"No Warwick bass is better than the other" Now tha

[Nojja]

If you look at it that way, no bass is better than the other..it all depends on the personal view of the person.

So my guitar stringed with 4 bass strings are better than all warwick basses, no one would agree. Even if i said the fake bass is better its still not better, its almost officially not better. Thats why i think it stupid to say its just a personal matter...



How come that streamer on the offcial warwick has been awarded with some big prize, its been voted the best bass, according to a group of experts the streamer is the best bass.

If 1000 people try the thumb BO and the NT and 800 people say the NT is better than the NT is better. According to that research 80% of all people enjoy the NT more, the NT has been voted the best bass.

 

[Tv IV Dogs]

So can women ever 'officially' be hotter than each other? Friends 'better' than each other?

Since there are no real objective measures in these things, there can only be personal taste and choice, because thats all that matters.

 

[ThirdthumB]

So my guitar stringed with 4 bass strings are better than all warwick basses, no one would agree. Even if i said the fake bass is better its still not better, its almost officially not better. Thats why i think it stupid to say its just a personal matter...


If 1000 people try the thumb BO and the NT and 800 people say the NT is better than the NT is better. According to that research 80% of all people enjoy the NT more, the NT has been voted the best bass.

I think this conclusion is incorrect. 80% prefer the NT is the correct conclusion instead of 80% say it's better. There are wayyyy more Fender players on this planet. Doesn't mean that Fender is better than Warwick.

 

[Nojja]

No but tell me why a bass can get an award for best bass 2008? How can Warwick advertise it if they have that philosophy that you talk about.



Theese jury look at basses on price, quality and everything. They then give the bass a verdict, warwick streamer got the best verdict and was announced "Best bass" because it got the highest overall score.



EDIT: The difference is that a bass is about sound. Sound cant be defined like "the best" sound, its a personal thing. A Tv can be voted the best TV because it has the best picture, thats the different because a picture are about best resolution and clearest "picture" its physical. You can do tests and find out which TV that gets the most crystal clear picture. Stil i think it stupid not to be able to say that one bass is better than the other. Overall a Rock Bass corvette is worst than a Warwick corvette, most people have that view. But if he compared a Rock Bass streamer vs a Corvette its harder to tell. People would have different opinions.



Whatever, i dont think anyone here have the right answer. Me myself i think if a majority of people think a NT is better than a BO then a NT is generally better than a NT. When we buy a bass we look after a certain attributes, it need to sound a certain way, a good sound.




I think we can all agree that a NT is technically better than a BO.

 

[ThirdthumB]

No but tell me why a bass can get an award for best bass 2008? How can Warwick advertise it if they have that philosophy that you talk about.



Theese jury look at basses on price, quality and everything. They then give the bass a verdict, warwick streamer got the best verdict and was announced "Best bass" because it got the highest overall score.

Technically, it would be correct to award it as "The most preferred bass by the jury according to given criteria". It is tradition to name it as "Best bass", which is technically incorrect.........

 

[Echo]

How come the BOs don't have Ekanga in the Ovangkol necks ??

Is Ekanga the same thing as Ebony? I'm awfully curious exactly what each wood is supposed to convey tonally, and then how they are expected to mix. I guess that's another topic for a complete Warwick 101 thread someone still needs to write.

Anyway, as for the age old original topic, I own a Thumb BO and a Thumb NT. There are definitely distinct differences in their tones, and the feel of their balance and hug against the body, and the feel of fretting them. Some of that may be due to how they are set-up, of course, but much is due to their obviously much different construction.

Choosing one aesthetic over another is too subjective for the OP to have much of an argument. For example, aesthetically, I prefer the wavy grain of the Thumb NT over the straighter grain of the Thumb BO. Throwing the grain of a banana bass into the mix is pretty poor sophistry on the original poster's part.

 

[ThirdthumB]

How come the BOs don't have Ekanga in the Ovangkol necks ??

Is Ekanga the same thing as Ebony? I'm awfully curious exactly what each wood is supposed to convey tonally, and then how they are expected to mix.

No. Ekanga is seemingly a composite, which tonal contribution is close to zero. 8)

Check out this link:

 

[Florin]

So im in a guitar store, and i asks if they have any Fenders, yes he says, but this 20 dollar guitar made of cheap plastic is as good as that expensive fender up on the wall, they are just made different. Its all about the sound you know, some people like this 20 dollar guitar more than that Fender for 1000 dollar.

