How good are High End Basses?

[stingrayPete1977]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322431006' post='1450879']
Would I be right in saying that these incredibly expensive works of art are largely bought by enthusiastic amateurs and professionals use flights of less fancy? Certainly the ones I've seen.
[/quote]

Not IME no

[RhysP]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322431006' post='1450879']
Would I be right in saying that these incredibly expensive works of art are largely bought by enthusiastic amateurs and professionals use flights of less fancy? Certainly the ones I've seen.
[/quote]

Who are these "Enthusiastic amateurs" then?

Matthew Garrison?
Victor Wooten?
Anthony Jackson?
Janek Gwizdala?
Stanley Clarke?
Michael Manring?

I could go on but you get the general idea - no, you wouldn't be right at all.

[stingrayPete1977]

Not in proportion to the thousands of cheaper basses made compared to the high end ones.

[rk7]

I agree with louisthebass, my Overwater inspires me to be a better player, and every single time I look at it I want to pick it up and play it. Surely thats the 'priceless' element of a higher quality instrument?

What I really need now is a rotating Stand, and a Talent Booster pedal, and I'll be sorted!

[JTUK]

[quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1322432291' post='1450897']
Not IME no
[/quote]

Agree.

[4 Strings]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1322433865' post='1450920'] Who are these "Enthusiastic amateurs" then? Matthew Garrison? Victor Wooten? Anthony Jackson? Janek Gwizdala? Stanley Clarke? Michael Manring? I could go on but you get the general idea - no, you wouldn't be right at all. [/quote]

I did say 'largely' and I while you've picked some elitist and solo players (although I wouldn't say Stanley's pretty standard Alembics are the same sort of thing as the others) and you could have named more but you didn't use all those elitist types who play standard or pretty much standard basses, like Pastorius, Miller, Sheehan, Geddy etc.

But, anyway, I was talking about the army of professional bass players who you see bands behind singers on, say Jools' show etc, who use standard (or pretty much standard) basses. That's why I used 'largely' as the world is too big for absolutes. In my experience.

[OliverBlackman]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1322433865' post='1450920']
Who are these "Enthusiastic amateurs" then?

Matthew Garrison?
Victor Wooten?
Anthony Jackson?
Janek Gwizdala?
Stanley Clarke?
Michael Manring?

I could go on but you get the general idea - no, you wouldn't be right at all.
[/quote]


this is a different topic altogether but you cant classify these guys as regular professionals. MOST of them are just virtuosos. The guys you see on TV or in the musical pits or at festivals are still top pro's, their very very very good however, they havn't learnt or innovated techniques or ideas on the bass that the guy you listed have.

From my experience a lot of the guys in London are using high end custom or vintage instruments. I know of guys who use "cheeper" instruments but the majority i know dont take them to recordings or big gigs.

On the issue of is more expensive better than cheep, i think yes most of the time but not all the time. My Tokai jazz offers me different tones that are very useable compared to my Overwater and i imagine when new the Overwater was 10x what i paid for the tokai. But its good to have both

[OliverBlackman]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322474664' post='1451099']
I did say 'largely' and I while you've picked some elitist and solo players (although I wouldn't say Stanley's pretty standard Alembics are the same sort of thing as the others) and you could have named more but you didn't use all those elitist types who play standard or pretty much standard basses, like Pastorius, Miller, Sheehan, Geddy etc.

But, anyway, I was talking about the army of professional bass players who you see bands behind singers on, say Jools' show etc, who use standard (or pretty much standard) basses. That's why I used 'largely' as the world is too big for absolutes. In my experience.
[/quote]

Didnt get a chance to read this before i posted. I think Jooles Holland is an example that doesnt really work. From what I've seen theres new bands that are trying to make it who use expensive gear (saw two 60's p basses used in one episode some time this series) and theres new bands that use cheep gear.

Backing up artists, its mostly high end isnt it? cant remember many examples of seeing cheeper basses used.

[4 Strings]

Ok, I don't think we're talking the same thing here. I understood the OP to be referring to guitars costing upwards of £2k, and these being bespoke/luthier made individuals rather than just very old or fancy versions of mass produced instruments. I hadn't classified anything made by Fender as 'high end' but then neither is it cheap - you can get your own Jaydee made up for you for significantly less than a standard Fender.

Sorry, the vast majority I see used by pros are not the 'coffee table' type.

Anyway, this is a digression from the original question, so apologies.

[molan]

[quote name='tbonepete' timestamp='1322440102' post='1450961']
enthusiastic amateurs who seem to have equipment way beyond their abilities, or needs
[/quote]

The bass playing world would be a sad place indeed if people were only able to own a bass that matched their abilities - how would this be judged I wonder?

Maybe something like 'oi, you, your muting technique is bloody awful, put that American Fender back on the rack and pick up that tatty old Korean copy instead'. . .

