Belka

I think a lot of Sadowsky's success is down to the time and place they were in. New York is full of session/theatre musicians who were mostly using Fenders. No doubt a lot of them had reliability issues, or became too valuable to play out, or didn't have a low B. Sadowsky was able to solve all these issues locally while still giving them an FSO that was familiar/comfortable to them and their employers, so it's no wonder they became successful. That said, there's nothing inherently pioneering/groundbreaking about them - B strings and active electronics had been around for a while when Sadowsky started making his own basses - he just put them into a package that appealed to a lot of people, and which also happened to be a high quality product. I'd guess that a lot of the hype about the Sadowsky preamp is less due to the fact that it is unique and special in some way, and more due to the fact that it was the first active preamp available on a traditional looking/sounding bass.

Wasn't this event being organised by the same guy/team behind Bass Review magazine? The one that has taken people's money for 16 issues and delivered 12 (there's a separate thread on it on this very forum)? I hope that both Bass Day and the magazine were started with the best of intentions, but it looks to me like we're moving into Letts Bass/Darrin Huff/SGD/Dr Bass territory here. Maybe I'm just being cynical, but I have to wonder if the cash he raised from Bass Day went towards keeping the magazine afloat. Robbing Peter to pay Paul perhaps. Good luck to all those who are owed money back.

It's far more likely to be a pickguard swap - the ad states there are two sets of holes drilled for two different pickguards - the original probably went bad and it's been replaced with another that didn't quite fit - hence the extra holes and gap at the neck. I may be wrong, but by 1969 Fender's tort was a bit darker - this one is very vibrant/red, it could be from an earlier instrument.

Unfortunately, outside of Spitfire, Avant Guard, Lava Guard, Reptile Guard, you're not going to find anything like that. There is nothing mass produced that looks like that. If you want something off the shelf rather than spending a lot on those aforementioned companies, I honestly think you'd be better off going for red pearl material rather than tort. It won't look right close up but from a distance it'll look good. Something like this attached pictures:

Same here. On their website issue 11 is the last one I can see. I used PayPal rather than bank transfer too. Might be time to start trying to claw the £21 back through PayPal.

That bass has definitely been stripped. You did see natural finish Fenders around 1972 but as far as I'm aware they all had ash bodies (this one is clearly alder) and white pickguards. If an advertisement begins with 'If you know, you know..' or some such variant thereof, it's a clear signal that the price of said item has been vastly elevated beyond its real worth.

I would agree with the Spitfire suggestion. Either that or one of the alternatives like Lava Pickguards or Reptile guards. The modern stuff just doesn't look right. Alternatively, as the bass is a '74 you can always save some pennies and just put a black pickguard on it. 1974 was the very last year of Fender using tort and most '74 basses do in fact have a black guard rather than tort, so it would be historically accurate if you went that way.

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.