Boutique basses and guitars

[nofi]

somebody riddle me this. why the big dollars for what in many cases is not very original. sadowsky, valenti and lakland come to mind. basically a fenderish bass body and neck with electrics and hardware anyone can buy. same holds true for tele and strat clones i have seen. just curious about this process and the prices. i now see why ritters have their place.

[Deathshead]

To have something that looks wacky and melted, that looks like a fancy table?

Seems to me many R&B players have no issues spending like $5k+ on a wacky 5-6 string made out of 50 different exotic woods and
with tons of knobs and preamps etc,

Just to achieve a extremely muddy generic tone...

[bassvirtuoso]

To me, I enjoy the "personal touches" the luthier can give the instrument. They've spent time studying the original models and have found ways to improve upon Leo's already great designs. With Sadowsky, and ultimately Valenti since he worked for Roger, you get upgraded active electronics that were pioneered by Marcus Miller. I'm not saying that all of those things excite me, but I can understand why they are wanted in the market.

[Psycho Bass Guy]

It's for that last 5% in tone that makes the difference between a good and a great bass. I'm old enough to remember when vintage Fenders and Gibsons were not particularly desirable except for the quality of Pre-70's versus then-current or recent vintage models. Then, some people started discovering that the instruments that were made well enough to have lasted 20 or 30 years also sounded superior. Also about that time Alembic, who had been around awhile, really took off in popularity because as amps of poorer and poorer quality became the norm, onboard active tonal shaping became almost a necessity.

So on one front, there were the copyists trying to replicate the close tolerances, neck shapes and finish compositions of the coveted vintage instruments, and on the other, active circuits went crazy. Sometimes the two overlapped, and in general, the market has not been kind to innovation past accepted "norm;" see Steinberger and Kubiki for examples of that. Since the market and tonal preferences dictate a fairly narrow spectrum of "popular," most upmarket innovation has gone into refining, rather than redefining, the state of the art. US makers are definitely far more conservative than their foreign (Dingwall is Canadian- so not just European) counterparts, probably as a reflection of our relative social/cultural conservatism.

[luve2fli]

Funny that this topic has come up. Having owned several high-end basses, I'm now at the exact opposite end of the spectrum. The extra dollars for those boutique basses only ever gave me a modicum of tone-shaping ability ..... certainly not enough to justify their price-tags. My '96 MIA Jazz Deluxe does everything a Sadowsky does.

On another note, I was doing a multi-band gig about a month ago and one of those acts was a country band. Really good band, two female vocalists, the bassist was equipped with an "F" bass (min. $3.5K out the door). While watching them set up and get ready, I was thinking how much I was looking forward to hearing him play and get a sampling of his bass tone. Completely disappointing. Thin, nasaly, wobbly tone, top end like a glass cutter. My Squier Jazz Vibe series (yes, I said Squier) absolutely killed. Simple, focussed tone with a ton of proven possibilities all at your fingertips. Can't go wrong.

...... my days of coffee-table basses are over.

[Pilgrim]

I think it's for the aesthetics of the instrument...and if you can afford that, then more power to you.

Personally, I am not interested in paying for those aesthetics - I'm perfectly happy with production line instruments that can be adjusted to play well.

If (as Psycho Bass Guy asserts) there is as much as a 5% improvement in sound at the top end, I'm comfortable in the knowledge that I'm not - nor will I ever be - a good enough bass player to reach the 95% level where that 5% could make any audible difference.

[gweimer]

In some cases, it's the idea of owning such a bass.   An old accounting teacher said it this way - A Porsche is not 5 times the automobile that a Triumph is, but the idea of owning one is why they are priced that way.

[uwe]

I think boutique basses have a place if they an own identity - like Alembic, Wal or even the much derided Ritter basses. But what escapes me is the trend of the last decade to recreate two bass icons - P and J - over and over again. A boutique J or P is just an exoensive replica to me, not the real thing. I'd stick with the Fender product anytime, imperfections welcome.

[TBird1958]

I do have a boutique Thunderbird.
Not your usual hippiesandwich or Fender clone tho similar.
Is better than an original? In some ways yes, in some ways no.
My bass was made just for me, virtually a sig model ( I'm not good enough really  ) and there's a lot be said for the care and level of quality that went into my bass, I'm quite happy with it and very proud to own it.
Of course I love my Gibsons, probably more than the Lull a '76 suits me just fine, Thank you 
   

[uwe]

To me the Lull is not a replica - but a bass with TB looks and a very conspicious TBird design departure: no neck-thru construction. That is to me like building a neck thru P. I would understand more why someone would want that (as it is not offered by Fender) than the umpteenth bolt-on replica of a P. The bolt-on neck makes the Lull more of a Fenderbird to me, which is ok as you can only build Fenderbirds yourself or get them from boutiques.

No, wait for it, in reality a Lull is more like a very expensive Epi TBird!!!! (Ducking ... - can spike heel boots be aimed and thrown at great distances?)

[TBird1958]

I know where you live......................




The boot would hurt much more because it'd be attached to my foot.

[exiledarchangel]

No, wait for it, in reality a Lull is more like a very expensive Epi TBird!!!!

You forgot to add "with a girlier neck" Uwe! 

[Chris P.]

A strange thing is that people buy a Sadowsky or Lakland cos they want a Fender, but 'better'. And they still use all the materials Fender uses... Why not a neck-through P or something. Or other tonewoods for bodies. Tha can be interesting.

Well, I'm a bit guilty of going towards boutique by buying a Warwick Buzzard and wanting a Stryker from the same brand. But that's more the Entwistle link and the glorious discount I get:D

[Barklessdog]

The bolt-on neck makes the Lull more of a Fenderbird to me, which is ok as you can only build Fenderbirds yourself or get them from boutiques.

No, wait for it, in reality a Lull is more like a very expensive Epi TBird!!!!

Nothing wrong with that. Only for bass snobs.

The Fender clone part I understand as its the most acceptable bass period to 90% of the market. It makes it possible for anyone to build basses and for them to sell easier.

The Hippie sandwich bass I understand the love as well - Its all about the craft of wood working in its highest form, not to be a touring bass, but an artistic statement you can play & enjoy rather than put a book on. If you can afford it more power to you.

I also agree with Uwe that a builder to be unique, needs to develop their own pickups, like Leo did after Fender. Rickenbacker, Wal & Alembic included. Slapping P & J pickups are just glorified Fenders.

[PhilT]

I remember reading a post on a bass forum somewhere, the guy said he went to an audition with a big Ampeg rig and a Wal. The guitarist looks at the Ampeg and the Wal, then says: "I suppose you spent so much money on the rig, you couldn't afford a Fender."