Insanely clean 1962 Jazz Bass....

[Rick's Fine '52]

Stunning!!

[url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CLEANST-1962-62-FENDER-JAZZ-BASS-PLANET-EARTH-ORIGNIAL-VINTAGE-INSANE-/360432195185?pt=Guitar&hash=item53eb6ed671#ht_10240wt_1202"]http://www.ebay.co.u...ht_10240wt_1202[/url]

He has a matching mint '60 Precision too, worth a look.....

Edited February 5, 2012 by Rick's Fine '52

[lettsguitars]

I dont care how clean any guitar is. Not worth 20 grand of any idiots money. If it's worth that much it should be in a museum. They're not even very good for f's sake. "Have you got a dirty one? I'll clean it myself!"

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='lettsguitars' timestamp='1328484573' post='1528024']
I dont care how clean any guitar is. Not worth 20 grand of any idiots money. If it's worth that much it should be in a museum. They're not even very good for f's sake. "Have you got a dirty one? I'll clean it myself!"
[/quote]

Actually, any vintage player or collector will tell you that this is certainly worth at least £10k, so starting the auction at offers under £12k, is not unreasonable. Its probably the best '62 Jazz anywhere.
What you mean, is it's not worth that much to you, which is fair enough, most people would agree with you. This bass is not aimed at most people though is it. The same way that a spotty deckchair cover isn't worth £15k to me, but Damian Hirst collectors would disagree. Everything has a market value (As opposed to a value to you, or me, or any other individual), and the market value of this, is somewhere in the region of his price.

Regarding the comment "They're not even very good". Most bass players who have actually played an all original '60-'62 jazz, would probably tell you different. Having played one, and owned one many years ago, it was the nicest sounding, and easiest to play bass i ever touched.

Anything as clean as this, is going to command top money, just like the '59 P he sold last month.

[KiOgon]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1328483845' post='1528014']
Stunning!!

[url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CLEANST-1962-62-FENDER-JAZZ-BASS-PLANET-EARTH-ORIGNIAL-VINTAGE-INSANE-/360432195185?pt=Guitar&hash=item53eb6ed671#ht_10240wt_1202"]http://www.ebay.co.u...ht_10240wt_1202[/url]

He has a matching mint '60 Precision too, worth a look.....
[/quote]

[b] [color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=1][left]"THE CLEANST 1960 FENDER PRECISION BASS ON PLANET EARTH! ORIGNIAL VINTAGE! INSANE[/left][/size][/font][/color][/b]

[b] [color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][left]MUST SEE TO BELIEVE!!!"[/left][/font][/color][/b]


[color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][left] :unsure:Those frets look pretty dirty to me[/left][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font][/color][color=#000000][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][left] [/left][/font][/color]

[lettsguitars]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1328485183' post='1528037']
Actually, any vintage player or collector will tell you that this is certainly worth at least £10k, so starting the auction at offers under £12k, is not unreasonable. Its probably the best '62 Jazz anywhere.
What you mean, is it's not worth that much to you, which is fair enough, most people would agree with you. This bass is not aimed at most people though is it. The same way that a spotty deckchair cover isn't worth £15k to me, but Damian Hirst collectors would disagree. Everything has a market value (As opposed to a value to you, or me, or any other individual), and the market value of this, is somewhere in the region of his price.

Regarding the comment "They're not even very good". Most bass players who have actually played an all original '60-'62 jazz, would probably tell you different. Having played one, and owned one many years ago, it was the nicest sounding, and easiest to play bass i ever touched.

Anything as clean as this, is going to command top money, just like the '59 P he sold last month.
[/quote]Of course. but still, come on

[molan]

If I had a spare $40K I'd buy the pair

The seller has some great amps too!

[andyonbass]

Well if it was that good, you'd have thought it would have been played a bit more in fifty years!! Looks like new!

[wateroftyne]

Even if I had a spare £12K rattling around in my pockets, I'd think twice before handing any over to that seller.

[Stacker]

That's [i]seriously[/i] clean for a 50 year old instrument!! Where the hell has it been?? That said, some of the frets look like they've seen a bit of action but the rest - it looks unused! Surely expect to see some dulling of the chrome over time?

