Warwick Streamer StageI 5 String - SOLD

[Sibob]

Ok, I'm listing this for a very good friend of mine! (so the price isn't down to me)

Its a Warwick Streamer Stage One 5 String, all stock as far as I'm aware, apart from the Birdseye maple body. I've seen Flame Maple bodied Streamers, but not Birdseye! Whether it was a really limited run, or Custom Shop I'm not sure!.

The condition is excellent, although there is some finger wear around the tops of each pickup where the thumb rests (pictured) and some tiny scuffs on the end of the headstock (also pictured).

He's in London and wants [s]£1600[/s] £1,100 ono for it! I think it's just a softcase with it, although I could be wrong, I'll double check

If you're interested and wanna chat to him about price or anything really...gimme a PM and i'll send you his number.
It's also now housed at The Gallery in Camden if you want to go and have a try!

Cheers
Si

[b]SOLD[/b]

Edited November 2, 2008 by Sibob

[Kev]

as much as its a lovely bass, and as much as it may be worth that price, i don't think you'll never get that on here, not with the current warwick market being the way it is

Edited April 12, 2008 by BassManKev

[Sibob]

Am just the messenger
I did make him aware of the current Warwick slump, i think for that price he's gonna put it at the Gallery to!

Thats why I suggested he go for a trade perhaps, more likely to shift it methinks

Cheers

Si

Edited April 12, 2008 by Sibob

[ednaplate]

Why do people not like Warwicks at the moment??? I just don't get it.

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='ednaplate' post='174958' date='Apr 12 2008, 01:56 AM']Why do people not like Warwicks at the moment??? I just don't get it.[/quote]

I don't think it's 'just' Warwicks but they do seem to be suffering the hardest.

If it's old and mojo'd and has the big 'F' on the headstock it will always attract a good price but other than that, in the present economic climate people are just becoming cautious with their spending

I know that Si is aware (as he has said) that this bass is going to struggle 'big style' to get anywhere near that price and a trade or retail outlet may well be the best bet. Saying that by the time a shop sticks its bit and the VAT (which it is obliged to do even on used items) on retailing that used bass, its going to be up there with the price of a new one!

[Dodge]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='174996' date='Apr 12 2008, 08:23 AM']I don't think it's 'just' Warwicks but they do seem to be suffering the hardest.[/quote]

Hmm. I've only got one left to get rid of, which has had an offer today which I'm pondering - I don't get why they're not selling either. Other than F@&$%%£ useless truss rods, they're great basses.

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='Dodge' post='175024' date='Apr 12 2008, 09:53 AM']Hmm. I've only got one left to get rid of, which has had an offer today which I'm pondering - I don't get why they're not selling either. Other than F@&$%%£ useless truss rods, they're great basses.[/quote]

I'm not defending all Warwicks or putting myself on a pedestal and saying they are great basses without faults but I've had Warwicks for 20 years and I've probably owned about 40 in that time and other than one stripped out nut due to an over enthusiastic previous owner I've yet to encounter a fecked rod! Not saying they don't happen, I've heard from people who say they've had problems but TBH I'm not sure how many people can say they have had a broken truss rod rather than knowing someone who has.

As an aside to this I was speaking to Dave Wilson at the Haltwhistle Custom Shop (trying to get some advise) re. a BCer who 'did' actually have a truss rod issue and he reckoned that they are generally one of the easiest to remove and replace of any bass that he works on (I know a particular BCer who might disagree due to said troublesome rod )! I should qualify that statement and say that he doesn't get any more Warwicks in than other basses.

I realise we'll all have personal experiences with particular instruments that direct our judgements. I could equally say that I like Fender basses except I'm sick of twisted necks and weak pups... problems that I've encountered with Fenders that I've never encountered with Warwicks

[matty589]

In the current climate, £1000-1100 is probably the most it will go for. I had a SS2 5 which I had to sell last year for about that (with a flightcase). Warwicks are lovely (I still have 2!), but their resale value compared to what they retail for is rubbish, especially the high-end NT models.

[Sibob]

I think what my friend is hoping is that the birdseye body pushes the price up.
He has gotten advice on the price, i believe from the gallery and a friend in denmark street.....although that could explain the high price

It is a lovely bass though

Si

[Mike]

Yeah, if it helps, I had a superb Warwick Streamer Stage I with Aero dual coil pickups and a john east preamp, and I could barely get £800 for it!

[warwickhunt]

Hey maybe I should get in touch with the Gallery or a shop on Denmark St. as I have a Birds-Eye Maple 4 stringer and TBH I'd be looking for £1200 - £1300 for this



I really do wish your mate well and hope he gets his price (where-ever it might sell) as it's about time these Warwick prices recovered... and they will.

[Macko1968]

It does seem that things are not moving well at the moment but Warwicks seem to be suffering the most. I have my own ideas about why this is and might tread on few toes here.

