Joe Hubbard Bass Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 On 17/10/2018 at 23:49, Mastodon2 said: What a ringing endorsement for Warwick 😮 Just keeping it real! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastodon2 Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 I don't feel any neck dive with my Thumb 5, but I do wear it high so the curve of the body locks in with the bottom of my ribcage, I guess this is how the bass was designed to be worn. I also use a wide strap with all my basses. My Spector Euro 5LX had a curved body too (and is obviously very close to the Streamer in shape) and I didn't have any problems with that either. The only ergonomic issue I see with the Thumb is the way it sits the first fret quite far off to your left, not an issue for me but if you're short or have a bit of a kite on you I can see how it could cause a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 Having had a ton of warwicks, you’re right about balance - the four string models aren’t too bad but the 5- and 6- strings dive toward the floor, mainly due to the short top horn on many models, but also the softwood body/hardwood neck on models like the corvette and jazzman. It’s fair to say that plenty of other brands do this as well - my Ibanez 6 is a wonderful instrument but has significant neck dive, and my Yamaha BB is even worse. The Streamer 5 and 6 stage 1 have been broadneck with 20mm spacing at the bridge since the mid 90’s and this spacing has been available as a custom shop option on other models for a long time. I don’t, however recall a model whose stock spacing is 19mm so that may be what Warwick meant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 (edited) On 19/10/2018 at 09:48, Mastodon2 said: My Spector Euro 5LX had a curved body too (and obviously the very close to the Streamer in shape was ripped off by Warwick) There you go...fixed and the reality clarified. Edited October 20, 2018 by TheGreek 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibob Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 2 hours ago, TheGreek said: There you go...fixed and the reality clarified. Hang on now, you have to be careful with your language here. The shape was officially licensed by Warwick, nothing wrong with that! Si 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 (edited) Yawn. Spector players forever upset that Warwick made a better bass with their design. Ripped off? History (or perhaps english) lessons needed 😂. Nice read, Joe. Great to see you on here. I'd recommend you play some vintage Warwick instruments, they all tended to balance much better in the eighties with less material in the neck. My Thumb has zero balance issues, at a push its body heavy Edited October 21, 2018 by Kev Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastodon2 Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Better? I think that's stretching it a bit. Warwick didn't and still haven't overcome the inherent flaw in the design, the dire upper fret access - although they did make that malformed Stu Hamm model which was meant to be better in that respect. Warwick certainly have a different take on the basses to Spector, but "better" depends entirely on who you're asking. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 (edited) 13 hours ago, Sibob said: Hang on now, you have to be careful with your language here. The shape was officially licensed by Warwick, nothing wrong with that! Si National Product Manager and Artist Relations for Spector had this to say: "The truth is that Ned designed the NS curved body shape for Spector in March 1977. This was Neds first musical instrument design, and an instant hit. Warwick came on to the scene in 1984 with their Streamer bass, an obvious version (ok, rip off) of the now very popular Spector NS. When approached by Spector, Warwick did agree to and did pay royalties (for a while) to Spector for their error. Stuart sold Spector to Kramer after that. Warwick stopped paying, Kramer chose not to pursue them." It was well documented that the first versions of the Streamer were near exact copies of the NS-Bass. The Spector NS-Bass was designed by Ned Steinberger for Stuart Spector in 1977, five years before Warwick was formed. In the May 2012 article titled "Meet Your Maker: Hans Peter Wilfer of Warwick", an interview with Warwick founder and CEO in Bass Player, the following history is given explaining Wilfer's decision to make copies of the highly sought-after Spector NS-Bass: "'We didn’t see any reason to build Fender copycats, which players could get easily and cheaply from Asia, so we decided to focus only on high-end, innovative instruments.' In the mid ’80s, the Spector NS was tracking well in the U.S., but these basses proved hard to come by in Europe. H.P. saw that problem as a potential solution for the direction of his company and took up the task of designing his own version of this popular, ergonomically friendly instrument. That venture resulted in Warwick’s first widely successful instrument: the Streamer Stage I."[2] At the annual Musikmesse Show (Frankfurt, Germany) in 1985, Stuart Spector became aware that a new German-based company was producing exact copies of his now famous NS-Bass. Spector, along with Ned Steinberger, confronted Hans Wilfer and he agreed to pay a licensing fee to both Spector Guitars and Ned Steinberger in return for being able to continue to produce the Streamer without legal action.[3] Shortly after this agreement was reached, Spector was sold to Kramer Guitars. The new owners had no interest in pursuing Warwick to enforce the licensing agreement and Warwick continued to make the Streamer without any consequence. In 1990, Kramer became insolvent and filed for bankruptcy. In the wake of their financial failure, Stuart Spector formed Stuart Spector Design, LTD. in 1992. In 1997 after a lengthy court battle, Stuart Spector was awarded the trademark and copyrights to Spector and threatened to sue Warwick to enforce the 1985 license agreement.