The law of diminishing returns, Tonewood and other folly’s

[Beer of the Bass]

38 minutes ago, drTStingray said:

Indeed they are but how much real value is added sound wise? And can the average listener tell the difference. I think, as with electric instruments, many can - but the same is true of acoustic guitars. The high level makes such as Martin and Taylor generally produce instruments with exquisite tone - but are cheaper instruments that different? Can the average listener tell the difference? 
 

There’s a world of difference in how different types and manufacturing of electric instruments are carried out, the cost and volume of the labour (and in which economy that’s based), the cost of materials and the perceived market value all have a bearing on it. 

 

I think there really is a difference with acoustic instruments. It shows up specifically in solo recording or minimally amplified performance settings, and it's often more than a subtle nuance thing. I sometimes go to folk club gigs, where you can often hear world class performers in intimate settings, and I've noticed that experienced performers with things like high end or vintage Martins, Fylde guitars and small luthier instruments just have a power and projection that fills the room in a way that the local opening acts with mid-range instruments didn't. You'll notice the same in small classical recitals too.

[casapete]

27 minutes ago, Beer of the Bass said:

 

I think there really is a difference with acoustic instruments. It shows up specifically in solo recording or minimally amplified performance settings, and it's often more than a subtle nuance thing. I sometimes go to folk club gigs, where you can often hear world class performers in intimate settings, and I've noticed that experienced performers with things like high end or vintage Martins, Fylde guitars and small luthier instruments just have a power and projection that fills the room in a way that the local opening acts with mid-range instruments didn't. You'll notice the same in small classical recitals too.

I agree.

 

However, I went to see Liverpool based singer songwriter Robert Vincent a couple of years ago, and he was using what looked like a 1970’s Eko acoustic guitar. ( I had a similar one back in the day, and it was very solidly built with a bolt on neck IIRC. ) And yes you’ve guessed - it sounded amazing in his hands. Maybe top notch pickup(s) had been fitted or some other trickery. 

 

Ive worked with a few classical players, and (like in other fields) there does exist the whole idea that a violin/cello etc can’t possibly be any good if it cost less than blah blah etc. As mentioned above, where that line is drawn is probably an ever changing thing, defined by rarity, desirability, tone and BS. 

[jazzyvee]

This topic subject is always going to be a contentious one. Formerly a guitarist first, I have not owned many brands of basses so have virtually no useful personal experience of the differences their construction woods, neck through, set neck or bolt on etc has on their sound. (this is one of the reasons I joined this forum and talkbass). When I decided to have a go at playing bass properly I made my choice from the bass sounds I enjoyed the most in my record collection, and chose the one who's sound i found the most interesting.  Hence ended up with high end bass. With that bass I haven't chosen based on any claimed tonal properties of the woods of construction as I have confidence that any bass I buy from their brand will sound fine. If I was to choose to buy another of their basses it would be based on the model and the cosmetic appearance of their body & woods. I would be hard pressed to recall a gig I went on that the bass sound was dreadful, badly mixed ..yes, some I prefer more than others.
Buy what you like and your budget allows, enjoy playing it and pay less attention to what others think you should be playing. Life is too short, and really who actually cares about diminishing returns if you are playing a bass you really love engaging with regardless of price point?
 

[drTStingray]

54 minutes ago, Boodang said:

I agree, it's just we're lucky in the solid body world where the difference between cheap and expensive is very compressed compared to the acoustic world.

That is a very subjective view.
 

However I certainly can tell the difference between instruments of the same make and type but different fretboard necks and bodies, for instance and definitely between low end and higher end models of the same instrument type, as a player.
 

Anyone else’s view is frankly irrelevant to the player.

 

I would be surprised if anyone couldn’t tell the difference between say the sound of a Precision bass, a Stingray and an Alembic. 
 

I do worry that there’s a certain level of sniping at other people’s choices somehow being wrong, irrelevant or less relevant in threads like this. Surely, so long as the musician is happy with their choice then it is likely they will get joy from performing and will be closer to achieving their playing ability than if they were playing something that they were not happy with - regardless of how much they paid for an instrument to achieve that.
 

I’m happy to pay extra, for example, for a figured maple neck or a specific colour because they please me, aesthetically. Others may not like them - it’s all a matter of personal choice - and there are lots of them with an instrument. 
 

Functionality is by no means the only driver for purchases.  
 

