What defines Quality and what's it worth?

[kevmove02]

This is an interesting conversation. Just to be clear, I have no intention of "building a bass" in the most literal sense. What I am suggesting is those who buy an inexpensive instrument, then greatly modify it are not really getting the value they percieve they are getting. So browntree's point actually helps me in that he correctly points out that a quality bass requires carefully chosen components, coupled with expert craftmanship. This is my point: if you buy a cheap bass, then DIY the mods, how can you make the value statement "my bass sounds just as good as. . ." While it may be an individual's perception of reality, it is not a statement of fact.

I love working on projects that challenge me to think. However, at a certain point, some things are not worth the time investment, like modifying a bass, when with a little planning and patience, I could find a bass that has the features I want, along with a service warranty to cover defects. Then I can use all that extra time to work on my technique, rather than fixing bad wiring or trying to eliminate a ground fault and all the other things that can and do go wrong with DIY upgrades to avoid labor costs.

Here's a good question: you bumped into someone who just happens to have a bass for sale. It is the exact bass that you have been gassing for and the price is right. Just before you hand over the money, you find out that there were mods done to this bass by the person who is selling it, and they are not a craftsman or luthier. Do you still buy the bass?

[Asahel]

This is my point: if you buy a cheap bass, then DIY the mods, how can you make the value statement "my bass sounds just as good as. . ." While it may be an individual's perception of reality, it is not a statement of fact.

Well, kevmove, I have to jump in and say that while I somewhat agree with what you are saying, I also somewhat disagree.  

Since there's no need for me to restate the points I agree with you on, please bear with me as I state the ones I don't agree on.

How do you establish what a "good sound" is?  I mean, since I joined this forum, I have witnessed (read about) the endless quest for "tone" many people here have.  IMO, as long as the instrument is properly tuned, the quality of the individual pitches coming out of that instrument is "in the eye of the beholder", or in this case, in the ear of the listener.  Add to this the fact that there are so many factors that affect tone (wood, strings, effects, amps, cabs, etc) and you can see that if someone is getting the tone they want/like with music combo "A" (el-cheapo bass modded, strings, pedals, amp, etc) they do have all the right to say/think that their instrument/rig sounds as good as music combo "B".

It is true that such statements are individual perceptions, but I really don't think they are ever statements of "fact".  I don't think statements of "fact" are entirely possible (sure someone can go into a lab, follow the scientific method, yada, yada, yada).  "Fact" would mean that there is some defined standard as to what individual pitches should sound, even on a particular instrument/model/brand (including things like "color", "dynamics" and all the things musicians refer to when they are talking sound/music) and then you can A/B against that.  There's a reason why most of you go to your local music store and try the bass out before you buy it: even two identical instruments may sound completely different.

A while ago I saw a YouTube video of Ed Friedland comparing various Fender/Squier models, and while there were appreciable sound differences I think it is safe for me to say that those differences weren't worth $1000+ to (caveat) *me*.  And there is also some monster player using a (hold your breath) Squier Affinity bass; his name is Kenny Harris and you can see/hear him by clicking the following link:  

Kenny Harris Bass Solo

 

Yes, that's a $300 Squier.

To me, buying an "inexpensive" bass (Squier Classic Vibe 60, Squier Affinity Jazz V) provided me with an affordable/acceptable entry point into music, where I can later "upgrade" to the "real" thing (Fender) w/o forsaking all that muscle memory and practice I've put in ('cause Squiers and Fenders are exactly the same shape, form, approximate weight, etc).  I took my Classic Vibe once to a well-known luthier in Colorado to have the BAII bridge saddles grooved, and he just couldn't believe it, and he told me (his words) that I got an instrument that in many areas pretty much came very close to a Fender. (I had originally said here "American Standard" but truth be told, I don't remember if he was referring to a Fender MIA standard or a MIM, so I am editing this.)  My old instructor also played both of my basses and he was equally impressed, even more so (again) with my Classic Vibe.  Perhaps I just got "lucky".

Even at $240, I do not feel that my CV60 is a "cheap" instrument.  Then again, I am not planing on selling it, and to me there's no point on buying a more expensive instrument yet until I can make mine sound close to the way Kenny Harris makes his, if I ever get to that level.

