It is currently Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:05 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
Post subject: Fender quality.
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:04 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2008 2:41 pm
Posts: 424
Prob gona be a controversial post, but its not fender bashing, im just voicing some things ive read and want others opinions.

Fender guitars were not originally created to be top quality, or the best guitars going but to be easily mass producible and affordable. Although decent components and woods were used, to keep the guitars affordable, the best quality components/woods would not have been used.

We can clearly see the guitars were still of good quality and in the right hands could create pure magic.

So nowdays is it safe to say that fender take much more time in picking components and woods? If thats the case then are they not altering what was a classic instrument, that although was not the top quality, had some "magic quality".

So, following this thread that todays guitars are of better quality, and thus "different" to the original guitars mass produced in the 50s and 60s, would it be fair to say that with todays modern manufacturing techniques and the ability to manufacture components with greater consistency, some of the lower quality modern fenders would be closer in quality to the original fenders?

I mean we hear about all the care and attention that goes into the american std series now days, in selecting premium woods and components, but we know this care didnt go into the earlier instruments, so it would logically follow that the new guitars are of a much higher quality, but also different from the original fenders.

What are your thoughts on this?


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:14 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 9034
Location: Louisiana
Your post makes sense to me! :wink:


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:39 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 7:13 pm
Posts: 19026
Location: Illinois, USA
fhopkins wrote:
Your post makes sense to me! :wink:

FH , bro , your psychic ' the love you take ........... '

_________________
you can save the world with your guitar one love song at a time it's just better, more fun, easier with a fender solid body electric guitar or electric bass guitar.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:43 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 9034
Location: Louisiana
Solid Body Love Songs wrote:
fhopkins wrote:
Your post makes sense to me! :wink:

FH , bro , your psychic ' the love you take ........... '


Ha! My wife says I'm psycho!! :lol:


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Fender quality.
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:01 am
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 9:56 pm
Posts: 3941
Location: Great White North, EH!
schmintan wrote:
Prob gona be a controversial post, but its not fender bashing, im just voicing some things ive read and want others opinions.

Fender guitars were not originally created to be top quality, or the best guitars going but to be easily mass producible and affordable. Although decent components and woods were used, to keep the guitars affordable, the best quality components/woods would not have been used.

We can clearly see the guitars were still of good quality and in the right hands could create pure magic.

So nowdays is it safe to say that fender take much more time in picking components and woods? If thats the case then are they not altering what was a classic instrument, that although was not the top quality, had some "magic quality".

So, following this thread that todays guitars are of better quality, and thus "different" to the original guitars mass produced in the 50s and 60s, would it be fair to say that with todays modern manufacturing techniques and the ability to manufacture components with greater consistency, some of the lower quality modern fenders would be closer in quality to the original fenders?

I mean we hear about all the care and attention that goes into the american std series now days, in selecting premium woods and components, but we know this care didnt go into the earlier instruments, so it would logically follow that the new guitars are of a much higher quality, but also different from the original fenders.

What are your thoughts on this?
I would say its a yes and no situation.

While points above are valid, i would also suggest that with the much smaller production runs of the early guitars, and less reliance on machines the guitars of the 50's received a lot more attention from the actual guitar makers.
More specifically:
schmintan wrote:

So nowdays is it safe to say that fender take much more time in picking components and woods? If thats the case then are they not altering what was a classic instrument, that although was not the top quality, had some "magic quality".


I mean we hear about all the care and attention that goes into the american std series now days, in selecting premium woods and components, but we know this care didnt go into the earlier instruments, so it would logically follow that the new guitars are of a much higher quality, but also different from the original fenders.


I don't see too many (if any,) 4, 5 or even six piece classic fender bodies. Also the aging process is different,and accelerated now. so i would argue there HAS been a DECLINE in care and attention to the woods used in the production run guitars, not an improvement.

_________________
I'm not an expert, but I play one on the internet.

Image


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:36 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:47 am
Posts: 15336
Location: In a galaxy far far away
Guitars way back in the mists of time were also hand built unlike todays guitars that are largely cnc shaped.

I'd also argue (though with little evidence) that woods these days are distributed by quality when way back when pieces would be hand selected for different applications.

Different routes to acheive the same goal.

