Guitar Snobs

Going back to the beginning - my argument is not for fender, as much as I love the vintage teles. My argument is against the fender copies. I would much rather have people say "Hey, whats that funky-lookin' thing?" than "Hey, that's a nice - oh, wait. That's not a fender."

And if you all want to argue against fender, then how did they build the strongest lasting reputation of any guitar company ever?
 
so your excuse for fanboism is that you don't want to answer ignorant comments from ignoramuses and fender guitar fans???

 
Ok, I'll give this a shot.  I personally don't own any Fender that I didn't have to severely modify to feel and sound good to me.  Out of the box with no mods, my experience is most of them haven't been all that great to me, though I *am* fairly picky about what I like after 20 years of playing.  I think every guitarist that knows what they want out of an instrument is to a varied degree.

I don't think that anyone's refuting that Fender was in the right place at the right time and came up with some groundbreaking solid body designs.  I also don't think most people think that Fender is the be-all end-all of guitar manufacturers.
 
Altar said:
And I own a fender 60's jaguar, which I adore. I will admit, though; that one has been heavily modded.

Hey Altar, that Jag sounds like an interesting instrument.  Can you post a photo of it and give us a bit more description?
 
When Eric Clapton recorded the now-re-revered John Mayall "Beano" album (which incidentally didn't sell doodles) he was playing a 1960 Les Paul, a 5-year-old guitar. When he actually got famous in Cream, he was playing a 1961 or 1963 "SG" Les Paul, and a 1964 ES-335, guitars that were 4 to 7 years old. Jimi Hendrix played only new Strats, 1967, '68 or '69, by which time he had so many stashed around he couldn't keep them straight. Mike Bloomfield, 1959 Les Paul, 1965 to 1968. Peter Green of Fleetwood Mac Blues Band, 1968-'69, 1959 (modified) Les Paul. Santana played a new SG at Woodstock, and recorded his first three definitive albums with a 1968 Les Paul, the 1st year re-issue. Has he ever gotten, or sounded better since?  :(

Jerry Garcia, Live/Dead - '68 SG. He actually was one of the earliest users of an old guitar, a 1957 Stratocaster given him by Graham Nash, but - the future founders of Alembic practiced some wide-open surgery on that piece. Likewise, when Jimmy Page began the real "Les Paul" story, the 1959 he started with was already rewired, neck shaved - and he did the same things to it's backup! Duane Allman was really one of the few great ones who played them stock, except - he quietly kept the pickups from his goldtop, which he sold for $200 with the pickups changed out from his "new" 11-year-old tobacco Les Paul. Beck recorded "Blow by Blow" with a 1955 Les Paul - 17 years old, a record! - except it had also been totally stripped and refinished, humbuckers (of some sort) to replace the P-90's etc. And he soon tossed it over in favor on the new "TelePaul" that Seymour Duncan used to weasel his Yardbird Tele out of him, which had been 11 years old when he was with them. And he then passed that over in favor of the 1964 Stratocaster given him by John McLaughlin, used to record "Wired" - when it was 12 years old.

Honestly - I don't know of a single solo or "required" song in the bar-band pantheon intentionally recorded with a guitar over 20 years old because the guitar was so great then. Clapton played "Blackie" for 20 years, but it was itself made out of 3 different guitars, as was Stevie Ray Vaughan's Wife. And they were both undoubtedly so buzzed - for such a large part of their "best" work - it'd be hard to fathom an instrument's "help". (I've often thought that most people's "problem" with cocaine was largely that it can assist you in staying blitzed on liquor for DAYS without dropping.) Page's Les Pauls were 18 years old on the 1977 tour, which was aborted because he was so drunk he was playing solos from one song stuck into another and "improvised" in keys which have never since been rediscovered. Fortunately the heroin straightened him out enough to endure the 1980 tour.

As vintage is technically means to be 25 years to 100 years old, at which point "antiques" take over, the people who's livelihood (and dope supplies :laughing3:) depended on their ability to sound good, have only rarely played vintage instruments. And, not intentionally, it was just all they had left. :laughing3: :laughing3: :laughing3:

SM-PA0021.jpg


OH PLEASE....
 
