Warwick - Give me the good, the bad and the ugly.

[mep]

[quote name='merello' post='921012' date='Aug 10 2010, 09:30 PM']Guy Pratt - stay out of this, you play Fenders! [/quote]

I didn't know Gut Pratt was a Basschatter, or is this some joke aimed a Fender players?

BTW I've tried a Warwick and although I like the look they are not for me.

[budget bassist]

I have bad GAS for another Warwick, though I'm not sure what, I just know I want one! I couldn't get rid of my $$ though I don't think.

[power of ten]

I'd been toying with buying a Warwick for a while, but didnt want to spend a fortune and be dissapointed... So a Corvette Std presented itself last week at the right money, c/w Bartolini 2 band pre where the tone pot was...... not sure if its the preamp or whatever, but it sounds and feels fantastic.... GAS for a jazzman now

[josh3184]

Love Warwick. Really miss my first Streamer Jazzman, but now have a Thumb BO which is simply fantastic.
The thing I love about Warwick is that the tones from the amazing growl (beats any Jazz IMO) to the upper registers feel really organic. It's supposed to just be marketing but I personally can really hear "the sound of wood"

Edited September 15, 2010 by josh3184

[xilddx]

[quote name='Linus27' post='955694' date='Sep 14 2010, 08:33 AM']OK, mmm, why does the neck feel longer and more of a stretch on a Warwick then? It has to be because it has more frets/another octave??[/quote]
It is simply because the top horn on most Warwicks (Corvette, Streamer) only extends to the 15th fret not the 12th, so the fret under your nose on a Warwick is higher than than the one on your Fender, therefore the nut is about three inches or so further away from your body. Hence the stretch.

[Linus27]

[quote name='silddx' post='957262' date='Sep 15 2010, 03:04 PM']It is simply because the top horn on most Warwicks (Corvette, Streamer) only extends to the 15th fret not the 12th, so the fret under your nose on a Warwick is higher than than the one on your Fender, therefore the nut is about three inches or so further away from your body. Hence the stretch.[/quote]

Ah so that makes sense, thanks Silddx. I wonder why they do this.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Linus27' post='957263' date='Sep 15 2010, 03:05 PM']Ah so that makes sense, thanks Silddx. I wonder why they do this.[/quote]
Because they are small and svelt and don't need a big old ugly body like a Fender to balance against that big old ugly Fender headstock.

[Linus27]

[quote name='silddx' post='957268' date='Sep 15 2010, 03:09 PM']Because they are small and svelt and don't need a big old ugly body like a Fender to balance against that big old ugly Fender headstock.[/quote]

but I have little arms and have to stretch and I don't know what svelt means

[Dodge]

I've had 4, three Streamers and a Fortress. For me, the 91 Streamer was the most complete and beautiful bass I've owned. Sadly, the truss rod nut thread got stripped on my 87 and my luthier discovered it was made of aluminium (seriously) - it's a suprise it lasted as long as it did. He also showed me another broken truss rod from a Corvette when I collected it, the truss rod was only around 3 mm diameter. The truss rod replacement cost me nearly £300 and left a sour taste in my mouth.

With that niggling doubt in the back of my mind, I sold them all.

[thisnameistaken]

I had the truss rod go in my old Corvette Proline 6, Warwick took it away and sent it back to me with a whole new neck saying the previous neck with predominantly maple laminates had been shown not to be strong enough. Didn't charge me a penny and sent me a bunch of other freebies back with my bass.

Next bass I bought was a Warwick.

[Linus27]

So has anyone got or even seen or played one of the new Pro Series Corvette's? Would be intesting to see how they compare to the German made models.

[budget bassist]

[quote name='Linus27' post='957649' date='Sep 15 2010, 08:25 PM']So has anyone got or even seen or played one of the new Pro Series Corvette's? Would be intesting to see how they compare to the German made models.[/quote]
Nope, and at that price, I'm not even remotely interested.

[Linus27]

[quote name='budget bassist' post='958813' date='Sep 16 2010, 09:07 PM']Nope, and at that price, I'm not even remotely interested.[/quote]

To be honest, I know exactly how you feel, plus its not German

[bassbora]

I have 2 Warwicks. Both Thumb NT 89. 5 st fretted and 6 fretless. I have tried few other Warwicks and always liked them. I have tried and owned many other brands (Fenders, Yamaha, Musicman Sadowsky and so on) but there was always something about the Warwick I loved. I have to say it was just a chance I ended with Thumb. It was the 5 string (used) when I was changing from 4 string to 5 string and I guess if it would have been a Streamer I would have bought that and kept.

I can understand all the things many people dont like about Thumbs. I dont find it neck heavy, I use a wide leather strap and I dont find it too long a reach to the first fret (I am 6,1 so tall enough not to find it difficult) but I have seen shorter people finding it uncomfortable and can see why they would not like the Thumb.

But for me the look of wood, the craftmanship and tone was always the thing which did it for me. I dont have enough spare cash to splash out and buy more but I would love to have more of them (streamer 1 and 2 and I love the FNA Jazzman 5 with J MM config). And I am also too attachted to the two of mine to sell them to try out another types.

I had Yamaha RBX 1000 (was the flagship of the RBX line in the early '90s if anyone remembers) and it always felt fairly good. But I have always compared the Thumb and the Yamaha to cars. It was like driving a mid priced Japanees car and switching to a German car (911). It was such a difference in instruments.

Anyway cant remember what the question or purpose of this tread was originally but I hope I have not added just random nonsense.

Edited September 17, 2010 by bassbora

[merello]

[quote name='mep' post='956739' date='Sep 14 2010, 11:27 PM']I didn't know Gut Pratt was a Basschatter, or is this some joke aimed a Fender players?

BTW I've tried a Warwick and although I like the look they are not for me.[/quote]
No joke aimed at Fender players - just me name dropping my new pal...er...mate...well...a guy I once read on here!

ps - I forgot I started this thread!

Edited September 17, 2010 by merello

[Linus27]

[quote name='merello' post='959805' date='Sep 17 2010, 07:11 PM']ps - I forgot I started this thread![/quote]

Ah so its your fault then

[merello]

[quote name='Linus27' post='959820' date='Sep 17 2010, 07:31 PM'][b]Ah so[/b] its your fault then [/quote]
You call me an ahso?!?!

[Linus27]

[quote name='merello' post='959830' date='Sep 17 2010, 07:40 PM']You call me an ahso?!?! [/quote]

[solofunkyjazz]

[quote name='guybrush threepwood' post='921266' date='Aug 11 2010, 08:36 AM']That's a real shame about the service you received there mate - I've emailed them in the past about the 2 Warwicks I used to own, and got a reply from Hans Peter Wilfer! The importance of PR...

Anyway, I absolutely loved the 2 I had; orignally a Streamer jazzman 5 string - fantastic tone, but the neck was a bit too chubby for my sausage fingers... And a old Corvette with the really, really thin wenge neck, god that was an incredible instrument![/quote]



They have very stiff necks, and rubbish aluminium truss rods. Stripped adjusters are a pretty common problem.

I had a Warwick Thumb 5 fretless and it ended up having a new truss rod.

[Jigster]

i find this hard to accept about the truss rod experiences on here - That a guitar of such obvious build quality has this flaw with its truss rods - Really???

I guess even more so as I feel I am edging towards an eventual Warwick purchase..

[Truckstop]

Me too. I really want one but s/h six stringers that don't cost the world are thin on the ground
There's plenty of reasonably priced 5ers, but I'd want to be able to play the stuff I play on 6ers already!

Truckstop

[budget bassist]

[quote name='Jigster' post='960357' date='Sep 18 2010, 01:16 PM']i find this hard to accept about the truss rod experiences on here - That a guitar of such obvious build quality has this flaw with its truss rods - Really???

I guess even more so as I feel I am edging towards an eventual Warwick purchase.. [/quote]
If you strip the nut on the truss, you're doing something VERY wrong. I've made a couple of minor adjustments to mine with absolutely no drama at all.

[LukeFRC]

hmmm shameless plug for the 1991 streamer i've just stuck in the for sale section....

[Truckstop]

Stick an extra two strings on it and i'll have it!

Truckstop

[warwickhunt]

This talk of truss rod problems; it stems from a few of the earlier basses and as has been pointed out, it's likely as much to do with ham-fisted adjustment as it is too do with anything else. I have to say that I've owned dozens (and I mean 'dozens') of Warwick basses and I've NEVER had an issue with a rod. I did have one rod that someone had been using the incorrect size allen key to adjust and it was a bit chewed but that was easily sorted. The other thing is that 99.9% of the problems with a Warwick truss rod are an easy and relatively inexpensive fix (the truss rods are removable without recourse to taking off fingerboards etc.). However, their is one BC owner who had a problem with his TR and unluckily for him the rod wouldn't tap out so his luthier did need to do a major bit of work to get it out. Saying that there probably isn't a large scale manufacturer out there that hasn't had some kind of issue with some aspect of their bass but things can end up being blown out of proportion.

I personally have no problem or worry with Warwick TRs but if I couldn't try one in the flesh before buying I'd reckon on worst case scenario maybe £75 to fix any problem... then again I'd only be buying an old model anyway not one of the new ones!