Mustang Bass vs P Bass

I own a number of Ps and one sort of mongrel Mustang (recent Squire Mustang body, JMJ Mustang pick guard and pickup, killer 70s Fender Musicmaster neck currently strung with LaBella Mustang Deep Talkin' flatwounds). They can definitely fill in similar sonic roles, but back to back and in a mix they can also be pretty distinct especially with flatwounds.

My comparison here will be assuming both instruments are loaded with similar flatwounds- if you are using bright roundwounds I think a lot of the tonal signatures of certain instruments can get lost under all the harmonics so I can see how the sound could be less distinct for those using brighter tones.

P-basses are midrange machines, which is why I suspect they fit so well into just about any genre where they fill the right space above the bass drum without messing with the guitar as long as you are careful with your tone and playing. A P-bass also has a sort of rounder or compressed attack and potentially fairly long sustain (unless you are using some sort of muting techniques or very old strings). A Mustang (consistent with many short-scales) has less harmonic stuff going on, so notes up and down the neck tend to sound fatter and it seems like in general the sound is taking up less sonic space than a P but somewhat more forceful in the space it does occupy. Mustangs also have a sharper attack (amplitude envelope vs frequency- more “plunk” than a P-basses “thump”) and less sustain in general (the pickups have a single pole located directly under the string vs the "split-pole" design of a P-bass pickup and more consistent with Fender guitars, the original single-coil P-bass, or instruments like Rickenbacker 4001/4003). I think the combination of all these factors makes tight melodic lines really punch through a mix on a Mustang with ease (especially with a pick, but possible with finger style too- mine sounds particularly great using palm-muted thumb/fingerstyle techniques) in a way that a P-bass requires more manipulation/care to achieve- it can be fat and clear with each note in a really distinct way. I'm not sure I'd choose the Mustang specifically in a role where I didn't want the bassline to stick out.

Of course the playing feel of a short-scale and long-scale is way different! In general I find long-scales easier to control due to my large hands and the tighter string tension and so I only choose the short-scales for tonal reasons when I think they'd be right. The Musicmaster neck on my Mustang is super thin and fast, but I can tend to dig in too hard or fumble around a bit with my fretting hand unless I spend awhile rehearsing on short-sale before a gig to refresh my muscle memory. I do find the Mustang tonally to be somewhat forgiving of digging in too hard in a way that some of my P-basses might not be (the setup on my neck is really nice though, may not be as great on lesser necks).
 
Last edited:
I mean, it's a Mexican production line instrument, manufactured, and targeted to a budget.
I just received a black JMJ over the weekend via Sweetwater and you really have to see the "relic-ing" to understand what he's talking about. Mine had that same semi-symmetrical star like pattern over the top horn of the instrument and the lower bout. There is literally a gouge right in the center of the star on the lower bout and it's like whoever was relic-ing it decided they were gonna mess with whomever purchased it. Seriously, they looked planned and kinda bad if you want the honest truth. It's almost like they have a template they can just slam into various spots. Don't EVEN get me started on the worn spot where your arm rests, literally 4 little gouges placed INLINE with one another. This was either a Friday relic job or someone was just sick of doing it. Shame too because the bass plays great and sounds fantastic, has a super tight fitting neck joint and is balanced perfectly without any neck dive that I can detect. The tightness of the over all body probably helps contribute to that. Might have to get a refin if I don't put some of my own wear to balance out the garbage "relic-ing", it would be nice if they could give us a non-relic option for slightly cheaper, I woulda jumped on that.
 
It's almost like they have a template they can just slam into various spots.

I'm certain they either have a template, or a map detailing the location of the particular relic marks, and which tool to make said mark.

It's a budget friendly replica - they're all meant to have identical wear (within tolerance, and budget).

I'm just not a fan of the whole relic practice in general (it's usually pretty unrealistic wear & tear, with the emphasis very much on tear), and even when custom shops accelerate the process of natural wear - whilst it certainly improves the feel of an instrument (unless the whole reason for buying a new instrument, is to have a new, unblemished instrument), I just don't dig the artifice.

The JMJ is a little different, as it's somewhere between a relic job, and custom shop wear, in terms of looks & feel (limited by budget), but is not generic, random blemishes - instead it is a detailed replica of very specific wear, on a specific vintage instrument.

To my mind, that made perfect sense for the Daphne Blue model, but one could argue that as soon as it was made available in another colour (Black), and with an alternative pick guard, it was no longer a replica of Justin's instrument - at which point it would have been very appealing if the black version was available without the relic work (cheaper too).
 
Being the owner of both a JMJ Mustang and a Squier Cv Mustang I will try and share my experience. With short scale basses, in my experience , tonal results vary greatly depending on your strings, their gauge and your amp and preamp pedals.

Even after EQ the biggest challenge I found playing live with the Mustang is that notes played on the E string had a tendency to lack punch and definition despite having the deep fundamental inherent with short scale basses. Having tried various string types and gauges I found when I tried lighter gauge E strings (95) it greatly improved low end growl and definition. I finally settled on Daddario Pro Steele 40-95 set on the JMJ. It seems counterintuitive to go to a lighter gauge but at least in my experience, it solved the boom / muddy sound, probability because that gauge vibrates more freely.

On the CV Squier I use Labella MUS strings and accept that it has a woofer sound but that’s my flatwound bass.

BTW I would recommend either bass , the JMJ is definitely the better of the two but also several times more cost. The CV Squier is remarkably close and very high quality.
 
I'm certain they either have a template, or a map detailing the location of the particular relic marks, and which tool to make said mark.

It's a budget friendly replica - they're all meant to have identical wear (within tolerance, and budget).

I'm just not a fan of the whole relic practice in general (it's usually pretty unrealistic wear & tear, with the emphasis very much on tear), and even when custom shops accelerate the process of natural wear - whilst it certainly improves the feel of an instrument (unless the whole reason for buying a new instrument, is to have a new, unblemished instrument), I just don't dig the artifice.

The JMJ is a little different, as it's somewhere between a relic job, and custom shop wear, in terms of looks & feel (limited by budget), but is not generic, random blemishes - instead it is a detailed replica of very specific wear, on a specific vintage instrument.
That’s the thing, the wear on the black one is kinda different from the blue one. The big stuff like the major sections of nitro are reliced (arm rest, upper section near the bridge gouges), but the finer details are completely different. The star pattern is repeated a bit as well which makes it looks kinda dumb and like someone was just playing a bit of a prank on whomever was buying it. It’s not as simple as, “yeah well it’s MIM.” If you saw it in person you’d understand immediately the “problem” with this type of cheap relicing. They don’t look like the original as much at all nowadays, even the blue one so it isn’t anywhere close to “custom” or replicating anything. It looks like they are just trying to get basses out the door. Still well made, just terribly reliced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wood and Wire
That’s the thing, the wear on the black one is kinda different from the blue one. The big stuff like the major sections of nitro are reliced (arm rest, upper section near the bridge gouges), but the finer details are completely different. The star pattern is repeated a bit as well which makes it looks kinda dumb and like someone was just playing a bit of a prank on whomever was buying it. It’s not as simple as, “yeah well it’s MIM.” If you saw it in person you’d understand immediately the “problem” with this type of cheap relicing. They don’t look like the original as much at all nowadays, even the blue one so it isn’t anywhere close to “custom” or replicating anything. It looks like they are just trying to get basses out the door. Still well made, just terribly reliced.


Yeah, I haven’t been hands on with a new one since they first hit U.K. stores (2018?), and like I said earlier; there’s been a pandemic since then - it’s entirely possible that the manufacture process / budget has changed a bit since then.

Heck, they make a lot of these, and tools wear out, or get lost - maybe that’s a contributing factor.

Post some pictures of your bass, would be interesting to see how bad it’s got.
 
I like short scales but never could get along with the Fender PJ version. Neck dive and no upper fret access weren't much fun. All body and headstock, no neck :p

That said, a short scale will always have a lower note feel than a long scale because of the scale. The same thing happens on guitar when comparing 24.75 and 25.5. ML Labs has a great video demonstrating it.

I wish Fender would do like MusicMan and just make a ~12% smaller Precision and call it a day. Until then I'll be over here playing BEAD to put the E where my pinky can reach it :D
 
I am an owner of a Mustang JMJ and a 57 RI Custom shop PBass.
My 2 cents:

- The basses are certainly similar, tonally. I agree that the Mustang tends to have a sharper attack and maybe a quicker decay; this will also depends on other factors such as setup, strings etc.
- With my particular JMJ, I find that I like roundwounds more: TI jazz rounds are a GREAT match. Compared to flatwounds, it really helps the E string sing a bit more and it avoids intonation problems or chorus-y effects past the 12th fret. However, I think I'm in the minority here, because most JMJ I see around are strung with flats (maybe thanks to the fact that these are factory strung with flats)
- I think that we should not underestimate how different is the "physical" aspect of playing a regular Pbass compared to a Mustang. In my case, this is exacerbated by the fact that the Pbass has quite a massive neck profile and is strung with 55-105 GHS flats. It is much easier to fly around on the JMJ's fretboard, but this also makes it easier to overplay. In general, I find that the physical interaction between the player and a particular instrument influences HOW music will be played (a more sparse approach versus a busier bass line).