Nojja, buddy. I am sorry, but what Warwick model would be the "cheap plastic one"?

The building process, the woods used and the electronics are 100% the same on all warwicks, on all price ranges. The same craftmen are building them, the same guys are checking them.
You already know why a NT bass costs more than a BO one, and add another reason: number of units. SSII will be more expensive because we don't sell too many.

I am sorry to tell you but most of the bassists actually prefer BO basses. I do prefer NT, but My friend, the endorser Adrian Ciuplea, will not trade his Streamer LX for a Streamer Stage II.
You came with proline/ std comparison. I am sorry, but in my opinion, the Corvette STD Bubinga sounds much better than the proline, even if it has passive pickups.

Another thing to say... I am a Warwick endorser too, and I buy my gear.
I am sorry to say, but this is simply a wrong topic... There is nothing wrong to say that you prefer SSI to the LX, but it is just your opinion, based on your limited experience. The same is for all of us we all have limited experience, and we all speak for ourselves.

So please, have the decency not to speak in my name, because I actually like the Streamer LX MUCH more than the Streamer Stage I

 

[Mr.D]

In my opinion you have some reason on what you're saying Nojja but let's see.
When you say NT are better you say it refering to overall construction and atention to detail or in sound? Once again in my opinion they are two diferent subjects.
In construction I must agree with you if we're talking about more attention in all that process, I got both the NT and BO versions of Thumb and sure the NT shows a little bit more atention to detail, the more silky finish on the wood, the neck construction with the veneers and if we want to get picky even the electronic cavity was better arranged on the NT.

As for the sound I have to disagree with you, since they use diferent woods , diferent PU position on the basses, also the sound is for me a personal matter. Like already been discussed the Thumb as a unique sound and a Corvette has a more common sound. Still using your comparison between Thumb and Vette let's see: the position of PU's on the Thumb is very diferent from the PU's position on the Vette, also the Vette has a bigger body so more mass that will inflict changes in sound since the Thumb body is smaller and have less mass.( hope I'm not getting to confuse) some prefer the attack you get from BO models, other prefer the sustain you get from the NT models of course its a matter of personal taste IMHO.

I personally can't understand the price gap between the proline Vette and the Standard Vette with active pu's, but making a comparison between the Thumb and the Vette IMO makes no sense, since they're 2 distinct models.
The price gap between NT and BO is not because one is better than the other, simply the NT construction requires a diferent aproach so it would be more expensive, you'll find diferent prices even when comparing NT models between them. Quick examples: the SSI is cheaper than a SSII simply because the SSII got an improved NT construction, more wood laminations on the neck and offcourse the hide neck thing, the SSI got the more regular NT construction if we can put it in that way, it's a neck with body wings glued to it. Another example: the Infinity besides the NT construction, the Neck hidding also got the TCS but it doesn't mean it's better than otther NT models.

 

[jay]

If you look at it that way, no bass is better than the other..it all depends on the personal view of the person.

How come that streamer on the offcial warwick has been awarded with some big prize, its been voted the best bass, according to a group of experts the streamer is the best bass.

The streamer that was voted "the best" happens to be a BO...

 

[Mr.D]

A quick curiosity , the Thumb NT is known for it's neckdive and balance issues and the Vette is a well balanced bass with no or little neck dive.
So as you can see a high end and high price Wick has an issue that a low cost wick doesn't have.

 

[FunkyMan]

Well well.. Here it established a large discussion.. I think it is simple to understand the original question, I will ask a question to all and please be HONEST in their answers, leaving behind our philosophy of personal interests and love for each warwick. Well: Physically, technically, electronically, constructively You think that a corvette standard is better than a Streamer Stage II??? (Remember, Physically, technically, electronically, constructively)
Guys don't get me wrong, but I don't think so..

 

[IncX]

If you look at it that way, no bass is better than the other..it all depends on the personal view of the person.

So my guitar stringed with 4 bass strings are better than all warwick basses, no one would agree. Even if i said the fake bass is better its still not better, its almost officially not better. Thats why i think it stupid to say its just a personal matter...



How come that streamer on the offcial warwick has been awarded with some big prize, its been voted the best bass, according to a group of experts the streamer is the best bass.

