其实无论什么时候,都有个不变的定理,就是:
力的作用是相互的.
我记得论坛也有不少朋友包括自己也写过FENDER以外的东西,但是从回复率,点击率上面来看,没一些写FENDER的,或者是些FENDER图片欣赏的多.这个潜在的品牌意识已经先入为主了.
既然是这样,自私的说一句:不如迎合下大家的口味是不是更好呢?就写FENDER吧.
这个是很不负责任的说法.但是当你负责任的话,有多少人卖帐呢?
像最简单的,写个效果器测评,DIGITECH的就肯定没有MXR多的关注率.品牌虚荣心作怪,会让人蒙住眼睛去找一些不适合自己的,但是高档的东西,而不是从自己的切身出发去考虑是否适合自己.
信不信我回头帖两个帖子,一个是FENDER照片,一个是PEAVEY照片,看FENDER的准多.看了还会说:"漂亮!""太爱它了!"甚至是"FENDER就是好!!"这些话.完了其他人就会跟着这些话来为自己选琴做标准.
干大死的拿FENDER,干重型的也拿FENDER,是不是迟点见面打招呼也来句:今天,你FENDER了吗?
"今天,你FENDER了吗?"
陈总这话说的一针见血!一语指出国内的现状和偏见,GOOD!
今天你FENDER和WARWICK了吗?
还有比这更牛得多的呢!!
最记得我以前给IBZ写过些测评.完了回头有人发PM咒我:你孙子是不是中国人?为什么发日本人做的东西?你还有民族气节吗?
真的是林子大了,什么鸟都有.
不尽力多去看看,多去学习别人的长处,总带着封建,偏见和盲目的崇拜,就造成了我们许多事物的停滞.
我内个问题怎么没人回答啊~~~~是8400更值得买还是8300谢谢啦
非常遗憾！二个牌子都未用过！！
但总有一天会有的！！！！
我喜欢乔丹的琴, 7802
我内个问题怎么没人回答啊~~~~是8400更值得买还是8300谢谢啦
可怜的菜鸡
琴这个东西绝对不是非常的私人化，就算不拿出来给人看，你弹的时候也会多多少少被人听见……为了别人的认同消费并不是什么所谓的虚荣，而是我们的文化的一部分
fender的意义是划时代的，他使电声音乐的普及成为可能，个人认为fender代表的不是奢华、精准、完美之类，而是实用、耐用和音乐爱好者，所以不能对这个品牌过于苛求，事实上从fender走出来的制琴师所创厂牌的产品很多都是走高端路线，证明了fender的技术和团队实力，而fender的产品组合则是一直贯彻他的市场战略
个人意见，不对请喷
大家说了这么多~!我觉得最重要的已经不是琴啦,应该是钱~!哈哈哈哈哈哈
有钱了买一堆回来,自己慢慢的试`!
两种琴在历史，文化，品牌号召力等方面都存在较大差距，最后购买者一对比价格就不再犹豫了。
原帖由 菜鸡 于 2006-7-31 18:32 发表
我内个问题怎么没人回答啊~~~~是8400更值得买还是8300谢谢啦
看你需要什么样的音色了, 8300的音色更现代一些, 也更好弹一些
各位斑竹能接触到的琴实在是很多~~
能找到属于自己声音的琴~~
FENDER 是在做一种文化~ 我也很喜欢FENDER这种气息~也希望能有一把适合自己的F那是件多么开心的事情啊~
所以 尽自己的力量多感受 感受 下 拥有各种各样琴的 朋友~ 从他们那里获得 声音的个人印象~~
等到自己有钱了 哈哈~~
还怕什么琴 整不到么？~~
好好学习！天天向上！
山珍海味！大胸大房！
对得好工整啊！
~~~
走 去扬州水包皮！！！
来吧来吧来吧！
原帖由 菜鸡 于 2006-7-31 18:32 发表
我内个问题怎么没人回答啊~~~~是8400更值得买还是8300谢谢啦
没反应过来8300和8400是什么琴，翻了下年鉴，才对上号了。
8300是Mark Hoppus Jazz Bass，是个P Bass琴颈和J Bass琴身的综合体。装配了Seymour Duncan SPB-3拾音器。属于现代款式的范畴，音色也比较现代，音量大。SPB-3的拾音器的声音我现在越来越不喜欢了。
8400是Mike Dirnt Precision Bass，Vintage的外型设计，Badass II琴桥，最牛逼的地方是装载了Custom Shop ‘59 P Bass拾音器，声音非常讨人喜欢。这个可是没有零售的噢。
以上两琴我没还没机会见到，我对他们的音色直观的了解是从那俩位的歌曲，间接了解是从国外网友的测评。（当然他们手中的琴是Custom Shop给定做的，质量当然更好）。从声音来说，我也更喜欢Mike Dirnt的音色。
这俩的售价不是一个档次的。后者要更高。
要是我的话，我肯定选Mike Dirnt Precision Bass，这把琴有我喜欢的一切东西，尤其是那Custom Shop ’59 P Bass拾音器，太喜欢了！（当然也有不喜欢的，就是他属于Artist系列，不太Original）
[ 本帖最后由 HellCat 于 2006-7-31 22:56 编辑 ]
大家说的太精彩了,我可算长见识了,我要想你们学习,你们真的是认真的在爱琴!!