[Musky]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1328507013' post='1528147']
Even if I had a spare £12K rattling around in my pockets, I'd think twice before handing any over to that seller.
[/quote]
+1

As soon as you said that I guessed who the seller was before even looking at the auction.

[SebCarr]

Those two are both exceptional. Wow! They look almost TOO new.

[lettsguitars]

Who is this infamous seller?

Edited February 6, 2012 by lettsguitars

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='lettsguitars' timestamp='1328520313' post='1528252']
Who is this infamous seller?
[/quote]

Here's a bit of background. There's more from other sources if you Google him...

[url="http://www.tdpri.com/forum/telecaster-discussion-forum/41792-amazing-antics-www-vintage-sales-com.html"]http://www.tdpri.com/forum/telecaster-discussion-forum/41792-amazing-antics-www-vintage-sales-com.html[/url]

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1328520689' post='1528261']
Here's a bit of background. There's more from other sources if you Google him...

[url="http://www.tdpri.com/forum/telecaster-discussion-forum/41792-amazing-antics-www-vintage-sales-com.html"]http://www.tdpri.com...-sales-com.html[/url]
[/quote]

Personally, I've never bought anything from him. having said that, I would have no problem whatsoever in buying from him. The important thing is to know what you are buying, and if you are unsure about any aspect, then ask the questions, and look at the pictures, if, following that process, there are still things you are unsure about, then make your offer/bid accordingly.

Having read the thread on the link you quoted, it appears to be divided between those that understand the vintage market and process, and those that don't. Predominantly, the issue seems to be regarding the definition of 'original'. Personally I would define 'original', as how it left the factory. If a certain component has been replaced with an original, then I prefer it to be called a period correct replacement, which wouldnt overly put me off a purchase. This is not everyone else's interpretation though.As an example, If you had a 1962 Fender Jazz with no case, then purchased an original white tolex case for it, would you describe it as "Comes with non-original 1962 white tolex case"? No, it would be described, without controversy, as "Comes with original white tolex case". If you need more info about every component then ask, if you dont trust the reply, and then have doubts, then leave it alone.

Quite simply, do you research, understand your game, and pay/bid what its worth to you, having gone through (With an item of this value/rarity), what should be a very rigorous component by component check.

I think he has had some fab items over the years, which has resulted in people questioning it. I notice nobody questions the sellers who strip apart perfectly good instruments to make more money selling components. That should be a criminal offence, isnt there a vintage guitar equivelant of the NCPCB??

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1328529754' post='1528443']
Personally, I've never bought anything from him. having said that, I would have no problem whatsoever in buying from him. The important thing is to know what you are buying, and if you are unsure about any aspect, then ask the questions, and look at the pictures, if, following that process, there are still things you are unsure about, then make your offer/bid accordingly.

Having read the thread on the link you quoted, it appears to be divided between those that understand the vintage market and process, and those that don't. Predominantly, the issue seems to be regarding the definition of 'original'. Personally I would define 'original', as how it left the factory. If a certain component has been replaced with an original, then I prefer it to be called a period correct replacement, which wouldnt overly put me off a purchase. This is not everyone else's interpretation though.As an example, If you had a 1962 Fender Jazz with no case, then purchased an original white tolex case for it, would you describe it as "Comes with non-original 1962 white tolex case"? No, it would be described, without controversy, as "Comes with original white tolex case". If you need more info about every component then ask, if you dont trust the reply, and then have doubts, then leave it alone.

Quite simply, do you research, understand your game, and pay/bid what its worth to you, having gone through (With an item of this value/rarity), what should be a very rigorous component by component check.

I think he has had some fab items over the years, which has resulted in people questioning it. I notice nobody questions the sellers who strip apart perfectly good instruments to make more money selling components. That should be a criminal offence, isnt there a vintage guitar equivelant of the NCPCB??
[/quote]

That's all fair enough, but he's charging top-dollar for a bass described as 'original vintage'. It may be, but the example above, and others I've read about too many times before, have tarnished him in my mind. That's not even his after-sales service - I'm aware of a UK-based buyer of one of his basses who got stung.

Mind you, it's all a moot point as I'll never have the money to afford this stuff.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1328530473' post='1528459']
That's all fair enough, but he's charging top-dollar for a bass described as 'original vintage'. It may be, but the example above, and others I've read about too many times before, have tarnished him in my mind. That's not even his after-sales service - I'm aware of a UK-based buyer of one of his basses who got stung.

