New range from fender.

[Sibob]

The 60’s Precision is about the only thing of interest to me here....a cheaper Pino Sig to all intents.

Wrong pickguard though!

Si

[Machines]

Having seen them in the flesh. The pau Ferro fingerboard look like crap.

[Sibob]

1 minute ago, Machines said:

Having seen them in the flesh. The pau Ferro fingerboard look like crap.

Was it just dry? I had a PF fingerboard from Warmoth a while ago and it was lovely!

Si

[Doctor J]

11 minutes ago, Cato said:

Sad as it may be, people don't want innovation from Fender.

I don't agree with that at all. To suggest people wouldn't buy a fanned-fret, neo-pickup bass just because it said Fender on the headstock is not logical, the same as saying someone looking for a Precision would opt against Fender because they offered a non-mundane instrument. That argument makes no sense. If they offered genuinely good alternatives I have no doubt people would give them a chance. They just need to be good instruments. Fender are big enough to offer a range of instruments to cater for any taste, be that under a different brand if needed (Heartfield, Kubicki, Hamer or any of the other great names which have been devoured and plopped out). What really good models have they put out and really got behind? It's hard to figure out what hole the Dimension was supposed to fill. What else was there?

 

They're never going to the same amount of units of, let's say, contemporary designs, but if Dingwall, Sadowsky, Lull, Ibanez, etc, etc, etc can make money selling new designs, then I don't think it would be beyond Fender. They just take the lazy route, repackage and sell the same old thing and they're going out of business because of it. With these old designs, they're going up in competition with themselves, as stupid as it sounds. This new line offers some of what the originals did but with a sterile and mass-produced flavour to it. No mojo, no personality, just cookie-cutter unit shifters. People have those pictures of Jimi and Jaco with Fender headstocks and the company cash in on that every year. It's what gives modern Fender an edge the rest of the competition will never have. If modern Fender had to trade on just the standard of their instruments at those prices, they would be broke next week. Gibson, I'm also looking in your direction.

[NickA]

like the word "Cool" that disappeared from about 1974 until 1998 and was only spoken by Austin Powers .... it's back .....it's been back for longer than it was here before. 

So with Fender: through the 80s everyone wanted a bootique wooden "sideboard" bass (me included) and mainstream music was allowed to have interesting bass parts - hell, even really super dull Paul Young had Pino playing the bass line.  Japan was considered POP,  Funk was hip and JD's, Stingrays, G&L2000s, and Wals were everywhere and hot on their heels came Warwicks with lovely tropical woods and enormous price tags.   Then came electronica, bass synths, and low frequency sine wave generators and out went actual instrument playing.

And suddenly someone re-invented guitar bands with buzzy old valve amps, flat wound thuddy strings and FENDER PRECISION basses.  A decade (and counting) of dullness ensued.

Unless, of course, you like Jazz and Fusion where Foderas and other exotica rule the roost and bass players may still, now and then, get a tune!

PS: yes I know, Pino plays a Fender these days - but he never sounds boring!

... rant over

[Machines]

12 minutes ago, Sibob said:

Was it just dry? I had a PF fingerboard from Warmoth a while ago and it was lovely!

Si

Just pale compared to rosewood. Looks cheap to me

[BigRedX]

There's nothing wrong with Fender churning the the same old... it's what they do best, and it's what most of their customers want.

However to say that these instruments are "new" when all they've had are a few specification tweaks is being very generous with the definition of "new".

Maybe they should use one of those brand names that they've bought up and squandered over the years to use for any innovation they might have lurking within that corporate behemoth...

[FinnDave]

17 minutes ago, Doctor J said:

 To suggest people wouldn't buy a fanned-fret, neo-pickup bass just because it said Fender on the headstock is not logical, the same as saying someone looking for a Precision would opt against Fender because they offered a non-mundane instrument.

The difficulty would be finding enough people to buy something that far removed from a standard Precision to make it worth the development and tooling costs. Playing it safe has worked well for Fender many years, and when they have changed a design even slightly, or even dared to bring out something new, sales are poor and they are soon dropped.