这样啊~~~明白了~~~就是说8400用途更多一点~~
插句嘴：有了满意的琴也还是需要乐手不断的修炼和提高自己对音色的掌控能力 否则有时实际效果还真不咋地 对于入门尚浅的兄弟们来说 至少不管什么琴 要先学会 尝试着不把所有的钮都拧到头儿。。。。。。。。。
原帖由 菜鸡 于 2006-7-31 23:02 发表
这样啊~~~明白了~~~就是说8400用途更多一点~~
我的看法与你正相反，我认为8400可能适应的乐风更狭窄些：
首先他的琴颈很宽(60年代典型的C Shape，琴枕处达到44mm宽)，有些曲风要求琴颈比较细，它就不能胜任了。第二，8400用了最典型的Vintage拾音器，音色肯定是比较“传统式的芬”，也就意味着，它不可能满足其他很多风格。
这帖子给了我不少的启发,让我更深的了解到了选琴的一些概念!
真是精彩的讨论啊!
学习中```
看完这个贴子。真的学到了不少啊/
我本人也特别喜欢FENDER。让我不喜欢F的原因说出来。我是真的不知道怎么具体说。因为我还没有真正的懂得音色的概念。因为不是每个人都有机会接触那么多琴的。但是我还是说我最喜欢F。我觉得那才叫做贝司。感觉简单，干净。一种说不出的感觉的喜欢，我知道这有点盲目，可能这就是F的自己特有的魅力吧/
原帖由 jinkuhan 于 2006-8-1 00:16 发表
看完这个贴子。真的学到了不少啊/
我本人也特别喜欢FENDER。让我不喜欢F的原因说出来。我是真的不知道怎么具体说。因为我还没有真正的懂得音色的概念。因为不是每个人都有机会接触那么多琴的。但是我还是说我最喜 ...
F才叫做贝司的话,其他琴叫什么?
我觉得你的sp 和我的mtd也可以叫琴
原帖由 HellCat 于 2006-7-31 23:13 发表
我的看法与你正相反，我认为8400可能适应的乐风更狭窄些：
首先他的琴颈很宽(60年代典型的C Shape，琴枕处达到44mm宽)，有些曲风要求琴颈比较细，它就不能胜任了。第二，8400用了最典型的Vintage拾音器，音色肯 ...
至少punk算一个吧 那就够了~~
Fender确实是跨时代的发明之一它造就了全世界的主流与非主流音乐我在80年代也曾经拥有过3支Fender确实好的让我没话说我到现在都还在国外的ebay网站上寻找我要的Fender vitage....
小小修正一下楼主的话:Metallica 第二任bass手用的是Sadowsky那是全世界长的最像Fender的琴之一....呵呵楼主兄我不是故意来闹场的哦只是追求真理....
关于Fender引领主流的问题小弟在此发表一个链接非常有趣大意是几个大牌子的老板和制造者(包括MTD,Zon,Spector,Sadowsky,Music Man....等)在一次“圆桌会议”上针对为何Fender仍然在21世纪占据录音师耳朵与各大厂牌将要如何杀出Fender包围圈等问题做出的会议有兴趣的朋友可以看看....
