Warwick 5 thumb

[Terry M.]

1 hour ago, eude said:

 

The sound was immense, they looks SO cool, but ergonomically, a very bad design compared to a lot of others out there, including other basses in the Warwick catalogue. 

From what I understand the Thumb was originally known as the JD bass after an American bass player based in Germany called John Davis.He seemingly had a hand in the design and development.Not only was he one of the actual singers of the lip syncing Milli Vanilli he was a slap and pop player hence the "Thumb". I believe the intention was to wear it high and play...with the thumb! This story won't make playing one any more comfy for those who find them challenging but it might explain the design to a degree. Definitely quite niche.Mine isn't going anywhere.

[itu]

52 minutes ago, Terry M. said:

I believe the intention was to wear it high and play...with the thumb!

They did an "enhancement" and "designed" the Corvette that looks a bit like a Gus bass. Every time I see a Thumb, I like it, but a Corvette makes me laugh.

 

Thumb is one good sounding bass, but the Dolphin was something I wanted, although never bought. They were expensive and rare from the start.

[Kev]

5 hours ago, Terry M. said:

I'm still yet to understand why electric basses that need amplification are judged acoustically. I'm always willing to learn however so what exactly am I missing with this? If the amplified sound is good isn't that the point?

Always the first test I give a bass.  If it doesn't sound good unplugged, it doesn't usually sound good amplified either, unless it's running something like EMGs.  Why? Don't know, but it's absolutely my experience of it.

[Misdee]

There's some synergy between the combination of very dense hardwoods used on the thumb that gives it such a unique raunchy tone. It's nothing like Spector, that's for sure.  The pickup placement must contribute a lot, too. 

 

It would be great if Warwick could somehow get that same sound with a bass that's more comfortable to play. I'm sure it's not beyond the wit of mankind to come up with such a design. Just a thought.

 

[Terry M.]

1 hour ago, itu said:

They did an "enhancement" and "designed" the Corvette that looks a bit like a Gus bass. Every time I see a Thumb, I like it, but a Corvette makes me laugh.

 

Thumb is one good sounding bass, but the Dolphin was something I wanted, although never bought. They were expensive and rare from the start.

Now it's the Dolphin I think looks weird. They sound really good though,went to a gig once and the bassist had a 5 string version.

[Kiwi]

5 hours ago, Terry M. said:

I'm still yet to understand why electric basses that need amplification are judged acoustically. I'm always willing to learn however so what exactly am I missing with this? If the amplified sound is good isn't that the point?

I think the point I was trying to make, perhaps poorly, is that there is a huge difference between how the Thumb sounds AND FEELS acoustically and what it sounds like amplified. Perhaps I"m still trying to get my head around the difference and I need more time with one to reach any kind of lasting insight.  I can't think of any other bass where I've felt like that.

[Terry M.]

30 minutes ago, Kev said:

Always the first test I give a bass.  If it doesn't sound good unplugged, it doesn't usually sound good amplified either, unless it's running something like EMGs.  Why? Don't know, but it's absolutely my experience of it.

I promise I'm not being deliberately obtuse here but I've heard this before and genuinely can't understand the point of testing a bass unplugged other than to get the feel of it. It doesn't mean you're wrong however so don't take it that way.

[Terry M.]

6 minutes ago, Kiwi said:

I think the point I was trying to make, perhaps poorly, is that there is a huge difference between how the Thumb sounds AND FEELS acoustically and what it sounds like amplified. Perhaps I"m still trying to get my head around the difference and I need more time with one to reach any kind of lasting insight.  I can't think of any other bass where I've felt like that.

I'm happy to have got this wrong but as I've said before I basically think the sound of an unplugged electric bass is irrelevant but are you saying you feel the Thumb bass even FEELS differently acoustically to when it's plugged in? When you arrive at more insight on this please let me know? I think my mental struggle with the sound is the sound shaping options available when plugged in versus unplugged. How for example can I expect the MEC preamp on my Warwicks to translate to them before they're even plugged in? Again I'm willing to learn.

[Kev]

28 minutes ago, Terry M. said:

I promise I'm not being deliberately obtuse here but I've heard this before and genuinely can't understand the point of testing a bass unplugged other than to get the feel of it. It doesn't mean you're wrong however so don't take it that way.

I guess its how the woods and general build of the bass resonates.  If its dead acoustically, that transfers through when amplified.  If its loud and alive, that seems to too.  The effect diminishes with active preamps and especially active pickups (I find anything with EMGs in the same positions sound the same).