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

[Florin]

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.

Now here you are right buddy The thing is that when you are not very experienced, you have no Idea what a good bass should sound like, or how is a good bass sound. So you look at the price tag, and buy the most expensive one to be sure. Well, it is not bad, you cannot go wrong with a 3000 EUR bass after all... But after you know what to ask from your bass, you'll be surprized to find that some "ordinary" basses can be the best.

Ok, for example, if you play rock, and you like the specific thumb sound... and you want a 6 stringer too, I personally believe that it would be a mistake to buy a Thumb NT 6, because the thumb BO 6 has the growl you actually need, while the NT 6 is more jazz- oriented, really nice and subtle, but not as powerful as the BO.

 

[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..

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.

Master, you are absolutely right, But citing the question in terms of "level" (Physically, technically, electronically, constructively) what is the best? I think, say that it is the SSII does not mean that the standard Vette is worse, The vette will continue to be good for some sort of sound requirements! (Now I am apparently the defender hehe :lol: ) Forgive me for insisting..

 

[Florin]

Sorry man, I know you want to ask the same question in different ways until someone will answer: THE STREAMER STAGE II!!!

But it's not like this We are musicians, and the instruments are tools. You don't need a Super Robotic Claw to extract a tooth right? Is the SUper Cyberclaw better? for whom? Not for my dentist for sure! So if you want a bass, don't look at the price tag, buy the one that feels better in your hands.

My bass is a Streamer Stage II. I personally like much more the looks of an infinity NT, but... the sound it's not for me.

 

[golem]

Re: "No Warwick bass is better than the other" Now

I am tired of hearing everyone say when given the question "Which bass is best? This BO or NT?" Everyone allways says "Uh, they are both good, they are just made differently"



How come all the famous Warwick players play with high end instruments, how come Ryan Martinie doesnt play with a BO instead then?


A NT is better than a BO, a Corvette Pro Line is better than a regular Corvette with passive electronics. I think when you cross the line of 20 000 Euro things starts to look different though. And ofcourse you cant compare a Thumb NT with a Infinity NT, the sound you can but not which one is the best bass. Because they are both at the top of craftmanship and its just the sound that differs but both basses are better than Thumb BO.



A Corvette BO Passive Mics and Thumb NT you can discuss which bass is the best, its the Thumb NT, end of story.


Ofcourse as a rich artist you would wanna buy that bass you dreamed of owning as a kid but still i think a NT is better than a BO, in the same meaning as a real fender is better than a squier.

`

The price of labor and materials affects the user price. As I already said, a solid gold screw driver costs more than a steel one. Since I have screws to drive, I use a steel one.

As to the choices seemingly chosen by celebrity players, they are not always freely made personal choices. I was offered one of those celeb player basses, by the player, who about to receive a replacement. I said more or less "Thanks, but I prefer bolt-on". He smiled and flipped it over [a several thousand dollar bass] to show me the neck bolts. He also prefered bolt-ons. At that point, I did consider the bass, altho ultimately it was just to "moh-derne" sounding for me.

If you actually wanna get into pointless BS argument, one thing I know for sure, by personal experience: Bolt-on is FAR SUPERIOR. I've tried every configuration, more than you'll ever bother with, and I wouldn't have a NT if you gave it to me.

Of course I can only judge from personal experience. I am not really susceptible to marketing and brainwashing cuz I come from another planet. But on my planet, personal truths are absolute truths. Therefor BOLT-ON rules. No Argument. End of subject. Deal with it.

`

 

[Casey]

There is no "better", there is what the person playing them prefers. I was able to afford either the Thumb NT or BO... I went with the BO, Like stated in the other thread... The BO has more attack/bite to it. I also found the BO that I chose to be brighter and snappier than the NT's that I tryed.

Not to mention at the time the NT's didn't have the option of BN spacing. After playing my BO and playing quite a few NT's I've decided BO is my preferred style of Warwick. My CS ebony Thumb will be a BO

 

[golem]

.........
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.

`

The majority are almost always wrong, thaz how they get to be the majority. Majority rule is not about making the best choices, it's about keeping the peace, avoiding anarchy and civil war.

So, if I wanna know which bass is "best", I shouldn't ask a 200lb gorilla, I should ask an 800lb gorilla, cuz the extra 600lb clearly proves his superior ability to make that choice. It's a democracy, "One Pound, One Vote". See how majority rule works ???