http://www.mtdbass.com/pages/Pushing%20the%20Envelope.htm
这篇是我看到最客观的关于fender这个品牌的讨论。不得不也来凑个热闹，虽然加一块只碰过2把fender。
110楼的是个好帖子，以前看过一句话，这个世界上只有两种声音，fender and nonfender，音色真的是个口味。
一个大众审美观一旦建立很难摧毁，就像很多听到的专辑都是fender bass录的，我们会很容易认为那就是bass 应该地音色，这时候的后来者就很难进入这个圈子了，但幸运和不幸的是我听得很少，我愿意接受nonfender，我也喜欢部分passive fender的音色。
嗯扁条体兄您说的这个事情就会让我们陷入另一个迷思
为什么Fender的passive tone永远可以在全世界的音乐圈领先？
而为什么在80年代末期之后active的琴慢慢崛起(当然包括了Fender被日本收购的空床期)全世界的乐手如何看待Fender？
而当老美又拿回Fender的主导权之后为什么他们除了passive之外开始生产active的琴那又以为了什么？
呵呵这些事情我也搞不懂当然无论是否Fender就像前面有些大大所说的只要是我要的tone就算是国产1000块的琴又何妨？
扁条体兄大家共勉之....
南瓜....
我非搞一只2万的fender不可！
How do you get a dozen of the world's top bassbuilders to sit down together and talk about their art? Easy... offer them a free meal. That's what we did at this year's Summer NAMM show, Nashville, the site of the first (and hopefully not the last) Bassmakers Breakfast.
Between bites of eggs, grits, and biscuits, the master luthiers engaged in an animated discussion about the current state of their art. Considerable credit goes to Michael Tobias, who cooked up the idea in the first place, helped to gather the participants, and inaugurat ed the festivities with a thought-provoking question. Joining Michael at the table were: Greg Curbow (Curbow String Instruments), Dudley Gimpel (Ernie Ball/Music Man), Geoff Gould (Modulus Graphite), Steve Klein (Klein Custom Guitars), Stephen Mosier (Moses, Inc.), Michael Pedulla and Bret Carlson (Pedulla Guitars), Michael Replogle and Richie Owens (Steinberger Sound), Stuart Spector (Stuart Spector Design), Roger Sadowsky (Sadowsky Guitars), Frank Thomas (Tobias Guitars), and Joe Zon (Zon Guitars).
Let's Listen in...
The State Of The Art
Michael Tobias: A few weeks ago, I heard from a guy who had spent 3,500 of his hard-earned dollars on a Tobias bass. He'd gone to a recording session, and the engineer couldn't get a sound with it. The engineer told him, "Go get a Fender," so this guy went out and got his Jazz Bass and brought it back to the studio. The engineer looked at it: Bang. Fine. "Play." So this guy asks me, "Why is this Fender a better bass in the studio than my expensive Tobias? Do you builders make these instruments just to satisfy your own egos? Do you pay attention to the market? Do you pay attention to what we need?" Now I would have to say there are several factors involved: One is your technique. Another is getting used to a new instrument and learning how to voice it. And another is tunnel vision from engineers who will just look at a bass and say, "It's not a Fender; I can't get a sound." All of us, to a greater or lesser extent, have to fight this kind of thing, because we don't just make Fender copies. So the question is: Is the Fender bass still the standard and, if so, do we raise it? Lower it? Confuse it?
Roger Sadowsky: I'll dive in, because I think I surrender to it, probably more than anybody here . Fifteen years ago, when my business consisted of doing repairs for the studio players in New York and I began to think of building my own instruments, all of those issues were smack in my face. The players didn't want anything that didn't look like a Fender, because they knew what the engineers would say. We're talking about jingle session where nobody was taking more than two minutes to get a sound - plug in, knock it out, you're outta there.
That situation was a major factor in the decision I made about the instruments I was going to build. So, as I said, I just surrendered to it. I saw what my market was and who my clients were, and I wasn't willing to spend ten years beating my head against the wall, trying to give them something they were going to resist. I made a commitment to make the best Jazz-style bass I could and to offer any refinements I could to the design. I'm comfortable with that - I mean, I don't have a problem with it. You brought up a very real issue, Michael. Creatively, it's frustrating because it limits what I can do - but looking at it from the business perspective of giving people what they want, it's worth it to me.
Michael Pedulla: We took a slight different route. Number one, I've always thought that I simply wouldn't be able compete with a large, established company on its own territory. I had to make a niche for myself. That's one reason why I got into making basses - guitar players wouldn't look at it if it wasn't a Martin or a Gibson or a Strat, but bass players were much more open to trying something new, regardless of the name or what it looked like.