Mind you, it's all a moot point as I'll never have the money to afford this stuff.
[/quote]

Theres nothing to suggest this bass is not 'original vintage'?

As I said, if you're not convinced, then don't bid (If you were in the market for such a thing I mean, which most of us aren't!).

I'm also aware of the UK buyer who had issues, if you're talking about the '74 CAR Jazz example??

[Muzz]

If there's an opposite of 'roadworn mojo', these basses have it. Have you SEEN that 64 'Bird?

[wateroftyne]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1328532510' post='1528506']
Theres nothing to suggest this bass is not 'original vintage'?

I'm also aware of the UK buyer who had issues, if you're talking about the '74 CAR Jazz example??
[/quote]
I'm not saying there is anything to suggest it's not original, but people get reputations based on their actions. That's all I'm saying.

And yes, I do mean the CAR...

[Happy Jack]

[quote name='wateroftyne' timestamp='1328520689' post='1528261']
Here's a bit of background. There's more from other sources if you Google him...

[url="http://www.tdpri.com/forum/telecaster-discussion-forum/41792-amazing-antics-www-vintage-sales-com.html"]http://www.tdpri.com...-sales-com.html[/url]
[/quote]

This is a brilliant post:

[color=#800000][i]I own a '72 Tele, '66 Vibrolux, '74 Vibrolux, and '79 Princeton Reverb, so I've got some stake in this "game". But Mikey don't wanna play this game. After watching the threads of the last several days, watching that guitar climb to 45K, and learning about all the detective work that goes into making sure you get something close to original, I can say unequivocally that I wish this whole vintage thing would just dry up and go away. I'm serious. I wish there was this big collective "what the hell are we doing???" from the folks who are willing to pay 45K for $450 worth of parts.

There is no bitterness on my part at all. I realize the value of my stuff will tank. So be it. At least I could take my mint '66 VR out of the house again! And you know what we could do? We could do EXACTLY what Leo intended us to do with his guitars. This man dedicated his life making a user serviceable guitar. A guitar with interchangeable parts. And I'm quite certain it was't so we could argue if the ash try cover and pickguard screws belong to a particular guitar. I'm sure he'd say don't even worry about the pickups. Poor Leo must be doing cartwheels in his grave! He comes up with this wonderful idea, makes it work, only to have it fall apart for fear that not keeping your instrument original will cost you dearly somewhere down the road. Stop and think...this is whacked!![/i][/color]

Applied specifically to "industrial" instruments like the bolt-together Fenders, this makes perfect sense. It'll never happen, of course, but it's something to think about.

(And yes, I'm as much part of the problem as anyone else. )

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1328533690' post='1528537']
This is a brilliant post:

[color=#800000][i]I own a '72 Tele, '66 Vibrolux, '74 Vibrolux, and '79 Princeton Reverb, so I've got some stake in this "game". But Mikey don't wanna play this game. After watching the threads of the last several days, watching that guitar climb to 45K, and learning about all the detective work that goes into making sure you get something close to original, I can say unequivocally that I wish this whole vintage thing would just dry up and go away. I'm serious. I wish there was this big collective "what the hell are we doing???" from the folks who are willing to pay 45K for $450 worth of parts.

There is no bitterness on my part at all. I realize the value of my stuff will tank. So be it. At least I could take my mint '66 VR out of the house again! And you know what we could do? We could do EXACTLY what Leo intended us to do with his guitars. This man dedicated his life making a user serviceable guitar. A guitar with interchangeable parts. And I'm quite certain it was't so we could argue if the ash try cover and pickguard screws belong to a particular guitar. I'm sure he'd say don't even worry about the pickups. Poor Leo must be doing cartwheels in his grave! He comes up with this wonderful idea, makes it work, only to have it fall apart for fear that not keeping your instrument original will cost you dearly somewhere down the road. Stop and think...this is whacked!![/i][/color]

Applied specifically to "industrial" instruments like the bolt-together Fenders, this makes perfect sense. It'll never happen, of course, but it's something to think about.