_________________
No no and no


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 6:55 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist

Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 4:21 am
Posts: 34
Its hard to tell if fewer hand made guitars or more consistant modern manufacuring which of the two would translate out to more consistant quality.
An argument could be made either way.
Ive never subscribed to the theory that all precbs fenders were 'magic'
Im sure there were a few dogs then as now.
Likely the good ones were kept and played and survived thanks to discerning players and the others...
Of course its highly subjective too.
I doubt Shobud's in Nashville in 1970 where EC found the pile of strats 'Your pick $100.00!' that he assembled Blackie from considered them fine instruments at the time.
Precbs or not.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:12 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 1257
The "vintage" emperor is butt naked.

Leo Fender, like all manufacturers, performed a balancing act of providing the best quality possible while satisfying the market (with both product and price) in a profitable way. It's not fair to say that "quality" wasn't his main concern: he naturally tried to make the best quality he could while still building guitars people would buy and making his company profitable.

When he sold the company, CBS cared far less for quality than Leo... they were run by bright young business school guys who were entering the Age of Diversification, a period where it was believed that a business was a business and they were all the same and anybody who knew how to run a toaster company could also run a TV network and a boat maker. We know better now. :D

As a result, most players who wanted Fender guitars found that the older, "pre-CBS" instruments were of better quality than then-current production guitars. So began the rise in price of pre-CBS guitars.

At that point, guitar players and dealers alike began inventing reasons why the older guitars were better. Thinner finishes. Aged pickup magnets. "Tonewoods." Mojo. Any visible difference between the older guitars and the new ones was magnified into legend. An entire mythology grew up around a simple industrial object that could be reasonably reproduced by anyone, sans magic. The obvious truth - that CBS started demanding a higher profit from the guitars at the expense of quality - got buried under a mystical arcana.

And today (coming full circle, agreeing with the OP, in a way), Fender makes better , more consistent, more playable and usable guitars, than it has at any time in its history. But the lure of the arcana is so strong, and the concept of "vintage mojo" lives on in a form SO persistent, it now actually infuses the CBS guitars - THE VERY ONES THAT STARTED ALL THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE - with the same magical glow, and prices are reaching ridiculous heights for "vintage," 70's Strats.

Somewhere on this forum is a link to a sound clip to "what a real '57 Strat sounds like live." If you listen to it, and you are honest with yourself, you'll conclude that it simply sounds like an electric guitar through a wah pedal into a loud amp. The player in the clip is very good, but there is no magic in that guitar, and he could have produced exactly the same sound (and probably the same playing feel) with a MIM Classic '50s made this very year.

Sorry to be so verbose, but I think this is a serious subject.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 7:55 am
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:21 am
Posts: 527
One point missed here is the natural aging of the woods and its affects on tone. Some players believe that as wood ages its tone improves. So therefore some of the desirable traits of older guitars is the aged wood tone. It's not that they are better quality instruments. The new strats today will be more desirable than an equal strat that is new in 20-30 years. Guitars, like fine wines, simply get better with age.

_________________
Guitars:
1. mid 70's Ventura MIJ Gibson l6-s clone (Pre-lawsuit) in Black with Rosewood FB and EMG 81 BR/ 85 Neck
2. ESP KH2 Neck Thru
3. 2008 Am Std Strat in 3 tone sunburst


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:04 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:57 am
Posts: 13164
Location: Peckham: where the snow leopards roam
Bound to say, I agree with everything SlapChop wrote (above).

I wonder if two things are being confused in the original post:

schmintan wrote:
Although decent components and woods were used, to keep the guitars affordable, the best quality components/woods would not have been used.


From the start, Fender guitars used commercially affordable species and sizes of wood. We are told that the Telecaster and Strat necks were designed specifically to be produced from a standard timber cut, so's to avoid the necessity of ordering custom machined planks. Ash and alder were more affordable than "traditional" tonewoods, as was maple for the neck.

But all that means is that Fenders didn't use the expensive imported hardwoods such as mahogany, alpine spruce, European sycamore, rosewood and ebony. It says nothing for the grading of timber within the species employed, either then or now.

There's many stories of the variability of manufacture in the '50s and '60s - precisely because so much more was done by hand. Apparently, many guitars left the factory with the necks shimmed, which is hands-on attention to detail in a way, I guess, but only necessitated by the imprecisions of the manufacturing process.