[Belka]

The law of diminishing returns applies very neatly to Jazz basses and Precisions, where you can go all the way from the most basic Squier up to Fender Custom Shop or Sadowsky, and the sounds they put out will all be in the same ballpark. It's a bit different when you get into basses which are a lot more custom. I think earlier in the thread some said they felt that Wals were way overpriced. Unfortunately however, if you want the Wal sound you're going to have to get one. Same with Alembic. Of course as regards functionality the diminishing returns may still apply, but saying that a £6000 Wal is only 10% better than a £1000 Fender bass is asinine and pointless.

i own both inexpensive and expensive basses and they all are usable in multiple situations, but the cheaper ones do not and could not ever have the sounds of the more expensive ones, and vice versa.

[Doddy]

20 hours ago, tegs07 said:

So would you say your in the camp that incremental improvements from trusted manufacturers known for their use of decent materials and attention to detail are worth the extra outlay. £400 may get a perfectly usable bass that would do the job for which it is intended but the additional attention to detail and finesse are missing?

Edit: For what it’s worth my feeling is that each change to a bass whether wood choice, electrics, pickups, strings used etc will have a slight impact on the sound of the instrument but after a certain price point it doesn’t make any sense other than on an aesthetic level or in terms of how desirable the instrument is which is where marketing starts to get very important. 

I think having improved parts and materials are completely worth the extra money.

I'm not against the idea that cheaper instruments can get the job done. I've got a Sire V7 that I've played on a bunch of shows, and I think it holds up very nicely against most new basses in the sub £800 range, but when compared to my high end instruments the difference is night and day. It just doesn't have the finesse in playability or tone.  I could take the Sire and spend more than it cost on new hardware and pickups and stuff, but it wouldn't up the value of the bass. It would still be a £400 Sire that has now cost £7-800. When you start looking around that price, you are getting to a point where you can buy a higher quality used bass that is arguably a better instrument at every point. I really think it's worth spending a bit more and getting a bass that is made of decent wood, has quality hardware and electronics, and better attention to detail.

[chris_b]

6 hours ago, tegs07 said:

I don’t mind if a luthier incorporates a bit of wood from a Pirate ship and says it invokes a sense of adventure and a mystical nautical tone. Whatever works for you. However it clearly annoys some people.

 

You asked for opinions.

 

That my £1.5k+ bass should annoy anyone because of the price is totally absurd.

 

These people should be doing more interesting things with their lives and not raising their blood pressure over such trivial stuff.

 

YMMV

[Doctor J]

6 hours ago, tegs07 said:

I don’t mind if a luthier incorporates a bit of wood from a Pirate ship and says it invokes a sense of adventure and a mystical nautical tone.

Ah, you mean a Fendarrrrrrr?

 

 

 

 

 

There's my coat, right by the door.

[Doctor J]

As played by Booty Collins, I think.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry, I'll walk the gangplank for that one.

[bassman7755]

1 hour ago, drTStingray said:

I would be surprised if anyone couldn’t tell the difference between say the sound of a Precision bass, a Stingray and an Alembic. 

 

They all have very different pickup configurations i.e. single mid poisoned single coil vs single mid-bridge position humbucker vs dual bridge and neck humbuckers. I'm willing to bet that this accounts for 90% of the sound difference.

Edited November 23, 2021 by bassman7755

[Boodang]

1 hour ago, drTStingray said:

That is a very subjective view.
 

However I certainly can tell the difference between instruments of the same make and type but different fretboard necks and bodies, for instance and definitely between low end and higher end models of the same instrument type, as a player.
 

Anyone else’s view is frankly irrelevant to the player.

 

I would be surprised if anyone couldn’t tell the difference between say the sound of a Precision bass, a Stingray and an Alembic. 
 

I do worry that there’s a certain level of sniping at other people’s choices somehow being wrong, irrelevant or less relevant in threads like this. Surely, so long as the musician is happy with their choice then it is likely they will get joy from performing and will be closer to achieving their playing ability than if they were playing something that they were not happy with - regardless of how much they paid for an instrument to achieve that.
 

I’m happy to pay extra, for example, for a figured maple neck or a specific colour because they please me, aesthetically. Others may not like them - it’s all a matter of personal choice - and there are lots of them with an instrument. 
 

Functionality is by no means the only driver for purchases.  
 

