My take...
I agree, this bass is
a great low B alternative for 4 string players. The only thing stopping me from getting a 5 string, and others I suspect, is the narrow string spacing on a 5'er. I know one could get a broad-neck, but then you have, well, a broad neck. Many players, including me, prefer a 4 string bass because it matches our bass playing style best. I have been formally trained on a classical guitar, I have played Bach, Beethoven, AC/DC, etc. So handling complicated (and not so complicated) arrangements on 6 strings isn't a problem for me (well, I
am out of practice so take that with a grain of salt :wink: ). I am much more comfortable laying down a heavy rhythm and thumb-tap-slapping a staccato-beat on a 4 string, just my thing.
Now the idea of having a low B really appeals to me. And like I said, 4 strings is 'my thing'. Anyway, I understand why some would prefer an EADG bass. Its 'traditional', you can play most 'already produced' music on it with open EADG tuning and 'standard' finger placement. But for those, like IncX and JanVanHove, EADG tuning isn't a major concern, throwing down the low-down is. I agree though that the Taranis could use an active pre-amp, but that can be dealt with using an amp's eq or using an external pre-amp which many people possess already. If I were to get a Taranis, I would probably swap out the passive 2 band eq for an active 3 band, but thats just me, and it would only cost a few hundred more.
Anyway, thats how I feel. I started this post mostly because I really value what you all have to say on all things Warwick (and bass in general). 99.9% of you know WAY more about bass guitars than I do, and I really respect your knowledge there. This bass fascinates me because it looks standard, but is not. Seems to fill a niche somewhere between a passive Jazzman and a Darklord, which I find interesting enough to talk about. And maybe purchase...
Sorry for the novel!

and thanks for playing along!

Keep the opinions coming too!