In my own experience Fender, like virtually every other instrument manufacturer, has come on in leaps and bounds in their delivery of quality production. So many western makers were nearly put out of business by the emergence of consistently high quality Japanese production at astonishingly reasonable prices in the '70s. (The stories I could tell...) Some went under but those that survived have learned the lessons well.

Obviously, we often hear on this site from people that have problems with their guitars, sometimes fresh from the shop. But I think that really represents a tiny percentage of the instruments put out. My own perception is that on average the quality of the product has never ever been higher.

Maker Jol Dantzig at Hamer commented recently that there has simply never been a better time either to make or to buy electric guitars. And I think he's right.

Cheers - C

EDIT: just thought I'd point out before someone else does that of course alpine spruce is a softwood, not a hardwood. That's what comes of not reading a post through before submitting it... D'oh!


Last edited by Ceri on Tue Mar 03, 2009 9:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:07 am
Offline
Hobbyist
Hobbyist

Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 2:19 pm
Posts: 91
This is a very interesting thread to me. I bought the "50 Years of Fender" book, and one of the things in the book that jumped out at me was the original list price of a Fender isntrument vs. that price in today's dollars.

A list price on a Strat was something like $190 or so. In today's dollars, that prices was like $1,150. I know I'm off on the exact amounts, but the point is that even for the musician back in the day, a "low cost" Fender instrument was not "low cost". In fact, it was about the same as we pay today for a Fender Am Std.

The question of quality is probably more related to consistancy than anything else. The vast majority of instruments - even crappy ones- can be made playable by a competent luthier and some hand work, covering up for the lack of consistancy. That hand work made the difference in the 40', 50's and early 60's. Today, manufacturing techniques have reduced the need for the handwork that makes a playable guitar because of consistancy.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:27 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 1257
firstrat wrote:
One point missed here is the natural aging of the woods and its affects on tone. Some players believe that as wood ages its tone improves. So therefore some of the desirable traits of older guitars is the aged wood tone. ....


Not to slap YOUR chops, sir, because the idea you present is widely repeated, but I don't feel we're missing this point so much as DISmissing it.

Electric guitars don't audibly improve with age as acoustic guitars do. They just get old. This is part of the arcana of "vintageness" I'm describing. (Think of it this way: Acoustic guitars improve with age because on an acoustic guitar, the body wood is the amp. Solid body electrics don't work this way.)

If you buy a new Stratocaster today, (even if it's finished in nitro), it will sound exactly the same in 25 or 30 or 40 years as it sounds the day you buy it.

Ceri, thanks for the agreement, sir.

Jazz Bass, good call. The concept of Fender as a cheap, rugged "working man's'" guitar is largely seen in retrospect. In 1957, a new Strat cost a bundle. Think of what you might have paid for a four-door sedan in 1957 and compare that to the price of a Fender guitar.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 1:48 pm
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 5:53 am
Posts: 1686
Location: Brooklyn NY
Technology is always improving, think what instruments will be like 10-20 years from now.


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:13 pm
Offline
Rock Star
Rock Star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 12:58 pm
Posts: 7714
Location: Planet Earth
firstrat wrote:
One point missed here is the natural aging of the woods and its affects on tone. Some players believe that as wood ages its tone improves. So therefore some of the desirable traits of older guitars is the aged wood tone. It's not that they are better quality instruments. The new strats today will be more desirable than an equal strat that is new in 20-30 years. Guitars, like fine wines, simply get better with age.

True for an acoustic guitar but it means nothing for a solid body.

_________________
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

Thomas Jefferson


Top
Profile
Post subject:
Posted: Tue Mar 03, 2009 2:16 pm
Offline
Aspiring Musician
Aspiring Musician
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 5:06 pm
Posts: 560
Location: Vale, North Carolina
JPD wrote:
Technology is always improving, think what instruments will be like 10-20 years from now.


Just ask Gibson.
In the past couple of years they have introduced very technologically advanced guitars such as the Robot series and lately the Dark Fire.

While these guitars may be more advanced with high technology electronics and auto tuning capabilities I don't think they are very popular.

I think Leo Fender got it right the first time which is why we still have the same basic guitar that has lasted 50plus years.

_________________
The time has gone, the song is over, thought I'd something more to say.

Image


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: