Question for W builders: What's so bad about a "mutt" W/Fender?

[stubhead]

To my way of thinking, even the idea of "dudness" is variable. A heavy, dense body is actually useful in high-gain situations, to project a particular range of frequencies - wide & flat, not centered around a specific resonant peak. I think the lighter and more resonant a body gets, the closer it is getting to a hollow body, and the more likely it is to have some unevenness in volume at differing, almost random frequencies. Genuine authentic vintage Fender basses are famous for having "dead spots" or uneven response, and that's not true of the double-trussed, walnut, maple & exotic wood 12-pounders.

My main #1 stage Tele guitar has a quite heavy swamp ash body and it's nowhere near the most acoustically-resonant solidbody I own - but it sounds great cranked, and I can control & shape the tone better with that than with a lighter guitar that adds so much of it's own character. I totally get the people who play maple & walnut & hippie sandwich guitars -  good tone is mostly subtractive, and it's easier and more controllable & predictable to cut the highs from a dense guitar than trying to add highs to a squishy guitar that just ain't got 'em to start with. IF you know how, aluminum & plexiglas guitars can sound great, and I sure don't think they "breathe" much... :toothy12:

In about a million different ways, applying acoustic guitar standards to solidbody electrics is a recipe for mediocre tone.*

What I would watch for first and foremost in cheap bodies would be ones that are made from completely different batches of wood, with varying-density pieces all glued together at random. Of course this might be the part you can't see, which is why I wouldn't actually pursue buying cheap painted bodies at all myself. Tone is God in my collection, playability is his Queen & appearances are secondary. Having said that, any decent wood can be worked around, and any guitar that sounds different that what you expect may very well warp your playing into unexpected areas, always a good thing in my estimation. Though, many (most?) people want their guitars to do exactly the same thing, and I'm one of those weirdos who want my guitars to be as different-sounding from each other as possible, within the limits of decency.

* (For future reference, please tattoo this on your forehead, backwards so you can read it in the mirror when you're drunk.) :hello2:

 

[AprioriMark]

Good stuff... thanks.  I agree about a lot of what you're saying.  I'm also of the opinion that electric guitar tone is 40% neck, 40% pickups, 15% hardware, 5% body.  That gets skewed if the body creates funky overtones or kills highs, but if everything is decent, I hardly think the body wood/resonance matters much.

-Mark

 

[Superbeast520]

I'm really curious if there's some aspect of the building of the cheaper bodies that's inferior and something I might not be considering.  I figure if anyone knows, it's you guys.

-Mark

I don't think there is a 100% this or that rule, as the bottom line is some pieces of wood just sound better than others, and that goes with all price range guitars, but the fact is you find less good or great sounding pieces when you start looking for a jem in a pile of second rate stuff, as cheaper manufacturing means cutting corners and using and matching less desireable pieces together with lottsa glue, which I guess may even sound good sonically given the right circumstances, though you would never get me to believe that.

That dosn't mean your not going to find a good piece if your looking for it, because ultimately its how it sounds to "your" ears not necessarily what someone else thinks unless of course your selling it to them and then it may become an issue.

Heck if a guy can build a guitar he's happy with and do it cheaply whos to knock that, but in all honesty its alot easier to create more of the "Cool" factors like tone and appearance etc. when you start with something that clearly has more of the positive traits associated with great sounding guitars...like weight and wood type and grain and all that, especially when you start pairing it with specific pickups and details to recreate a tried and true sound, such as the classic strat and gibson tones weve all come to love.

I go with Warmoth stuff simply because they do it better than anybody else, when you look at the whole picture you find they've done it longer,better, and have been more succesfull at it than just about anyone out there...That pretty much makes it about as sure a bet as a guy can get...thus Warmoth Rules...hehehe... :laughing7:

 

[BobR55]

It's funny. Like Aaronic I had a MIJ Strat that was dull and lifeless. It was fine for high gain situations but lacked a tone of acceptible character for lowgain use. I replaced the neck, bridge, and pickups but never got anything sonorous and sustaining until I replaced the body. By then I had a totally new Warmoth!

 

[jay4321]

The biggest problems with cheaper/unknown brand pieces are:

1) The often don't fit to "standard" specs such as Fender USA or Warmoth. I have a (very nice) Japanese strat that required a good deal of modification to fit a Warmoth neck. In the cases of Squiers not all neck pockets are the same either. I have an agathis Tele Deluxe/Custom squier body. It's completely out of whack with everything. Standard necks don't fit well, the routing doesn't line up well without the original pickguard.

2) Woods are often subpar. Agathis is common, as is poplar (which can be okay sometimes). I've seen 5 pieces of alder glued together, particle board and all kinds of weird things. With $150-ish guitars, I'd say all bets are off as far as what can be hiding under the paint jobs.

That's not at all to say there aren't really nice cheap bodies out there, there are. Just make sure you know the specs and what you're really getting.