Author Topic: Persuader for sale (Read 711 times)

David Houck · « **Reply #30 on:** February 19, 2006, 08:09:56 PM »

Hi Patrick; I don't really know but it might just be a simple case of someone asking for help with some questions they have about their bass. Email and internet posts are an imperfect means of communication. As you said, sometimes it can be difficult to understand what someone else is saying.

musikdept · « **Reply #31 on:** February 20, 2006, 06:45:07 AM »

Dave,
You're absolutely right...I was just asking for help and clarifying what was standard on 86 Persuaders. I thought the best way was to ask those who actually owned the bass. I apologize if my questions were misinterpreted. I'm not trying to pull anything or stalk anyone. I truly enjoy playing this bass and was simply asking about the history of the bass (original parts etc). Sorry for misunderstandings, I'm relatively new to Alembics.
--Wayne

pmoran · « **Reply #32 on:** February 20, 2006, 09:04:50 AM »

still doesn't explain why wayne sent a pic of a koa persuader w/p-j pups, saying it was my old bass i sold flax. as we can all plainly see, the bass at the top of this thread is a vermillion top, pic taken in my livingroom...........looks nothing like the persuader wayne sent me by email. not even close. koa persuader didn't even have the custom knobs i put on mine when i sold it to flax and the tuners were never gold. in addition, i received an email from wayne insisting the koa top persuader was the pic from this site relating to this bass.........it's not!

musikdept · « **Reply #33 on:** February 20, 2006, 09:17:50 AM »

If I sent the wrong pic...I apologize. It seems as though my inquiries are being blown out of proportion. I was simply asking about the history (parts etc) about bass I bought.

bob · « **Reply #34 on:** February 20, 2006, 10:36:06 PM »

Patrick,

It seems there was some confusion here, and if I were to speculate I would suggest an unfortunate coincidence of new-owner enthusiasm, and prior-owner paranoia :-), as well as the vagaries of modern communication as Dave suggested.

No reason to make a federal case out of it, you now have two public apologies, whether warranted or not. Time to let go and move on, life is too short to dissect the past.

No criticism or offense intended, this discussion just doesn't seem constructive or otherwise useful. Hope you agree.
-Bob

flaxattack · « **Reply #35 on:** February 21, 2006, 06:21:15 AM »

my bad pat
he asked some q's that i thought you could answer... main one beign the s/n
he didnt give me a clue about anything else
didnt know it would escalate to this...
me sorry......

mica · « **Reply #36 on:** February 21, 2006, 09:36:22 AM »

I'm sure folks wish we would keep better track of things like when the A mark started showing up on the back, but it's just one of those countless decisions we make every day.

I vaguely remember drawing an enormous A for the artwork on the tuners when we were still on Foley Street, but it had to be after 1987, because that's when I started working here. In 1986, it's almost certain the tuners were chrome standard issue Gotohs, which except for the decoration are the same as the Alembic-Gotohs.

Another note about tuners We received many compliaints that the tuners didn't match the brass hardware. Sometime after 1987 (probably before 1992 or so) we started putting gold tuners on as standard. We loved the chrome finish for it's practicality - it looks new for a really long time, unlike the gold, which can wear pretty quickly depending on the person.

Hope this can help clear up questions about tuners on Alembics. If there are others, please ask myself or Valentino, we're happy to assist.