We were trying to take what was established and change it a little bit, improve it. And it's a different instrument, so you have to get used to it. It's like going from a Ford Escort to a Porsche - boy, that Porsche is difficult to drive at first. Everything's different about it. And it takes a long time to learn to drive it well.
Bret Carlson: The Fender does only one thing, pretty much. It does that thing well, and everybody's used to what it does.
Michael Tobias: Right, everybody's used to it, but in 40 years how much has the state of the art changed? Alembic came out in the '70s with these incredible basses, but they're not the state of the art today.
Geoff Gould: I thing you're mixing up terms. Fender may be the standard - I'll buy that - but it's not the state of the art.
Richie Owens: But isn't it the standard partly because of the analog recording techniques that people got used to? It was the standard sound on a lot of recordings, so everybody adapted to it. Now the technology is changing, with digital and everything, and engineers are able to accept an instrument with a wider frequency range than a Fender bass. Recording technology is becoming more open to other instruments.
Geoff Gould: What Mike said in the beginning about engineers is the key to the whole thing. A while ago, engineers would see a Modulus bass and say, "Oh, I can't work with that; it's too hard." But now Nashville is our most successful town, and most of the engineers have a Modulus setting. It's become normal here.
Roger Sadowsky: Also, Nashville is a town where a guy goes to a session with a trunk, and he's got eight basses with him. In New York, on the other hand, the guy's got one bass in a gig bag, and he hops on a subway to get to the session. It's really different.
Michael Replogle: We're seeing almost a circular evolution. The engineers might be on the back side, but now they've got a Modulus setting - cool. So it's almost become a standard. At the same time, as builders, we often push the envelope, to give players new sounds and new direction. Seven or eight years ago, when I was with Valley Arts, we were making basses that were just glorified Fenders, really. We weren't pushing the envelope. But at Steinberger we've got a whole different animal, and it is pushing that envelope. Each of us here is pushing out into the wilderness, and eventually, behind us, the engineers come along. But they haven't forgotten that old sound. So while we're breaking new territory, we're still trying to cover that old sound too. It's almost a circular thing.
Michael Tobias: Things do run in interesting cycles. For a couple of years, neck-throughs were the hottest thing, and then bolt-ons make a big comeback.
Bret Carlson: People are always trying to find something better. It was "more sustain" for a while, then it was "wider frequency response." Sometimes you go too far, and then you say, "Okay, this is good. We got this far, now let's back up a little bit and focus on what works ."
Geoff Gould: But I think we're all here because Fender gives us the room to be here.
Michael Pedulla: Well, they're not changing - it's been P-Bass and Jazz Bass forever.
Geoff Gould: Let's face it, they have to do that. They're stuck in that niche. Now, one interesting thing that we're working on is a J-style 5-string. And Fender's working on that, too; they've had one, but they're introducing a couple of new versions. But where does a 5-string meet a Jazz Bass? I think there are some
compromises that you have to make.
Michael Tobias: Well, a 5-string's just never going to respond like a 4-string, anyway.
Michael Pedulla: Most of the guys I work with still use a fretted 4-string because the E string just sounds different than it does on a 5-string. And the B string on a 6 sounds different from the B string on a 5.
Survival Of The Fittest
Michael Pedulla: What we do is like any other business - I mean, you have to look at the economic side. When we're designing a new bass, one question we have to ask is: What price range should it be in? We also have to think about trends - bolt-on or neck-through? what kinds of sounds are happening? - but we
always have to keep that price in mind. I can make a very expensive bass; I know that. But I also enjoy the challenge of making a more affordable bass that's still true to what we do - one that can go right into the studio, with no skimping on electronics or hardware or anything else. We've all got to pay our bills, and lately it's been tough to sell $4,000 basses. There's a limit to that market. So that's part of our challenge - to bring what we do to the players less expensively.
Michael Tobias: The economy dictates where we can sell basses. Right now, I'm building about one a week, but there are people here who are building 35 or 40 a week. Somehow, we all fit into this market at different levels. And the amount the market can absorb is dependent on what you build and where you place it.
Greg Curbow: You're kind of self-placed, because you have the ability to make only so many at a certain point, and you've got to price your instruments so you can survive.
Michael Tobias: Well, you don't have to make the most expensive bass in the world. If you have somebody make parts for you at a reasonable price, then you can produce a bass that's much more affordable. You don't have to make a $4,000 bass, but there seems to be an almost constant number of basses that you can sell at $4,000 every year.
