Ashdown Basses?! Woo!

[spectoremg]

4 minutes ago, FDC484950 said:

Sorry but that’s nonsense. It a passive Fender clone with nothing to lift it above a Squier other than potentially better finishing. Molloon are at a completely different price point and a different market. Whether Dan Lakin “knows what sells” has got nothing to do with it. These are not Lakland basses (Which cost thousands even back in the day), or even Skyline in terms of differentiation. Even if they are an improvement who’s going to buy them given how conservative most Fender players are? You can pick up a late 70’s/early 80’s Fender with a ton of mojo in the same ballpark. 

Give up mate, I find on here sometimes arguers gonna argue 😑

[BigRedX]

So to all of those defending Ashdown's choice of basses to copy. Would you buy one at the RRP and if so why would you buy one rather than a Fender at the same price point?

[Cuzzie]

7 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

So to all of those defending Ashdown's choice of basses to copy. Would you buy one at the RRP and if so why would you buy one rather than a Fender at the same price point?

Why wouldn’t you look at one as a credible alternative?

If I have money to burn, and something hits the remit I am after, I will look at all options and spend on the one I like best.

People often say the same about other makes like Sandberg, until they actually try them and it becomes apparent that bass for bass the QC consistency is better across the line.

Back to Ashdown though, there can be subtle things like the neck, feel etc which could tip the balance towards it - I don’t see what it’s a problem just as I don’t believe in brand snobbery, despite being a bit of a snob

Edited May 1, 2020 by Cuzzie

[spectoremg]

10 minutes ago, Cuzzie said:

Why wouldn’t you look at one as a credible alternative?

If I have money to burn, and something hits the remit I am after, I will look at all options and spend on the one I like best.

People often say the same about other makes like Sandberg, until they actually try them and it becomes apparent that bass for bass the QC consistency is better across the line.

Back to Ashdown though, there can be subtle things like the neck, feel etc which could tip the balance towards it - I don’t see what it’s a problem just as I don’t believe in brand snobbery, despite being a bit of a snob

Do you have money to burn?

[Waddycall]

If it was between Ashdown and Fender, quality and price etc equal, I’d go for the fender as it may hold a better resale value.

[Cuzzie]

5 minutes ago, spectoremg said:

Do you have money to burn?

Always, the flames are interesting  - however I may miss it and I should probably spend it wisely 

[stewblack]

Why are people so cross with Ashdown over this? It could be bad business, the basses may not sell. But unless you're a shareholder, why are you so upset about it? 

[BigRedX]

16 minutes ago, Cuzzie said:

Why wouldn’t you look at one as a credible alternative?

Me personally?

If I wanted something that looked like a Fender P or J for up to £1k, I'd probably buy a Fender P or J. There are plenty of examples to try and as has been said already they hold their resale value far better than the current flavour of the month copies.

If I had more money to spend then I'd have someone like Martin Petersen make me a bass that looked liked a P or J but had all the things that I consider design problems fixed.

[Cuzzie]

Just now, BigRedX said:

Me personally?

If I wanted something that looked like a Fender P or J for up to £1k, I'd probably buy a Fender P or J. There are plenty of examples to try and as has been said already they hold their resale value far better than the current flavour of the month copies.

If I had more money to spend then I'd have someone like Martin Petersen make me a bass that looked liked a P or J but had all the things that I consider design problems fixed.

That’s fine, and we all make personal decisions, so maybe I should have been more grammatically correct and say why wouldn’t one?

Still your answer would be the same.

The question is, bearing in mind very few have tried them in person, if you had a Fender in your hands and an Ashdown in your hands and the Ashdown felt and played better in every way, would you not buy it because of the perceived and probable lower resale price?

You could argue in this scenario you would lose as if you bought a bass you are more likely to flip them resale becomes an issue rather than one that felt right for you (financial circumstantial changes aside forcing sales)

[OliverBlackman]

43 minutes ago, FDC484950 said:

Sorry but that’s nonsense. It a passive Fender clone with nothing to lift it above a Squier other than potentially better finishing. Molloon are at a completely different price point and a different market. Whether Dan Lakin “knows what sells” has got nothing to do with it. These are not Lakland basses (Which cost thousands even back in the day), or even Skyline in terms of differentiation. Even if they are an improvement who’s going to buy them given how conservative most Fender players are? You can pick up a late 70’s/early 80’s Fender with a ton of mojo in the same ballpark. 

I imagine for one thing that these basses won't be using Fender parts and won't be manufactured by Fender, so there's straight away going to be some differences, even if it is only QC that will be enough for some people to buy an Ashdown over a Fender when played side by side. Do you really believe Squiers are that good? I've currently got a passive Overwater and Squier. If I was to sell one it'd be the Squier.

Also I don't see how Moollon is not a Fender clone but this is? Please elaborate. 

 

[Woodinblack]

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

So to all of those defending Ashdown's choice of basses to copy. Would you buy one at the RRP and if so why would you buy one rather than a Fender at the same price point?

I certainly wouldn't but then I wouldn't buy an RRP fender either. I have a Maruschyck which was probably the cost of an american jazz, but had features not available in one of those. I bought that accepting that if I had to sell it at any point, I wouldn't get as much money as if I had bought the american jazz.

If the resale value of something is off less interest to you (ie, you are going to buy it, keep it for a long time / ever) then I see it as a valid choice if you like it. For me I don't see anything to raise it above being a fender, but beauty is in the eye and all, and if you want one and can afford it, get it.

And obviously looks aren't everything, maybe they play really well?

 

[BigRedX]

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

And obviously looks aren't everything, maybe they play really well?

IMO unless you are strictly a studio or home player then looks are a very big par in making a choice.

Certainly when I consider an instrument it goes in this order:

1. Looks I won't even bother trying it if I don't like the way it looks

2. Feel/Ergonomics

3. Sound

These days there is so much choice out there that there is no excuse for finding instruments that don't satisfy all three criteria at almost any price point.

[Woodinblack]

11 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

IMO unless you are strictly a studio or home player then looks are a very big par in making a choice.

Well, yes for me too as I am shallow AF.. but some people, maybe not

 

[spectoremg]

FWIW the GB Spitfire, my favourite take on the Jazz shape. 

[AndyTravis]

8 minutes ago, spectoremg said:

FWIW the GB Spitfire, my favourite take on the Jazz shape. 

Yeah - really elegant. That control layout is a shame...but love the shape

[AndyTravis]

@spectoremg - this linear setup suits the lines more.

[Cuzzie]

41 minutes ago, BigRedX said:

IMO unless you are strictly a studio or home player then looks are a very big par in making a choice.

Certainly when I consider an instrument it goes in this order:

1. Looks I won't even bother trying it if I don't like the way it looks

2. Feel/Ergonomics

3. Sound

These days there is so much choice out there that there is no excuse for finding instruments that don't satisfy all three criteria at almost any price point.

So in that case, if it is a Fender clone at a Fender price point (if you like the Fender look) and they feel and sound better - then it’s a winner surely?!

[Cuzzie]

Those spitfires just go to show how horses for courses it is - they look nice actually but defo not for me, shape, controls, finish- but I bet they look good on you chaps

[AndyTravis]

1 minute ago, Cuzzie said:

Those spitfires just go to show how horses for courses it is - they look nice actually but defo not for me, shape, controls, finish- but I bet they look good on you chaps

The shape - not into the finish/woods on either really.

[Cuzzie]

6 minutes ago, AndyTravis said:

The shape - not into the finish/woods on either really.

Aye gathered that, shape not right for me.

some shapes I have wanted desperately to work for me as I liked the bass but didn’t, and I suppose saved me money

[AndyTravis]

Just now, Cuzzie said:

Aye gathered that, shape not right for me.

some shapes I have wanted desperately to work for me as I liked the bass but didn’t, and I suppose saved me money

I really enjoy the Spector NS body shape, but whenever I sit with them I end up hunched over them.

I’m comfiest with a BB or precision shape - Jazz bass too - ergonomically they work for me.

I say fair play to Ashdown for giving it a go - as I mentioned earlier, I think I’m going to start a thread on bass designs - see what turns up.

[BigRedX]

47 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

Well, yes for me too as I am shallow AF.. but some people, maybe not

There is nothing shallow about having an appreciation for aesthetics. IMO there is something wrong with those who don't (or claim they don't) 😉

[ClassicVibes]

4 hours ago, FDC484950 said:

You can pick up a late 70’s/early 80’s Fender with a ton of mojo in the same ballpark. 

I'll take the Ashdown then! 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, OliverBlackman said:

I imagine for one thing that these basses won't be using Fender parts and won't be manufactured by Fender, so there's straight away going to be some differences, even if it is only QC that will be enough for some people to buy an Ashdown over a Fender when played side by side. Do you really believe Squiers are that good? I've currently got a passive Overwater and Squier. If I was to sell one it'd be the Squier.

Also I don't see how Moollon is not a Fender clone but this is? Please elaborate. 

 

Again that’s nonsense. We are not talking about the validity of a boutique custom builder producing a high end P or J (like Molloon or Overwater, Lull, Sadowsky etc), but a midrange, likely Far East factory build of a product that is little different to dozens of near identical manufacturers’ output.

For £300-ish and made in China Squiers are very good indeed, as are MIM/MIJ Fenders, which are more at the Ashdown price point. 

It’s a crowded market place - with no differentiation (bog standard looks, std Fender colours, passive) how will they get market share? Because they make amps?

[Cuzzie]

37 minutes ago, FDC484950 said:

Again that’s nonsense. We are not talking about the validity of a boutique custom builder producing a high end P or J (like Molloon or Overwater, Lull, Sadowsky etc), but a midrange, likely Far East factory build of a product that is little different to dozens of near identical manufacturers’ output.

For £300-ish and made in China Squiers are very good indeed, as are MIM/MIJ Fenders, which are more at the Ashdown price point. 

It’s a crowded market place - with no differentiation (bog standard looks, std Fender colours, passive) how will they get market share? Because they make amps?

Not unreasonable points, but if production costs all things in are the same as say a US Fender and they are at least as good if not better, should they charge less because they are a new/different brand? Surely not.

Sire I think were clever in their price point, quality and named artist - the minute they brought out a higher end expensive bass folks on here gave em a slap essentially saying go back to your niche, I hasten to add probably without trying them.