By comparison, the upright I currently covet, and madly thinking of saving up for, is the Nick Lloyd Double Bass as used by Ben Ezra. At 45k it is considered a bargain in the upright world.

By contrast the electric bass I'm currently considering is a Vigier passion, which at 3k is considered top endish in the bass guitar world. 

[Mokl]

4 minutes ago, Boodang said:

By comparison, the upright I currently covet, and madly thinking of saving up for, is the Nick Lloyd Double Bass as used by Ben Ezra. At 45k it is considered a bargain in the upright world.

By contrast the electric bass I'm currently considering is a Vigier passion, which at 3k is considered top endish in the bass guitar world. 

Don't even get me started on the price of bassoons.

[SteveXFR]

Although expensive basses are nice, it's always quite reassuring when you see a professional using a cheap instrument. 

Chuck Garrick plays an Epiphone Thunderbird with Alice Cooper. I'm pretty certain he only has to make a quick call to Gibson and they'll send him a truck load of Thunderbirds so he's madea choice to use an Epiphone. 

Kim Deal used a $100 Aria with Pixies for years.

Mike Kerr of Royal Blood used to (possibly still does) use a budget Gretsch and he's a man who's put huge effort in to creating a specific tone.

[BigRedX]

1 hour ago, drTStingray said:

I would be surprised if anyone couldn’t tell the difference between say the sound of a Precision bass, a Stingray and an Alembic. 

 

I probably couldn't. 

 

I mean I'm sure that I would hear 3 different bass sounds, but if they were recordings where the artist(s) in question weren't known for playing one of those particular basses, I doubt I could tell you which is which.

 

I also think that unless they were recorded in such a way to emphasise a particular unique characteristic of the bass a decent mix engineer could get them all to sound much the same in the context of a band recording.

[Rich]

23 hours ago, Boodang said:

I think what I object to is something like the Wal bass that's currently up for sale at £6500!!

 

As a Wal owner, I have not even the slightest objection to their value going up and up. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

Why do you find it 'objectionable' anyway? You obviously don't want another Wal so why should it particularly bother you? Do you object to the value of vintage Fenders etc too? Genuinely curious to know.

 

23 hours ago, Boodang said:

If I went to a luthier to have a bass made I don't think it would be possible to make it cost that {£6500} amount no matter what spec I ordered.

 

Presumably you haven't seen the price of bolt on neck, solid wood Foderas recently..?  

[TimR]

If I was touring or even playing twice a week, I'd happily spend more money. But I can't justify £1600 for a bass when £400 gets me something very good and durable enough to last long enough. 

 

At work we size our generators to do the job and to last for the expected duty. I've never heard of anyone stealing a generator from the boot of a car, generally because they weigh several tons and are bolted into the concrete. 

 

Regards professional orchestra players, they're playing several hours a day. I've heard professionals play beginner instruments and instruments worth thousands of pounds. They sound no different, they always sound like 'John the trumpet player.' However, they can instantly value your instrument and say what needs attention and whether you need a more expensive one because you're fighting to play the one you have. (Brass players and flute players will spend hundreds/thousands on a solid silver mouth piece.)

 

We have lots of threads here about set-ups and other adjustments and changes. So at least some of us can tell when we have outgrown our instruments or they've drifted out.

Edited November 23, 2021 by TimR

[SteveXFR]

Do those who object to expensive basses also object to a Porsche 911 Turbo S costing 20 times as much as a Dacia Sandero?

[TimR]

3 minutes ago, SteveXFR said:

Do those who object to expensive basses also object to a Porsche 911 Turbo S costing 20 times as much as a Dacia Sandero?

No one is objecting to expensive basses.

[Boodang]

1 hour ago, Rich said:

As a Wal owner, I have not even the slightest objection to their value going up and up. Quite the opposite in fact.

 

Why do you find it 'objectionable' anyway? You obviously don't want another Wal so why should it particularly bother you? Do you object to the value of vintage Fenders etc too? Genuinely curious to know.

 

Presumably you haven't seen the price of bolt on neck, solid wood Foderas recently..?  

Don't get me started on the price of Foderas!! 

As far as Wal's are concerned, and I don't know why it irkes me so much(!), I just can't see why they are prohibitively expensive. Bolt on neck, solid body, excellent hardware and quality materials but really, 4.5k starting price new.. where's the money being spent?!! 