`

`

 

[TravisMoore]

(oh, and for the record, a 1000$ fender probably has 20$ worth of wood in it anyway.... (yeah, I don't like fenders, I'm that way...))

Agreed on that one!


I think the point is every person on this forum likes their bass for different reasons e.g. sound, playability, looks and their basses range from the lowest end Warwicks to the highest and as they are Warwicks this doesn't make them any less of a quality product.

 

[golem]

(oh, and for the record, a 1000$ fender probably has 20$ worth of wood in it anyway.... (yeah, I don't like fenders, I'm that way...))

Agreed on that one!


I think the point is every person on this forum likes their bass for different reasons e.g. sound, playability, looks and their basses range from the lowest end Warwicks to the highest and as they are Warwicks this doesn't make them any less of a quality product.

OK. I didn't quit the thread. I lied. So sue me.

Anywayz, some inneressin examples:

EBMM discontinued the SUB basses. Half price, same stuff in a less fancy package. They were undercutting their own mainstream.

Spector's Czech basses are consistently acclaimed, this is not majority rule but unanimity, as being roughly 90% of the USA product for half the price. Thank you Stuart for NOT discontinuing these !!!

Ned Steinberger has a similar situation, Czech & USA, to that of Stuart Spector.

So why do people still buy the more, or most, expensive version, even if it's only "10% better for 100% more money" ? Cuz they can, at least those few buyers can. It's a people thing, not a bass thing.

`

 

[Rieno]

The level of craftmanship is not a synonym for 'better'. My Kubicki is better than all of your Warwick's combined..for me.

Your bass...........the Kubicki...................suddenly it reminds me of the banana example Nojja gave.............hehe...................Just kidding bro. 8) :lol:

Haha, oh so true...nice and yellow with a black tip on each end


And @ Nojja: dude, you're just looking for a discussion and are in no way prepared to look at it in any other way than you see is the right one. That kind of stuff kills a discussion, 'cause you're just venting and not really looking to talk about it with anyone. Godwin's Law is very suitable here, mainly because of your stubborness, no offence ment of course

*edit: crap first!

 

[TravisMoore]

(oh, and for the record, a 1000$ fender probably has 20$ worth of wood in it anyway.... (yeah, I don't like fenders, I'm that way...))

Agreed on that one!


I think the point is every person on this forum likes their bass for different reasons e.g. sound, playability, looks and their basses range from the lowest end Warwicks to the highest and as they are Warwicks this doesn't make them any less of a quality product.

OK. I didn't quit the thread. I lied. So sue me.

Anywayz, some inneressin examples:

EBMM discontinued the SUB basses. Half price, same stuff in a less fancy package. They were undercutting their own mainstream.

Spector's Czech basses are consistently acclaimed, this is not majority rule but unanimity, as being roughly 90% of the USA product for half the price. Thank you Stuart for NOT discontinuing these !!!

Ned Steinberger has a similar situation, Czech & USA, to that of Stuart Spector.

So why do people still buy the more, or most, expensive version, even if it's only "10% better for 100% more money" ? Cuz they can, at least those few buyers can. It's a people thing, not a bass thing.

`

To an extent but even if i had the money for a really expensive warwick although i would probably buy it (after trying it of course) i would still keep playing my less expensive warwick because i love it =D

 

[flipper_gv]

and this comes from a guy that only has 46 posts here?

I mean come on, if the majority of us are telling both are awesome, I guess the majority wins. I mean, I prefer the streamer LX over the SS1, but I prefer the SS2 at the end of the line. I prefer NT thumb over the BO but then again I prefer a Corvette Std. bubinga over a Corvette $$ NT ash.

Opinions differ from people to people...

 

[flipper_gv]

Head over to the Fbass webpage, and read the little thingy about bolt-on vs. NT basses.

I used to wonder if there wasn't a bigger difference, but that changed my mind. I've played an Fbass, and it was absiolutely unreal. Amazing. stunning. Heavenly. ORGASMIC! A little ugly too.

Anyway, in one sense, I do agree with the poster. Not all warwicks are as good as each other.

Streamers are better than thumbs.

