Fender Jazz Bass necks 1966 vs pre-1966

[Undertone]

Hi - I'd appreciate tapping all you knowledgeable people out there.

I have a '72 Jazz bass whose neck is kind of chunky & I'd like to move to an earlier model but am unsure as to how far I need to go back to get a significantly slimmer neck. I mean smaller distance from front of fingerboard to back of neck, say at the 12th fret or something I suppose - whatever's common sense. By signfiicantly slimmer, let's use 1961-1965 or a subset thereof as a benchmark (acknowledging there's probably variation within this period, but guessing that this variation is probably small relative to the width difference between this period & my '72).

Another factor is cost, since jumping from 1966 to pre-1966 is accompanied by a material increase in price (refins are fine but the price still jumps). If I really have to go for 1961-65 then so be it. (I recognise there are plenty modern alternatives out there & have been exploring these too, probably for a 5-string...)

So, do folks know, is a pre-'66 neck materially thinner than a '66? than a '67? than a 68?...

I'm sure someone has specs out there, which I'll also find interesting, but am equally interested in feedback from folks who've played them, as feel is as important (if not more).

Many thanks.

[Dingus]

[quote name='Undertone' timestamp='1372794008' post='2130163']
Hi - I'd appreciate tapping all you knowledgeable people out there.

I have a '72 Jazz bass whose neck is kind of chunky & I'd like to move to an earlier model but am unsure as to how far I need to go back to get a significantly slimmer neck. I mean smaller distance from front of fingerboard to back of neck, say at the 12th fret or something I suppose - whatever's common sense. By signfiicantly slimmer, let's use 1961-1965 or a subset thereof as a benchmark (acknowledging there's probably variation within this period, but guessing that this variation is probably small relative to the width difference between this period & my '72).

Another factor is cost, since jumping from 1966 to pre-1966 is accompanied by a material increase in price (refins are fine but the price still jumps). If I really have to go for 1961-65 then so be it. (I recognise there are plenty modern alternatives out there & have been exploring these too, probably for a 5-string...)

So, do folks know, is a pre-'66 neck materially thinner than a '66? than a '67? than a 68?...

I'm sure someone has specs out there, which I'll also find interesting, but am equally interested in feedback from folks who've played them, as feel is as important (if not more).

Many thanks.
[/quote]

In my experience , there is huge variation in the profile of old Fender necks , and it seems like no two feel completely the same . As I understand it , the manually - controlled lathes that Fender were using back gave a degree of variation from one batch of necks to the next , depending onthe finer points of how the operator had set the controls . That said , generally speaking later Sixties Jazz necks had slightly less depth towards the twelth fret than many early 60's examples , that tended to get very slightly fatter towards the top end of the neck . From '74 Fender went with a fatter , more "U" shaped profile . Given the imprecise nature of Fender's manufacturing techniques at the time , any specs are likely to be a guideline , at best .

[Fat Rich]

I can't tell you exactly when they went chunkier, from my limited experience the Jazzes with bindings around the fingerboard seem chunkier like my 72 and my 74.

The ones I've played without binding feel more like the slimmer pre-CBS, but as I say that's only from my limited experience. Seems logical that the change in construction method resulted in a chunkier neck but the world of old Fenders is rarely that simple.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Fat Rich

[gjones]

Well if you're prepared to spend that kind of money I think you should make sure you try before you buy. You don't want to spend thousands and find the bass you bought has a neck like a bassball bat.

This is probably the guy you want to go visit. [url="http://www.andybaxterbass.com/"]http://www.andybaxterbass.com/[/url]

Edited July 3, 2013 by gjones

[itsat34]

Gotta late sixties (68) blocked and bound with a [i]very[/i] slim neck, this is the one with the strap button on the headstock........

Agree tha probably seventies were thicker,,,,,,,,,,,,,

(we were) .-)

[xilddx]

Why not go for a later model? The neck on my 83 is wonderfully shallow and slim.

[Undertone]

Thanks. I'll certainly play them before buying. I just want to avoid travelling to see every candidate I see advertised if I know there are era's / models that aren't likely to be what I'm after. I played a rather prominent player's '65 last week & it's neck is in a different class to that on my '72 (which is a nice bass - also with binding by the way). I also played another '72 last week & it's neck was only slightly slimmer than mine (not what I'm after) but still a different class to the '65. Interesting the comment above re a '68 with a very slim neck (so perhaps it's possible a post CBS neck can be as thin as a pre-CBS?). Keen to hear more views.
Apparently there were A, B, C (maybe D) necks of varying width ACROSS the neck (E to G strings) - do we think any of these are likely to have a thinner neck?
Appreciate the contributions.