[3] The pending litigation was eventually dropped because Warwick had changed the Streamer design and it was no longer an exact copy of the NS-Bass. In time, Warwick has evolved the design of the Streamer while Spector has sought to preserve the classic elements of the NS-Bass. Since 1984 very little has changed regarding the design, electronics and hardware of the Spector NS-Bass, whereas the Warwick Streamer has evolved into its own unique guitar and can no longer be considered a "copy" of the Spector,[according to whom?]although it still has some of the general shape of the original. Edited October 21, 2018 by TheGreek 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ped Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Anyway moving on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sibob Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 (edited) Very interesting, there was thinking it was all relatively above board (which it is now anyway). Every day is a school day! Cheers Mick. Si Edited October 21, 2018 by Sibob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Yup, that clears it up nicely. No ripping off, loyalties paid when asked, now developed and improved beyond the previous design, all good 🙂 Re upper fret access, my thumb is cut away to the 24th fret, some basses don't even have that many to begin with! 😂 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGhostofJaco Posted October 21, 2018 Share Posted October 21, 2018 Most Warwick have 36 frets? - is this a serious post or trolling? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cetera Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 (edited) On 21/10/2018 at 01:12, Kev said: Yawn. Spector players forever upset that Warwick made a better bass with their design. 😂 No ripping off, loyalties paid when asked, now developed and improved beyond the previous design, all good Best 'alternative reality' post of the year....😂😂😂😂 Edited October 24, 2018 by cetera 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastodon2 Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 On 21/10/2018 at 15:05, Kev said: Re upper fret access, my thumb is cut away to the 24th fret, some basses don't even have that many to begin with! 😂 Aren't we talking about the Streamer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangur Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 On 19/10/2018 at 11:26, Joe Hubbard Bass said: Hey Grangur That is incorrect- most Warwicks are not made with 36 frets. The average with them is 24 frets and if you've ever played a Thumb bass or a Streamer which are their two most popular models, then you would immediately feel the unbalanced pull towards the headstock. That is precisely why Stu Hamm's signature model has a altered body shape from their standard Streamer shape. Wariwck's head designer Marcus Spangler and their owner Han Peter Wilfer have both told me directly that they have never made a neck as wide as mine to accommodate the 19mm specs. Have you spoken to them directly? No- I didn't think so. Ok, I stand corrected on the 24. Thumbs do neck dive. But that isn't ALL Warwick as you appeared to imply. My 4 string Streamer doesn't neck dive, as you implied it would. I've not tried a Streamer 5, only Thumb, Corvette $$ and FNA Jazzman. The 2 latter ones didn't dive. No, not spoken to HPW on the matter of the bridge, but I can measure. I can assure you my 4 string basses are set at 19mm. Sorry for not grovelling to you, if that is what you expect. But I'm also not stupid. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 Don't like to talk about it too much but... I had a Dolphin, 26 frets IIRC and didn't suffer from neck dive 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ped Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 It depends though on how you play and the position you have your bass in. What dives for some might not for others I guess. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 Good point...well made 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangur Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 TBH what does get me is when some folk can't talk about instruments that aren't to their taste without aggressively attacking them. There are few real rubbish instruments on the market. All leading(?) brands deserve respect. There are makes I don't particularly like, but you won't catch me rubbishing them. Some people are even prepared to take money from a maker in a signature bass contract, and then rubbish all their other products! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ped Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 5 minutes ago, Grangur said: TBH what does get me is when some folk can't talk about instruments that aren't to their taste without aggressively attacking them. There are few real rubbish instruments on the market. All leading(?) brands deserve respect. There are makes I don't particularly like, but you won't catch me rubbishing them. Some people are even prepared to take money from a maker in a signature bass contract, and then rubbish all their other products! I didn’t read it like that, although maybe he could have added ‘for me’ to the statement. Not a big issue imo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 2 hours ago, Grangur said: Thumbs do neck dive. Nope 🙂 only one Thumb I have owned has notably neck dived, a Bolt On 2000 model with a big chunky neck. The multiple NT models I have had have balanced wonderfully at a variety of strap lengths. Like I said previously, if anything the older ones are body heavy due to the dense bubinga and thin necks. ANYWAY WHY are we having to talk about Spector in a Warwick thread again? 🙂 Funny how there is relatively little Warwick talk in a Spector thread...lets forget all that and just concentrate on not being Fender players together 😁 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atsampson Posted October 22, 2018 Share Posted October 22, 2018 It certainly sounds nice in the video! That's the kind of tone I aim for... What strings are you using on it, @Joe Hubbard Bass? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris2112 Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 On 21/10/2018 at 15:05, Kev said: Yup, that clears it up nicely. No ripping off, loyalties paid when asked, now developed and improved beyond the previous design, all good 🙂 No ripping off? Loyalties paid when asked? Paid when caught, more like. 3 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayman Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 lol... I've missed this place. Been away a couple of years, nothing's changed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangotango Posted November 2, 2018 Share Posted November 2, 2018 On 17/10/2018 at 20:58, TheGreek said: ...the grammar Nazis are going to love your contribution. 😏😏 People who note deficiencies in the way that people use their mother tongue....were they not once called "Teachers" and treated with much respect? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.