Beedster

Probably true, listen to any player playing any bass the way s/he plays it, through their own EQ, FX, rig, and it pretty much all sounds the same, especially when you stick another loads of musos in the mix But deep down in the murky depths of grain and fibre, scientifically measurable differences lurk 😀

Yep this is an area in which empirical (as opposed to theoretical*) science won't help, if only because the sheer numbers of data samples required would render the costs of the whole process far far far greater than any benefits. Precisions generally sound more like other Precisions than do Jazzes, which tend to sound mode like other Jazzes than they do Precisions. That's good enough for me 👍 * The theoretical science is pretty clear; there is ALWAYS going to be a difference. The question is how small a difference are we looking for? I listen to some audio clips online in which sound engineers respond with 'Wow, did you hear that compressor kick in?" to which my answer is nearly always "Um, no, I don't think I did" Expert ears hear more than inexpert ears, and technology can 'hear' more than the most expert ears can hear. But what's the minimum worthwhile effect here, no one actually knows. But it's probably way way bigger than would satisfy a purist in a lab and way smaller than would ever matter to an audience member or audio consumer, and probably even most players.

Jaco

I think I get the sneaky feeling that in the video he's doing his best to show the bass in it's worst light? There are certainly issues, but also when he plays unprocessed he also puts in about 90% less effort than when he plays processed, which probably makes more difference than would changing out the PUPs

That was my feeling, the saddles appear to be offline Re sig, not sure I agree, I doubt they've made a purposely misaligned instrument to meet the endorsed player's requirements?

I'm not sure, he wouldn't have such uneven spacing, and the jury's out on whether the strings need to run directly over those pole pieces

Although his bridge setup doesn't help, bridge doesn't look great?

But this is really not good

Mmm, if Fender were venturing into, I don't know, oboes, cor anglais, or bassoons, then I'd agree. But irrespective of the different (for Fender) PUP configuration, this is nothing more than two bits of wood that are pretty much the same that Fender have been making since 1951 that need to be aligned with a couple of bits of metal. No bedding in of processes required to my mind. Having said that, it's good to see Fender doing something that isn't a J or P derivative for sure,

Gotta be quick when it comes to these things mate. There were so many options on offer I couldn't resist. There were options around Parker (Lady Penelope's 'man') but it felt I might be getting obsessive

And I dread to think what they'd do with a Stingray

They could probably lose several Thunderbirds

Yep, the more discerning you are about - and the more you pay for - wood, the more chance you have of building instruments using wood with largely consistent characteristics across instruments. Which is why top builders are able to make the statements about wood, and why all bets are off with Fender

Which is true and speaks to the variability between component parts 👍

Just checked, he used Secursus https://www.secursus.com/en-gb/?gad=1&gclid=EAIaIQobChMImaGpvKyTgQMVRvDjBx3oUQtjEAAYAiAAEgJsd_D_BwE

I sold a bass to a member here recently and he sorted his own insurance for the courier, seems what sensible people do, but still doesn't remove the 24-48 hours of stress

110%

Mmm, to use your own phrase, no you've got that wrong. If you're going to bring in the laws of physics then the transmission of energy through a medium will differ with the characteristics of that medium, type, density, age, moisture. Yes it makes little difference most of the time but certainly can make a big difference in some. Whether or not it suits snakeoil salesmen, science (physics) also attests to this reality

I'm with you mate, but for those who aren't......