Signature Basses...is it just me....

[OldGit]

Of course if your name is Mavis and you live in Japan you can have lots of sig J and P bass copies, and Amplifiers ...


I've seen "Brian" basses for sale in Japan too...

Edited June 13, 2010 by OldGit

[velvetkevorkian]

I dislike them on principle, but I play one because it has the features I wanted (strings- 7 of them) and was available at the right price. I didn't buy it to play like Bill Dickens, although the ridiculously OTT EQ does make it easy to get his signature "bag full of cutlery" sound.

[deathpanda]

I have the Geddy Lee sig, I wasn't trying to copy him, I just wanted a black jazz bass that kicked and punched like a bad ass motherfu*ker, and it certainly does just that. if someone slated me saying I copied Geddy's tone, I would be chuffed to bits.

[spinynorman]

Actually I did seriously consider buying the Mike Dirnt Fender. I quite liked the idea of the slab body with a split pickup. And I thought it would make me look 30 years younger.

Edited June 13, 2010 by spinynorman

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 15, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[OldGit]

[quote name='andyjingram' post='866686' date='Jun 14 2010, 01:54 AM']Signatures usually put me off (why have a Sting bass when you can have a 51' reissue?), but I did play an Ibanez K5 for a time. Not a Korn worshipper, but I tried the bass in a shop and was most impressed with the tone- and comfort factor.

The Mike Dirnt, like others above, ticks a lot of my boxes- a few tweaks and a horrific paint job and there's my daydream custom 'signature' bass, right there. I also think he was wise to leave off any marks or signature on the main model.[/quote]

I like that one too. However it says "Squier" on the headstock and, as a lable snob, that would stop me.


Mike's Manager "Hey Mike! I got this fabulous news! I've got Fender to make a signature bass for you. They reckon it will sell Fenders to your fan base"
MD "Wow, man, that's fantastic! Well done! That puts me up with Pino, Geddy and Marcus. Finally I've been recognised as a major influence in the bass playing community"
MM "It's going to be under the Squier brand, made in China and sell for £200"
MD "Hummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ......... So how much are they paying?"

Edited June 14, 2010 by OldGit

[Dr.Dave]

With Fender style instruments , there's so many after market bits we can all have our own signature models OR we can emulate instruments our hero's use. So why a sig? Unless , of course , the answer is 'I like it' which is fine.

[Jus Lukin]

-

Edited February 15, 2022 by Jus Lukin

[sk8]

I really want a Steve Harris Sig P

Edited June 14, 2010 by sk8

[cetera]

There's far too much sh*te talked about signature basses.....

Owning and/or playing one DOESN'T take away your individuality or set you up to sound a certain way. Your sound is in your fingers, strings, instrument construction, amp, speakers etc etc...

I had one bassist ask to try my 'Geddy Lee' Jazz recently. He played it (rather badly) and then declared "It's a lovely bass, but I couldn't play it live as I'd hate people thinking I was trying to be Geddy Lee". I had to bit my tongue to stop saying to him "Mate, with your poor technique and lack of talent I don't think ANYONE would EVER think that!!"

A good bass is a good bass.... and if it is a 'signature' model then so be it.
I have some great basses in my collection including many signature models. My Jackson 'Kip Winger' looks/sounds/feels great. My Fender 'Geddy Lee' is widely regarded as a classic and is very playable. My Peavey 'Randy Jackson' & 'Rudy Sarzo' are incredible, versatile and very underrated basses with superb build quality.... My Gene Simmons 'Punisher' & 'Axe' basses WERE purchased due to my role in the KISS tribute, but both are fine instruments and I'd probably buy them anyway even if I wasn't in the KISS tribute.

[discreet]

[quote name='Johnston' post='866745' date='Jun 14 2010, 09:23 AM'][url="http://fender.com/products/search.php?partno=0138400341"]Fender mike dirnt here[/url] On paper to me anyway it looks like a good cross breed of various years of precision.[/quote]

Like it!

[OldGit]

[quote name='Johnston' post='866745' date='Jun 14 2010, 09:23 AM']There is actually two MD sigs a squier and a genuine Fender.

The Fender has the contoured '55 body and scratchplate I think custom shop '59 split pup's, Badass II, '60s(?) neck profile and no silly star. Infact I don't think it says Mike Dirnt on it. Someone correct me if I'm Wrong anywhere al the above has been garnered from various websites so the usual disclaimer applies .

[url="http://fender.com/products/search.php?partno=0138400341"]Fender mike dirnt here[/url] On paper to me anyway it looks like a good cross breed of various years of precision.[/quote]


Ah Ok!
That's much better ..

Mike's Manager "Hey Mike! I got this fabulous news! I've got Fender to make a signature bass for you. They reckon it will sell Fenders to your fan base"
MD "Wow, man, that's fantastic! Well done! That puts me up with Pino, Geddy and Marcus. Finally I've been recognised as a major influence in the bass playing community"
MM "Yup and It's even better. They are doing two; a pukka Fender one for the label snobs like OldGit, and a great cheap one under the Squier brand, made in China and sell for £200 for the kids and for people who don't care about lables and just know a good bass when they plauy one"
MD "Hey great. So like Flea but with a beginners' bass kids and parents can actually afford? Outstanding! How much are they paying?"