I think, as a company, Warwick have totally lost their way. In the halcyon days they arrived on the scene as a company making instruments to a standard an not a price, they snagged a number of hugely influential endorsees - Jack Bruce & John Entwhistle being the most notable. When you bought a Warwick you were buying a no compromise, hand-made instrument that could compete with any boutique maker out there. Over the years they have pushed in to the mainstream, to the detriment of the instruments they make. I now see a company who's primary goal is no longer to make instruments, it's to make money. The decision to embrace a roster of endorsees that is primarily made up of "metal" players has alienated its original demographic & I doubt the average Slipknot fan has £1k to spend on a bass. The quality of the product has gone from exceptional to merely acceptable; plastic nuts, MEC pick-ups, the current bridge, all have been to cut costs with a corresponding cut in performance.

What I see on dealers walls now are decent instruments and I'm sure owners are more than happy with them but I just don't get the "wow" factor I got with the early models. The image of the brand has undoubtably slipped which helps explain why warwickhunt & Woolf have both tried & failed to sell exceptional early instruments despite asking utter peanuts for them. Folk just don't see Warwicks as being special anymore.

Interestingly, in the 90s I saw Status heading up the same blind alley, their decision to move to wooden necks alienated their fan base & I seriously feared for their future. It is a big relief to see them back doing what they do best, unique graphite basses with the wow factor that makes them stand out from the crowd.

[Sibob]

[quote]I doubt the average Slipknot fan has £1k to spend on a bass.[/quote]

Isn't Paul Grey's endorsement and signature model with Ibanez?
(yes i know he played thumbs)

Mike, is that streamer you sold one that you got from Mike Walsh at The Bass Merchant? If so, that's a beautiful bass, played it while i was there about a year ago.

Warwickhunt, yeah good luck with shifting yours to, maybe you and my friend should hook up with putting them in the gallery, they can advertise them as a matched pair haha!

Cheers
Si

Edited April 12, 2008 by Sibob

[warwickhunt]

[quote name='Macko1968' post='175105' date='Apr 12 2008, 12:11 PM']It does seem that things are not moving well at the moment but Warwicks seem to be suffering the most. I have my own ideas about why this is and might tread on few toes here.

I think, as a company, Warwick have totally lost their way. In the halcyon days they arrived on the scene as a company making instruments to a standard an not a price, they snagged a number of hugely influential endorsees - Jack Bruce & John Entwhistle being the most notable. When you bought a Warwick you were buying a no compromise, hand-made instrument that could compete with any boutique maker out there. Over the years they have pushed in to the mainstream, to the detriment of the instruments they make. I now see a company who's primary goal is no longer to make instruments, it's to make money. The decision to embrace a roster of endorsees that is primarily made up of "metal" players has alienated its original demographic & I doubt the average Slipknot fan has £1k to spend on a bass. The quality of the product has gone from exceptional to merely acceptable; plastic nuts, MEC pick-ups, the current bridge, all have been to cut costs with a corresponding cut in performance.

What I see on dealers walls now are decent instruments and I'm sure owners are more than happy with them but I just don't get the "wow" factor I got with the early models. The image of the brand has undoubtably slipped which helps explain why warwickhunt & Woolf have both tried & failed to sell exceptional early instruments despite asking utter peanuts for them. Folk just don't see Warwicks as being special anymore.

Interestingly, in the 90s I saw Status heading up the same blind alley, their decision to move to wooden necks alienated their fan base & I seriously feared for their future. It is a big relief to see them back doing what they do best, unique graphite basses with the wow factor that makes them stand out from the crowd.[/quote]

Your sentiments don't tread on my toes

If anything I'd say you are being gracious toward some of the 'issues' (for want of a better word) with Warwick of late. I'm not sycophantic about their basses, I've used them for 20+ years and if there is something about their product that I don't like then I can say what I genuinely feel because I've bought and paid for every warwick I've owned. I've played and owned various Warwick instruments that would stack up against anything produced by any other manufacturer but hand on heart I've rarely played anything from later than about 93 that has made me feel like it was a bass that I'd part with my folding for.

I genuinely believe that, like Status (and a lot of other manufacturers), Warwick will find their way again and some of their quality instruments, such as Si's mate's Streamer, will realise their true potential.

[Dodge]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='175049' date='Apr 12 2008, 10:31 AM']I know a particular BCer who might disagree due to said troublesome rod [/quote]

Did I tell you the rod in the 87 was made of aluminium? And that was from the factory - Warwick denied ever putting aluminium rods in, but my luthier said it hadn't been touched since it was new, and he'd seen several old Warwick rods made like that. The threads just polished off! He also showed me a current Corvette truss rod, which was about 3 mm diameter.

[Mike]

[quote name='Sibob' post='175112' date='Apr 12 2008, 12:23 PM']Mike, is that streamer you sold on that you got from Mike Walsh at The Bass Merchant? If so, that's a beautiful bass, played it while i was there about a year ago.[/quote]


It certainly was - I paid £1k for it, and sold it (due to Shuker arrival) about 8 months later taking a £200 hit. And even then people still didn't want to pay £800 which, for a Streamer Stg I V string w/ aeros & john east is a bargain !

[Bernmeister]

Crying out loud !!
It makes me laugh/cry when i hear about the prices that warwicks sell for now.

I remember when i brought a 2nd hand 4 string SS1 it was an '87 model approx
12 years ago for £1k.