Jumble Jumble said:
Just want to say that, in addition to all the music I'm allowed to listen to, I also likeMadonna,and it has nothing to do with my teenage self wanting to gt girls. T school if I'd told a girl I listened to Madonna shed have laughed me cross the from. To get girls you had to listen to Soundgarden, Nirvana and REM. I don't listen to any of them any more.

It's not nostalgia either; I just like pop music in addition to worthy guitar music. I like Katy Perry too.

Guitar snobbery bad; music snobbery OK?

'Has nothing to do with "snobbery". That music just plain sucks, and the people performing it are not musicians.
 
jackthehack said:
AprioriMark said:
Altar said:
Mayfly said:
Altar said:
Again, just stating my opinion. I don't like anything like a fender that's not a fender.

Wow - I feel bad for you buddy.  It's like saying you don't like redheads or something.  You're missing out on some great experiences.

Nothing against redheads. But the blondes that dye their hair "Aubrey O'day red...." Whats with that? Be blonde, be suhr, be G&L, not fender.

I can't believe I'm so quick to pull the age card, but dang, man.  Look at the "whys" behind why things are the way they are.  G&L, Music Man etc were instrumental in getting Fender to remove its head from its hind end.  Fender's offering were so effing poor that the *original* people tried to recreate more playable versions of what they'd previously created.  I own more Fenders and have built more guitars with Warmoth parts than you will probably ever play.  I've owned an actual Nocaster, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 2000s and beyond Strats and Teles.  The ones I've kept, I've kept for a reason, and the ones that have had their necks replaced were also for reasons.  Fender made some garbage as well as some gems, even in the "golden era" or whatever.

I'll also echo Mayfly here, and expound to say that you shouldn't be a fanboi of anything.  If Fender is/was so great, WHY is that, and WHAT made it that way.  Music isn't about brands and trends.  Those things follow music.  Some of us have taken that to an extreme and started mod'ing and building guitars and basses that are EXACTLY what we want.  I'll put my Bloodwood/Ebony necked bass against any bass on the planet.  The fact is, I don't own a single pure Fender bass anymore.  For a reason.  It's my reason, so get your own!

-Mark

You DO realize you're attempting to have a logical argument/point out the obvious to a 13 year old? Just shoo him off your lawn and carry on...

+1
 
Cagey said:
Opinions vary. The CBS stuff was junk, and I don't think you'll get much argument from anybody on that, but the older stuff wasn't anything to write home about. The hardware was pitifully bad, as was the fit/finish. Of course, I'm comparing to what's available today, which is worlds away. Kinda like comparing a modern Mustang to a '65. The '65s were junk, relatively speaking. Bad brakes, suspension, tires, steering, engines, sheet metal - you name it. They were death traps. Thing is, there are a lotta fond memories of those old girls so all their inadequacies have been forgotten/forgiven. Guitars are much the same way. Problem is, forgiving and forgetting doesn't change the reality. The only way I'd take an old "classic" is so I could put it on ebay and wait for a sucker to enrich me.

Which makes me wonder why Yngwie's favorite Strats are the CBS era.

Oh, and I love classic cars. There are so many suspension, brake, and power-train upgrades available nowadays, it makes it worth having one (or several). New cars will never have styling as magical as those old classics.

You're just not a car-guy.
 
My mom had a '65 Mustang that she loved.  My uncle had a 64.5 that he drove for 25 years.  My husband has a 66 Mustang that he loves because it isn't full of computer chips and crap that he can't work on with regular tools.  He's got a 2007 Mustang that he drives around on a day to day basis, but man, he loves that '66.  That car is to him what my guitars are to me.   
 
I've owned my share of classics, and even did a couple restorations. Loved the things, but they were the scariest cars I've ever driven. I've since gotten it out of my system. I'm not as convinced of my immortality as I was when I was younger. So, it's not that I'm not a car guy, it's just that I like brakes that stop me and suspensions that keep me upright and going in the direction I intend, engines that start and run no matter the weather, double digit mileage, on and on.
 
Stubhead's post reaffirms to me that the person is the most important part of the instrument.  Higher than a kite or not, it is the person.  Viewing those last two sentences, the brand/model/year is of minor importance.  Are some better than others?  Of course.  But why are we posting on a Warmoth site?  Because we have figured out enough to know what we like, so that we can make instruments that make us happy and play better.  I am still never going to sound like "Rust in Peace," era Marty Friedman, but I will have a guitar that will get my sound as close as I am ever going to be, and grinning all of the way.  And I am going to continue typing run ons, because that seems to be my intended purpose in life.
Patrick

 
Had to repost, I just think this totally "Custom/Deluxe" Tele is the shit......hmmmm......may have to make some changes to my build.......

Warmoth ..if you dont love em, its because you've never seen em up close and personal.....  Truth is everyones a Snob on this sight and for good reason.

SM-PA0021.jpg


 
Street Avenger said:
Has nothing to do with "snobbery". That music just plain sucks, and the people performing it are not musicians.
Hahaha, saying its not snobbery doesn't make it not snobbery. And your comment there is pure 100% concentrated snobbery. I mean, what were all those guys with guitars and drums behind KP if they weren't musicians? They're session guys with skills that would probably make you look like an angry child (if you weren't doing such a good job yourself).

What barometer do you use to decide if it "sucks"? It's a completely subjective thing. The barometer I use is, when I listen to it, does it cause in me a emotional reaction I enjoy? If yes, I like it, and it doesn't "suck". Your barometer seems to be based on whether or not they're doing everything how you think it should be done, and nothing to do with the experience of being a listener.

Unless of course you're asserting that if your experience as a listener to a particular piece of music isn't a positive one, then everyone else is objectively wrong if they get a positive experience out of it? No, can't be. That would be stupid.
 
Mayfly said:
Altar said:
And I own a fender 60's jaguar, which I adore. I will admit, though; that one has been heavily modded.

Hey Altar, that Jag sounds like an interesting instrument.  Can you post a photo of it and give us a bit more description?

Maybe. I love it, but it would make y'all laugh or cry or hunt me down and kill me. The original owner gave it a bartolini in bridge. Then my dad removed the bridge, chopped off the head, and filled the bridge cavity. He made a new head with 12 tuner holes. He but a modded floyd rose in, so each saddle holds two strings. He painted it a metallic-ish black that looks purple in some lights. I myself haven't changed anything about it, dad prefers I get my own guitars. :icon_biggrin:

So I may post pics sometime, but if you all tell me how I can "improve" it, probably won't happen.
 
A few things, Altar.  You come to a site of replacement parts enthusiasts, say the brand you like, will build a guitar out of parts of the brand you like, don't like Fender look-a-likes, claim G&L lacks original designs - though claiming Leo left his original designs when he sold Fender, say you have a 60s Jaguar, say the Jaguar is your dad's.  You're 13.  Did I leave anything out? Had you started this thread, you'd be labeled a troll.
 
There is a reason I posted this in the snob thread. I have an undying snobbery for fender, and I merely stated my opinion. I also do not understand the contradiction between leo selling his life's work and owning a vintage instrument? Please explain...
 
In my opinion, the fact that you have 8 guitars as a 13 year old makes you a snob automatically imo... On another note, in terms of my snobbery, i dont think im much of a snob. I don't usually express my guitar preferences unless im asked. I feel its out of place for me, with only a few gigs under my belt, and unfortunately, no custom warmoth(yet, im workin on it). I dont have 10+ years of guitar playing, i dont have tons of guitars, so i just dont outwardly express what i think on things without being asked.
 
Altar said:
There is a reason I posted this in the snob thread. I have an undying snobbery for fender, and I merely stated my opinion. I also do not understand the contradiction between leo selling his life's work and owning a vintage instrument? Please explain...

I don't think.you get the thread.  If you're a Fender snob, you know this isn't a Fender site.  Fender snobs look down on Warmoths.  There is no contradiction of (your dad) owning a vintage instrument and Leo selling a company.  The contradiction is that saying G&L isn't original and later saying Leo sold his original designs.
 
Again, I dislike G&L because they used the designs fender sold and try to get around it by using a different headstock shape.
 
Back
Top