[Rich]

[quote name='Rayman' post='865751' date='Jun 13 2010, 10:14 AM']I don't have a problem with signature basses at all, as long as you're buying the bass in it's own right, and not because of the signature on the headstock (or fretboard in Stings case).[/quote]
This.
I'm with the OP. It does pique my curiosity when a new signature instrument is released, but only because I am interested to see what the player has specified -- is it a completely new shape/everything, or just a fancy paintjob on a standard instrument and a grand added to the price?
I would consider buying a signature bass, if I played one and liked it -- for example, if I was in the market for a new Jazz I'd definitely try the Geddy and Marcus models. It would have nothing to do with who the signatory was.

[Rich]

[quote name='Johnston' post='866963' date='Jun 14 2010, 12:53 PM']Does anyone know how much input any artist actually puts into a sig model. I've heard stories where the builders look at what the artist is known for, build a few variations and then give them to the artist to say which one. So the artist really just gives the okay put my name on that one rather than state what they want.[/quote]
I seem to remember reading an interview with Mark King where he said that a guy from Alembic arrived one day with a load of wood samples and asked him which ones he liked, and that next thing he knew there was suddenly a Mark King Signature model on their catalogue Obviously it's just my memory, and so this could be total bollicks.

[BassBod]

Not complete b$£ll&cks...I remember reading the same thing about MK and Alembic. Funny thing is the sig Alembic's are just nice Alembics - SeriesI/II style but without the really expensive electronics? From what I recall the only things MK chose were the facing woods and scale length?

The one that impressed me was the Roscoe Beck V - I'm sure he made Fender spend a lot more than they ever intended on pickups and hardware etc, but he got what he wanted and created a very nice variation and update on the Fender concept.

[tauzero]

Warwick did a Jack Bruce sig bass which (looking at the neck dimensions) seems to have the nice slim neck of the early stuff.

One minor point that they may have overlooked in producing a Jack Bruce sig Thumb was the number of frets. It has 26 more than JB's own Thumb...

Oh, and JB's original Thumb has the one-piece bridge that Warwick for some reason ditched:



So, how close should a sig instrument be to the actual instrument that inspired it?

[OldGit]

Quite like Stu Ham's Fender Urge II

[Ou7shined]

^ that is quite tasty looking.

[Legion]

Interesting insight into peoples confidence issues...that they feel critically judged if using a bass with another persons name on it somewhere. Also most people are happy to advertise Ernie Ball, or Leo Fender without a problem. Does the name of an endorsee infer all sorts of different things to the name of the manufacturer?

I don't know what mine class as, 1 sig bass and 1 artist bass I suppose. The Tony Franklin purely offered a combination of things I wanted (P bass, fretless, ebony, jazz pickup) I had never heard of the guy till I bought one. I don't care that his name is on the neck plate.

Thinking about it, the same thing goes for the Pino. I was looking for a lovely fat, warm P bass that was easy to play. I played it, loved it, bought it. Then I looked into who he was afterwards. Quite the player apparently

[Chris2112]

I think signature basses get a lot of stick for what they are, but they also have their fans.

I'm definitely a fan, as long as the signature bass is 1) good in it's own right 2) not just a cynical money making ploy (Jimmy Page Les pauls etc etc).



To much weight is given "having your own sound". Having your own sound is great but the pros have really covered all the bases as far as basic tones go, and I doubt much fiddling around is going to take you a whole new place of undiscovered tone. Similarly, the argument of not wanting to play someone elses bass or a bass with someone elses name on it is strange. Most people never bat an eyelid playing a guitar with Les Paul's or Leo Fender's name on it. Similarly, attaching "kudos" to an instrument simply because it isn't instantly recognisable as being connected to a pro player strikes me as a strange fashion.


And furthermore, it's all well and good saying "I've got my own custom made bass that is my singature model". Well, its not really. Sure, it's a custom bass built to your specs, but no one other than you is ever going to look at it and go "oh, it's a such and such signature model!". At the end of the day, it's still just a custom bass. Which brings me full circle to having your own tone. It might be good, but no one will ever know its "your" tone, simply because if you were big enough to have a sound recognised as your own you'd have manufacturers knocking on your door to offer you a proper signature bass.

I remember buying a Kubicki Ex Factor precisely because I wanted to capture Stuart Hamm's tone. Sure, I can't play like Stuart despite learning his tunes, but the music I write and record isn't anything like Stuart Hamm's stuff anyway. It just so happens that his tone works extremely well for what I do - furthermore, thats not the only sound a Kubicki can produce either! The Ex Factor wasn't a signature bass either, but I definitely wouldn't have seen one aged 14/15 if it wasn't for Stu!





I am still puzzled as to what makes people get so wound up about signature basses. I dislike displays of corporate greed as much as the next bloke, so is it jealously? Pride? Just think how many cool things basses like the Status Kingbass, the Status Jonas Hellborg, the Alembic Stanley Clarke bass etc etc have been used for. We'd not have them if we didn't have signature basses!