Edited November 28, 2011 by molan

[OliverBlackman]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322479364' post='1451181']
Ok, I don't think we're talking the same thing here. I understood the OP to be referring to guitars costing upwards of £2k, and these being bespoke/luthier made individuals rather than just very old or fancy versions of mass produced instruments. I hadn't classified anything made by Fender as 'high end' but then neither is it cheap - you can get your own Jaydee made up for you for significantly less than a standard Fender.

[/quote]

ah ok, in which case yes i think alot of these basses that push 5-6k are made to look like artwork and sound as individual as possible. Good for experimenting in the bedroom or playing at improv jazz nights but not so much for recording a popstars latest hit.

Basses such as Overwaters, Ken Smiths and high end yamaha's are designed to fit what a pro musician wants and needs, and are used very commonly by the pro's iv met

[dave_bass5]

[quote name='tedgilley' timestamp='1322346464' post='1449863']
My Squier Jazz is also the best bass in the world! How did that happen?
[/quote]

Ive given up mid range basses as my Squier's do the job for me so not sure what a high end bass would offer other than looks and maybe a different feel. If i had the "spare" cash to by something a lot more expensive I probably would but even with unlimited money ive seen the prefect bass for under £2000 so i wouldn't even consider a higher end boutique bass.

[molan]

[quote name='tbonepete' timestamp='1322483982' post='1451255']
Intersting, the rest of the sentence seems to be missing from the quote!
I hoped that I worded my post to indicate an opinion, and not a fact, but maybe I was mistaken. I shall be more careful in the future.
Golf courses up and down the land are a testament to peoples desire for the best (better than their co players) equipment that money can buy, but it doesnt change my opinion that the vast majority of players won't be able to play like tiger woods (or any better than if they had a reasonable middle range set) just because they have the same clubs. Granted they may feel better, and indeed want to play more because of the feel good factor, but for them these top range clubs will have no discernable benefit. There are (and in all walks of life) some that the pursuit of "stuff", or "gear" is more important than the task that the "stuff", or "gear" is used for. As always its the individuals money, and the individuals choice! IE not a sad old world after all. One by product of endless oneupmanship is the classifieds. Cheap American Fenders Galore!!!
[/quote]

Sorry for cutting the quote short - didn't mean to offend.

All I wanted to say was that I find it really hard to agree with a view that says people's abilities, or needs, aren't good enough to own more expensive equipment (whether it be musical instruments, golf clubs or anything else for that matter).

I've heard this argument soooo many times and I never understand it. I can't see why someone's abilities should have anything to do with what instrument they play, club they use or, a very common example, what car they drive.

The other point I was trying to make was about who is it that can decide how good someone's abilities have to be before they can play a high end bass. I've been at gigs watching enthusiastic amateurs having the time of their lives playing really expensive gear only to hear someone in the audience mutter that the instrument they are playing is way to good for them (to be fair this is more common amongst guitarists than bass players).

In fact I saw exactly this happen a gig recently with a decent guitarist who had a pair of PRS customs that looked fabulous. I heard someone moaning that he wasn't even good enough for one PRS let alone two - just sounded like petty jealousy at the time and made me wonder just how good this particular person was that he felt he could criticise someone else's choice of instrument(s).

[BigRedX]

[quote name='tbonepete' timestamp='1322440102' post='1450961']
I think that the names quoted above are well known to be "top professionals",and although I'm sure that you could indeed go on, the list would still be relatively small in comparison to the number of enthusiastic amateurs who seem to have equipment way beyond their abilities, or needs, but it's their money, and their choice, so yes, 4strings, you may well be right!
[/quote]
As someone who is only an average player (if that) I take exception to that statement. Having some very good basses has encouraged me to concentrate more on my playing which has certainly helped to lift me up to the "average" ability category. Also if you want something with a bit more individuality in an instrument a custom "high-end" is often the only way to go. There's certainly nothing in the musical instrument stores that has the vibe of my Gus, or Sei basses.

[dave_bass5]

I thought the whole idea of paying £2000+ on a bass (for example) was because it plays so well. If thats the case i dont see how a bass can be to much for someone's abilities. To me it means its easier to play by anyone, no matter how good they are and so is ideal even for a learner.

Edited November 28, 2011 by dave_bass5

[RhysP]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322474664' post='1451099']
I did say 'largely' and I while you've picked some elitist and solo players (although I wouldn't say Stanley's pretty standard Alembics are the same sort of thing as the others) and you could have named more but you didn't use all those elitist types who play standard or pretty much standard basses, like Pastorius, Miller, Sheehan, Geddy etc.
[/quote]

Stanley Clarke's "Standard" Alembics still cost a f*** of a lot of money.

Marcus Millers bass is a 70's Jazz that was modified by Roger Sadowsky.

Geddy Lee's Fenders are expensive custom shop models, not the same ones that can be bought in many music shops.

Billy Sheehans Signature Yamaha bass is a ground-up designed custom shop model.

How are these "standard" basses?

[4 Strings]

My point in suggesting that most pros use 'standard' type basses was not to suggest any instruments are 'too good' for anyone (otherwise I'd be looking for a suitably sized cigar box and broom handle) but that the people who earn their money playing don't seem to use very expensive works of art and so they must end up in the bedrooms and living room walls of enthusiastic amateurs.

