|
Post by tele1962 on Jul 31, 2006 8:04:26 GMT -7
Well, TJ...I confess to playing relics myself. A '55, a '58 a '60 and a '62. I bought them all used, so a lot of the wear marks, etc are not mine. I play them, but I don't treat them rough. They're old! They don't need any more harsh treatment than what life has already done to them! They are clean, and meticulously set up. I see no good reason for treating fine instruments with disregard. In that respect, I agree with you. When you buy one of these "reliced" new instruments, it's like saying " Hey, this is cool! I'm going to pay extra dollars for a guitar that looks like another guy treated it badly! Wow, that's magical!"
|
|
|
Post by nitehawk55 on Aug 2, 2006 5:57:51 GMT -7
A couple years back I happened to be at a local music store when this fellow in his mid 50's brought in a black Strat be wanted to trade in for a new one . I could not believe it when he explaned to the store owner that he had purchased this guitar used from the store in around 1965 and turned out it was a completely original 1961 that was in very nice condition except for some dust , a bit of corrosion on the saddles and this goofy sticker on the body which I'm sure could be removed and the finish buffed out . This fellows idea was to trade it in on a new Strat as he wanted to get back into playing after several years of the guitar just sitting . He had no idea of what the guitar was worth and the store owner was honest enough to explain that the guitar was valuable and that a general tune up would have it in perfect playing condition . I sure wish he had asked me if I wanted to buy it !
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 2, 2006 8:23:59 GMT -7
Wouldn't you have liked to see him in the parking lot before he went in and you could have snagged it! Oh, wait a minute, not ethical.
|
|
|
Post by Hohn on Aug 2, 2006 9:38:47 GMT -7
I'm only 31, and have really only been playing since I was 16. I guess that might make me the "young buck" with less experience, but here's my Dos Pesos---
The early Fenders were and still are *the* standard. They were the pioneering instruments that were many decades ahead of their time. Their incredible popularity and lasting legacy is a testament to Leo and George's effective and simple design.
What has this to do with modern instruments? A lot. Modern makers generally fall into a couple camps-- those trying to exactly duplicate an Early Fender, those trying to improve on the early Fenders, and those doing their own thing, but inspired by early Fenders. Very few makers are doing something that's almost completely unrelated to a Strat or Tele (think Parker Fly, for example).
This discussion is incomplete without a mention of the power of branding and brand loyalty. The Fender brand is so powerful that many many people are buying inferior axes simply because they bear the right name. To me, the heart of the matter is whether or not the intrinsic value of the instrument aligns with the intrinsic value of the brand-- and if not, which side is errs on.
We as musicians and prospective buyers assign those worths based on our own unique values. Some people would pay $4K for a mediocre vintage Fender and think it's a steal because they have a lot of money and it's a Fender, after all. Other's balk at the price of a EJ strat, even though it may be the best new Strat currently offered for sale at any price.
We owe it to ourselve to make a brand "earn" its loyalty-- by making a good product at a good price. If we start to get brand blinders, then we hurt ourselves by overpaying and we hurt Fender (for example) by allowing them to slack off and become more vulnerable to competition.
The insane prices of vintage instruments has a lot to do with the wealth of the Baby boomers who are bidding them up that high. It has to do with romanticizing our childhoods, and getting the instruments that our musical heros played when we were coming of age. If a popular music hero played a pirce of crap, reproductions of that same piece of crap can command high prices because of this-- even though the axe sucks.
It is my personal belief that vintage magic is a one-way street, meaning that vintage magic happens when magical instruments age; they don't BECOME magical just by aging. I can age the cheapest $3 wine, and it might get better-- but it's still cheap wine. It will NEVER be what a fine wine can be. In fact, that aged crap is likely to be much worse than a better wine that isn't aged at all.
So a 1952 Tele isn't magical because it's a Fender, it's a Tele, or because it was made in 1952. It might not even be magical because some celeb played it. If it has magic, the magic was there from the day it was made-- it may improve over the years, and get a little more "mojo", but you can't create magic that was never there just by aging or celebrity status.