[Cato]

27 minutes ago, Doctor J said:

27 minutes ago, Doctor J said:

I don't agree with that at all. To suggest people wouldn't buy a fanned-fret, neo-pickup bass just because it said Fender on the headstock is not logical,

 

I honestly don't believe that logic comes in to it.

Look at what happened with Gibson's robo tuners.

On the guitars I tried with the device, despite what the internet says, the robotuner system seemed work as intended.

Gibson fans absolutely hated it. They didn't want innovation on their Gibsons, they wanted the classic models with absolutely no whistles and bells.

Currently Gibson are looking at phasing out ebony (and possibly rosewood if they can get the colour right)  fretboards in favour of a paper based composite called richlite. 

It wouldn't matter if richlite turns out to be the best fretboard material in the history of guitars. Gibson fans are furious at the change.

Edited January 16, 2018 by Cato

[Doctor J]

Gibson tried to shoehorn robo-tuners into 60+ year old designs. Somebody who buys something as ergonomically dreadful for the sake of adhering to original form as a Les Paul is generally not looking for robo-tuners as part of the deal.

[Wilco]

On 16/01/2018 at 17:05, FinnDave said:

Purely a personal observation, but it seems that the enthusiasm for 'boutique' basses expressed on this forum doesn't translate into mass sales. I would think that the number of players who equate 'bass guitar' with Fender must be in excess of 75% of all players of the instrument. In the real world, rather than the rarified atmosphere of a specialist forum, I have never heard any negative comments when I have turned up with a US Fender. They are an industry standard, and are likely to remain so for many years to come. Say what you like about more modern designs, technology, etc, the truth is most bass players regard a Fender bass as an essential tool if you expect to be taken seriously by anyone considering hiring you. A Fender bass will keep it's value far better than any beautifully crafted, hand made special, simply because they have such a wide appeal.

Go ahead and tell me I'm talking out of my backside, but you won't change my opinion.

I'm far too polite to say that your talking out of your derrière 😆 but.....

Boutique bass builders by their very nature are low volume & aren't chasing mass sales. I bet a boutique builders profit margins would make Fenders accountants weep though...

I don't know how you can measure or even estimate the equating 'the' bass guitar to Fender. I've been a player for 30 years & all I know is that I've never done that. It's a brand, one of many, full stop.

If your bass tone is good or what's required in a 'real world' situation, then no matter what you play no-ones going to complain. There are many basses that can do that comfortably as well as & sometimes better than Fender. Wouldn't all basses costing as much as these sound as good? Is there really a duff bass brand at the £1500 - £2000 mark these days?

Brand an Industry standard? Once perhaps, but not these days. Again there's too many others to choose from. The standard might well be (or not in fact!) a P or a J, but there's a other brands to choose from with more aesthetic originality or better price vs quality. And there's many a player that would rather play say Warwick, Yamaha, Musicman or a G&L instead. 

I (& many others I'm sure) would not see a Fender bass as an essential tool to be taken seriously as a player. There's many a factor, both instrument & otherwise, that make up you as a good bass playing candidate. If someone was judging you highly by the presence of a Fender or not, I'd be walking away from them at very high speed!

Fender's better at keeping value? - no chance! Market forces of supply & demand & the same old, same old models are factors here. Yes, plenty of new Fenders have sold over the years, which also means there is plenty of used instruments to choose from. Plentiful supply however equals lower prices on anything, & there's not much to differentiate many a P or a J is there so buyers have plenty of choice (proper vintage instruments excepted). My own recent experience? A 2014 Jazz Deluxe (top production model of it's time mind) with a new price of circa £1600, I picked up last year in excellent condition for £950. Then sold I'd for £900 a few months later. Pretty typical & poor asset value retention - certainly not better than other brands.

Please don't change your mind - it's good to have an opinion you believe in. But a flip side if you like, for contemplation!

Edited January 17, 2018 by Wilco

[stingrayPete1977]

I like Fender but I can't see anything new. 