However, if we could pursue that line of thought for a little, starting at an extreme, my wife knows a bit about basses but wouldn't be able to tell an expensive one from a nicely finished cheapo. Taking that a little further, you could suggest that a beginner wouldn't reap the full benefits of an expensive bass, and that you'd be needing a player of some experience to make best use of it and appreciate its qualities. I suppose its another example of the the now well worn thought that I sound like me on any bass, work of art or charity shop bargain.

Just to throw another in, are these hugely expensive basses much better in the woodworking or the playing?

[4 Strings]

[quote name='RhysP' timestamp='1322487892' post='1451349']
Stanley Clarke's "Standard" Alembics still cost a f*** of a lot of money.

Marcus Millers bass is a 70's Jazz that was modified by Roger Sadowsky.

Geddy Lee's Fenders are expensive custom shop models, not the same ones that can be bought in many music shops.

Billy Sheehans Signature Yamaha bass is a ground-up designed custom shop model.

How are these "standard" basses?
[/quote]

'pretty much standard' was the phrase used, ie not individually crafted, bespoke works of woodworking art but based on a mass produced instrument.

[BigRedX]

Playability is hugely subjective. Most bass players find Fenders suitable the majority of gigs, but for someone like me who grew up playing basses that had little in common with them I now find them very uncomfortable. Nothing intrinsically wrong with Fenders - they just don't suit me with the way my playing style has developed.

As for "woodworking" remember that a lot of the more expensive instruments are using materials that are more radical than simply wood. However because these instruments are generally individually built to order the quality of construction, fit and finish is normally exceptional.

[JTUK]

[quote name='4 Strings' timestamp='1322487983' post='1451352']
............
Just to throw another in, are these hugely expensive basses much better in the woodworking or the playing?
[/quote]

I'd say both if the luthier is any good.

The woods alone might carry a premium..the handwork, for sure, will...as will the paint job, if applicable.
If you go to bare wood...you'll need a decent looking piece, maybe a trlple AAA facing, and then about a month or so preparing the wood for its final finish.
The neck might be finished by hand etc etc ..
This is where the man hours can go...esp if done mainly by hand..and that depends on your builders way of doing things.

Whether that is worth say £1500-2000 extra is for the buyer to determine.

But if you can't see this type of thing as of any value, then you either have gone to the wrong builder or the process is lost on you.
Up to you.

[4 Strings]

I thought anything other than wood was not favoured. The fallacies (or otherwise) of the use of 'tonewoods' in electric guitars and basses is well hammered out elsewhere (- especially in thread comparing the alder body and the bit of pine from the basement floor!)

Perhaps to bring this back to the OP question, there's no doubt the quality of workmanship in these instruments, some of it is breathtaking, but is it necessary? Do we benefit from such lush finishes, exotic materials, perfection in shaping etc when the vast majority (and some of the best) music that uses a bass guitar was played on a mass produced instrument with a bolt on neck? No matter how perfect the neck joint I cannot play like Jamerson or Pastorius. No perfection in craftsmanship, no matter how beautiful, no improved neck stabilising design will help me play like Seth Govan, nor even my mate, Sam who always sound and play much better than me and use basses with a painted finish and bolted construction.

[BigRedX]

I don't know about anybody else but my high-end basses are made out of equal quantities of Carbon Fibre, Aluminium and Wood.

[risingson]

To return to the OP, I've always thought that any bass is worth it if the person buying it is happy to pay the price tag, providing the fit and finish of the bass is really remarkable and the customer service between you and the company you've bought from is nothing short of incredibly comprehensive.

People put too fine a point on how much a bass costs though. I would agree that an instrument worth in excess of £2000+ should be flawless, but as a bass player who plays instruments that cost a lot less, I can still get my job done either way. My desire is to own a Sadowsky, but I suspect this has more to do with what I want rather than what I need, and my Lakland that costs under half that of the bass I wish to own one day does just a fine job... better than fine in fact, I'm extremely happy with it.

[Ou7shined]

[quote name='molan' timestamp='1322486119' post='1451303']
All I wanted to say was that I find it really hard to agree with a view that says people's abilities, or needs, aren't good enough to own more expensive equipment (whether it be musical instruments, golf clubs or anything else for that matter).

I've heard this argument soooo many times and I never understand it. I can't see why someone's abilities should have anything to do with what instrument they play, club they use or, a very common example, what car they drive.
.....
[/quote]

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNLpZdDz-1k[/media]

[JTUK]

ha ha ..... Knew that would happen.

Some things are just not very useable in lesser hands.

Car and golf clubs would be a case in point, IMO.
If the average hack tried hitting a bladed 2 or 3 iron which many top pros would use and certainly Woods would do so....they would give up golf pretty damn quick, IMO.. !!!

We just don't have the ball striking qualities to make it work well enough often enough.. That is the point of utilities and rescues

Edited November 28, 2011 by JTUK