Conversely, a new guitar isn't automatically inferior just because it's new. There are some VERY good wines (if you're into that-- I'm not) that are less than two years old.
A really don't care what it says on a headstock-- I'll let my hands and ears be the judge. I've played $4k Les Pauls that were JUNK (ca early 90s), and some Epi LPs that were absolutely amazing fiddles for $800. Some of the Tokai knockoffs in the 70s were absolutely amazing instruments at a go-to-jail price.
70something Fender instruments were generally of poor quality-- speculation and romanticization aside, 30 years of time won't produce the alchemy of converting these slugs to pure gold.......
JMO
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 2, 2006 10:02:25 GMT -7
Right on!
|
|
|
Post by RC on Aug 2, 2006 10:35:09 GMT -7
Hohn-- I think that sums it up perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by nitehawk55 on Aug 2, 2006 15:33:33 GMT -7
Very well said Hohn +1 for you !! Billy , I only wish I would have caught him before he went into the store . I'm sure this guy would have been happy to get $500 for it to put towards a new USA Strat . I would have come away with a prize but you're right.....I would have to look at myself in the morning and that is the way the store owner explained it to me as well . I guess he see's this happen a couple times a year and say's sure , he could come off with a sweet prize and make a huge $$ too but chances are the guy would find out sooner or later what he had done and it would come back and bite you in the arse . I did get an in need of restoration 1960 LP jr at an auction some years ago for $27 that I did well with but that was fair game as well as if you ever found one sitting in a yard sale
|
|
|
Post by skydog958 on Aug 2, 2006 15:41:23 GMT -7
I did get an in need of restoration 1960 LP jr at an auction some years ago for $27 that I did well with but that was fair game as well as if you ever found one sitting in a yard sale Gah!! I've been dying for a LP jr., so I need to start surfing the yard sales.... I know a kid who's father has what he described as a Fender Tweed Twin. When they clean house I'm going to see what he wants for it. How much is a Tweed Twin worth?
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 2, 2006 15:48:10 GMT -7
Fair game is fine. I just love it when you see something good at a pawnshop and they don't realize what they have. They give enough people a good screwin' that to give it back to them is just Karma. 10 years ago or so i bought these at different pawnshops; 1951 Epiphone Triumph with original brown case for $189.00, a real nice blackface Vibroluxe Reverb for $139, black Kustom 200 with factory Altecs and all the effects for $200 (sold it for $400), and other stuff I can't think of. A guy here bought a beat to hell 1956 Strat for $99 from a local pawn shop. I quit going because you don't see anything worth having anymore. Too much competition I guess.
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 2, 2006 15:54:23 GMT -7
Tweed Twin? depending on condition, $5k to $10k.
|
|
|
Post by nitehawk55 on Aug 2, 2006 16:40:31 GMT -7
It's hard to find treasures now because people ( pawnshop owners , auctioneers ) have become more educated about what might be worth something or if they are not sure they find out . Pawn shops would be fair game though Billy , your right on them screwing a lot of people over !! There are still treasures to be found but it's more of being in the right place at the right time . You always hear about the guy who found a ?? at a yard sale but I've yet to find one myself. I guess if you a persistent enough it will eventually pay off and I'm sure it does happen .
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 2, 2006 17:09:57 GMT -7
I've heard lots of good stories, some may even be true. The odds are about as bad as Powerball, just ain't worth the time. There's so many ways for people to find out about the values of things now that it's just impossible.
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Aug 7, 2006 9:25:32 GMT -7
Hohn, we are with you in many respects even though some of us are more than 20 years older. A guitar stands on it's own merit. Regardless of branding, loyalties or traditional accumen.
Two things jump in the way of everything else however. One is that the early Fenders sounded so distinctive, so recognizable and so damn GOOD, that they're hard to ignore. I can have you play any re-issue, any knock off, and "relic", and then have you close your eyes, and put my '58 or '62 Strat in your hands, and you'll say " holy &*$#!" We can't explain this, and Lord knows we all try. The sound is so pure, the feel is so dead on, and the vibe is not even something we can talk about.