[Harryburke14]

the 60s Jazzmaster is a bit of me, even if I'm hopeless with guitar 😅

Will be interesting to see how they price up to other US made Fenders, especially the non-standard and AVRI stuff.

[Gareth Hughes]

5 hours ago, wateroftyne said:

Adrian Maruszczyk must laugh his socks off whenever Fender come out with an updated range & price list...

I was thinking the same thing. Even just in terms of something...ANYTHING...new, if Adrian can come up with a decent looking and playing 24 fret Jazz, then why can't Fender? Yes they did have the Jazz 24 years ago, but I'd argue that it got ignored by the traditional crowd because of the preamp, the control layout and the wood combos. A bog standard Jazz, passive, with 24 frets - is that too much for Fender to realise is a good thing?!?!?!?!?!? 

[gareth]

3 hours ago, FinnDave said:

Purely a personal observation, but it seems that the enthusiasm for 'boutique' basses expressed on this forum doesn't translate into mass sales. I would think that the number of players who equate 'bass guitar' with Fender must be in excess of 75% of all players of the instrument. In the real world, rather than the rarified atmosphere of a specialist forum, I have never heard any negative comments when I have turned up with a US Fender. They are an industry standard, and are likely to remain so for many years to come. Say what you like about more modern designs, technology, etc, the truth is most bass players regard a Fender bass as an essential tool if you expect to be taken seriously by anyone considering hiring you. A Fender bass will keep it's value far better than any beautifully crafted, hand made special, simply because they have such a wide appeal.

Go ahead and tell me I'm talking out of my backside, but you won't change my opinion.

You are right.

but I don't see anything new from fender in this new range

as others have said maybe just a move to enable re pricing 

all in all showing what excellent value the mexi classics are

[Cato]

23 minutes ago, Harryburke14 said:

the 60s Jazzmaster is a bit of me, even if I'm hopeless with guitar 😅

Nothing inspires practice and improvement like a really nice new (to you)instrument.

[Twanger]

27 minutes ago, Gareth Hughes said:

I was thinking the same thing. Even just in terms of something...ANYTHING...new, if Adrian can come up with a decent looking and playing 24 fret Jazz, then why can't Fender? Yes they did have the Jazz 24 years ago, but I'd argue that it got ignored by the traditional crowd because of the preamp, the control layout and the wood combos. A bog standard Jazz, passive, with 24 frets - is that too much for Fender to realise is a good thing?!?!?!?!?!? 

If it has 24 frets it's not a Fender, even if it says "Fender" on the headstock. Fender shaped his bass, and the Fender bass then shaped Fender right back. People don't buy Jazz basses and Precisions for 24 frets. They go elsewhere for that.

[Gareth Hughes]

1 minute ago, Twanger said:

If it has 24 frets it's not a Fender, even if it says "Fender" on the headstock. Fender shaped his bass, and the Fender bass then shaped Fender right back. People don't buy Jazz basses and Precisions for 24 frets. They go elsewhere for that.

I'd argue that they go elsewhere because they have to. I doubt that even if I had the money, that the Fender Custom Shop wouldn't make me a 24 fret version of a Jazz. So the likelihood of that model even making it into the bog standard production range is nil, and off I go to Maruszczyk.

[NancyJohnson]

Yawn.  So many derivations of a handful of designs.

So the Original series reverts back to original vintage-ness...BBOT bridges make a triumphant return.  Nearly £2K a pop to buy into a production line series of instruments that look and sound the same as nearly every other Fender bass anyone has owned.

Sheesh.

[Wilco]

11 minutes ago, Twanger said:

If it has 24 frets it's not a Fender, even if it says "Fender" on the headstock. Fender shaped his bass, and the Fender bass then shaped Fender right back. People don't buy Jazz basses and Precisions for 24 frets. They go elsewhere for that.

So to be clear, this is not a Fender then...?