Just my opinion.

Blessings,
Asahel

[dhagler]

Here's a good question: you bumped into someone who just happens to have a bass for sale. It is the exact bass that you have been gassing for and the price is right. Just before you hand over the money, you find out that there were mods done to this bass by the person who is selling it, and they are not a craftsman or luthier. Do you still buy the bass?

If allowed, I would play it extensively before I commit to the sale.

How do you establish what a "good sound" is?  I mean, since I joined this forum, I have witnessed (read about) the endless quest for "tone" many people here have.  IMO, as long as the instrument is properly tuned, the quality of the individual pitches coming out of that instrument is "in the eye of the beholder", or in this case, in the ear of the listener.  Add to this the fact that there are so many factors that affect tone (wood, strings, effects, amps, cabs, etc) and you can see that if someone is getting the tone they want/like with music combo "A" (el-cheapo bass modded, strings, pedals, amp, etc) they do have all the right to say/think that their instrument/rig sounds as good as music combo "B".

Well said, Asahel. I also take into account my audience's and my fellow musicians' lack of perception. Take the audience, for example: most of them equate "busy" or "loud" with "good". Fellow musicians are usually happy if you are (1) in the right key; (2) not too loud; (3) not so busy that you overshadow them or the vocalists. That's not to say you should you should be unconcerned about tone, but in five years [disclaimer: I am talking about me] I have only been in a handful of playing situations where somebody suggested that I alter my settings on my bass or amp to get a certain tone. Most of the suggestions I get have to do with volume level or selected notes in selected places ("you're too loud"; "you're not loud enough"; "instead of playing this note, play that note instead"). If you were to poll the bass players here, I would guess that about half of us have the same experiences in our playing situations as I do.

I used to read the forums here and other places and feel like I was missing something because the posts and threads about modding basses, about spending X amount on a bass, about all the various scales and modes, about using pedals and effects, about slapping and popping, seemed to go right over my head. And then it finally hit me: I am not that bass player. And this is not necessarily a bad thing. The basses I play, the amps and cabs I use, my style of play, they all fit my personality, my playing needs, my contribution to the music ministries I participate in, my budget (both in terms of time and money). That's not to say that there is not room for growth and improvement, but at 45 years old with a full-time job and two kids and numerous other commitments, my bass playing has to fit in with the rest of my life. So three hours of daily practice is probably not going to happen, but I will be more than prepared for Sunday morning. String changes are best left to James at Tuscaloosa Music because he can do it faster and more efficiently than I can plus he will check my setup at the same time. Mods to existing basses may or may get done and if they do James will be the one to do it (and quite frankly if he tells me I don't need them I will probably take his word for it.  ).

Again, I respect and admire my LGM brothers and sisters who are more versed in their craft and more knowledgeable about their equipment than I am. I learn so much from all of you here and little by little, bit by bit, I incorporate what I learned into my playing and my knowledge base.

[floaded27]

kev, i dont disagree with you on certain points. I think somebody buying a knockoff brand bass at Target or Walmart and trying to drop like $600 worth of electronics in it and think they're getting a "bang for the buck" bass is just fool crazy. Nor do i disagree that an expert craftsman would no doubt through skill, careful planning, and know-how put together a quality instrument.

But where's the middle, gray area?

There are people who modify decent basses and get decent results. And sometimes particular components are all thats needed to make it a bass to write home about. I wouldnt say they shouldnt have upgraded, but rather just got rid of that bass and got something else that had everything they wanted. (Isnt that the same reason why people make renovations to their homes? and with good renovations it becomes more valuable. or should they have just moved into a different home with all that stuff already there?) Sometimes upgrades, or even fix-er-uppers, are totally worth the investment.

and i never thought u had to be a craftsman or luthier to drop in some pickups or a preamp. now, drillin new holes or refinishing the wood, maybe. But mods like that? When i bought my 5 string MTD, the guy dropped in a Bart pre since the bass was originally passive, and i didnt second guess it at all. I put my audere in my schecter. Took me all of 20 minutes (it was my first time) so not sure if there wouldve been a significant difference had i used that time for practice.