I had a Sei bass made to spec, ebony & wenge, ABM hardware, thru neck, compound radius neck profile, umpteen coats of lacquer, leds for side dots... 2k (including a full flight case) and the craftsmanship is second to none. Where is the extra 2.5k going on the Wal? The easier bolt on neck construction?! 

It shouldn't bother me, if people want to pay then fair enough, but I just think it's taking the p*ss slightly. 

As for the price of classic Fenders..  well again, if you want to pay, fair enough but it might be an investment rather than good value for money. 

Edited November 23, 2021 by Boodang

[SumOne]

The Dingwall range demonstrate the limits to Bass diminishing returns for me:

 

The £1,700 Combustion is a very well made instrument that I think would be good enough for pretty much any discerning high-level professional player. It is a Dingwall design built to a high spec and high-level of quality control but via an efficient mass-produced process in China. That seems to be about the limit for high-end but mass-produced and efficiently made Basses, beyond that the diminishing returns graph of cost vs how 'good' the instrument starts to go almost flat because the increased cost seems to be largely for inefficient production. 

 

The Dingwall Z3 costs £6k + and is made by hand in Canada. I've heard nothing but praise for the Canadian made Dingwalls and I'm sure they are better but I find it hard to believe it's really worth £4,300 more, surely a big chunk of that is down to paying for an inefficient build process - paying people's wages for many hours of work in Canada vs an efficient mass-produced process in China paying lower wages for fewer hours, and it's partly paying for scarcity rather than actually the value of how good the instrument is. (Similar to Wal and Foderas and others).

Edited November 23, 2021 by SumOne

[Mokl]

3 hours ago, Boodang said:

Don't get me started on the price of Foderas!! 

As far as Wal's are concerned, and I don't know why it irkes me so much(!), I just can't see why they are prohibitively expensive. Bolt on neck, solid body, excellent hardware and quality materials but really, 4.5k starting price new.. where's the money being spent?!! 

I had a Sei bass made to spec, ebony & wenge, ABM hardware, thru neck, compound radius neck profile, umpteen coats of lacquer, leds for side dots... 2k (including a full flight case) and the craftsmanship is second to none. Where is the extra 2.5k going on the Wal? The easier bolt on neck construction?! 

It shouldn't bother me, if people want to pay then fair enough, but I just think it's taking the p*ss slightly. 

As for the price of classic Fenders..  well again, if you want to pay, fair enough but it might be an investment rather than good value for money. 

To be fair,  you'd be doing well to get a new Sei with that spec commissioned for £2k these days.  They have always been great value for what they though.  

 

You could make the investment comment about the Wal. My first one (used) cost me £900 in the noughties. Shortly after I bought a used Sei for £200 more.  I lost money on the Sei...

Edited November 23, 2021 by Mokl

[Downunderwonder]

5 hours ago, SteveXFR said:

I'm pretty certain he only has to make a quick call to Gibson and they'll send him a truck load of Thunderbirds so he's madea choice to use an Epiphone. 

There's other possibilities. He could have been turned down for an endorsement deal and the cheapy is his big finger to Gibson Inc. Or Gibson Inc might have asked him to play a custom shop Epifone for a worthwhile fee.

 

I don't even know if Gibson Inc do endorsement deals. I am pretty sure it's not universal for big manufacturers to have an 'artist program'.

[Downunderwonder]

4 hours ago, TimR said:

No one is objecting to expensive basses.

I do. By not buying buying them. Take that, expensive bass makers!

[peteb]

11 minutes ago, Downunderwonder said:

Or Gibson Inc might have asked him to play a custom shop Epifone for a worthwhile fee.

 

I don't even know if Gibson Inc do endorsement deals. I am pretty sure it's not universal for big manufacturers to have an 'artist program'.

 

1) Yep, that's probably the reason

2) Most of them do 

[SteveXFR]

18 minutes ago, Downunderwonder said:

There's other possibilities. He could have been turned down for an endorsement deal and the cheapy is his big finger to Gibson Inc. Or Gibson Inc might have asked him to play a custom shop Epifone for a worthwhile fee.

 

I don't even know if Gibson Inc do endorsement deals. I am pretty sure it's not universal for big manufacturers to have an 'artist program'.

 

It looks like a completely stock Vintage Pro Thunderbird. I can't imagine Alice Cooper letting his bassist sound sub standard just because he had beef with Gibson. The current Epiphone sounds much closer to the 70's Gibson than the current Gibson does.