The results are in!

R

Resist The System

Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Not to long ago I posted a thread on behalf of a Rockbass Streamer 5 vs. Warwick Corvette FNA 4. I purchased my Wick in 99/00 and have never came across another bass quite like my FNA. I'm sure most to all you guys know what I speak of, when I say "nothing plays/sounds like a Warwick".

I just received my Rockbass today, I must say it's far from a let down! It retains many of the same features of a true Wick, snap case for the electronics & truss rod, Warwick tuners and bridge, MEC pickups and Warwick strap locks! Guitar Center made me pay extra for my strap locks and I paid 1200 (NEW) for the Wick (for crying out loud)... Speaking of money, I purchased this bass brand new for $309.00 from Dana B. Goods (free shipping as well) and I also received a free Warwick hat. I don't think you'll find a better deal than that any where?

Last but not least, does the Rockbass come close to the real thing? Yes and No! You won't find a better non-Warwick bass as far as playability and sound goes in this price range. However, it does lack the monstrous tone and true wood feel of my FNA, although there's still trace elements of the Warwick growl. All in all I'm very satisfied with this bass, actually astounded. I do believe after the Seymour Duncan preamp goes in, the bass will be close to my FNA (although thats a big seat to fill). Have no doubts my friends, the Rockbass is far from a let down!

P.S. My main reason concerning the ROCKBASS name was due to my past experience with Parker guitars. I own a Fly Classic which is a phenomenal instrument; I thought I'd try one of their lesser models after Ken sold the company and it was a huge mistake, this isn't the case! Don't let the Rockbass name fool you for a second! It may not play and sound like a true wick but it will slay the garden variety bass i.e. Fender, Ibanez, Schecter or should I just say Cort guitars. Enjoy =)
 
Nice contrast :-)
I do agree that we should see the Rockbass series not as an entry level Warwick bass, but simply like another bass. It is not bad at all...
 
Florin said:
Nice contrast :-)
I do agree that we should see the Rockbass series not as an entry level Warwick bass, but simply like another bass. It is not bad at all...
Click to expand...

Nuff said. It is too good to be called an entry-level bass. If you use an RB for recording, nobody will notice that your bass is an 'entry-level' one.
 
I have 2 RB's, both active, a Vette and a Fortress, and they're both great. Worth far more than what I paid.
 
I really think people "like myself" see the Rockbass name and instantly think it's a wanna be Warwick. That's totally not the case, it's far from a Warwick in terms on sound and playability, however that's not saying the Rockbass isn't a great bass. My Streamer is in desperate need of a preamp, however the pick ups are super nice and even through out the 5 strings. It almost has a Les Claypool type sound. Overall I'd have to give this bass a 7.0 out of 10. 1 being crummy manufacturers and 10 being Warwick (German) made basses.

P.S. I've been playing both guitar and bass for well 11 years now and swore by 4 string basses; I received the Rockbass Streamer 5 string last friday and never noticed the fifth string... I never had to adjust my playing style, unlike other 5 strings I tried out over the years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
My RB $$ 'vette is a 5. I had the same experience with playability.I had a Ibanez SR755 and it drove me crazy. Sound on the other hand is another matter. Mine sounds like a real Warwick. I have played both versions of the 'vette $$ and prefer the RB. It's sound is more focused IMO. Mine is the 2010 version and I did not care for older RB's at all. Of course I have not tried the old streamer RB though.
 
From the information I've gather people often prefer the old Rockbasses to the new, honestly I think it's more of a visual bias. The basses are almost identical rather than the 1 and 2 piece bridges, and the removal of the huge Rockbass font on the headstock. The pickups are the same as well as the wood, I really don't foresee any tonal difference nor playability issues between the two. I do agree the 2010's look better but I hardly doubt they play any different. I for one know, no Rockbass could ever feel or sound like my Corvette FNA German made Warwick.
 
I've actually found the opposite.More people tend to like the new RB's better than the old ones.
Re.the wood.RB's are alder,ash & carolena & all have maple necks.That 2 piece bridge is a pretty significant improvement in sustain,intonation & tone.The new ones are a big improvement on every level imo.
 
