Question for John Hall

bobcat · Post by **bobcat** » Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:27 pm

It's definitely about eight trillion times prettier than a Warwick.

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 4:52 am

I don't get all the fuss about Warwicks. I have played a few and don't care for them at all. The necks are like 2x4's! Blech!

I guess since my first good bass was a 4001, I gauge all necks to that bass!

jwr2 · Post by **jwr2** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 5:01 am

my first good bass was a 1968 4001 ... now that's a tough act to follow!

Warwicks don't growl ... and they don't have a real bite either ... they are clean and smooth and I really like the adjustable nut ...

david_schwab · Post by **david_schwab** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 5:06 am

I was always surprised that they got away with that nut, since I believe that Alembic did it first, and I thought had a patent on it.

I like zero frets myself.

Jack Bruce plays a Warwick, so I have to respect that. I don't care for them though.

80stingray · Post by **80stingray** » Fri Sep 02, 2005 6:36 am

Try playing a Warwick from the late 80's to the early 90's, completely different feel and sound, 1000 times better than any of the new ones. I've owned a couple dozen of them.