Vintage Fender Prices

[Thunderbird]

I would like to say that in no way shape or form am I questioning any prices or anything like that and if I should not post this could a mod delete it please but I have a genuine question looking in the for sale section here there is a 1960 jazz and a 1966 precision but the prices are really different and I'm genuinely interested in why is one rarer or more desirable or of a better vintage? I'm in no way a Fender expert and I'm honestly curious if you Fender experts can explain

Thanks in advance 👍

[Dad3353]

I'm no expert, but 1960 was when the Jazz bass was first marketed, and, for collectors at least, carries a premium price tag simply for that reason. Similar to a 'first edition' of a book, I suppose. One should note, of course that the asking price is not always the final sale price, and that, if something is still available for sale, it's because it hasn't sold (yet, but maybe won't...).

[wateroftyne]

A lot happened in six years. Jump down the rabbit hole - there’s lots to learn.

[Thunderbird]

2 minutes ago, wateroftyne said:

A lot happened in six years. Jump down the rabbit hole - there’s lots to learn.

I agree funnily enough I've been reading the Haynes Fender manual and that's quite interesting but barely scratches the surface as you suggest down the rabbit hole I go 👍

[GuyR]

Buy The Fender Bass by JW Black. It will all become clear.

[wateroftyne]

...and follow it up with Fender: The Inside Story by Forrest White

[Happy Jack]

Or just buy a Squier and get on with playing.

[GuyR]

Then spend 30 years playing and handling as many examples as you can

[GuyR]

Just now, Happy Jack said:

Or just buy a Squier and get on with playing.

I hope you mean a first series 1982 large fender logo jv Squier

[Happy Jack]

Just now, GuyR said:

I hope you mean a first series 1982 large fender logo jv Squier

Is there another sort?

[GuyR]

Just now, Happy Jack said:

Is there another sort?

Some people give house room to the second series, best keep quiet about that

[Happy Jack]

Just now, GuyR said:

Some people give house room to the second series, best keep quiet about that

Silver is the new Second.

 

[wateroftyne]

39 minutes ago, Happy Jack said:

Or just buy a Squier and get on with playing.

...or do both.

[Grahambythesea]

I can understand some prices for a piece of history, but I cannot understand why any one would pay hundreds for some of the sixties junk like Egmond or a Rosetti Lucky 7; even some of the Hofners are ridiculous over.  Who’d pay over a grand for a club 40; I remember selling for a tenner!

[Dan Dare]

4 minutes ago, Grahambythesea said:

I can understand some prices for a piece of history, but I cannot understand why any one would pay hundreds for some of the sixties junk like Egmond or a Rosetti Lucky 7; even some of the Hofners are ridiculous over.  Who’d pay over a grand for a club 40; I remember selling for a tenner!

I think it's just rarity. Many cheap instruments get abused or chucked, so the few that survive in good nick are rare. I suspect there are also plenty of people who cannot afford to collect vintage name instruments, so they turn to oddball stuff.

[ead]

Fender sold out to CBS in 1965 ending the pre-CBS era.  Although Leo and his team were still involved with making the basses, and 1966 pre-dated the cost-cutting measures later imposed by CBS, these instruments do not attract the same price tags as the the pre-CBS items.

I have a perfectly lovely 1966 P bass myself but I doubt it will ever be for sale in any future I can see at the moment.  Never say never of course.

[bassaussie]

Someone mentioned above that 1960 was the first year of the Jazz, which is correct, so that definitely puts a premium on the instrument.

But there's a special point about 1960-61 Jazz Basses that makes them very desirable for collectors. In those first years, the Jazz was produced with 2 sets of stack knobs - ie. a volume and tone stacked into a single unit. If you look at the bass mentioned in the OP, you can see that it looks like there's only 2 knobs on the control plate, but on closer inspection, it's actually four controls - one stack (V/T) for each pickup. Starting 1962, the Jazz then changes to the 3 control setup that has been standard until today (ie. V/V/T). I can't remember the specific reason for the change, but vaguely, it was something to do with some sort of "bleeding" effect when you used each tone, so that it had an impact on the other pickup - maybe someone else can clarify that.