 

[Twanger]

3 minutes ago, Gareth Hughes said:

I'd argue that they go elsewhere because they have to. I doubt that even if I had the money, that the Fender Custom Shop wouldn't make me a 24 fret version of a Jazz. So the likelihood of that model even making it into the bog standard production range is nil, and off I go to Maruszczyk.

But Fender have made 24 fretters in the past. They are nowhere now. I made the mistake of buying a Stu Hamm Urge bass years ago. 24 frets. It didn't have the Fender "vibe" (sorry for using the term!). There are certain sets of characteristics that work with each bass concept, and 24 frets is not one for Fenders.

[Gareth Hughes]

1 minute ago, Wilco said:

So to be clear, this is not a Fender then...?

 

They absolutely are Fender's, not arguing that. My point is that I'd want one without the modern angles - ie, the preamp, the fancy wood top. I'd just want an old fashioned Fender, with my tort guard, and my VVT plate, in Olympic White, with 24 frets. No objections to the 24 fret one they've made at all.

[Gareth Hughes]

3 minutes ago, Twanger said:

But Fender have made 24 fretters in the past. They are nowhere now. I made the mistake of buying a Stu Hamm Urge bass years ago. 24 frets. It didn't have the Fender "vibe" (sorry for using the term!). There are certain sets of characteristics that work with each bass concept, and 24 frets is not one for Fenders.

Absolutely, and I totally get why Fender don't make them.

[TheGreek]

I think that most of us accept that at one time Fender was the market standard, however IMO they became complacent and allowed build standards to deteriorate during the 70s and 80s resulting in a loss of confidence which meant that the niche Bass market became accessible/profitable for anybody who could build a half decent bass. Prior to this nobody would have realistically thought that they could have muscled into the Fender market but due to their inadequacies, many did.

Leo is a classic example - he unloads the Fender organisation and brand and starts up Musicman where he builds a superior bass. In effect he out-Fendered Fender. He later moves that on, re-designs his classic builds and launches G&L, again a superior instrument at competitive rates which means that he can muscle in on his own former market, a strategy adopted by many others.

Fender must have the worst marketing strategy ever - build something that's overpriced (competitors can build something similar for less), looks like what they've been making since the invention of the square wheel, confuse potential buyers (because of the similarities to existing models) who promptly go off and buy a copy that is surprisingly close to the original at a tenth of the price. New musicians can't tell the difference so have no reason to have any allegiance to the mother company, hence falling sales.

Something that has always been confusing to me - why do people buy Fenders then promptly buy aftermarket pick-ups and preamps to install? Why not install superior electronics in the first place and kill off the opposition? 

Fender may have been a great 20th century company but this is the 21st century and they've been left behind. Whether this "new" range will be enough to re-engage with former users or whether it is too little, too late, is yet to be seen.

One thing is sure...if you were a potential investor, you wouldn't be buying Fender shares on the Stock Market.

 

[Woodinblack]

1 minute ago, TheGreek said:

I think that most of us accept that at one time Fender was the market standard, however IMO they became complacent and allowed build standards to deteriorate during the 70s and 80s resulting in a loss of confidence which meant that the niche Bass market became accessible/profitable for anybody who could build a half decent bass. Prior to this nobody would have realistically thought that they could have muscled into the Fender market but due to their inadequacies, many did.

Leo is a classic example - he unloads the Fender organisation and brand and starts up Musicman where he builds a superior bass. In effect he out-Fendered Fender. He later moves that on, re-designs his classic builds and launches G&L, again a superior instrument at competitive rates which means that he can muscle in on his own former market, a strategy adopted by many others.

 

There were always lots of other brands than fender from the 60s - 70s onwards, especially as fender were quite an expensive brand (over here).

I would also say it isn't really fair to say that fender unloaded fender and start MusicMan. He sold Fender as he was wrongly told he was dying and he wanted to provide money for the family, and then didn't die, so helped a guy who used to be at fender with his new company.

G&L was certainly a thing of his own though. 

Not sure if they out fendered fender though, in scale of how many basses are put out by manufacturers, I would think only ibanez come near to the output of fender.