And to think Mike sold his Streamer V for less than that amount is astonishing.

[matty589]

Warwicks are definitely not what they used to be. I have a 96 NT Thumb 5 that is as solid and and as gorgeous as you'd expect from a boutique instrument. My 07 Corvette Ash 6 custom sounds and looks great but is much less well-made.
I get to see a lot of Warwicks pass through the shop downstairs from my flat. You can tell the difference between late 80's-mid 90's and current models. Early Thumbs with Wenge necks and standard bubinga are heavy but are built like a tank. Streamers have that great slap sound (a la early Jamiroquai), tight defined fingerstyle tone and feel really alive. I've tried Warwicks with EMGs, Bartolinis, Basslines and MEC pickups and circuits and the MEC is in most cases the worst-sounding (and noisiest) of the bunch. The retail prices are also too high. 5, and 6's all have terrible balance due to the big headstock, long necks made from hardwoods, downsized body and short top horn. Don't get me wrong - I love the sound of Warwicks and the beautiful woods they use, but would I pay £1200-£1300 for a second-hand one? Only if it was an older model.

[Dread Bass]

Well i feel the need to defend newer warwicks

I have just got one. a 2005 i think and i cant see anything wrong with it at all construction wise and i have an alembic.

The only thing i hate is the terrible just a nut design which is sharp and gets in the way a crude effort to copy alembics i think could be wrong tho.

I have never played an older Warwick and maybe they sound better but i am talking from a build quality mine is hard to fault.

[minty fresh death]

I havnt seen anything wrong with the new warwicks my local shop has in either *shrug*

[geilerbass]

I don't think there's anything wrong with new Warwicks as such and I don't think that's the point that anyone is making here. I think the issue is that there was a time when Warwicks had a certain x-factor, something truly special that you can only find in top-line boutique basses. Again, it's not that there's anything wrong with recent models, it's more a comment on just how good they used to be.

But I think there's a problem when you're expected to pay boutique prices for an instrument that falls short of boutique expectation - and Warwick's past reputation has given it that expectation for a lot of people. At £1.5k+ I would expect something special and having tried out some newer Streamers and Thumbs, I've been sorely disappointed. Not because they were in any way bad - they weren't, they were very good basses. It was because they were lacking that special something that most pre-1998 Warwicks that I've tried have had.

[tauzero]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='175049' date='Apr 12 2008, 10:31 AM']I'm not defending all Warwicks or putting myself on a pedestal and saying they are great basses without faults but I've had Warwicks for 20 years and I've probably owned about 40 in that time and other than one stripped out nut due to an over enthusiastic previous owner I've yet to encounter a fecked rod! Not saying they don't happen, I've heard from people who say they've had problems but TBH I'm not sure how many people can say they have had a broken truss rod rather than knowing someone who has.[/quote]
Twenty years ago: bought Thumb. chopping in all my other basses to get it. Took it home. Day of gig at Mean Fiddler, changed strings and decided to adjust truss-rod. Didn't know about reverse thread so was actually loosening it - not that it exactly got very far, truss rod snapped after turning it less than a flat. Repaired under warranty but meant I had to play the gig with a truss-rod-free Warwick.

When I got it back, I adjusted the truss rod (turning it the right way this time) and it's been there ever since.

I adjusted the truss-rod on my other Thumb (a 2000, I think) with no problems.

Incidentally, I do wonder whether Warwick's gradual move away from the detail work on their basses (compare the ridged back of an early headstock with the flat back of a later one) plus their introduction of the Rockbass line under the Warwick name has knocked their secondhand value. Not to mention those dreadful baseball bat necks...

[Macko1968]

[quote name='geilerbass' post='176034' date='Apr 14 2008, 08:41 AM']I don't think there's anything wrong with new Warwicks as such and I don't think that's the point that anyone is making here. I think the issue is that there was a time when Warwicks had a certain x-factor, something truly special that you can only find in top-line boutique basses. Again, it's not that there's anything wrong with recent models, it's more a comment on just how good they used to be.

But I think there's a problem when you're expected to pay boutique prices for an instrument that falls short of boutique expectation - and Warwick's past reputation has given it that expectation for a lot of people. At £1.5k+ I would expect something special and having tried out some newer Streamers and Thumbs, I've been sorely disappointed. Not because they were in any way bad - they weren't, they were very good basses. It was because they were lacking that special something that most pre-1998 Warwicks that I've tried have had.[/quote]


Beautifully put, nail squarely on the head.

[ednaplate]

[quote name='warwickhunt' post='175090' date='Apr 12 2008, 12:01 PM']Hey maybe I should get in touch with the Gallery or a shop on Denmark St. as I have a Birds-Eye Maple 4 stringer and TBH I'd be looking for £1200 - £1300 for this



I really do wish your mate well and hope he gets his price (where-ever it might sell) as it's about time these Warwick prices recovered... and they will.[/quote]

That is lovely and would compliment my '92 nicely. If only I had the cash. Good luck with the sale.

[Sibob]

Bump for significant price drop

£1,100 ONO

Cheers
Si