And that whole thing has brought point two. That's the resale value of these instruments. We can't explian all of this either, but some of it has to do with the first point. The marketing folks at Fender today are trying their best to duplicate the past. Sometimes , as in the case of Custom Shop, they do amazing things. Sometimes with things like re-issue amps, it falls woefully short.
In all cases, what's trying to happen happen now is companies are "reaching back" to try and recapture lost love. It's so elusive that the price of the originals still keep going up at dizzying rates.
A 2001, or 1999 or 2006 Mercedes Benz almost never appreciates in value. A 1957 Chevrolet Bel Air does. The Mercedes is the better car. And it just doesn't matter that it is.
|
|
|
Post by Hohn on Aug 8, 2006 6:54:02 GMT -7
True enough on all points...
I've never been privileged to play an actual pre-CBS Fender, but I think I can understand what you're aiming at.
Why has that "vibe" proven so difficult to reproduce? Is it the availability of truly great wood? I'd think that with technology now they could make an fiddle better than the best vintage pre-CBS.
The other intangible is aging. What effect does that have on the wood and the guitar? On our MEMORY of them?
I'm too young to say. Heck, when I was born (1975), Fender necks had 3 screws afaik.
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Aug 8, 2006 10:06:49 GMT -7
Great questions Hohn! In talking with other guitar techs past and present, what they are all seeming to agree with is that materials have changed. 1) Woods are aged differently. The process used now is mainly "Kiln drying". This is where the moisture and tree juices are zapped out of the ash or alder by heat drying in a basic gas fired kiln. Natural aging takes too long, and although Leo Fender had a lot of naturally aged wood hanging in warehouses, he'd have run out eventually with demand as well. The thing is, with the guitars of the 50's and early 60's, he had supply. ( by the way, that's why guitars of the 70's and 80's and even some today are so heavy and the old ones were light...the bodies are still wet, not totally dried out by kiln firing) Does this make a difference? Most luthiers say yes, it would. 2) Metal materials have changed or improved. Copper is of a totally different composition today than it was in 1954. Steel has changed somewhat, and many new hybrid or synthetic components now comprise the hardware and PU's. Maybe an argument can be made that materials are actually better. This could be, but the sum total of the sound was the exact sum total of parts using the materials of the day. Can this be a difference? Electronics experts say yes. Everything. Paint has changed. Laquer has changed. The nickel in fret wire is a different mix. Ever try buying a decent capacitor for the volume control on a Telecaster? Hard to do, and get them to have the same roll off and effect as the old ones, and no one knows why, because they spec out BETTER than the old! On and on it goes, and the end result is just that no matter what, these old girls just sound fabulous, and the vibe is just there! When Fender Custom Shop created the 50th Anniversary Strat in 2004, they agonized over this. They knew what they were up against in PERFECTLY creating a 1954 Stratocaster. It was going be be painful and expensive. I talked to one of the builders there. It was hell. First they had to get proper wood. Naturally aged and the right consistency with the old standards. Then they took the dust covers off the old drill presses and lathes that Leo had in the old factory in Fullerton. These hadn't been used in 30 plus years, and were sitting idle. They had to be used, according to one of the Materbuilders, because it would lend to the overall end result and vibe. These guys were thinking!! Finally, they had to have Abigail wind the PU's herself to EXACT '54 specs. She did it. The paint and laquer had to be exactly the process of yesteryear. It got very close. The assembly had to be by hand...the nut had to be installed by a certain person, after being milled absolutely perfectly to the original, using George Fullerton's old manuals and diagrams. The results? A guitar worth over 5G, and stellar! In 1954, that two color sunburst beauty sold for around $300, hard shell case included. I've never worked on a 1954, but I've worked on 56's, 57's ,58's ( I own a '58) and many from that point on... This re-issue is the best recreation I've ever seen. I've set up two of them. They're light! They sound like 1954. That dry woody barking sound off the high end, that's still smooth on the neck PU, cuts through a mix, and still sounds so authentic, you never thought they could do it! But it costs. And so does an Anderson, a Crook, or a Lentz. So does a Dr Z amp or a Matchless or a Dumble. Tone does not come easy or cheap, my friend. Not these days.