and to build a quality instrument, you dont have to be an expert, just skillful and knowledgeable enough to build a quality instrument. We all do what we do based on standard practices, and over time we gain wisdom and understanding to explore and expand on our own in different areas, but that doesnt mean we cant/dont do a quality job. Thats no different here. Otherwise all of the Tobias', Brubakers, Callowhills, Skjolds, etc were trash UNTIL they became experts. But how can u be an expert if u continue to build trash? At some point you have to consistently produce quality well before you become an expert.

there is a gray area on either side that can prove worthwhile and result in something of quality.

[malthumb]

Kevmov02,

Take a look through this thread and see if it addresses some of your thoughts. 

http://www.learngospelmusic.com/forums/index.php/topic,47482.0.html

A while back I bought an MIM Fender Jazz with the sole purpose of seeing if I could mod it to sound as good as a more expensive bass.  In this case the more expensive bass was a Marcus Miller.

To make a long story short, I really liked the way the mods came out.  They were a SIGNIFICANT improvement to the original bass in every way.  Since I still had the Marcus Miller at the same time, I was able to A/B them.  At the end of the day, the modded bass was good, but not as good as the MM.  But considering that I could fill the gaps in tone between the MM and the modded J with other basses in my stable, the modded bass was good enough to allow me to sell the MM and play the modded bass in its place with confidence.  If I needed more than the modded jazz could deliver (rarely) I had other basses I could use.  Overkill.  Sorta like squirrel hunting with an uzi     

Now, here's where personal taste in tone and quality come into play.  I eventually sold the modded bass to an LGMer.  I liked it enough to keep it, but a 1980 Music Man Sabre became available unexpectedly so something had to go.  The buyer didn't like it nearly as much as I did and moved it on to someone who might appreciate it more.

Peace,

James

[kevmove02]

All great responses! I begrudge no one their say and thank you for your feedback. Okay one at a time. Asahel, I get your point, but one of the problems today is that we have elevated "point of view" to "statement of fact".  "In the eyes of the beholder" is not only dangerous, but completely contrary to the pursuit of truth. Let's use a musical example. I own 3 basses: MIM JBass with Bassline p/u, Squier VM PBass with Bassline p/u, Yamaha RBX765a 5 string (stock). I say, "I think all these basses have equal tonal qualities" and some may disagree with that statement, but really can't challenge it because it is my point of view. However, if I hook all 3 basses to the same tuner and start playing them all in the same manner, what I will find is that not all C notes are created equal. Some will be right on tune, some will not. Even after a proper setup and intonation, not all the notes will be perfectly in tune across the fretboard. However, the instrument that is more finely crafted will have fewer variations, therefore, from a pitch standpoint, perform better. This is an absolute test of an instruments ability to play true to pitch and the result really does matter.

Yes, many of us will be okay with the tonal performance of out instruments and live on. But to say that a finely crafted instrument is overpriced one thing, to say that an inexpensive instrument performs just as well as the others is simply not true.

I have seen the video of the guy playing the Squier. Let's see if we can find other videos, in other settings of that guy only playing his Fender, like we would see of Marcus Miller playing his favorite bass.

Yes, there are people who mod their bass and do a fine job of it. There are probably some who could have a nice second career, if they chose to do it. But my own experiences tell me that sometimes, we don't know when to pull the plug on a project that has become a money pit. Even after we complete the project, we don't want to admit that it would have been cheaper and far more effective to let a pro do the work. In my case, the pickup upgrade of my J Bass took weeks to get right, while the pickup upgrade on my Squier took 10 minutes. I will tell you that in the future, should I buy another bass (not likely), I will just wait until I get all the features I want, rather than settle for half, then do the other half. That is absolutely a statement of fact.

[Asahel]

All great responses! I begrudge no one their say and thank you for your feedback. Okay one at a time. Asahel, I get your point, but one of the problems today is that we have elevated "point of view" to "statement of fact".  "In the eyes of the beholder" is not only dangerous, but completely contrary to the pursuit of truth.

