I know its stupid to ask this question, but would either of these be good to start bass on? I already play guitar, but i would like a bass to have and learn. I want something at moderately versatile, suggestions would be perfect.


He's laughing at YOU.
You better click that bastard.

Ibanez RG370DX
Peavey Valveking 112 (w/ Bad Monkey and GE-7 EQ)
FAQ has a list of tried and tested starter basses and amps. It also answers a lot of questions you may have about switching fro guitar to bass.

Read it.
Warwick freak of the Bass Militia. PM Nutter_101 to join

Quote by elliott FTW
Damn you and Warwickyness

Quote by ScottB
gm jack knows everything
if you intend on playing bass for a band or something skip the cheap guitars and buy something half decent, head down to your local used guitar shop and have a fang on some of the basses there and see how you like playing them and you can make them sound, if you just intend on mucking around on one go the second link.
^I disagree. If you're just starting out, there's no sense in splurging out a tonne of money at first and then turn to find out you're not going to stick with it. With a bass that cost you $150, you can't lose.

For the question, go with the second link for ONE reason alone. For me, the first bass looks better, has better pickups, and a better shape (that Jagurish shape is wicked). However, the second bass has an ash body, which is generally considered "better". It's a clearer wood and will provide a better bass to modify. If you're not looking to modify, or find you already love alder guitars over ash, definitely consider going for the first one.
^JRF is correct
Fender could sue.
I like #2 better.
Quote by FatalGear41
I wouldn't call what we have here on the Bass Forum a mentality. It's more like the sharing part of an AA meeting.

Quote by Jason Jillard

Warwick Fortress>>Acoustic AB50