|
|
|
Post by hiftbso on Aug 8, 2006 12:51:42 GMT -7
That $300 for a 1954 strat when adjusted for inflation over the last 52 years comes to $2262.83 in todays dollars. So even way back when good tone wasn't cheap.
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Aug 8, 2006 15:25:41 GMT -7
A super amp was $169.00, not cheap either then and not as expensive as a Pro. He was boutique in those days. The cost of doing business is much more today also. If you had to adjust for those factors also I bet a Strat would be $3,000.00, adjusted for today's costs.
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Aug 8, 2006 19:41:57 GMT -7
Exactly right, guys. Maybe even more. A 1954 Plymouth sedan sold for $1420.00. Loaded!
|
|
|
Post by Telemanic on Aug 16, 2006 12:45:58 GMT -7
Tele 1962, i do agree on all points as well, all good perspective here in regard to all the posts. I do have to say tho, while it is certainly more hit and miss finding a good one, i have Closed my eyes and A/B'd my first year 60' relic (rw) with a 61', 63, and a 65', all at the same time. The were differences bettween the oldies, for sure, just slight little characters to each, and i could pick a winner, but, my relic was VERY close. Not only in sound but feel as well. Yes it was lacking some of the MOJO i suppose, which is a little hard to quantify, and if i had to pick a winner it WAS one of the originals, but i'd of chosen the relic over at least one of em, for sound and playability. Obviously value not figured here. I guess my point is that at least "some" of the relics are capable of being quite close not even considering the cost factor. Mine is a early serial # made by Vince Canetto in 96'. It wouldnt make ya want to put your 62 away, but it's damn good, IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Sept 3, 2006 8:57:54 GMT -7
That's what I'm saying about the '54 Custom Shop Strat. Man, did they get close!
|
|
|
Post by Laroosco!! on Sept 7, 2006 9:00:14 GMT -7
My '75 Strat is a guitar that I'd put up against any Strat.
Great neck that doesn't have a thick sticky finish. It's pretty light too. I had a 77 Tele that was a POS. Weighed about 14-15lbs and wouldn't play right no matter what anyone did to it. My Strat is not one of those guitars.
While build quality may have been suspect I think it's just plain dumb to assume that they are all worthless.
I've been playing 3 bolt Strats for 20 years and have NEVER had a problem. If the 3 bolt system was such a failure then why did Leo Fender choose to use the same design in his G&L's for so long?
A friend of mine who build great guitars has a real 61 Blond Tele. It is an absolute hunk of crap compared to the Tele's he builds. Not all the old ones are "magic"
|
|
|
Post by nitehawk55 on Sept 8, 2006 5:49:40 GMT -7
I've found the 3 bolt neck pockets on the G&L's are very tight . You actually have to pull the neck off and pretty much need the screws to pull it back into place . I think that was an important part of that design and what Leo intended but a lot of people didn't realize that and eventually G&L had to go to the 4 bolt just to satisfy non believers .
I'm sure there is the exception to the build quality of any make of guitar built in any era . It seems companies go through periods of good and poor workmanship due mainly to management pressure to make $'s till it eventually catches up to them and they need to redeem themselves due to the outcry of guitarists and sagging sales . I'm hoping Gibson is turning it around as I have not been impressed with thier guitars for a number of years now . Good and bad in all , that's just the way it seems to go .
|
|
robt
Full Member
Posts: 138
|
Post by robt on Sept 8, 2006 5:58:25 GMT -7
Ditto on Gibson. You have to go through twenty five to find a good one. The acoustic Gibsons build qualtiy is much better than the electrics, IMHO. Seems like the mid-90s was a peak time for their electrics, good stuff then.
