3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 20, 2018 18:23:37 GMT
Here's another one. I'm not convinced this is the same wood a these ebony fingerboards on new models, though. I wonder what others think.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 21, 2018 7:01:44 GMT
I pulled some more high resolution pictures of ovangkol and ebony fingerboards used in Harley Benton models. I made one big comparison picture with ovangkol on the left and ebony on the right. You'll have to open this in a separate tab or download it to visualise it in full resolution. It's a large picture (over 10MB, 7716x7480p). Whatever that ebony is, it often looks very nice.
|
|
rtm
Harley Benton Club Junior Member
|
Post by rtm on Oct 30, 2018 2:50:07 GMT
Thomann are doing exactly what I would expect them to do. Find out what is selling and try to sell sell that. There should be no room in good business for vanity. There's room. Washburn proved it in 2004 with the Taurus. (T-24 and T-25) Those things flew off the shelves. If I hadn't got mine early (wanted a 5-string but only one 4-string was left when I went to try one) I wouldn't have been able to until a year after. Unique as far as basses go. Also doesn't hurt that it got rave reviews and the Bass Player Magazine's "Outstanding construction" award that year, something you rarely see with $400 instruments.
The Taurus money is probably what's keeping Washburn alive to this day, god knows they've been creatively shooting blanks for what seems like ever since.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 30, 2018 5:40:06 GMT
I wonder if that middle ground the new HB are going is not a dead end. Tweak the traditional look a little and it's no longer a real copy while staying too close at the same time. This Washburn Notaprecision model is an example of this:
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 31, 2018 7:29:45 GMT
This Fender Performer from the 60s didn't catch on. I don't think we'll see a Harley Benton version of it any time soon. Too bad
|
|
1,481 posts
Disclosures: Everything I don't like I can modify.
|
Post by blablas on Oct 31, 2018 9:15:58 GMT
60's?? Wiki says built from 1985 to 1987. Thinking out of the box with this model: a 5 string lefty would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by Vincent on Oct 31, 2018 9:24:32 GMT
>60's?? Wiki says built from 1985 to 1987. Probably the reason why it failed to catch fire in the sixties then. And it is an ugly looking thing too. Best left inside the box
|
|
1,481 posts
Disclosures: Everything I don't like I can modify.
|
Post by blablas on Oct 31, 2018 9:26:40 GMT
Ugly? I've seen worse designs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vincent on Oct 31, 2018 9:31:15 GMT
Ugly? I've seen worse designs. Me too. Doesn't stop it from being ugly.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 31, 2018 9:58:15 GMT
I must have misunderstood something I read. Yes, it's a little too edgy for the 60s. The angled horns make it look like some battle axe from Dungeon & Dragons. I like the headstock. The angle makes it elegant, which the Macmull idea is not. There were guitars as well:
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 31, 2018 10:03:08 GMT
This one's on ebay for 3000 £:
|
|
|
Post by Vincent on Oct 31, 2018 10:49:33 GMT
You are good at finding ugly looking guitars, LeoThunder ! I will say this one does have a little charm element to it. It is on the pricey side. For something like that based solely on what it is, marque aside I would not pay more than say 200-250 euros providing it is in good shape ( ) and comes with a decent gig-bag.
|
|
3,457 posts
|
Post by LeoThunder on Oct 31, 2018 11:03:43 GMT
You can't beat that in terms of "ugly":
|
|
|
Post by Vincent on Oct 31, 2018 11:16:38 GMT
You are on a roll today, LeoThunder. You are right I cannot beat that. Looks like it needs a good clean with some lighter fluid * * and a lighted match.
|
|