Well, we are not talking doctrine here... neither false liberalism.  We are talking whether someone has the right to say "I think my instrument sounds as good as".  We are talking about quality of "inexpensive" (not the same as "cheap") instruments and whether they should be modded or not.  I think most would feel that they can be entitled to their opinion.

Regarding doctrine, I am a straight shooter, as most who have read my posts can attest to.  So I think your argument above does not apply to this situation, with all due respect.

Let's use a musical example. I own 3 basses: MIM JBass with Bassline p/u, Squier VM PBass with Bassline p/u, Yamaha RBX765a 5 string (stock). I say, "I think all these basses have equal tonal qualities" and some may disagree with that statement, but really can't challenge it because it is my point of view. However, if I hook all 3 basses to the same tuner and start playing them all in the same manner, what I will find is that not all C notes are created equal. Some will be right on tune, some will not.

Even after a proper setup and intonation, not all the notes will be perfectly in tune across the fretboard. However, the instrument that is more finely crafted will have fewer variations, therefore, from a pitch standpoint, perform better. This is an absolute test of an instruments ability to play true to pitch and the result really does matter.

Again, I disagree.  A C note is a C note, by definition.  If it's not in tune, that's no longer C, it's either B or C# or something else.  It's what your tuner is going to be looking for.  Now, if an instrument can't be tuned, or doesn't hold tune, or has intonation problems, that is entirely a different problem.  If it has fretboard issues, dead spots, and the like...  You just have a bad instrument.  I think what you are implying here --and rightly so-- is that the most "expensive" instruments will have greater quality, which is true most of the times, but not necessarily always.  It's why many people complain about Fender's quality control on various music forums (Talkbass, for example).

IMO, you are straight out denying the possibility that someone can buy a "less expensive" instrument that happens to be of great quality, can be properly tuned and intonated, and just happens to be a joy to play.  And then he/she mods it "with taste" and he/she brings the instrument to its fullest potential.  Just because it hasn't happened to someone doesn't mean that it hasn't happened to someone else.  I am not talking probabilities but possibilities here.

Yes, many of us will be okay with the tonal performance of out instruments and live on. But to say that a finely crafted instrument is overpriced one thing, to say that an inexpensive instrument performs just as well as the others is simply not true.

Disagree too.  If the purpose is to play music, and your instrument does the job wonderfully, then by definition your instrument performs just as well as anything else.  Now, if the argument here is to say, a non-Ken Smith bass sounds just like a Ken Smith... well, no one is asking the non-Ken Smith to imitate the Ken Smith per se, but to sound "as good", "good" meaning, exactly that, that it sounds good, very pleasing to the ears, even though the tonal qualities of both instruments and all of the sound chain (amps, pedals, etc) are different.  A pineapple can't taste like a banana, yet both are "very good" when it comes to eating something if you happen to like fruits.

I have seen the video of the guy playing the Squier. Let's see if we can find other videos, in other settings of that guy only playing his Fender, like we would see of Marcus Miller playing his favorite bass.

It still doesn't deny the fact that the guy can play a $300 instrument and make it sound "good".  If he was to play a Fender or anything else, it would still sound "good", just in a different way.  BTW, the fact that he *chooses* to play a $300 instrument in a public setting is proof that he trusts his "cheap" $300 instrument enough to know that it is going to get the job done.

Yes, there are people who mod their bass and do a fine job of it. There are probably some who could have a nice second career, if they chose to do it. But my own experiences tell me that sometimes, we don't know when to pull the plug on a project that has become a money pit. Even after we complete the project, we don't want to admit that it would have been cheaper and far more effective to let a pro do the work. In my case, the pickup upgrade of my J Bass took weeks to get right, while the pickup upgrade on my Squier took 10 minutes.

Ah!  Yes, I can certainly agree with the above 100%.  Still, if someone wants to spend their money doing the above, they can go for it.  Some may get good results, others may not.  Personal experience is not the same for everyone, I think.  BTW, that $300 bass that Ken Harris is playing on the video?; I think I read on Talkbass that it has been modded.  Sounds pretty good if you ask me.