Its science. :lol:

HUGE +1 HERE

I mean F bass are some of the finest bass of the planet (along with MTD and Roscoe and Ritter) and guess what? They are Bolt-Ons!!!!!

Omg, this thread is totally pointless

 

[EVOLVEBASS]

Omg, this thread is totally pointless

:lol:

I've certainly forgot what direction the thread was taking. Is it BO versus NT or is it if you spend more money it should be a better bass? Either way, I'm probably not a good candidate to solve anything here. I own 5 basses, 4 of which are BO and 1 NT. But I own the least expensive NT Warwick makes (Corvette $$ NT) - it's actually less expensive than the BO Jazzman because of the 3-band EQ (that I wouldn't use anyway). I guess to each their own.

 

[avionix543]

But I own the least expensive NT Warwick makes (Corvette $$ NT) - it's actually less expensive than the BO Jazzman because of the 3-band EQ (that I wouldn't use anyway). I guess to each their own.

I thought the Katana was the cheapest NT Warwick in the States... :? It was the last time I checked prices.. About the Jazzman, I find it kinda odd that they ever took that bass past $2000, personally. ~M~

 

[EVOLVEBASS]

But I own the least expensive NT Warwick makes (Corvette $$ NT) - it's actually less expensive than the BO Jazzman because of the 3-band EQ (that I wouldn't use anyway). I guess to each their own.

I thought the Katana was the cheapest NT Warwick in the States... :? It was the last time I checked prices.. About the Jazzman, I find it kinda odd that they ever took that bass past $2000, personally. ~M~

It used to be, but the Katana NT is no longer on the US pricelist period. On music gear sites they have it running ~$100 more than the $$ NT. I agree about the Jazzman, it seems overpriced in comparison...

 

[FunkyMan]

I feel excluded for having given my honest opinion on this subject! I identify fully with your ideologies on our basses, and Florin has clearly pointed out that if you are going to make a jazz recording sessions for example, there are certain warwick model which is indicated, and others not so indicated, So that each has its taste! Anyway we are a family and from time to time we must discuss!! :lol:

 

[joekickass]

I had open a thread about "Is NT better than BO ?" so I can understand why he open this thread too.

I think you guys don't understand what he wanna say, I think I can understand some of it,

In Warwick bass, I thank the NT is better than BO, why ? it is not about the personal taste or prefer or any crap you just said(sorry ) , the people here is definitely love the shape of Warwick bass, the Warwick NT is always look much much better than Warwick BO, Warwick do more craft work on the NT, you can find it on the multi angles of the body, the numbers of the neck wood they use, the electronics and the price, I do agree that BO sound different, so I bought one too but.....the punch is bigger but still very small, the XXX is better but still not enough compare to the same thing you can find on the other brand BO bass, the Warwick NT bass don't have this problem, even the punch of Warwick is tiny, but the attack, the treble, the cut thru, the tone can kick other bass easily.

I had SSI & SSII, after playing them, I can see why people like them, but after playing my friend's LX, I still think it is a cheap model of SSI.

Yes, I know you can find the "better" sounds on the Warwick BO model, the custom shop!!!! pls, they are expenice and the BO bass still look exactly the same with the factory bass....

Bolt on bass can have the same value like neckthru bass but in Warwick, they are cheap model, you can find that on the price list 8)

Many people on the internet just try to be gentle, I am maybe over drastic on the language but I think maybe this is the thing he try to say!

I am disappointed with my Thumb 6 BO, so I am kind of agree him, I wish the Thumb 6 BO could be better.....

 

[Florin]

Bolt on bass can have the same value like neckthru bass but in Warwick, they are cheap model, you can find that on the price list 8)

LOOOOL!!!! Ok, I need some help here... Can we find another way to explain why the BO's are cheaper... a new approach? Or should I consider that some users don't bother to read the previous posts?

 

[motleycrew]

Guys who try to make an argument on which bass is "better" than other basses usually as a rule can't play bass. Sure they usually know a few good licks but can not hold a groove for one full minute without losing time. Also, as a rule they are teens who do not buy their own instruments. :roll:

 

[flipper_gv]

Guys who try to make an argument on which bass is "better" than other basses usually as a rule can't play bass. Sure they usually know a few good licks but can not hold a groove for one full minute without losing time. Also, as a rule they are teens who do not buy their own instruments. :roll:

wtf man?