So .... when you see these basses advertised, they'll often make a specific point of mentioning that it's a "Stack knob" Jazz. Year wise, they started in 1960, and ended late 1961. The thing with Fender that you have to remember, though, is that they always used every part that had been made, so you can often get a crossover of features that are associated with one year, but appear on a later year. For example - you might have a bass that has a neck stamped for 1965, and set of pickups for 1966, pots with 1965 stamps, and a serial number from 1966. If that was what was in front of the guy putting it together on that day, then that was what was used. From a collectable point of view, you then have the question - what year is that bass? The way it was explained to me, by a well-known vintage bass dealer that most people on here would know of, is that the part with the latest date on it designates the year. When you think about it, it makes sense - if a bass (or guitar) has a part on it that says 1966, then clearly the instrument wasn't completed before that date. But I'm sure that's a subject that would probably get debated extensively.

There are other desirable features associated with those early Jazz basses, though. The serial number would be a "pre-L" - so preceding the L-Series. L-Series Fenders are very desirable because they preceded the CBS takeover, so "pre-L" numbers get people even more excited. I think L-Series starts around 1962, something like that. Also, the rosewood on the neck is a slab board. In 1962, Fender decides to start making a curved rosewood board, as opposed to a piece that was a flat bottom and a curved face. I've heard various reasons for this - one is that it was a cost-cutting method, another is that the slab board didn't stick to the maple neck very well. For whatever reason, this happened, and again, it's a desirable point for collectors. Rosewood boards on any Fenders only appeared around 1959 (I'm pretty sure that applies to guitars as well, but please correct me if I'm wrong), so these slab boards have a fairly short window of about 4 years, from 1959-1962.

Most of this information is available on the internet, if you know where to look. However, there's a brilliant book by Black and Molinaro called "The Fender Bass - An Illustrated History" that I'd recommend reading.

As for what I've written, this is all off the top of my head, so if there's any mistakes, please correct me.

[bassaussie]

7 hours ago, ead said:

I have a perfectly lovely 1966 P bass myself but I doubt it will ever be for sale in any future I can see at the moment.  Never say never of course.

I have a 1966 P as well, and I agree, it's a sensational bass. When I play it, it sounds exactly how I think a P should sound, and playing it brings out the Jamerson in me (albeit a very poor version of that! )

[ClassicVibes]

Vintage Fenders are overpriced full stop.

The only reason you buy one is to say you have a 'pre CBS' Fender. Wow... ladies dropping their knickers has we speak.

They'll talk about the pickups being much more organic, the body wood being richer and denser, the neck being super playable... all stuff you can find on a modern P or J for under £2k, sometimes much less.

😴

[bassaussie]

11 minutes ago, ClassicVibes said:

Vintage Fenders are overpriced full stop.

The only reason you buy one is to say you have a 'pre CBS' Fender. Wow... ladies dropping their knickers has we speak.

They'll talk about the pickups being much more organic, the body wood being richer and denser, the neck being super playable... all stuff you can find on a modern P or J for under £2k, sometimes much less.

😴

I'm not going to agree or disagree with this, but if you look at where the collectable markets started with both Gibson and Fender, there's an argument that the original reason, which in both cases was a practical solution to a developing problem, no longer applies.

With Fender, it was mentioned above that in the late 60s, players felt that the CBS instruments didn't match up to the instruments that had been produced while Leo Fender was still at the company, so some players started looking for older instruments. Ironically, the man we most associate with the Stratocaster, Jimi Hendrix, is mostly photographed using CBS era Fenders, so make of that what you will. Anyway, moving forward, the general opinion was that quality continued to drop during the 70s, so the earlier instruments became more and more desirable.

With Gibson, it's similar, although not quite the same. Late 60s, various big name guitar players were attracted to the Les Pauls that had been discontinued in 1960, and especially so the sunburst models from 1958-1960. The guitars from that period had features such as the PAF pickups that became more and more desirable, and so a market arose from that. Moving into the 70s, it's a similar story to Fender, where the public felt that quality dropped, and players went after the earlier instruments.