Geoff Gould: I don't really agree. I think the high-end niche has definitely shrunken.
Michael Tobias: Maybe so. I'm probably building the smallest number of instruments of anyone here, just because I'm building them by myself at this point. But if you're trying to expand your company and grow a business that will last and support you, then you have to have broad-spectrum appeal. You can't rely on the very-high-end niche.
Michael Pedulla: That's right - you have to find your own niche. And you always have to look for openings:
"Well, there's only one U.S.-made bass in this price range. Why don't we try to fit into that?" We found that to expand we couldn't do it with just one model. We had one bass for 15 years, and then, over the next five years, we came out with three new models that were pretty different - different look, different sound, different hardware. That opened up new segments of the market for us. We had the studio guys, and we said, "Hey, we want some of the rockers too. We want the bass-in-your-face players, so let's make something like that."
Dudley Gimpel: As for the price your instrument needs to be sold at, I think that usually comes down to what is costs to make it. And what it cost to make it can vary a lot, depending on your production situation and whether or not you manufacture your own hardware, your own pickups - that sort of thing. If you can
reach the point where you're building fairly large numbers, then it becomes less expensive to make your won parts than to buy somebody else's.
Michael Pedulla: It's tough to get to that point, but that's what we've been trying to do. And you always feel as if you're chasing. "Oh, we did that. Well, that gets us a little closer, but we've got to get a little closer yet."
Geoff Gould: We're all driven by the market, but you have to be true to yourself. You have to do what you do best - and that's why we're all here, you know? Because there's something special and different about each one of us.
Roger Sadowsky: I agree with Geoff. After reading the article Michael Tobias did last year ["The Quest for Tone," May/June '94], I marveled that every one of us has a group of bassists who think we make the best bass in the world. How wonderful!
Michael Pedulla: And they're all so different.
Roger Sadowsky: Absolutely. And I agree with you, Geoff - I think all of us got into this for non-business reasons.
Stuart Spector: Lord knows there are easier ways to make a living .
Roger Sadowsky: We all have our identities. We just have to do what we do, and do it as well as we can.
Michael Pedulla: It's interesting - in Europe, there are about a million bassmakers . It's incredible. And yet you don't see the diversity that we have here. If you look at five bassmakers in the U.S., the instruments are very different; over there, they're very similar. There must be at least 80 bassmakers in Germany, but the instruments are almost all the same. Most of them look like Tobias basses, actually .
Michael Tobias: Tell me about it.
Stuart Spector: I think there's a lot more diversity in what we do than there is in the guitar part of the market. Fender basses are in some ways a standard, but they have a sort of narrow focus in terms of what they do. I think that has presented opportunities for all of us to try different approaches.
Michael Replogle: The Fender bass was pretty much your Model T. And if you look at the history of the automotive industry, you see an incredible amount of innovation over the years, and now it's a whole different animal. In a similar way, the people here represent an explosion of innovation from builders who wanted to get away from the old Tin Lizzie. And it wasn't just for money. I mean, that's one common thread I keep hearing from builders, wherever I go: "I'm not doing this for the money."
Michael Pedulla: Because we don't have any!
Geoff Gould: It's kind of like microbreweries, you know? I mean, Budweiser may be the standard - and I don't mean to offend anybody - but there's a lot of room for improvement there. So people come out with different things.
Roger Sadowsky: Micro-luthieries!
Michael Pedulla: Micro-profits!
Guitar vs. Bass
Stuart Spector: I think we should give credit to the diversity and open-mindedness of bass players, compared to guitar players, and their willingness to listen to new instruments and try new things. Otherwise, practically one of us would be doing this.
Dudley Gimpel: Coming from a company that makes both guitars and basses, my perception of it is the opposite, to some extent. In terms of introducing new things and having the players accept them, even down to what colors we're going to use, we find that bass players seem to be a lot more conservative than guitar players.
Geoff Gould: Well, there are structural things and there are colors. Structurally speaking, I don't think that guitar players are all that flexible. Plus, they play through all that scuzzy amp stuff, so everything sounds the same once they're plugged in .
Roger Sadowsky: What I find is that with guitar players I'm always fighting the vintage market. That's not true with bass players. A guitar player would be just as happy to spend his two grand on a vintage guitar, and he thinks there's nothing that sounds better than an old guitar through an old amp. A bass player may
want to have a clean '63 Jazz Bass, but he's really not looking to play it every day.