If 1000 people try the thumb BO and the NT and 800 people say the NT is better than the NT is better. According to that research 80% of all people enjoy the NT more, the NT has been voted the best bass.

your line of thinking is basically all about popularity contests ...

so what if 80% of the public voted a band like Fall Out Boy as "ALBUM OF THE YEAR" ... do you think they actually make good music just because they won that award? OK, im sorry FOB fans ... but i just really think the band is a fashion band.

lets not forget warwick is also a company and it needs to do marketing to survive in this competitive climate... there are some basses they want to promote, and some that they choose to lay low for awhile... do not believe what you read and what you see ... trust yourself and your ears.

have you owned a BO and an NT? ... well, the guys here who have owned both actually say they are unique and not better from each other. if you have owned both BO and NT wicks, then sure... you can form an opinion for yourself.

I do not have any wick NTs or SNs ... i plan to have an NT though, not because of its sound.. but simply because of: aesthetic, mojo and the fact that i know it took a lot of hard work and commitment to make such a fine instrument. i love listening to a bass, but i also love looking at it... and im willing to pay more money to have a bass id love looking at.

so yes.... a bass isnt all just about sound. I will never play a bass that sounds and plays like my dream if it looks like a toilet seat (ooopppsss... similarities to other basses are purely coincidental, i wont be held liable if in any case the adjective has similarities to any basses in production - nice save dont you think? *lol*)

 

[catworm]

The BO Streamer $$ that won 2007 bass of the year also happened to be:

"Best bass over £1000"

I'm pretty sure the Thumb NT clocks in at about £1700.

Just accept that some people think BO is better. I love bolt on corvettes, and although I most certainly wouldn't say no to an NT bass, I won't be fucked if anything happens to my neck, and I have tone that my friends envy. Enough.

 

[Ian]

It's not a matter of what bass is better or what... It's a matter of taste ! I love my Streamer LX (BO) to death, I'm not sure I would love it if it was NT, I don't know...

 

[Nojja]

If you look at it that way, no bass is better than the other..it all depends on the personal view of the person.

How come that streamer on the offcial warwick has been awarded with some big prize, its been voted the best bass, according to a group of experts the streamer is the best bass.

The streamer that was voted "the best" happens to be a BO...

Well it is fun that the BO was voted instead of the NT (which i proclaim is the best bla bla) but it still fun that a bass can be officially better than another bass. But i have allready changed my mind a little in my "wall of text" reply.



And btw, most people here have a good philosophy, but the truth is different IRL, most people i meet either are the "uh, whats so good with that bass, my J&M is as good as any bass" or "What did it cost? The thumb is better, its more expensive" (maybe they dont say exactly like that but that is like their view on the subject) I am 17 so i probably meet more people like this than you who are much older.


Ofcourse this is childish to think but many people are like that.

 

[jay]

Well well.. Here it established a large discussion.. I think it is simple to understand the original question, I will ask a question to all and please be HONEST in their answers, leaving behind our philosophy of personal interests and love for each warwick. Well: Physically, technically, electronically, constructively You think that a corvette standard is better than a Streamer Stage II??? (Remember, Physically, technically, electronically, constructively)
Guys don't get me wrong, but I don't think so..

Physically, and consrtuctively I would think their the same. Otherwise I wouldn't know. I don't care for the Streamer shape, so I have never picked one up...

 

[ThirdthumB]

I think I'm going to give Mr Rabble a +1 on this one I'm afraid..........

 

[FunkyMan]

Well well.. Here it established a large discussion.. I think it is simple to understand the original question, I will ask a question to all and please be HONEST in their answers, leaving behind our philosophy of personal interests and love for each warwick. Well: Physically, technically, electronically, constructively You think that a corvette standard is better than a Streamer Stage II??? (Remember, Physically, technically, electronically, constructively)
Guys don't get me wrong, but I don't think so..

Physically, and consrtuctively I would think their the same. Otherwise I wouldn't know. I don't care for the Streamer shape, so I have never picked one up...

Brother, I want to clarify that I have nothing against the corvettes, Otherwise, I like them!! :twisted: I hope you answer my question honestly!

 

[Florin]

Well well.. Here it established a large discussion.. I think it is simple to understand the original question, I will ask a question to all and please be HONEST in their answers, leaving behind our philosophy of personal interests and love for each warwick. Well: Physically, technically, electronically, constructively You think that a corvette standard is better than a Streamer Stage II??? (Remember, Physically, technically, electronically, constructively)
Guys don't get me wrong, but I don't think so..

Sorry you didn't got the Idea... There is no "better" here, but "better for my needs"
And to answer to your question, If I go in a studio with 3-4 basses for a job, including a SSII and a corvette std, be sure that there are songs where I would use a corvette STD, not the SSII.