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Sept 8, 2006 21:37:15 GMT -7
I was a Fender registered dealer in 1975. Here's the difference. Could a '75 Strat be OK? Yep. One out of a whole crap load of them was. But not one of them that I heard about, saw, or worked on...about 400 or so ...in that vintage, were even close to great.
On the other hand, there were clunkers from Fullerton in the 50's and 60's. Just reverse the percenatges of the 70's fiasco. That's what other dealers and techs were saying as well. Our sales didn't tank by accident, and the Japanese finally turning the lights on again was our salvation. I'm not saying the odd one wasn't playable, it was. But dang, they cost us in the long run, and there were those of us trying to make a living on them back then, and we felt stabbed in the back by a company that had always provided a reasonably well made product in the past.
I can't count how many guys threatened to shoot themselves with the "bullet" truss rod. What the hell was that?
|
|
|
Post by nitehawk55 on Sept 9, 2006 15:26:32 GMT -7
Ditto on Gibson. You have to go through twenty five to find a good one. The acoustic Gibsons build qualtiy is much better than the electrics, IMHO. Seems like the mid-90s was a peak time for their electrics, good stuff then. A friend and I were just talking the other day on how it seemed Gibson was cranking out some good stuff in the mid 90's . I wonder what happened ? I'm sure there was the odd good 70's Fender and the odd clunker as you say from the golden era . You are correct in stating the MIJ's sort of turned it around and actually they were probably a big influence on a lot of manufacturers because of the guitars coming out of Japan in the late 70's early 80's........ darn good stuff for the most part except maybe the pick-ups in some . Some of the Ibanez guitars and others were killer made and a bargain ! Sort of the same thing with the automobiles and the big 3 trying to build cars as well as Japan. Some fine guitars and auto's coming out of other countries now too but i'm a die hard made in North-Am type person and I like to support our economy . I hate looking at everything now that has" made in China " on it but I guess we saw that too years back with Japan , Korea and the like . I can recall when the general feeling in the 60's was that if it was made in Japan it was junk .
|
|
|
Post by billyguitar on Sept 9, 2006 15:42:41 GMT -7
Gibson probably upped production by cutting the time allowed for each step. I heard that they used to only allow 8 minutes for strings and a rough set-up!
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Sept 9, 2006 19:22:54 GMT -7
8 minutes? Well, I'm inclined to believe that. Good on those of us who charged $35 for a Silver Setup, $50 for Gold, and $75 or more for a Platinum Standard Setup. Gibson and Fender's sins of the 70's and 80's...and even now... made us some cash, so all isn't lost. I just did a brand new Gibson Les Paul last week again. These guitars are utility grade, my friends...and set up even worse.
|
|
|
Post by johngourlay on Sept 17, 2006 9:40:56 GMT -7
They must have painted the LP standard that I once had in 8 mins max. Horrid thing. I hear people saying that PRS guitars are characterless and have no class like Gibsons. I'm more than happy with the PRS's I've had.
|
|
|
Post by Telemanic on Sept 17, 2006 11:08:03 GMT -7
I have to admit to having a 73' maple neck straty i bought in about 77'. Was my number one for years before i could afford a second guitar. Is it great? no, ....... but ya know what i dont think it deserves too much critisizm. Neck is smallish but fine, Three fret jobs later. (played the heck outta that thing!) Dont like the poly finish. The body was creme that has now turned to a beautiful butter like color, neck has all the wear marks like a Keith richards tele, So,... i guess i'm sayin that ya know what?,.... it's got great mojo. Sound wise, yeah,... it falls short of my Relic, i guess the smallish neck and body wood take there toll, and to be honest i dont often play it nowadays, .......but it's the oldest guitar i own now, and i guess i'll keep her,
|
|
|
Post by tele1962 on Sept 20, 2006 22:06:37 GMT -7
Telemanic, I respect that. You know what you have, and aren't pretentious about anything, but enjoy it for what it has given you. Good on you.
|
|