Bret Carlson: Maybe it's because of the roles that bassists and guitarists have played. The guitar player, in general, is up front, but the bass player has to push for recognition all the time. I think that's reflected by the gear - with the gear that bass players had in the beginning, they didn't have a voice that would stand out. They had to push.
Stuart Spector: I remember something Will Lee said, which I though was hysterically funny and also very true. He was talking about playing with the Letterman band and learning some old tunes. He said he realized that the bass was so badly recorded on some of those old records that you couldn't tell what the notes were - and if you started to play audible pitches, it ruined the effect! What you needed was this dull, toneless thump .
Roger Sadowsky: I often find that when bass players are interested in an instrument, the test for them is hearing playback on tape. They have to find a spot for themselves between the kick drum and the synth - they have to hear themselves. If they can't hear themselves, then they're not interested in the bass.
Geoff Gould: I want to say "Hear, Hear!" for the players. We all have the guys we work with - I sit and listen to Oteil Burbridge; he's playing our bass, but he could sound great on anything, you know? It's wonderful. That's what it's all about.
Michael Pedulla: It's the players who give us the ideas and drive the market. "I need something to do this. I need it to sound like this. I want to try this." We use our endorsers not so much for advertising but for feedback. When we're working on a new instrument, we send it out to four different people - one guy's doing studio work, one guy's playing big concert places outside, and so on. How does it work in this situation? How does it work in that situation? What do you need? The guys that are really good can tell you, "Well I need the bridge here" or "It would be easier for my technique if we moved this over here." That's how we design. The bass layers make the changes. They drive the market.
Out Of The Woods
Joe Zon: A lot of people are concerned about endangered woods, but I don't think it's the instrument industry that's depleting the supply.
Stuart Spector: A lot of that stuff is getting cut up into veneer for conference tables, as far as I can tell.
Joe Zon: Actually, most of it's being burned. It's the slashing-and-burning for agriculture that's the real problem.
Michael Pedulla: I heard a report that only six container loads of ebony came out of Madagascar last year. That was it. The rest of what was cut down was burned. The deforestation problem is not being caused by fingerboards.
Stuart Spector: Recently, I found out why there's always a constant supply of East Indian rosewood: on the tea plantations in India, rosewood trees are planted to shade the rows of tea bushes, and when they reach a certain age, they're harvested. So there's an ongoing supply of it.
Greg Curbow: The material my necks are made of is finished birch; they've been farming that material for close to a hundred years now. It's just growing like corn, you know?
Michael Replogle: A lot of people don't realize that our industry is actually helping to promote preservation of the woods we use. My family is from Oregon, and when they moved there 60 years ago, they clear-cut the hills. They went through the trees and pulled out the straight lumber, and the rest was left to rot. The quilted and curly maple was considered trash wood. My uncle said that when they hit a tree that had all this beautiful figure in it, they'd chip it up or burn it. Before quilted maple became popular for guitars and basses, they used to make particle board out of it.
Michael Tobias: Well, they couldn't run it through their planers. It would destroy them.
Michael Replogle: We've taken our lumps as consumers of wood, but actually we're raising awareness and making it more viable for people to farm exotic woods.
Geoff Gould: We've been investigating some new woods. For instance, we've been using this new wood from Mexico called chakta kok. It's being farmed in a certified program. Hopefully, the players will buy it. Michael Pedulla: You have to say, "Hey, this wood is acceptable, because I'm putting it on my bass. Itsounds great." But it can be a tough sell when people just want curly maple.
Joe Zon: Well, if enough of us do it, it will force the issue.
Greg Curbow: If you don't introduce a new material, they're not going to ask you for it. The players ay not even be aware that it exists. If I hadn't decided to try Rockwood, the neck material I've been using, nobody would have know about it. And I've done well with it; in fact, those are the best-selling basses I've ever had. The sound is phenomenal. But nobody would have used that unless I had said, "Well, I'm going to give it a shot."
Rewards
Michael Tobias: One reason I started building instruments was because I wasn't a good enough player to be Mr. Flash onstage, but I could make something that allowed someone else to do that.
Greg Curbow: Right. The next best thing to being onstage is seeing your instrument up there.
Stuart Spector: Another thing that's incredibly satisfying about what we do - and incredibly rare in this day and age - is that we make something that's not a disposable commodity. If it's a good instrument, it's not going to wind up in the trash bin in a few years. One of the things I tell people is that this bass is something you're going to be able to play for the rest of your life and hand down to your kids.