This is a short groove played on the CS precision (sample 1) and on the JMJ Mustang (sample 2). Again, tonally in the same ballpark (the differences are mainly due to rounds vs flats IMHO), but a completely different experience while playing.



 
I'm certain they either have a template, or a map detailing the location of the particular relic marks, and which tool to make said mark.
-
It's a budget friendly replica - they're all meant to have identical wear (within tolerance, and budget).
-
The JMJ is a little different, as it's somewhere between a relic job, and custom shop wear, in terms of looks & feel (limited by budget), but is not generic, random blemishes - instead it is a detailed replica of very specific wear, on a specific vintage instrument.

To my mind, that made perfect sense for the Daphne Blue model, but one could argue that as soon as it was made available in another colour (Black), and with an alternative pick guard, it was no longer a replica of Justin's instrument - at which point it would have been very appealing if the black version was available without the relic work (cheaper too).

I have seen forum posts by Justin in the past where he states that the JMJ Signature model was intended to be a close replica of his 1966 Mustang. But I have seen pictures of his original 1966, and the wear patterns on the reissue are not all that close.
I think Fender DID capture the "vibe" of the original, but didn't create an exact replica.
It's more "MIM Road Worn series" than "Custom Shop"!

I found a video interview with JMJ

where he shows a JMJ model side-by-side with his original 1966 (start watching at about 3:45). He shows all sides of the original, and talks some about the process of creating the signature version.

Orig & JMJ 1.png


The original 1966 is a bit LESS worn and gouged than the reissue, but the original DOES have the weird cluster of pocks/scratches (caused by a bracelet or watch?) on the top between the bridge and upper pickguard, as well as random "tool-mark" divots scattered over the top.

Orig & JMJ 2.png


I think when the earliest JMJ models were released in late 2017 the relic treatment was a bit more restrained and standardized than it is now.
(By the way, you can tell the earlier Daphne JMJs by the smaller pickup mounting screws. The screws got larger when the black version was released.)

My 2017 JMJ definitely looks more "natural" than some more recent ones I've seen. Some of the newer ones (ESPECIALLY the black ones) look like they were attacked by a rabid beaver!

Here are pics of my 2017 model:

My 2017 JMJ new 1.jpg
My 2017 JMJ new 2.jpg

Compare the 2017 relicking to this:

Beaver 1.png

and this:

Beaver 2.png


As an aside, I DO have a theory to explain why the black JMJs seem to look more "beat up" and "overdone" than the Daphne models, but that will have to wait for another day...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wood and Wire
I had a fender PJ mustang and still have a Squier CV mustang. I preferred the Squier and let the fender go. Never tried the other fender mustang offerings.

Mine has a Nordstrand pickup and gotoh tuners. Plays great. Sounds great. Kept it despite having a nice collection of Bordwells in the stable. I still grab it sometimes despite having more expensive options.
 
I have seen forum posts by Justin in the past where he states that the JMJ Signature model was intended to be a close replica of his 1966 Mustang. But I have seen pictures of his original 1966, and the wear patterns on the reissue are not all that close.
I think Fender DID capture the "vibe" of the original, but didn't create an exact replica.
It's more "MIM Road Worn series" than "Custom Shop"!

I found a video interview with JMJ

where he shows a JMJ model side-by-side with his original 1966 (start watching at about 3:45). He shows all sides of the original, and talks some about the process of creating the signature version.

View attachment 5468370

The original 1966 is a bit LESS worn and gouged than the reissue, but the original DOES have the weird cluster of pocks/scratches (caused by a bracelet or watch?) on the top between the bridge and upper pickguard, as well as random "tool-mark" divots scattered over the top.

View attachment 5468372

I think when the earliest JMJ models were released in late 2017 the relic treatment was a bit more restrained and standardized than it is now.
(By the way, you can tell the earlier Daphne JMJs by the smaller pickup mounting screws. The screws got larger when the black version was released.)

My 2017 JMJ definitely looks more "natural" than some more recent ones I've seen. Some of the newer ones (ESPECIALLY the black ones) look like they were attacked by a rabid beaver!

Here are pics of my 2017 model:

View attachment 5468375View attachment 5468377
Compare the 2017 relicking to this:

View attachment 5468378
and this:

View attachment 5468381

As an aside, I DO have a theory to explain why the black JMJs seem to look more "beat up" and "overdone" than the Daphne models, but that will have to wait for another day...



Yeah,

another thing worth bearing in mind is that Justin’s Mustang had a 35+ year history, before he got it.