I will tell you that in the future, should I buy another bass (not likely), I will just wait until I get all the features I want, rather than settle for half, then do the other half. That is absolutely a statement of fact.

Yes, it is a fact that you are stating now in the present what you intend to do in the future if you see yourself in the situation you describe.  Only God knows what you will ultimately end up doing should your situation ever change and you find yourself not being able to "save up" to get what you need/want in one purchase.

My opinion is: if you can afford a $5,000-$10,000 bass and that floats your boat, fine.  If someone can only get an inexpensive bass, and either add things little by little or then upgrade to a "better" bass, that is fine too.  The cats with the most expensive instruments shouldn't dismiss the opinions of those with lesser instruments because they (the latter) "think" that they get a good sound that can be compared with the sound of much more expensive instruments.  Listen, that may be what they can afford.  They love playing music and most here do it for the Lord.  A $5,000-$10,000 instrument or $100 instrument doesn't make you, because it's not about the instrument but about the musician.  

At the end of the day, the proof should be in the pudding...  If the brother with the modded el-cheapo doesn't sound good, let's all share some smiles with love.  But if it does sound good, and he can prove it, is it at all possible that we can accept his/her statement/opinion?  Why couldn't it be true?  For Christian living, we have the Word of God as the standard.  Could you please share with me what the standard is (instrument-wise) when it comes to bass playing, tone, and sound?

I have seen/heard "christian" musicians playing very expensive instruments, in state-of-the-art settings, best sound equipment, you name it.  And nothing happens!  Absolutely nothing!  And I have seen poor christian musicians that live a life of integrity and worship the Lord in Spirit and in Truth, who play at churches because they are Christians first and musicians second and are not jumping from church to church, that are committed to their home congregation even when they are disrespected and unappreciated, that believe that God is He who opens doors for them and provides them with their talent, and when they play, because they do it for Him and Him only, the presence and power of the Holy Ghost comes down over the whole congregation.  That to me is the "better sound".

Peace,
Asahel

[kevmove02]

Asahel, while I think you finely crafted your counter argument, I think you miss my point. While a person may be entitled to a point of view, that doesn't elevate it to truth. Because I believe that a particular instrument perfroms well does not trump actual performance. Taking an instrument and testing the accuracy of the tone across the fretboard is an absolute test. Can you agree that if a properly set up bass does not play notes in tune across the fretboard that this speaks directly to it's quality? Does the listeners' perception change that reality? So if, on a consistent basis, more expensive instruments play in tune across the fretboard, and inexpensive instruments do not, then there is an objective basis on which to say their is a positive cost performance relationship?

As stated earlier, I own one of these "inexpensive instruments" that get dogged all the time (you would think owning a Squier was a captial offense), so I have no bias against them. I also believe you can pay more for an instrument than its worth. But i also believe that it can be objectively determined why all the extra expense for a well made instrument, especially if take the listener's ear out of the equation and use a tuner instead. It is well established that what a person believes can cause them to skew their perception. This is why you have to have a "control group" to validate the results of an experiment.

Let me say it this way: if I buy a Mercedes, it is unlikely that anyone will ever say" "I bought a Hyundai and added a bunch of upgrades, so now my car is just as good as a Mercedes" and have other people accept that as objective fact.

[kevmove02]

malthumb, thanks for the reference to your thread on upgrading. How did you decide to go with the electronic components you chose? When I modded my P-Bass and J-Bass, I went strictly off of reputation and the desire for higher output. On my Yamaha Active, I haven't really thought about an upgrade of the electronics, because I'm not clear on how the tone it already has will get better with different components.

[Andrzej]

This question is open to so many interpretations.

But, to put the topic into context, one of my students bought a cheap 5-string from a far eastern manufacturer that sold exclusively on Ebay.  I forget the name, but when he pulled it out of the case I was surprised that he paid so little for it.  It's a through neck built bass with a 5-piece neck (maple and mahogany), burl maple body with walnut top and back with good hardware.  He paid $650 for it and I was amazed, until I took a closer look at it.

