how is this possible?

[neepheid]

I ignore any part of a review which refers to setup out of the box - it's utterly irrelevant.  If you go through life expecting every bass you receive to be set up to your exact liking, especially at the price points being discussed here, you're going to be disappointed - a lot.  Either learn how to set up your instruments, or stop being a cheapskate and operate within the price points where you would expect this kind of service/attention to detail.

 

I suspect it's used in reviews as a cheap shot just so they can have something negative to say about otherwise perfectly serviceable instruments.

[NickA]

On 18/02/2025 at 20:53, kodiakblair said:

Folk often cite set up issues with budget basses

To be fair they winge about fancy basses too.  The warwick I bought from here a few years ago came beautifully setup, with an action so low I couldn't play it 😂.  Job 1, jack all the strings up.

 

Does anyone pull a bass out it's box and expect it to be perfect for them straight away?

 

Whatever your bass, it's always worth going over the setup now and then.  I reset the string heights, pickup heights and neck relief on my much used fretless Wal this week.   New bass!  Not sure why, as I doubt things drift much, maybe my playing style changed or the wood changed shape in the winter damp.....well worth it tho.

 

Still setup isn't everything and a pine body and poplar board are never going to feel or sound like mahogany and ebony.

[ezbass]

29 minutes ago, neepheid said:

If you go through life expecting every bass you receive to be set up to your exact liking, especially at the price points being discussed here, you're going to be disappointed - a lot.

I've yet to have a bass that I don't have to adjust a bit/lot. I've had actions that are too high, and too low for me, they might suit someone, but we're all individuals and have our own foibles. That's not to say that were unplayable, far from it, in fact I've only ever handled one almost unplayable bass ever, a Rickenbacker, at a show, where there was so much neck relief, you could slide your fingers underneath. I think reviewers should use the phrase,  playable out of the box, which is a fair assessment.

[kodiakblair]

1 hour ago, NickA said:

Still setup isn't everything and a pine body and poplar board are never going to feel or sound like mahogany and ebony.

I'd be surprised if they did.

 

The pine used for bodies doesn't come from B&Q. They go for Mexican or Indonesian/Cambodian varieties, a damn sight harder, heavier and denser than most mahogany earmarked for guitar building.

 

Poplar is an interesting timber. More expensive than Ash, shares many similar properties with Alder. It's great for bodies and burl veneers but like Alder too soft for fretboards. Perhaps you were getting confused with the treated Monterey Pine which has been used for fretboards on recent years ? Sadly much Poplar goes the same way as Alder; making pallets. Good thing it doesn't burn so great; plenty Alder goes out as wood pellets or matchsticks.

 

Pine body.

 

 

Poplar body.

 

 

Mahogany with walnut drop top.

 

[NickA]

23 hours ago, kodiakblair said:

Perhaps you were getting confused with the treated Monterey Pine

Just reading the spec sheet on gear4music, where islt says the fingerboard is "laminated poplar" which I guess means plywood.

 

The pine in these basses is reportedly quite soft as ( similar thread on Facebook ) they're said to dent rather easily ..

But yes, at school I made a chopping board from "piranha pine" that was tough as £_&&.

 

You'd need a chisel to dent the Brazillian mahogany core of my old Wal and the Shedua Warwick is pretty tough too.  My solid padauk bass has marked a bit though.

 

The issue with soft woods isn't so much dentability as the lack of sustain and high frequency transmission.  May not be linearly related.

[BigRedX]

On 21/02/2025 at 15:29, NickA said:

Still setup isn't everything and a pine body and poplar board are never going to feel or sound like mahogany and ebony.

 

You can't say that, because every piece of wood if different and to try and make sweeping generalisations about a particular species is at best nonsense.

 

Remember also that descriptors like "pine" "poplar" "mahogany" etc. are very broad. There are over 40 species of tree that can produce wood called ash. Swamp ash is simply one of those species grown in swampy contains which goes to show that the climate/environment in which a particular species is gown might be more important than the species itself.

 

Also there's nothing wrong with plywood. Even Jens Ritter uses it to make bases.