1970s Fenders

[BossHog]

My 78 has all the recognised pitfalls of the era with the routing and weight, however the neck pocket and neck stability are very good which makes good the debate they got some right..and I would put up with all these issues for the tone alone. Arguably one of the most recognised and copied bass tones of the last decades has been Marcus Miller on a Fender late 70's J Bass.. so many boutique bass manufacturers emulate this era with this sound in mind.

I also have a 1966 J Bass which is stunning. However I do strongly believe in the fashion of which the basses were and are still produced, there always has been a Fender lottery for build quality and sound.

Edited February 5, 2010 by BossHog

[The Bass Doc]

And I've still got a '66 machine head for you boss.

[leftybassman392]

My '78 Jazz has a very snug neck fit - no gaps at all on either side. It's lived a full life in the hands of previous owners, but still plays and sounds great. Yes it's a bit on the heavy side and the pickup balance is, er, interesting... . On balance though I'd much rather have it than not.

[BossHog]

[quote name='The Bass Doc' post='736441' date='Feb 5 2010, 05:19 PM']And I've still got a '66 machine head for you boss. [/quote]

Yeah I know, I'll have it....dont let it go anywhere.

[The Bass Doc]

[quote name='BossHog' post='737004' date='Feb 6 2010, 11:03 AM']Yeah I know, I'll have it....dont let it go anywhere.[/quote]

It's not going anywhere but the price is.........you see it's all down to the pound-v-dollar. I posted it to a friend in California so that he could send it back with the consequential rise in value.

[alanbass1]

Most of it has been said.Tthe notable things that caused the bad reputation are weight ( a lot of mid/late 70's fenders are very heavy), design changes like the three bolt construction and the fact from 1973 they increased their production from around 40,000 instruments a year to around 150,000. You could figure that with such an increase quality control is likely to suffer, whether it's sourcing good/consistent quality woods to less attention in the build process.

On the other hand, P basses from 1972 have a great reputation as they changed to a slimmer neck profile that year.

[4-string-thing]

People have always said that late 70's Fenders were not as good as earlier (or later) models.

I dunno, my 77/78 (not sure which) suits me fine. Don't know if its a good one or not, never played another one to compare it to. A drummer a while back, declared it "the best sounding bass, I've ever heard" Probably down to the MarkBass rig I was playing through, or the 20 year old strings! It is a bit heavy though nowdays.

BTW, if anyone within 20 miles or so has one, I'd be interested in comparing... Stop sniggering at the back!

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='BB2000' post='733644' date='Feb 2 2010, 03:54 PM']In addition very heavy (cheap) ash was often used for ash bodies at this time, instead of the expensive swamp ash used earlier (14lb jazz basses are not unknown).[/quote]
Swamp ash or punk ash as it was called back then was the undesirable stuff the cabinet makers would not use because it would not hold screws sell. Leo was the king of the cheap substitute, it's the basis for the entire company. Now that the old ones have achieved a price in the thousands those that own them have been revising history to say punk ash was chosen for quality reasons. Leo always bought the cheapest stuff he could get away with and punk ash was the choice on cost only. Much more wood is used in cabinetry than guitar building and that industry set the standards no matter what the mojo peddlers say. Some of the more hyperbolic of the wood revisionists will claim swamp ash grows underwater and this gives it its special qualities. Carvin for example [url="http://www.carvinguitars.com/colorwoodguide/"]http://www.carvinguitars.com/colorwoodguide/[/url] but if you leave the guitar world and talk to woodworkers you'll learn it's just the cheap stuff they don't want to use.

[quote name='chris_b' post='734179' date='Feb 3 2010, 08:11 AM']Quality issues weren’t unknown before the 70's. In the 60's Leo's pre CBS Fender basses were always reported to be better than CBS Fender's, even though Leo could cut corners with the best of them.[/quote]In an interview Leo himself said guitar quality improved at Fender after selling to CBS. But why take the word of a non musician non luthier in the first place

One thing that gave a bad rap for the '70's basses IMO was the move to maple fingerboards (another cost saving function which is now an upcharge for many builders) which would be sprayed with a thick finish leaving plastic on the frets that would wear in a rather ugly way as it wore through to the frets. Add the block inlays with the finish sagging and dripping all over the place and the '70's will look like they are inferior, and therefore sound inferior to many.

One thing that's odd is that through the '80's the '70's and late '60's were well known as the worst Fenders around, then we had Marcus Miller and things changed

Edited February 9, 2010 by Vibrating G String