I do think that, these days, we're very fortunate in that it is possible to get very good instruments for very little money, which is why I don't think the original reason for the rise of a vintage market still applies. But the vintage market no longer represents a practical solution to a problem, as it did in the 60s and 70s. It's now become a collectable market, pure and simple, therefore things like playability are not a deciding factor on value.

[Steve Browning]

Supply and demand. Same as everything else.

Remember that these instruments are also bought by collectors purely for their investment potential which also pushes up the price. Many of the Stradivarius violins being used by players are owned by pension schemes etc and loaned to the player.

[ClassicVibes]

18 minutes ago, bassaussie said:

I'm not going to agree or disagree with this, but if you look at where the collectable markets started with both Gibson and Fender, there's an argument that the original reason, which in both cases was a practical solution to a developing problem, no longer applies.

With Fender, it was mentioned above that in the late 60s, players felt that the CBS instruments didn't match up to the instruments that had been produced while Leo Fender was still at the company, so some players started looking for older instruments. Ironically, the man we most associate with the Stratocaster, Jimi Hendrix, is mostly photographed using CBS era Fenders, so make of that what you will. Anyway, moving forward, the general opinion was that quality continued to drop during the 70s, so the earlier instruments became more and more desirable.

With Gibson, it's similar, although not quite the same. Late 60s, various big name guitar players were attracted to the Les Pauls that had been discontinued in 1960, and especially so the sunburst models from 1958-1960. The guitars from that period had features such as the PAF pickups that became more and more desirable, and so a market arose from that. Moving into the 70s, it's a similar story to Fender, where the public felt that quality dropped, and players went after the earlier instruments.

I do think that, these days, we're very fortunate in that it is possible to get very good instruments for very little money, which is why I don't think the original reason for the rise of a vintage market still applies. But the vintage market no longer represents a practical solution to a problem, as it did in the 60s and 70s. It's now become a collectable market, pure and simple, therefore things like playability are not a deciding factor on value.

Great. I don't care. 

[Chiliwailer]

45 minutes ago, ClassicVibes said:

Vintage Fenders are overpriced full stop.

The only reason you buy one is to say you have a 'pre CBS' Fender. Wow... ladies dropping their knickers has we speak.

They'll talk about the pickups being much more organic, the body wood being richer and denser, the neck being super playable... all stuff you can find on a modern P or J for under £2k, sometimes much less.

😴

I’ve owned a fair few 50’s and 60’s Fenders over the years. But I ain’t that person you think we all are, neither were my reasons for buying, as you put it. Same goes for a great deal of people I sold them to when I worked in the guitar trade and spent time specialising in vintage - those were good folks with a passion for history, gear, nostalgia and good vibes  

Oh yeah, and many were nicely minted  

 

[musicbassman]

Yep, and just because it's old and is on a collector's wish list doesn't mean it will be a good instrument to play - two old but similar vintage Fenders can be alike as chalk and cheese.

I had a '62 Jazz back in the day, first of the 3 control type, five figure serial number.

It looked great, but it was really pretty worn out and I really don't think played any better than a modern Squier Jazz would.

Shame that old basses don't have a mileometer like a car. Not quite sure what you'd measure though - No of owners? No of gigs? ..........................Number of notes played ????  

[NancyJohnson]

The prices of old Fenders is getting ridiculous...I suppose there's a parallel with estate agents estimates, thus adding a few thousand on the pertained value of a house, based on a similar one they sold earlier.

Granted this was a few years back, but I was in New York in 1999 and visited a music store over the road from Manny's.  They had a small bass room stocked full of a recently deceased session musician's 60s and 70s Jazz basses; I don't believe I saw anything in there over $1,000.

End of the day, it's all a personal choice.  Little enthusiasm to own a vintage Fender, but I can understand the drive and passion to own one if that's your thing and you're bitten by the bug.