliberately in 'Click Baito' curmudgeonly old git mode. He also omits some information and gets stuff wrong. He is quite happy to play the Donald Fagen phone call, but forgets to mention that Fagen was also quite happy to license six Steely Dan tracks to be used in the documentary, so there's probably an element of him wanting to maintain his 'difficult' persona while being happy to get the exposure he knows the TV show will get. Also, JD Ryznar and Hollywood Steve (two of the original makers of the Yacht Rock skit) were not producers of the dockumentary, they're just guests interviewed on the show. Personally I don't get the negativity of Beato and some here about the term 'Yacht Rock'. Both the documentary and the original skit were very sympathetic towards the music and have only served to spread it to a wider, and younger audience, and anyway, it's no worse than terms like 'Hair Metal' or even K-pop which also lump different artists into one category but noone seems to complain about. The Yacht Rock skit show is hilarious too. It's not cringe, it's both very sympathetic to the music, but also completely ridiculous and quite surreal (Michael McDonald saving Giorgio Moroder's home planet by using the smooth grooves of Sweet Freedom to destroy the black hole that Hall and Oates come from). They are a bit harsh towards Jimmy Buffett however.

Of course, there have been some instances where fakes are just that - you had the case of Music Ground/the Harrisons, while their fake Fenders were; as I put it, cut and shuts and refins (and stolen guitars!), some other items, like their Hofner basses, were just modern guitars aged to look like vintage ones. I think they did something similar with Marshall amps. And their Dumble amps of course - those were complete fakes. There is also the issue of fake provenance - tenuous links to a star which may even be completely false to justify huge hikes in price.

I think a lot of people imagine men in their sheds creating fakes from scratch, but I think what you write here is a far more truthful picture of what 'fakes' are. I would also guess that a lot of the fake Fenders out there are more likely cut and shuts, refins, or originals with some dodgy parts rather than out and out fakes.

It does have a slight router hump though - if you look at the back it's visible. To be honest I'm not convinced it is 100% genuine, and as you or another poster has said, without opening it up you'd never know for sure, but it's certainly not a 1980s model or a complete fake. The fact it sold so quickly when they have other unmodified 1969 Jazzes for sale for less indicates that someone has taken a punt on it being somewhat genuine.

It could well be refinished, but it's definitely not a 1980 model. The pickup spacing is 1960s, the tuners are late '60s ones, and black binding disappeared in 1972/3. Also, Fender didn't make fretless Jazzes until the late '80s, and those would have had rosewood boards.

The Gallery have an interesting Jazz on sale at the moment. It's a 1970 in what looks like LPB and it appears to be a factory fretless. I thought that there were only a handful of these made and if it is genuine it is probably extremely rare and considerably undervalued at the price they have it for sale at. Fender Jazz 1970 Fretless – The Bass Gallery Of course, it could be a replacement neck, but the tuners and black binding look right for the era, and it's not likely to be a defret job as fretted basses of this era would have had black blocks. I think by this time maple necks were one piece rather than the earlier capped jobs they did in 1966-1968, so if it's had a replacement fretless board it should be fairly easy to tell. Shame about the Badass though. And as is typical of the Gallery, as much as I love the shop, the description is worse than useless. Here's a photo (from I think Geddy Lee's book) for reference of confirmed genuine factory fretless Jazzes (one of which also seems to be in LPB).

I suppose you have a point here, but I would guess a lot of these players came up when 5s and 6s weren't really around. Also, there is a big difference between famous and successful players and talented players. While the likes of Jeff Berlin, Marcus Miller, and Pino have stuck to the 4 string, a lot of the more talented players around today play 5s and 6s; Thundercat, Felix Pastorius, Hadrien Feraud (in terms of raw talent and ability he's almost certainly the best player out there today - doesn't mean you have to like him of course), Matt Garrison, Janek, etc.

I think that 4s, 5s and 6s all have there advantages and disadvantages. Personally I really like the freedom of a 4 string as they're so easy to play. I also really enjoy the creative possibilities of 6. It's strange, at home I do about 80% of my practice on a 6 and 20% on a 4. I never practice 5 string, unless I'm noodling after changing strings. Playing live however, it's pretty much exclusively 5 string. I mean, I can do it on a 6 but you generally don't have much need for the high C, slapping can be a pain on a 6, and 5s are generally lighter. In modern function/wedding bands it's difficult to get away with a 4 and still sound authentic on some modern songs. You also have to deal with singers who might want to take tracks down a semi or two, sometimes on the fly. I suppose you could tune your E down on a 4 but you don't always have time to do that when you have short gaps between songs. Drop pedals generally sound awful and cause more problems that they're worth, and using an octaver completely changes the sound. I have no problems at all if people want to stick with a 4 if they have no need for a 5, I don't think 4 strings are limiting at all.

They changed constantly throughout the '80s. At first they were badged as the Squier Contemporary Series starting from around '83 and seen into '84. They had the large pole pickups, but no selector switch, and probably no TBX. The necks were painted, but in the body colours, not black, and the hardware was just chrome. Next was the PJ Bass, which is the early name of the JBS. These seem to have all the features of the later Duff basses. At some point in 1984/1985 they started badging them as Jazz Bass Specials rather than PJ Basses. Or perhaps PJ bass was what they were called for the Japanese market and JBS for export. Regardless, the PJ Bass name disappears in 1985. Then, as you correctly say, sometime in 1986 there was the new neck without the paint and with truss access at the headstock, but with the old bridge and the large pole pickups. Next, in '87/88 you have the same as above but with a higher mass bridge and small polepiece pickups. You also got models like the above but with unpainted headstocks and Gotoh lightweight tuners, and without a pickup selector switch or TBX. I always assumed these were later models but I've seen at least one listed as an '86. There was also a re-run of the model around 1994 (probably off the back of the exposure on the Use Your Illusion tour), which got the painted neck and basic bridge back, but kept the small polepiece pickups. Then you got the first version of the Duff signature, although this was Mexico made, not Japanese. And finally the 2020 Boxer reissue, And all this is before looking at the other models: there was a medium scale version with slanted PJ pickups, a version with two slanted P pickups, a single pickup P Bass, and a JJ Jazz. There was an active version - The Power Jazz Bass Special, and its successor, which is also known as a Jazz Bass Special before being re-badged as the Precision Bass Lyte. I doubt many of these changes were to do with availability of parts (although the change to the smaller polepiece pickups could have been) - I think for the most part it's a design evolution. In 1987 They stopped exporting them and ramped down production (E serial numbers indicate they were for export) and later versions were supposedly Japanese market only, although they did still get exported (like mine). I've heard about this before, but I've never exactly understood what he means by 'egg-shaped'.

Here's mine: