flipper_gv said:
trujo777 said:
I got that pic saved and use it all the time when people on bass groups start bashing Warwicks and i dare them to do this to their necks...then you only hear the grasshoppers chirping after that... silence. Then somebody changes the subject.
:wink:
People on TB started to say that warwick necks are unstable. I quote:"... I'm worry about the infamous warwick neck instability..."
And I was like, wtf? Warwick neck are the most solid necks I've ever played :?
I haven't seen anyone make this claim about warwicks before and I've browsed hundreds of warwick related threads when I had my furious GAS for one. All I can assume is that it was a few isolated comments made by people either 1)making things up or 2)listening to people who make things up.
Still funny though, I would think warwick's of all bass's would be the LAST ones to have instability or neck snapping issues. Multi peice neck, check,
bubinga neck which is known for it's density and stability, check, thick neck profile that many people don't seem to like(love mine, though it really isn't that thick IMO... check.
Not sure how the new'er ok..something necks compare, but it can't be that different, especially if they are generally thicker then the older bubinga necks from what I hear.
I love Talkbass community/forum. But the electric bass section is filled mostly with blank opinions and very little real information. And while misinformation is prevalent enough(easy to spot when searching for tight/flobby B strings as very few people seem to have an idea), There is far more "XXX sounds better then XXX", which is completely subjective, even when comparing a $105 SX bass to a sadowsky. No mention to how they sound different ect.
eh thats just my little rant. Rest of the place is fantastic, and the luthier section provides a great resource for busting many common myths.