Honestly, the more mass at the bridge you have the more sustainability and resonance the instrument can posses. The older RB's sport the 1 piece bridge like so many other manufacturers i.e. Fender, Ibanez, Yamaha and so forth. I do like the 2 piece design better, however I've yet to tell a huge difference from my RB to Corvette as far as comfort, action and overall playability goes (bridge wise).

Does a RB feel like a Warwick? No, it never will! No current model RB will ever feel like a true Warwick! Maple necks, rosewood finger boards and bottom shelf woods will never match that of a true German made Warwick. In all honesty, the RB is to refined to match that of a Warwick.

Warwick's are super raw basses, slide your hands down a Ovangkol neck and you'll notice a huge difference in feel. The Ovangkol neck and wenge fingerboard accompanied by bell brass frets alone sets a standard the RB's will never touch. I'm not bashing the RB in any means, however RB's plays and feels like a mass produced instrument.

P.S. Look at it like this; there's no ghosts in the machine... That special something is missing and it's something only true Warwick's muster. True Warwick's aren't for everyone, at times I think they're too raw and unrefined for many bass players.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I haven't played the new rb's yet but they look great,I have a 06 rb vett and it's a good bass but it isn't in the same class as the german made ones.But the redesigned rb's look like there closing the gap a bit.
 
Resist The System said:
Honestly, the more mass at the bridge you have the more sustainability and resonance the instrument can posses. The older RB's sport the 1 piece bridge like so many other manufacturers i.e. Fender, Ibanez, Yamaha and so forth. I do like the 2 piece design better, however I've yet to tell a huge difference from my RB to Corvette as far as comfort, action and overall playability goes (bridge wise).

Does a RB feel like a Warwick? No, it never will! No current model RB will ever feel like a true Warwick! Maple necks, rosewood finger boards and bottom shelf woods will never match that of a true German made Warwick. In all honesty, the RB is to refined to match that of a Warwick.

Warwick's are super raw basses, slide your hands down a Ovangkol neck and you'll notice a huge difference in feel. The Ovangkol neck and wenge fingerboard accompanied by bell brass frets alone sets a standard the RB's will never touch. I'm not bashing the RB in any means, however RB's plays and feels like a mass produced instrument.

.
Click to expand...


I appreciate what you're saying,but,"bottom shelf woods"?C'mon mate.Alder might be more common,but I really dont think it's any less of a tonewood.As long as it's cut & dried the same way as it's more exotic counterparts,it's going to perform just as well.
I totally agree that a maple neck is going to feel different to an ovangkol neck,no question.But I believe it's a case of just being different,rather than "better".SS1 necks are maple & imho,have the same feel of a RB's neck.The frets are now the same material on both basses & rosewood fingerboards certainly arent a cheap alternative.You'd never find it on the Infininity,or any other bass,if it wasnt a great wood.
The RB's single piece bridge is the same,Schaller made bridge that the earliest Warwick had fitted.Some Fender guys swear blind that the high-mass replacement bridges,like the Bad Ass,might improve sustain,response & other things,but it takes away the organic,woody tone.
I'm not saying the RB is an equal bass to a Warwick.Let's face it,"nothing" on earth feels,plys or sounds quite like a Warwick bass guitar.We can all pretty much agree on that.:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I'm trying to say here is, common woods such as alder, maple and rosewood are found on $69.00 dollar instruments. Find me a $69.00 dollar swamp ash body with veneer covering, wendge fingerboard and ovangkol neck. When I said "bottom of the shelf woods" I simply meant your garden variety woods that come standard on even the cheapest of guitars and basses. I don't know if you own an actual an Warwick, however I have no problem in pleading my case... It would only take a few seconds for me to record myself playing both basses, with the same amp, same mix, same volume and the results are staggering. Once again though, the Rockbass is a fine instrument but hardly that of a Warwick.

P.S. I don't know if you've heard of traben or not, however they use massive bridges and some of their basses arguably sound better than a China made Rockbass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Resist The System said:
It would only take a few seconds for me to record myself playing both basses, with the same amp, same mix, same volume and the results are staggering.
Click to expand...

