NancyJohnson Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Interesting conversation yesterday concerning provenance. (That's a lot of letters for just five words.) Assume you are buying a bass and had the choice option on two similar basses, let's say Fender Jazz basses, same year, same finish, similar condition. One is selling for £750, the other is previously owned by a big name bass player, was purportedly used on the #1 album he played on ten years ago and the seller has a nice letter from the big name dude to support this, however this bass is £1,500. A simple internet search also throws up photos of the guy playing it as well. Would this sway you to pay more for the more expensive one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRedX Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 No. I'll buy the one that I like the best, although I'd probably pass on both if the one I liked the best was the more expensive one and didn't look/play/sound significantly better than the cheaper one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartelby Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 (edited) Nope. EDIT: Although, had I had the money at the time I would have bought Richard March's (Pop Will Eat Itself) bass a few years back Edited September 15, 2016 by bartelby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alyctes Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Erm, I ticked two boxes in the poll... (No I wouldn't.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cato Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 It would depend on who the previous owner was. If one of Dee Dee Ramone's basses came up & I had the cash, I'd be very tempted, although with regards to any other player, no matter how famous, probably not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dropzone Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 [sup]Yes, but nowhere near as much, maybe 5% just for the bragging rights[/sup] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ambient Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 No. Assuming I've even heard of him or her anyway, he or she possibly got it for free if they're in a big band. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lw. Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Provenance isn't just about who has previously owned a bass; I'd probably be more likely to pay more for a bass if it came with original receipt, tags & all the serial numbers/year codes in the correct places than I would for a bass that had none of that stuff, especially for brands that people have been known to fake/bolt random bits together. But would I pay more for a celebrity owned/played bass? Absolutely not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahpook Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Couldn't care less who owned a bass before me, as long as they looked after it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezbass Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 I bought a '63 P Bass some years ago which I bought because it played and sounded fantastic. It was only after I'd bought it that I enquiried into whether there was any interesting history and was told the previous owner was Bruce Thomas. It would've been nice to have some paperwork to verify that, but that in itself wouldn't have made me buy it over another, superior instrument. So my answer to the poll must be, no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luulox Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 No unless it was Jamesons'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangur Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Maybe a good question would be "how much extra would you pay for provenance that a bass was previously owned and played by.....(Insert name of your favourite bassist here). ? I once saw an ex Mark King Status, being sold by Mark King for charity, go on ebay for £5,000. I hope the new owner was really happy. I wouldn't have paid it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highfox Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Depends who's it was and what album. If I was a fan of them then maybe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Ivoted no as I think it is a load of old bollocks and a bit show off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bassassin Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Interesting discussion. I went with the comedy answer but otherwise it's "no" - with a caveat. I wouldn't pay over the odds for an instrument with a "history" for myself, whoever had owned it. However I certainly would if I was pretty sure I could sell it on for a significant profit myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highfox Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 [quote name='Highfox' timestamp='1473956914' post='3134531'] Depends who's it was and what album. If I was a fan of them then maybe Mines worth more now because I have done 2 albums with it, right! [/quote] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangur Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 (edited) [quote name='Bassassin' timestamp='1473956988' post='3134533'] Interesting discussion. I went with the comedy answer but otherwise it's "no" - with a caveat. I wouldn't pay over the odds for an instrument with a "history" for myself, whoever had owned it. However I certainly would if I was pretty sure I could sell it on for a significant profit myself. [/quote] [s]A man after my own heart[/s] That's a disgustingly outrageous outlook! How DARE you!?!? Isn't this provenance thing all very dangerous in the long term? A bass owned and played by Xxxxxx Player, might be worth a bit now, but unless his/her name endures in music history, the value will drop rather than rise, surely? Edited September 15, 2016 by Grangur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lozz196 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 (edited) If I were a big fan of them/their work then yes. Other than that, no, wouldn`t matter to me if it were once owned by a very famous, high-street-known name, wouldn`t be interested. Edited September 15, 2016 by Lozz196 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 [quote name='ezbass' timestamp='1473955899' post='3134514'] I bought a '63 P Bass some years ago which I bought because it played and sounded fantastic. It was only after I'd bought it that I enquiried into whether there was any interesting history and was told the previous owner was Bruce Thomas. It would've been nice to have some paperwork to verify that, but that in itself wouldn't have made me buy it over another, superior instrument. So my answer to the poll must be, no. [/quote] Wow no way?! Never heard of him,that's the problem with 'famous' owned items I'd only be interested in provenance if it was something I was already buying as security that I hadn't bought a lemon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger2611 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 A local shop tried to sell me a Jaguar bass apparently once owned by the bass player from Coldplay, I suggested it was worth less than one not owned by Coldplay.....the deal didn't happen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skankdelvar Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 Couple of 'provenanced' basses I'd definitely have had if I'd known they were on the market: * Phil Lynott's #2 P bass went for £700-800 at a London auction about 20 years ago * Sparko's Gibson sold on ebay a couple of years ago similarly for about £800 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezbass Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 [quote name='stingrayPete1977' timestamp='1473961684' post='3134588'] Never heard of him,that's the problem with 'famous' owned items [/quote]Bass player with Elvis Costello & The Attractions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingrayPete1977 Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 [quote name='ezbass' timestamp='1473963711' post='3134606'] Bass player with Elvis Costello & The Attractions. [/quote] That's cool, but only as nerdy bass players, big money is only added once collectors from more than one buying group have an interest. Nice little addition rather than a value adding name imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy Apple Posted September 15, 2016 Share Posted September 15, 2016 I'd only pay te premium if it was once owned by a really famous bass player like Sid Vicious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.7e18f76540598a8efc0e6ca9be453059.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.