(And yes, I'm as much part of the problem as anyone else. )
[/quote]

I don't see it as a problem, 99% of vintage guitars can be classes as 'players', where they have either replaced parts, non-original parts, extra routs, refinished wood, or just well-worn/played examples. These instrumenst will always be priced for the majority of keen vintage players and collectors, and will serve that purpose well. With the owners not being nervous about taking it on the road, or, if neccessary, changing parts to suit their own needs.

In the case of a rare guitar, that is also near mint, and represents one of the finest examples available, it is only normal that it should be looked after, and kept as such by the owner.

Most serious collectors I know, are fully aware of what they are buying, as they know their stuff. Every now and then, someone will fall foul of a poor deal, whether misrepresented, misinterpreted, or the buyer simply being keen and naive.

Its certainly not a problem though. Most people I know who have been 'done', and there are a few, would openly admit that it was there fault, as they were either naiave, or simply followed a particular need for gas, somewhat blindly.

[Musky]

[quote name='Rick's Fine '52' timestamp='1328534582' post='1528555']
I don't see it as a problem, 99% of vintage guitars can be classes as 'players', where they have either replaced parts, non-original parts, extra routs, refinished wood, or just well-worn/played examples. These instrumenst will always be priced for the majority of keen vintage players and collectors, and will serve that purpose well. With the owners not being nervous about taking it on the road, or, if neccessary, changing parts to suit their own needs.

In the case of a rare guitar, that is also near mint, and represents one of the finest examples available, it is only normal that it should be looked after, and kept as such by the owner.

Most serious collectors I know, are fully aware of what they are buying, as they know their stuff. Every now and then, someone will fall foul of a poor deal, whether misrepresented, misinterpreted, or the buyer simply being keen and naive.

Its certainly not a problem though. Most people I know who have been 'done', and there are a few, would openly admit that it was there fault, as they were either naiave, or simply followed a particular need for gas, somewhat blindly.
[/quote]

As ever, it's a case of caveat emptor. For me that means should a vendor be less than forthcoming with all the relevant details, describe items as all original when it's sporting non period correct parts or has credible allegations against him of having sold a ringer, then for me that would preclude any purchase.

Which is why I wouldn't buy from this chap, no matter how authentic the instrument looked or what questions were asked.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='Musky' timestamp='1328558085' post='1529129']
As ever, it's a case of caveat emptor. For me that means should a vendor be less than forthcoming with all the relevant details, describe items as all original when it's sporting non period correct parts or has credible allegations against him of having sold a ringer, then for me that would preclude any purchase.

Which is why I wouldn't buy from this chap, no matter how authentic the instrument looked or what questions were asked.
[/quote]

I agree, I just dont think that applies to this guy, from my experience anyway.

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='hiram.k.hackenbacker' timestamp='1328568521' post='1529430']
Not that I have the money or the impulse to buy what appears to be a stunning vintage Fender, but are we saying this particular example is not as it came off the line? i.e. had some parts replaced with others commensurate to it's age?

If I was looking at spending that much, I would certainly want to fly over there and give it the once over before I parted with the cash....and buy it a seat next to me on the plane home
[/quote]

I think some of the comments relate to other items, although my experience of this seller have always been pleasant ones. I can see nothing wrong with this particular bass. But, like you, if i was buying, i'd be needing to check it out in person, or via a 3rd party, before parting with any cash, as I always do.

Edited February 6, 2012 by Rick's Fine '52

[Rick's Fine '52]

[quote name='SebCarr' timestamp='1328518259' post='1528216']
Those two are both exceptional. Wow! They look almost TOO new.
[/quote]

It is very unusual to find nitro finishes this clean, but they are out there, i guess they must have been stored in cases, out of light and elements for almost their whole life. Its unusual to see zero checking though, but they do exist. I've been fortunate enough to have played (And had my photo taken with), John Entwistle's Mint 1960 Blonde stack knob Jazz, and it was as clean as a brand new American Vintage, stunning. Similarly, the neck on my '52 is unplayed, not a mark on it, or the frets. They do exist, and when they turn up, they command top dollar. I have no doubt at all that this will be sold in a week.

[redstriper]

How many of us are there on basschat?

Why don't we all pitch in and buy it between us - then we'll have a raffle with the bass as prize.