First of all, the neck felt really strange.  Very fat on the out side and very thin and flat on the underside.  It was quite uncomfortable to play and my fingers began to hurt just below my knuckles very quickly.  The fret finishing was terrible.  Lots of sharp edges and some had gaps between the fingerboard, so they weren't even flush.  The 5-piece neck was also poorly finished.  You can feel every stripe of the wood as you run your hand up and down the neck...very off putting.

The wood on the body is not of good quality.  Lots of imperfections in the grain that look like dead spots to me.  That affects the natural sustain and tone of the wood in dramatic way, especially for a through neck.

At first, when I plugged it into my amp it sounded pretty good with my tone settings and I was about to forgive all the other faults, until I went back to my Warwick.  It wasn't so much the tonal difference that bothered me, it was the very big dip in output.  I had to knock down my input gain control on the amp by 4 or 5 places.  So, the pups/preamp was very poor.

Next to a Ken Smith, for example, it is built with the same materials in a similar construction method.  So, paying 2 or 3 grand less sounds like the steal of the century for paying for a bass that does the same job?  Not really.  Let me explain:

Experience

Probably most essential ingredient. Quality instruments that are built by people with 20+ years compared to someone who has been given a few months training before building instruments for sale. Over time you develop a very keen eye for detail...quality of wood selection, finishing etc...  A lot of these cheap far eastern instruments on Ebay are only in business for a year or two, on average.  The workshops are not very well equipped and the builders not well experienced.  Materials and electronics usually very cheap and though the instruments are sometimes hand made they are put together very quickly, so attention to detail is usually suffering.

Listening to players

Top companies really pay attention to feedback from their customers and respond in their build designs and quality.  They constantly develop their models to appeal to as many players with different playing styles and techniques.  Again, they develop a lot of experience about what players want.  Instruments that can cover a lot of styles, play well, sound good and will last a lifetime.  Top companies and luthiers invest in a lot of research to give you that.

Materials

The combination of wood, hardware and electronics to produce a good instrument can be painfully complicated.  Top builders understand this science passionately (going back to experience), develop sensitive years and are prepared to experiment to get precise tones according to what players are looking for.  This bit is a can of worms and there are lots of posts about it, so I will leave it there.

Service

I have been over the moon with the service I have received from companies such as Warwick, MTD, PRS and Overwater has been second to none...before and after sales.  I have had a couple of unpleasant experiences with other companies with big reputations which I would have expected more from.  I am not going to start to name and shame, but I have found that the after sales customer service I have had from companies that are dominant in the manufacturing market are usual very poor and unhelpful.

Just three pointers that make a huge difference.  It's true that you get what you pay for, but don't mistake me for a snob!  I have had some very good budget priced instruments that I have really enjoyed playing.  I owned a Washburn Bantam 7 yrs ago that I couldn't put down.  Yes, the build quality was not great and yes, the tone wasn't much to write home about, but it was great for me.  I believe that is all that matters.  Not the price or even the name.  It is how an instrument makes you feel and better represents you.  At the end of the day, that's all that matters and it is really up to you how much you want to pay for the experience.

[Asahel]

Asahel, while I think you finely crafted your counter argument, I think you miss my point. While a person may be entitled to a point of view, that doesn't elevate it to truth.

I certainly agree, but I don't see where I have stated that an opinion is "truth".

Because I believe that a particular instrument perfroms well does not trump actual performance.

I agree here as well.  I think I even provided small proof that it is performance what counts.  (Refer to video by Ken Harris).

Taking an instrument and testing the accuracy of the tone across the fretboard is an absolute test. Can you agree that if a properly set up bass does not play notes in tune across the fretboard that this speaks directly to it's quality?

What you would be testing across the fretboard is not tone, it is the accuracy of the individual note pitches at that location on the fretboard.  Tone goes beyond the individual note pitches and takes into consideration things like the specific timbre of the instrument, wood resonance and other properties, strings, etc, etc.

Does the listeners' perception change that reality? So if, on a consistent basis, more expensive instruments play in tune across the fretboard, and inexpensive instruments do not, then there is an objective basis on which to say their is a positive cost performance relationship?

I"m sorry, but I need to flag you on this argument.  Yes, you do have a valid statistical argument.  But you are denying the fact that there can be statistical outliers.  If someone says that they have modded a bass and gotten good results with it, and they feel that they can repeat the results based on their experience, what's wrong with that.

As stated earlier, I own one of these "inexpensive instruments" that get dogged all the time (you would think owning a Squier was a captial offense), so I have no bias against them. I also believe you can pay more for an instrument than its worth. But i also believe that it can be objectively determined why all the extra expense for a well made instrument, especially if take the listener's ear out of the equation and use a tuner instead. It is well established that what a person believes can cause them to skew their perception. This is why you have to have a "control group" to validate the results of an experiment.

All a tuner does for you is tell you if an instrument produces the right pitches, where A=440 Hz.  It is meaningles in something as subjective as what would be considered good sounding, or even musical.

Let me say it this way: if I buy a Mercedes, it is unlikely that anyone will ever say" "I bought a Hyundai and added a bunch of upgrades, so now my car is just as good as a Mercedes" and have other people accept that as objective fact.

The owner of the Mercedes tells the owner of the Hyundai: "For $80 grand my state-of-the-art machine took me here this morning."  To which the Hyundai owner replies, "mine got me here for just $14,995, and as you can see, I"m here as well."

Kev, I think we are approaching this from different angles.  You from the extra-value that a finely crafted instrument provides.  Myself from a strict functional perspective.  But at this point I'll concede the point to you and move on, because what's more important here is our fellowship through the Lord and through this forum, and truly, I am overstepping my bounds because I am a very inexperienced aspiring musician.  So peace to you my Brother and I defer to you folks.

Asahel

[kevmove02]

I accept you wanting to end your involvement in the discussion, but I hope you aren't using "inexperience" as a reason for not continuing the dialogue. I don't see anything wrong with lively discussion, and I hope you don't think that I am emotionally involved in the conversation; I also hope I haven't offended you. If I have, I apologize.

[Asahel]

I accept you wanting to end your involvement in the discussion, but I hope you aren't using "inexperience" as a reason for not continuing the dialogue. I don't see anything wrong with lively discussion, and I hope you don't think that I am emotionally involved in the conversation; I also hope I haven't offended you. If I have, I apologize.

Oh, no, Kevmove, not at all.  We are good.  But I don't think I have much to add other that what I've said.  Maybe in the future as I become a more skilled musician I will be in better position to recognize those intangibles that separate a finer instrument from the rest of the pack.  Right now, I really don't know so I will have to humbly admit it and leave it at that.

Besides, I will be coming back to you guys for advice as I learn so I want to remain in your good graces!  

So cool, Brother, and blessings!

Asahel

[floaded27]

i like the car reference. Every major car brand has a luxury brand (Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, etc) and all of them have several examples where a car on both the budget and luxury brands is built from the same base. usually (because its probably the easier way) the luxury model is designed first, and then stripped down to become the budget model. usually its all the extra bells and whistles, convenient but not really necessary features that are removed (things that make it luxury). so if the budget model ISNT quality, then that should mean that the luxury model isnt quality either. so if i take a honda and add a few luxury items that mattered and were important to ME, cant i say "for me its just as good as an Acura"?

also in the sense of worth, not every addition adds to value, but it does add to cost. so if a particular thing doesnt add value (even if its a personal perspective), doesnt that mean its worthless to that person, even though it may add to cost? I've seen pics of basses basses with like 8 or so knobs and 3 or 4 switches. I know ALL of that adds to the cost, but how much of that adds to the value? Isnt that diminishing returns?

[malthumb]

i like the car reference. Every major car brand has a luxury brand (Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, etc) and all of them have several examples where a car on both the budget and luxury brands is built from the same base. usually (because its probably the easier way) the luxury model is designed first, and then stripped down to become the budget model. usually its all the extra bells and whistles, convenient but not really necessary features that are removed (things that make it luxury). so if the budget model ISNT quality, then that should mean that the luxury model isnt quality either. so if i take a honda and add a few luxury items that mattered and were important to ME, cant i say "for me its just as good as an Acura"?

also in the sense of worth, not every addition adds to value, but it does add to cost. so if a particular thing doesnt add value (even if its a personal perspective), doesnt that mean its worthless to that person, even though it may add to cost? I've seen pics of basses basses with like 8 or so knobs and 3 or 4 switches. I know ALL of that adds to the cost, but how much of that adds to the value? Isnt that diminishing returns?

