Nice. I assume that you recorded each bass at the same input level. The 62 was louder however, and we perceive louder as “better”. I can only guess that the pickups on the 64 were lower (further from the strings) than the 62 (62s have Alnico 2, 64s are Alnico 5). I have a 64 and can attest that those pickups are smooth sounding. I liked them but changed them out for a puchier set. From my experience of those two models the 64 is FAR superior in every respect! The one exception might be that the dots on the 64 are not as visible. Fender even corrected the body outline on the upper cutaway with the 64. 64s cost more and are well worth the money.
Thanks for the video ! But I will add here the facts about the colour the so called clay dots. The real,colour is more of beige colour than orange brown , yes they can become darker with age and time.what fender uses today is close but nothing like the original.
The ‘64 is certainly good, but to my ears the ‘62 has a stronger, more complex sound. It also has more “punch”.
The 62 killed it!
Hi Paulo, that's also my preference. I just like that growl :)
That 62 has that rickenbacker growl.
Not exactly the same obviously .
But that bite in its own way. I definitely dig the 62
Thanks for pointing out! I‘ve never played a Rickenbacker, but I do like the 62‘s growl.
What about any comparison on the necks ? They are different yes? Specifically radius? Anybody out there got any information?
Cheers Alan
62 all the way, loved the both though.
Yes, 62 is also my preference👍🏽
Nice. I assume that you recorded each bass at the same input level. The 62 was louder however, and we perceive louder as “better”. I can only guess that the pickups on the 64 were lower (further from the strings) than the 62 (62s have Alnico 2, 64s are Alnico 5). I have a 64 and can attest that those pickups are smooth sounding. I liked them but changed them out for a puchier set. From my experience of those two models the 64 is FAR superior in every respect! The one exception might be that the dots on the 64 are not as visible. Fender even corrected the body outline on the upper cutaway with the 64. 64s cost more and are well worth the money.
Hi, yes, settings were consistent thruout the recording.
Great Vid. The 62 sound better but the 64 is really good too.
Thank you! I also lean more towards the 62. I would also love to compare it with the Flea signature Bass, with which it shares the stacked tone pots.
@@PaulReno fleas bass was actually based on a 62 jazz bass
Flea bass is based on a 61 not a 62 by 1962 Fender had already moved from a stack knob to the current VVT configuration
great comparison! Tell the owner that 64 is dying for some fret oil
Hi Donnie, good point, will pass that on!
The owner said he’s well aware of that😄
I choose whichever one is lighter
Hi G Brandt and welcome to my Channel! Between these two basses, the 64 is slightly lighter.
Buen video , me gusto el avri62
Thanks for the video ! But I will add here the facts about the colour the so called clay dots. The real,colour is more of beige colour than orange brown , yes they can become darker with age and time.what fender uses today is close but nothing like the original.
Thank you very much for sharing!
Спасибо, интересный обзор. Музыка хорошая:)
AV62 for me
62
I prefer 62...
The best is Squier CV70 jazz bass, cheap and well made, same tone as the expansive Fenders.