bakerster135

I've always used Gibson polish and 100% cotton cloth on my old nitro Fenders. It's always done a good job and never had any issues.

This is great, @SumOne, thanks very much for posting!

Pleeeeeeeeease could one of you be kind and post a recording!? I'm meant to be on super saving mode for impending house purchase, but if this sounds like I hope it's going to sound then I must have one!

You may be joking, but I think he's talking about the serial number

Arnold bought my 66 Jazz Bass, and the transaction couldn't have been smoother. We were able to meet just down the road from me in Finsbury Park to complete the deal. He's a lovely guy, and it was great to chat and share our love of all things bass. Enjoy the bass, Arnold, I already miss it immensely!

The Wimbish at 0:31 and the lateral fade NS-2 straight after it sound the best of the bunch to me! Assuming that Wimbish has the tonepump considering it's a Euro? Very close to the NS-2 to my ear though, just a bit more flab and not quite as grindy...Good to see Frank Bello in the background!

Is there any chance that anyone here who owns the Funky Puppy could be very kind a post an audio clip of just the filter (00Funk) side so I can hear how it sounds? Been after a 00Funk for years and so interested in their Silver Funk, but I can't find any demos anywhere... P.s. Why are all of these builders in Australia!! 😆😩 Seemed to be the same case a few years back when I was looking for an Animato clone...

Sounds like pickups out of phase to me. Had this on one of my Jazz Basses when one of the pickups was somehow put back in the wrong way around

@Hellzero I do apologise if my responses here have riled you. That certainly wasn’t my intention, and I’m not looking to cast doubt or shade on your knowledge and experience. I also wasn’t trying to suggest that Andy Baxter, The Gallery, etc., are the absolute, unrefutable authorities on vintage Fender, or to deny the possibility that they might sometimes (perhaps conveniently) fail to mention non-original or altered aspects of some instruments they sell. My interest and confusion is more around unusual examples, like the supposed ’61 VVT I linked, where the assertion is that the year can’t be correct based on the setup. Yet, from my perspective (which I feel is relatively experienced), there’s nothing that seems to suggest it’s incorrect. It’s also one of a handful of examples I’ve come across with the same setup. I’m also aware of the idea that certain features are said not to have appeared until ’62, but where is the definitive proof of this? For instance, is there a photo of the first invoice for decals with numbers and three-hole control plates dated 1st January 1962? As mentioned, I’d genuinely like to hear your thoughts on the example I linked (linked again below), and from your experience, understand what aspects you see as red flags. Respectfully, I’m not trying to refute your experience or act like an authority here, I’m honestly just trying to build on my own knowledge. https://www.andybaxterbass.com/collections/fender-jazz-bass/products/1961-fender-jazz-bass-see-thru-blonde

I was somewhat trying to let sleeping dogs lie regarding my previous assertions, but I agree with many of your points, @GuyR. I feel that I've seen a few VVT Jazz Basses from late 1961 to 1962 where the parts appear to be mixed up. It's interesting that you mention Andy Baxter, as I'd be keen to hear people's thoughts on this example, which is probably one of the ones you've cited: https://www.andybaxterbass.com/collections/fender-jazz-bass/products/1961-fender-jazz-bass-see-thru-blonde. The decal position doesn’t seem too unusual to me. Having owned a couple of '65s, still owning one, and having seen quite a few more, the main part of the decal is generally much more centred on the headstock, with the "offset contour body" part always applied separately at the end. This guy's description of decal changes has always resonated with my own experience: https://www.talkbass.com/threads/vintage-fender-decals-who-really-knows-the-facts.902851/post-12962893. As you can see, he states that the three PAT and one DES number didn’t appear until 1962, but again, I don't think it's out of the question that Leo or his employees could have started applying these to basses before January 1962, while also using up a random selection of parts during the transition. I also don't think this portrays him as some form of "mad professor", but it's perfectly reasonable that they would use a selection of the available parts and that electronic and hardware consistency was not a primary concern for them at that time. On this basis, I don’t think it's unreasonable to suggest that they could have used a concentric pot on this plate — not for its original purpose, but simply because it worked for the intended function.

With all due respect, I disagree on the timing here. I have it from a few reputable authorities that the concentric control configuration was officially changed in late 1961 and have seen some examples that concur with this idea. You do see Jazz basses with concentric configurations with 1962 dates but, as we know, Leo liked to avoid wasting money so he used up his stock of the stack knobs, although the actual updated design had changed.

As has tended to be the case from Bass Gallery in recent years, there's VERY little detail provided about such an expensive instrument. This is also clearly a 1961 JB at the earliest so the three-knob would be valid having come in late 61. It always annoys me when people include multiple dates, unless it's a bitsa then the year of the bass is the date of the newest part on it.