Floaded27,

I like the logic you use in the car analogy, but I do have to push back on some of the detail.  Not just to be contrarian, but because this is literally what I do for a living (the car part, not the disagreeing part   )

Usually when vehicles share platforms or architecture (car biz lingo) the first product designed is the high volume product.  Additional variants are developed in parallel, but usually a little bit behind.  I'll give you a GM example.  In around 2003 - 4, work started on developing the "Lambda" platform.  The first vehicles planned for this product line were the GMC Acadia and the Saturn Outlook.  The Buick Enclave started development a few months later.  The Acadia and Outlook launched in late 2006 as 2007 models.  the more luxurious Enclave launched in January 2007 as a 2008.

Toyota introduces a new Camry before they introduce a new Lexus ES300, BMW launches base 5 Series before they launch M5....and so on and so on.   What makes your analogy work is that the development cycle is so long for cars, 3 -4 years, that there is time to engineer the higher end content before the base vehicle ever makes it into production, so you already know what will and will not work.

[kevmove02]

To further the car analogy, Toyota pioneered the "world car" concept, in which one platform would be used for cars intended for every region of the world. This provides for 2 very important advantages: universal parts and shortened product development cycles (If you really want the inside scoop the auto industry read "The Decline and Fall of the American Automobile Industry" by Brock Yates).

Fender USA has taken the "Toyota approach" to instrument manufacturing (yeah, I know the recent news about them is not helping me now) by choosing to build instruments around the same design imperatives, then using their brands to offer different feature sets. Squier, Backed by Fender, Fender, Made in Mexico, and Fender, Made in USA are just subsets of the overall design, similar to Toyota's brand strategy.

Just as someone can modify a car, we also can modify an instrument But unlike car mods, which produce an objectively measurable performance enhancement, instrument mods can be less dramatic. Sometimes, I would say the performance enhancement is so minimal that its like claiming the brand of motor oil you put in your car makes your car perform better than another brand of equivalent grade.

This analogy is starting to get away from me, so I will close with this: I can choose to purchase a Camry (inexpensive instrument), then modify it so its fit and function is close to that of a Lexus, or I could just go buy a Lexus (expensive instrument). The best choice is determined by whether I enjoy taking the long  way home or just want to get there.

[floaded27]

This analogy is starting to get away from me, so I will close with this: I can choose to purchase a Camry (inexpensive instrument), then modify it so its fit and function is close to that of a Lexus, or I could just go buy a Lexus (expensive instrument). The best choice is determined by whether I enjoy taking the long  way home or just want to get there.

i think part of it is knowing which features are a moot point. kinda like dude always in the car by himself, but has to have TVs in the headrest. Why??!? That adds nothing to your driving experience because he cant watch the TVs. But the guy with the same exact car without the TVs cant say his car is just as good? To a passenger, who that makes a difference to, maybe he cant, but to a driver who that feature doesnt even matter, why isnt that a valid statement?

I think this is the same logic why the cable companies can say this package is better than that one or they're better than the other company because  they offer more channels. But how much weight and value does that statement hold when you have no interest in actually watching any of those extra channels offered?

I like the logic you use in the car analogy, but I do have to push back on some of the detail.  Not just to be contrarian, but because this is literally what I do for a living (the car part, not the disagreeing part  )
Usually when vehicles share platforms or architecture (car biz lingo) the first product designed is the high volume product.

i mistakenly came to this conclusion because car reviews almost always compare the base brand to the luxury brand and almost never the other way around (probably as a selling point - compare the Honda to the Acura to make the Honda buyer feel like they are getting luxury, but compare the Acura to previous model Acuras to make the Acura buyer feel that they are getting improved luxury), so one would logically conclude that the base model was designed based on the luxury model, regardless of which hit the market first.

sorry about that. will this be put on my permanent record? lol