[spinynorman]

[quote name='tauzero' post='867001' date='Jun 14 2010, 01:33 PM']Warwick did a Jack Bruce sig bass which (looking at the neck dimensions) seems to have the nice slim neck of the early stuff.

One minor point that they may have overlooked in producing a Jack Bruce sig Thumb was the number of frets. It has 26 more than JB's own Thumb...

Oh, and JB's original Thumb has the one-piece bridge that Warwick for some reason ditched:



So, how close should a sig instrument be to the actual instrument that inspired it?[/quote]

I think that's a common misunderstanding about sig models, it's not what the artist plays, it's what the manufacturer wants to sell and the artist is prepared to endorse. Hence a long history of arguments and fallings out over signature models.

Didn't Gibson try to get JB to endorse something, I seem to remember the Grabber, but he didn't like it? And then there was the very expensive EB-3 tribute Warwick did, which sat on a stand at the side of the stage all through the Cream reunion, while he played the Thumb and the EB-1.

[cetera]

[quote name='Chris2112' post='867064' date='Jun 14 2010, 02:40 PM']I think signature basses get a lot of stick for what they are, but they also have their fans.

I'm definitely a fan, as long as the signature bass is 1) good in it's own right 2) not just a cynical money making ploy (Jimmy Page Les pauls etc etc).

To much weight is given "having your own sound". Having your own sound is great but the pros have really covered all the bases as far as basic tones go, and I doubt much fiddling around is going to take you a whole new place of undiscovered tone. Similarly, the argument of not wanting to play someone elses bass or a bass with someone elses name on it is strange. Most people never bat an eyelid playing a guitar with Les Paul's or Leo Fender's name on it. Similarly, attaching "kudos" to an instrument simply because it isn't instantly recognisable as being connected to a pro player strikes me as a strange fashion.

And furthermore, it's all well and good saying "I've got my own custom made bass that is my singature model". Well, its not really. Sure, it's a custom bass built to your specs, but no one other than you is ever going to look at it and go "oh, it's a such and such signature model!". At the end of the day, it's still just a custom bass. Which brings me full circle to having your own tone. It might be good, but no one will ever know its "your" tone, simply because if you were big enough to have a sound recognised as your own you'd have manufacturers knocking on your door to offer you a proper signature bass.

I remember buying a Kubicki Ex Factor precisely because I wanted to capture Stuart Hamm's tone. Sure, I can't play like Stuart despite learning his tunes, but the music I write and record isn't anything like Stuart Hamm's stuff anyway. It just so happens that his tone works extremely well for what I do - furthermore, thats not the only sound a Kubicki can produce either! The Ex Factor wasn't a signature bass either, but I definitely wouldn't have seen one aged 14/15 if it wasn't for Stu!

I am still puzzled as to what makes people get so wound up about signature basses. I dislike displays of corporate greed as much as the next bloke, so is it jealously? Pride? Just think how many cool things basses like the Status Kingbass, the Status Jonas Hellborg, the Alembic Stanley Clarke bass etc etc have been used for. We'd not have them if we didn't have signature basses![/quote]

Excellent post!

[OldGit]

[quote name='Chris2112' post='867064' date='Jun 14 2010, 02:40 PM']And furthermore, it's all well and good saying "I've got my own custom made bass that is my singature model". Well, its not really. Sure, it's a custom bass built to your specs, but no one other than you is ever going to look at it and go "oh, it's a such and such signature model!". At the end of the day, it's still just a custom bass. Which brings me full circle to having your own tone. It might be good, but no one will ever know its "your" tone, simply because if you were big enough to have a sound recognised as your own you'd have manufacturers knocking on your door to offer you a proper signature bass.[/quote]

Oh no! Really?






















It was a joke, Chris.

[cetera]

[quote name='Johnston' post='867114' date='Jun 14 2010, 03:39 PM']I'd hate to see what would have been said if I turned up with a Gene Simmons axe or a Billy Sheenan attitude.[/quote]

If you locked into the groove, sounded great and got people interested in the band and it's music they would have to put up & shut up

I know where you're coming from though.... and it says more about them than about you...

[Ou7shined]

I think some people are over analysing the concept of a sig bass. Basically it's a convenient name for a line of endorsed custom jobs normally based on a standard line from a know brand. That's all. What ever inferences drawn beyond that about wannabees is up to the individual.

The problem for me (if there was one) arises when not only is it an endorsed product but it becomes free advertising (in the form of physical signatures, logos etc ) for an artist who may or may not even play one and I find that kind of promotion a bit icky and most importantly it can spoil the look of a bass too.

Those of us posting about our own signature models were doing so with tongue in cheek. The reason I have my name and logo on my bass is because I built it. Custom made one off basses built to a spec are equally as justified. Yet because this doesn't fit with the criteria mentioned above can't strictly be sig models. But who gives?

And while I'm at it, Fender, Gibson, Shuker, Ernie Ball etc. are simply brand names which happen to be people's names too, not signature lines.