....and the results would be....errrr.....different.

Alder, maple and rosewood basses were played by John Paul Jones, John Deacon, Jaco, James Jamerson...etc. etc. well, most people really.

Horses for courses; you say tomato, I say tomato - tho' that doesn't work in print!

EDIT: Hey - my post count equals my age...do I get a prize???:d
 
Yeah and all those bass players you mention have nothing to do with Warwick. This is strictly Rockbass vs. Warwick. I'm not saying alder and maple aren't decent woods as most of my Yamaha guitars are alder with maple and rosewood necks. To me Yamaha makes the ultimate guitars and great basses to boot, however they DO NOT sound like a Warwick. There's something Special about Warwick made basses and I've yet to figure it all out.

I can also tell the difference between a Yamaha and non Yamaha guitar, each manufacturer has their secrets, Warwick just having a little extra secret sauce. What I'm trying to tell everyone is don't get your hopes shattered when your new Rockbass doesn't match that of a real Warwick, however their still extremely nice instruments. People see the "Made by Warwick" and except it to play like a 4,000 dollar thumb.
 
Resist The System said:
I don't know if you own an actual an Warwick, .
Click to expand...

Well,if you look at the bottom of every post of mine,you'll see that I do indeed own an actual Warwick,which isnt wasnt my first btw.I've also played just about every model there is,both new,old & in between.
If you look into it,there's $10,000+ basses that are made of alder,maple & rosewood,as well as $69 jobs.
I've heard more than enough recordings of different basses in an A/B comaparison to know that most people cant pick which bass is which.Check out talkbass for some threads where you're asked to identify which bass is which,from every price range.Most get it wrong & cant pick the Fodera from the Squire.
 
Resist The System said:
What I'm trying to say here is, common woods such as alder, maple and rosewood are found on $69.00 dollar instruments. Find me a $69.00 dollar swamp ash body with veneer covering, wendge fingerboard and ovangkol neck. When I said "bottom of the shelf woods" I simply meant your garden variety woods that come standard on even the cheapest of guitars and basses. I don't know if you own an actual an Warwick, however I have no problem in pleading my case... It would only take a few seconds for me to record myself playing both basses, with the same amp, same mix, same volume and the results are staggering. Once again though, the Rockbass is a fine instrument but hardly that of a Warwick.

P.S. I don't know if you've heard of traben or not, however they use massive bridges and some of their basses arguably sound better than a China made Rockbass.
Click to expand...

First of all Greg is soooo right! Remember, it is always about the player's sound, not the bass's sound. Do you have a bass in your room somewhere? How does it sound? I bet it is silent now because you are at the computer.
If YOU pick your bass it will have YOUR sound. If I pick the bass it will have my sound. If we put it back again it will have NO sound :-)

...............................................

About the woods, the most important thing is the quality, how and how long were they dried. Be sure a 69 EUR bass will not have the same wood as a 6900 EUR maple bass, don't fool yourself.

Cheers,

Flo

 
You guys have totally twisted this topic! I play both basses through the same fingers, same amp (G-K full stack), same mix, same computer and the results are still the same (staggering). I never made mention to other artists as that has nothing to do with this discussion. I'm telling you right now, I'm a tone freak and have honed my sound over the past 11 years! The Rockbass in "no way shape or form" can remotely come close to my Corvette FNA.

I don't know how many of you guys play guitar outside of bass, but those of you who do will understand. For years I listened to NIN, however I never seen them live... I remember Trent having a questions and answers forum in 2004 on NIN.com. Anyway, I submitted my question asking him if he uses Parker Fly guitars? I heard the use of distorted guitars and piezo's in quite a few recordings! He never replayed to me, however I finally seen them live during the "With Teeth" tour and never the less he plays a Parker Fly.

If you listen to the bands like Orgy, Spineshank, Twisted Method and Memento you can tell they use Yamaha AES guitars, their tones are very similar due to the fact their using the same instruments! You can also tell the same about Warwick basses, there's something a little extra no other manufacturer comes close to, regardless who's playing them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top