[Dingus]

[quote name='Undertone' timestamp='1372891872' post='2131440']
Thanks. I'll certainly play them before buying. I just want to avoid travelling to see every candidate I see advertised if I know there are era's / models that aren't likely to be what I'm after. I played a rather prominent player's '65 last week & it's neck is in a different class to that on my '72 (which is a nice bass - also with binding by the way). I also played another '72 last week & it's neck was only slightly slimmer than mine (not what I'm after) but still a different class to the '65. Interesting the comment above re a '68 with a very slim neck (so perhaps it's possible a post CBS neck can be as thin as a pre-CBS?). Keen to hear more views.
Apparently there were A, B, C (maybe D) necks of varying width ACROSS the neck (E to G strings) - do we think any of these are likely to have a thinner neck?
Appreciate the contributions.
[/quote]

As far as I know ( and I am no expert on old Fenders , by any means ) , the A, B and C width necks were primarily an option for Precision Basses , rather than Jazz Basses that tended to have a uniform 1.5 inch nut width .

[Fat Rich]

[quote name='Dingus' timestamp='1372893389' post='2131467']
As far as I know ( and I am no expert on old Fenders , by any means ) , the A, B and C width necks were primarily an option for Precision Basses , rather than Jazz Basses that tended to have a uniform 1.5 inch nut width .
[/quote]

I think the width stayed pretty constant for the Jazz bass (A width), although I think the bindings tended to bring the strings a little closer together as the nut has to be a little narrower than on an unbound neck.

Edited July 3, 2013 by Fat Rich

[Undertone]

Aha. Brilliant - thanks very much. Makes sense.

[GuyR]

Fender necks do vary within the same age range - if you look at some of the books about vintage Fender guitars which have tables of neck dimensions the dimensions for individual models do vary significantly . I expect it is the same for basses - although I am certainly no expert, I hasten to add.

I have '62 and '65 jazz basses. The '62 has a shallower neck, although the widths feel the same. I wouldn't look for an early Jazz bass solely to find a slimmer neck, as there are great alternatives, but if you buy a good one you won't regret it.

[Dingus]

[quote name='GuyR' timestamp='1372925275' post='2131593']
Fender necks do vary within the same age range - if you look at some of the books about vintage Fender guitars which have tables of neck dimensions the dimensions for individual models do vary significantly . I expect it is the same for basses - although I am certainly no expert, I hasten to add.

I have '62 and '65 jazz basses. The '62 has a shallower neck, although the widths feel the same. I wouldn't look for an early Jazz bass solely to find a slimmer neck, as there are great alternatives, but if you buy a good one you won't regret it.
[/quote]

On Guy's point about exploring alternatives , if you have got your heart set on a vintage Fender then fair enough , but there are indeed some excellent alternatives out there that capture the sound and vibe of a pre-CBS Fender without any of the drawbacks that a 40 - 50 year old bass is likely to have . I'm a Fender man myself and have played ( and owned ) a good deal of what is out there , and the best I have ever played for capturing the essence of old Fenders are the U.S.A - made Lakland basses . They may not look exactly like the old Fenders by virtue of their oval - shaped bridge , but the overall sound and feel of them is right on the money in capturing what those basses were about . The Joe Osborn model ( now called the 44-60 ) has a neck which is an exact replica of the neck on Joe's 1960 Jazz Bass that he played on hundreds of hits , or alternatively the U.S.A Darryl Jones model has a neck which is carved to exactly replicate the neck on Darryl's 1966 Fender Jazz . The other obvious option would be to get the Fender Custom Shop to make you something with a neck on the slimmer side , which I'm sure they would be happy to do .

Edited July 4, 2013 by Dingus

[molan]

Another quick thing to point out is that most really good vintage Fender J necks are attached to equally nice Fender J bodies

I'd be a little wary of buying a neck that's sold as genuine vintage that has been removed for sale. You do see some people 'parting out' vintage basses. Because the potential value of the parts is greater than the complete bass but I've heard a few nightmare tales of supposedly vintage parts that turn out not to be original

I've got '63 and used to own a '65 - virtually no difference between them. In fact the similarity between them was so close I decided I didn't need two of them

[booboo]

What about getting an AVRI '62 neck (plenty pop up on ebay)? You could probably sell it on without losing dosh, it would cost less than a real pre-CBS neck, and you could have it altered without trashing an antique. The neck on my AVRI 62 jazz is as skinny as I think anyone would ever want, the only problem might be stability over time if you use hight tension/heavy gauge strings.

[Undertone]

Many thanks gentlemen. Think I have decent information now thanks to your contributions. Am certainly considering alternatives (per my original post) although those will probably be for a 5-string that I also need (to my reticence). Think I have my heart set on a vintage J. I have a '62 Precision & nothing I've ever tried comes close to it's thin bare silky sweat-infused neck (although I've by no means tried all that's on the market!) & it serves my needs for the music for which it's played. But I will go out & try some of the alternatives suggested above thanks. Thanks again! Regards.

[Undertone]

Actually, should I assume, in further naivety, that the Fender reissues of 62 J basses & the like, are not extremely faithful replicas of the originals? (in terms of neck, and then generally) Perhaps less so than, for example, the 44-60 mentioned above? Thanks again...

[Undertone]

replica, reproduction, modelled after.....whatever we care to call it...