好长，看得我好累……
原帖由 上帝的信仰 于 2006-8-1 10:07 发表
好长，看得我好累……
厉害，我看第一眼就直接晕了
我操,救我...
确实世界上有些录音师/制作人非常偏好FENDER
我也贴一点关于他们的看法, 是在一本BASS PLAYER PRESENT, 名字叫做"STUDIO BASS MASTERS"里面看到的
先是著名的制作人 PETER ANDERSON( 不是马来西亚内位ANDY PETERSON, 是一位美国人, 制作人兼吉他手, 获得过GRAMMY奖, 也是80年代一位非常重要的BLUES/COUNTRY吉他演奏家 ), 他在谈到录音时候用的BASS时候是这么说的:
Q: what basses do you exprect a player bring in?
A: if the player has only one bass, it's got to e a fender, and i hope it would be a p-bass. that's the definitive electric bass design.
然后是仍然是与GRAMMY有着千丝万缕联系(他的唱片获过奖, 但是本人没获过)的录音师兼BASS手DUSTY WAKEMAN
Q: what bass gear do you like to see in a session?
A: a vintage fender. i hate basses with built-in preamps. unless you know how to use an equalizer, you're more likely to mangle the sound than enhance it. basses with built-in preamps are also much more likely to produce hum. stock fender basses are usually adequately shielded. if not, it's easy for a good guitar tech to do the job. on my old jazzbass i use alligator clips connected to a piece of wire. i clip one end to the bridge and the other end to my watchband between the band and my skin. that completes the ground and kills the buzz. with some bases, facing a different direction can eliminate the hum, especially if the bass has single-coil pickups like jazzbasses do.
再贴一个此书作者职业BASS手KEITH ROSIER 对于琴的看法
the fender precision bass and jazzbass are the accepted standards for recording electric bass; you can't go wrong if you bring one to a session.
原帖由 bassam0222 于 2006-8-1 02:59 发表
Fender确实是跨时代的发明之一它造就了全世界的主流与非主流音乐我在80年代也曾经拥有过3支Fender确实好的让我没话说我到现在都还在国外的ebay网站上寻找我要的Fender vitage....
小小修正一下楼主的话 ...
这样啊~~我说怎么没看到FENDER有跟他那琴一摸一样的~~呵呵~~:D:D
确实学到了不少东西啊~~~~才发现原来自己对琴的认识原来很浅薄~~~
大家讨论的都非常好啊！
确实是一个以FENDER为范例的BASS设备概念大讨论！
章哥的疑问我觉得不难理解，为什么Fender的passive tone可以在全世界的音乐圈领先首先要从50年代说起，整个50~70年代FENDER在国际贝司领域占有绝对主导地位，因为当时还基本没有大品牌能与之抗衡，而且FENDER的声音非常适合当时所存在的音乐形式，所以受到了最广泛的欢迎；
但进入80年代以后，随着以重金属为代表的音乐形式逐渐繁盛，FENDER一度进入低靡时期，只有一个原因就是Fender带有浓厚底蕴的passive tone已经不能适合当时年轻、猛烈、高输出要求的重金属音乐的需要；
90年代以后音乐形式更加多元化起来，而且很多新兴风格都是在传统风格上的创新与融合，并且全球范围内的复古风潮对音乐领域也有不小的影响，所以FENDER标志性的声音能够再次很好的与市场相吻合，再次受到欢迎是必然趋势；
现在FENDER再一次有占有贝司领域的主导地位的趋势，但现在的情况与6~70年代完全不同了，现在各种高档手工琴各种特色琴不可否认的要占领挺大一部分市场，各种品牌特色的高、中、低端产品一应具全，所以竞争也是可想而知的激烈，FENDER也要跟进的做出一些改革与创新才能更好的满足音乐形式的需要，所以才会出现类似AMERICAN DELUXE、DELUXE、ARTISTS系列等等装有主动电路的款式。。。
我个人预见将来FENDER的发展应该是一种多元化的模式，就是既有最原始传统的纯 vintage passive tone的经典产品，同时也会有最新的适合诸如nu-metal或者实验先锋音乐的纯active产品。。以custom shop为旗舰产品以American deluxe为先锋产品以Vintage reissue为后盾产品的具备高中低端同步发展的一整套市场体系。。。所以将来FENDER仍然有可能长期的继续占领相当大的市场份额。。。