Whilst there’s some predictable player wear (of the variety that is often guesstimated, and chronically over done on relic instruments), there’s also all kinds of dings that are unique to the life it has had - it seems to have collided with objects, had objects dropped on it, fallen over, been continually clunked by jewellery, and who knows what.

It’s the latter that I think are the bone of contention, for some people.

We don’t know what caused the original impacts, so it’s hard to say how accurate they really are - but it’s safe to say the relic work stands out more on the Black instrument, and that it does seem as if the accuracy of the relic has drifted between the original run, and the current run.

To me, the good thing about a relic instrument, is that it removes that anxiety about damaging the original finish - and it kind of invites you to be a little cavalier about throwing it around, and acquiring new mojo.
 
To me, the good thing about a relic instrument, is that it removes that anxiety about damaging the original finish - and it kind of invites you to be a little cavalier about throwing it around, and acquiring new mojo.

You are right - my JMJ's relic treatment ALMOST completely fixed my usual fretting about scratches and marks on any new gear...

While I was tweaking the setup on the new JMJ I dropped a wrench and put a healthy, half-inch-long ding on the front edge of the lower horn. It took me about a minute to reassure myself that the new mark was no more visible or obvious than the hundred or so OTHER dings on the bass!

But, still, it took me about two weeks before I could "un-see" that divot... :rolleyes:
 
I'm certain they either have a template, or a map detailing the location of the particular relic marks, and which tool to make said mark.

There definitely is a template or plan for at least SOME of the wear marks, although the execution varies quite a bit from bass to bass.

Every JMJ I've seen has the forearm-wear area on the top edge, the big "sunglasses-shaped" mark on the bottom of the lower horn, and that oval-shaped cluster of little dents ("wristwatch rash"?) on the front somewhere between the pickguard and the bridge.

The other marks are less consistent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wood and Wire
As an aside, I DO have a theory to explain why the black JMJs seem to look more "beat up" and "overdone" than the Daphne models, but that will have to wait for another day...
Having looked at both the blue and black side by side in person, I think the JMJ relic patterns are essentially identical.

The only difference in what shows up comes down to contrast and light reflection. Any relic work that gets through the finish to the wood stands out more on the black because the contract of light wood showing through the black finish. You also see the dings in reflected light on the black better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wood and Wire
This is a question for anyone who's spent time with a Mustang Bass, but especially anyone who's used one on stage. I am thinking of the traditional split Mustang Bass pickup configuration, not the modern P or the PJ varieties.

I've been reading a lot recently about the Mustang Bass, which has kind of resurged in recent years especially in the indie music scene. I have not found any to try out locally, but the prospect is very interesting.

The sound is described by one artist I admire as being very focused with respect to the fundamental, as sitting very well in a mix, slicing through effortlessly. Some people describe the Mustang Bass as having more punch or more twang. At the same time, people sometimes say they have a tubbiness or more low-mid than a P due to the scale length. Others say they are very similar to the P sound.

Here's an example of a Mustang Bass tone that sounds quite nice to me:
I like the normal tone and the overdriven tone at the end.

The question:

Playing a long scale isn't a problem for me, and I already have a Precision Bass.

To those who've owned a Mustang Bass or used one live, do you think they are different enough from your P to warrant having both?

How would you described the differences in the tones and the feel?

What I have in my mind is perhaps a Mustang Bass fitted with Fender 9050s, played finger style but often picked like this as well. (I like those strings as a balance between a more traditional flatwound sound and a round sound, and as flats that have a good sound when picked)

Anyone owned both a Mustang Bass and a P-Bass? I'd never get rid of my P, but I wonder if having both makes sense, or if they are pretty similar in the end.

Thanks!


Nicolas Godin (AIR) and Deck D’arcy (PHOENIX) use Mustang Bass Special Pickups by Tornade MS !

=> Formvar wire / A5 double magnets / wax potted / RWRP wiring (Precision Bass like)

The double magnets give boost and more open sound. They provide extraordinary generous and precise low frequencies !

Mustang Bass Pickups / Wiring : both pickups are identical in the same direction (North or South) but wired in a way that’s still canceling Hum. If you try to add additional pickups then one half of the Mustang pickups will be out-of-phase with them.

Precision Bass Pickups / Wiring : both pickups are reverse wound and reverse polarity (RWRP) then wired out-of-phase makes the signals in-phase with each-other while the noise remains out-of-phase that’s still canceling Hum.

Mustang Bass spécial - Tornade MS Pickups
Micro Mustang Bass Special - Tornade MS Pickups
https://www.tornademspickups.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Mustang-Bass-1.jpg


May the Groove be with you.
 
Last edited: