Your dealbreakers on basses?

[Vanheusen77]

Extreme neck dive, extreme weight (70’s fenders).

[Eldon Tyrell]

satin finishes, 1.5'' nut width, chunky necks, weird looking pickguards (e.g., Ric), multi-scales, short scales, 5 or more strings, relic basses, sparkly finishes and headless basses

[jd56hawk]

Those ridiculous tooled-leather pickguards.

Sure, just a mod, but so hideous I wouldn't even try out a bass with one.

 

[mr4stringz]

Anything that’s only got jazz pickups. Unless it’s a fretless.

[Skybone]

Dealbreaker?

 

NRSO.

 

Non Rickenbacker Styled Object.

 

Could be tempted by a T-bird Styled Object though...

[MichaelDean]

I don't like nut widths under 40mm.

 

What I really hate though, is the screw holes left after someone has fitted pickup covers, regretted it when they actually wanted to play the darn thing and then took them off again. It's a constant reminder of someone's bad decision! I've been thinking about saving up for a Limelight as long as he can do it without those holes that he puts on every single one...

[LukeFRC]

8 hours ago, AndyTravis said:

Matching colour headstock with a Maple board.

 

I won’t entertain it. 
 

+1

 

also fancy wood basses where the use of fancy wood is for no other purpose than to show off the fact that you can use fancy wood. Fancy wood where it's being used as part of the construction, or as a "tone wood" sounds good.

thick poly finishes. 

Anything with hardware that is like chocolate on a hot day when you get a screwdriver near it. 

bad font choices in logos. eg Valenti with his logo in Optima  

 

EMG pickups. I've tried, not my thing

 

 

[40hz]

Not many things would ever stop me owning or buying a bass, full stop. Biggest offender would be a Bass being finished in Sunburst. Can't bloody stand it - awful, awful finish.

 

Then I'd add anything pointy or 'metally'. They just look silly, IMO. Having to have an 'extreme' body shape to hammer the point home how 'metal' you are, just seems ridiculous to me. It'd be more metal playing Djent on a Hofner.

 

And finally - any user 'upgraded' bass. 

Edited April 8, 2022 by 40hz

[Owen]

I am a bass tart and will go with any bass.

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

Any bass that looks like it was designed later than about 1967 has a harder time getting my attention.

 

I'm not keen on active electronics either, or anything with more than four strings.

[Steve Browning]

Given that my non-Precision itch is well and truly scratched now. I would only apply these criteria to a Precision-type instrument. I assume it is in good order (no bent neck etc). Similarly, I wouldn't consider a slab bodied instrument now (that's a lie because I'd love to have my '66 slab back) so this list applies to bog standard basses.

• weight
• 50's style nut width (I am so used to the late 60's early 70's B profile)
• colour (for some reason I find white basses look enormous when I play one)

Precisions tend not to do neck dive so that's not a consideration. All the other stuff is easily replaced if the basic instrument is good.

[NancyJohnson]

15 hours ago, NancyJohnson said:

 

There's probably more.

 

viii) Gold hardware.

ix) Short scale basses.

x) Not a fan of body shapes where the top matches the bottom (ie Gibson EB3).  It worked with my old Travis Bean, but generally no).

xi) Natural/oiled finishes.

xii) Mudbuckers.

xiii) Oh, headless basses.

 

I'm sure I could hit 20 by lunchtime.

[Vanheusen77]

4 minutes ago, NancyJohnson said:

Mudbuckers

If it’s a single pickup bass with a mudbucker at the neck then I agree, unless you only play with a pick in which case it sounds awesome.

Edited April 8, 2022 by Vanheusen77

[Eldon Tyrell]

Forgot the worst deal breaker - mismatching woodgrain. Man, I cannot stand something like the one below 🥴

 

  
 

 

[knirirr]

Fretless with anything other than an unlined board and side dots level with where the frets would be (as shown below). That's what I learned on and anything else feels wrong and confuses me.

[TrevorG]

19 hours ago, jd56hawk said:

Unfinished headstocks.

Absolutely ruins the look of a bass.

With a maple fretboard, no problem, but with rosewood,, ebony, etc?

Looks like crap.

Agreed though I do have a natural finish P (rosewood fingerboard)which looks like it matches the headstock which is good too.

[Oomo]

Another one I remembered - long/thin horns. They just look flimsy to me, and I'd always be worried how much stress a heavy bass must be putting on the the wood. Plus I hate the looks

 

Thinking things like:

 

[chris_b]

One deal breaker I forget to add, because it is so ingrained I just took it for granted, only 5 string basses need apply.

[gazhowe]

Not too many for me:

 

- anything relic’d

- heavy weight

- narrow string spacing

- matching painted headstock with maple neck

[NancyJohnson]

6 hours ago, NancyJohnson said:

 

viii) Gold hardware.

ix) Short scale basses.

x) Not a fan of body shapes where the top matches the bottom (ie Gibson EB3).  It worked with my old Travis Bean, but generally no).

xi) Natural/oiled finishes.

xii) Mudbuckers.

xiii) Oh, headless basses.

 

I'm sure I could hit 20 by lunchtime.

 

xiv)  Pointy basses (Explorers, Vs, BC Rich)
xv)  Basses (in general) derived from longstanding guitar designs that don't quite work in translation (Explorers, Vs, Les Pauls)
xvi)  Fan fretted basses.
xvii) Six string basses (or more, ie Conklin)
xviii)  Maybe this is more a mental thing, but the more someone tells me a bass 'is really great,' and 'you'd love it!' the more off-putting it becomes.  Musicman Stingrays for example.  Why the hell do you think I had a brief love affair with a Bongo 5HH.  It was because nobody liked them.
xix)  Basses with fake truss rod covers and decals.  Not fooling anyone.
xx)  Factory distressing.  I suppose if you went the Fender custom shop route, the prices could have parity against an actual vintage instrument that the new build apes to be.  Just shop old.

 

I think that's it.😁

[gjones]

Pointy headstocks.

 

I got rid of a really nice sounding and playing Charvel, because it had a pointy headstock.

 

Guitarist was afraid I'd take his eye out.

 

[NicoMcJ]

23 hours ago, NancyJohnson said:

OK, here goes:
i)  I'm really not a fan of the Jazz/Precision shape.  Or Fenders generally.
ii)  Sunburst finishes generally (especially sunbursts where the colour goes from black to yellow).
iii)  Maple fingerboards.
iv)  Hi-gloss finishes that look like furniture.
v)  Terrible headstock design (ie Cort, Sandberg, Chowny, G&L).
vi)  Anything with a single pickup (I'm just of the opinion that a twin pickup set up is way more versatile tonally).
vii)  'Does it come with a hardshell case?'  If the answer is 'no', then well, no.

 

There's probably more.

If it comes with a hard case I’ll ask for a discount and tell the shop to keep it.  Beastly relics of a bygone age!!

[NicoMcJ]

Anything in a natural finish. I don’t want a bass that lookslike a 70s kitchen.

[thodrik]

7 hours ago, Vanheusen77 said:

If it’s a single pickup bass with a mudbucker at the neck then I agree, unless you only play with a pick in which case it sounds awesome.

You haven't lived until you have owned a vintage Gibson EB3 in which the inherent tone from the front pickup is utterly impervious to tone settings or pick up settings.

 

I have owned a 1974 EB3 for twenty one years and I am still not sure exactly why!

[Woodinblack]

10 minutes ago, NicoMcJ said:

Anything in a natural finish. I don’t want a bass that lookslike a 70s kitchen.

 

Odd, I would think anything coloured looks like a 70s kitchen.