"Thin skin" JM

Discussion of newer designs, copies and reissue offset-waist instruments.
User avatar
RumorsOFsurF
Mods
Mods
Posts: 17599
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by RumorsOFsurF » Fri Feb 22, 2008 10:54 am

luau wrote:
StevenO wrote: I keed, I keed. I love me a few Gibsons...

http://www.againstperfection.net/guitar ... om/VOS.jpg
Back GAS demon! Back!
The power of Leo compels you! The power of Leo compels you!The power of Leo compels you!The power of Leo compels you! The power of Leo compels you!

Image
Damn kids, get off my lawn!

User avatar
JDandCoke
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Cambridge - UK

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by JDandCoke » Fri Feb 22, 2008 9:07 pm

do we know how many of these thinskins have been made?

are they limited at all?
all i know is that ive only seen two for sale in the UK. and the one i got to play was incredibly nice (shoreline gold  :?)

User avatar
JD
PAT PEND
PAT PEND
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 7:45 pm

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by JD » Sat Feb 23, 2008 9:38 am

THE RADIUS diff between my 62 and my thin skin is simply unnoticable. I think folks make too much of it - if anythig 9.5 is much more comfortable in the higher registers

User avatar
B
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 12:33 am
Location: PACIFIC NORTHWEST

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by B » Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:12 am

JDandCoke wrote: do we know how many of these thinskins have been made?

are they limited at all?
I can look up exact production numbers, but they were right around 20 each I believe.  Meaning 20 in each color (Sonic Blue, Shoreline Gold, SeaFoam Green and Fiesta Red).  I expect the same kind of numbers with the new ones.  Of course, that number will vary when you figure in the ones that were sent back due to some sort of shipping damage.  I think Fender still owes us one SeaFoam Green JM.  We just got our Fiesta Red replacement JM in.

So yes, these are genuinely a limited run of instruments.  When you consider that Fender USA hasn't done these colors with a matching headstock since way back when (not including Custom Shop stuff), I think they're definitely rare gems.

Of the colors from this last year, our Sonic Blue JM models were almost all spoken for before they even arrived at our shop from Fender.  The only reason I was able to get mine is that I had a customer change his order to a Fiesta Red.  I am seeing as much if not more inquiries about the new 59 model.  :)

User avatar
Surfoverb
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1360
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:37 am
Location: Commonwealth

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by Surfoverb » Sat Feb 23, 2008 10:29 am

JD wrote: THE RADIUS diff between my 62 and my thin skin is simply unnoticable. I think folks make too much of it - if anythig 9.5 is much more comfortable in the higher registers
What about the bigger fret wire? I read that Fender 'vintage' frets (the ones they use on stock AVRI's are actually taller than what thy used back in the day so I can imagine the taller frets are huge no?

I don't  think I would mind the 9.5 radius, I used to play an SG with 12", but I think the combo of flatter radius + bigger frets might be a turnoff. Even if I think I'd still buy one if they came in black or silver with matching HS and B/B.

I think what irks people about the 9.5 radius and bigger frets is that somewhere along the line Fender decided for everybody what is 'better'. I read all the time how you can't bend strings with 7.25" yet I don't have a problem. Eric Johnson doesnt have a problem bending strings on his 57 strat with 7.25" yet the EJ Strat has a 12" radius. SRV's 'number 1' also was 7.25" and became compound after years of playing/refretting. What happens to a 12" radius after years of refrets? Does it become even flatter? What's next 16" radius on 52 Tele RI?

It's just annoying.

idiotbear

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by idiotbear » Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:07 pm

JDandCoke wrote: all i know is that ive only seen two for sale in the UK. and the one i got to play was incredibly nice (shoreline gold  :?)
Where'd you play it?

User avatar
Stratelejazzuar
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 6744
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 10:15 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by Stratelejazzuar » Sat Feb 23, 2008 12:17 pm

Surfoverb wrote:
JD wrote: THE RADIUS diff between my 62 and my thin skin is simply unnoticable. I think folks make too much of it - if anythig 9.5 is much more comfortable in the higher registers
What about the bigger fret wire? I read that Fender 'vintage' frets (the ones they use on stock AVRI's are actually taller than what thy used back in the day so I can imagine the taller frets are huge no?

I don't  think I would mind the 9.5 radius, I used to play an SG with 12", but I think the combo of flatter radius + bigger frets might be a turnoff. Even if I think I'd still buy one if they came in black or silver with matching HS and B/B.

I think what irks people about the 9.5 radius and bigger frets is that somewhere along the line Fender decided for everybody what is 'better'. I read all the time how you can't bend strings with 7.25" yet I don't have a problem. Eric Johnson doesnt have a problem bending strings on his 57 strat with 7.25" yet the EJ Strat has a 12" radius. SRV's 'number 1' also was 7.25" and became compound after years of playing/refretting. What happens to a 12" radius after years of refrets? Does it become even flatter? What's next 16" radius on 52 Tele RI?

It's just annoying.
sometimes i think that they're trying to make the newer instruments easier to play for today's players who want to be able to do what their heroes do/did on vintage guitars way back when. plus it's like you said, vintage guitars get worn down (radius-wise) and refretted over the years, so rather than make a new player have to work in a 7.25 radius and stuff over X amount of years, the manufacturer just says, 'let's pre-flatten the radius and give them tall frets that will make it easier to play and take longer to wear down...' etc

just a semi-thought during a weekend work day...  :-[  ;)

User avatar
RumorsOFsurF
Mods
Mods
Posts: 17599
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by RumorsOFsurF » Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:42 pm

B wrote:
JDandCoke wrote: do we know how many of these thinskins have been made?

are they limited at all?
I can look up exact production numbers, but they were right around 20 each I believe.  Meaning 20 in each color (Sonic Blue, Shoreline Gold, SeaFoam Green and Fiesta Red).  I expect the same kind of numbers with the new ones.  Of course, that number will vary when you figure in the ones that were sent back due to some sort of shipping damage.  I think Fender still owes us one SeaFoam Green JM.  We just got our Fiesta Red replacement JM in.

So yes, these are genuinely a limited run of instruments.  When you consider that Fender USA hasn't done these colors with a matching headstock since way back when (not including Custom Shop stuff), I think they're definitely rare gems.

Of the colors from this last year, our Sonic Blue JM models were almost all spoken for before they even arrived at our shop from Fender.  The only reason I was able to get mine is that I had a customer change his order to a Fiesta Red.  I am seeing as much if not more inquiries about the new 59 model.   :)
Do you think the '59 will sell out really quickly?  How do I reserve one, should I decide to do so?
Damn kids, get off my lawn!

User avatar
Surfoverb
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 1360
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 6:37 am
Location: Commonwealth

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by Surfoverb » Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:50 pm

Stratelejazzuar wrote: sometimes i think that they're trying to make the newer instruments easier to play for today's players who want to be able to do what their heroes do/did on vintage guitars way back when. plus it's like you said, vintage guitars get worn down (radius-wise) and refretted over the years, so rather than make a new player have to work in a 7.25 radius and stuff over X amount of years, the manufacturer just says, 'let's pre-flatten the radius and give them tall frets that will make it easier to play and take longer to wear down...' etc
True. I think the 9.5" is great for people who want it. Just give people like me and RumorsOfSurf the option of 7.25" (and a handfull of others in the World)  :-[

It's funny I was just reading about a documented 1950 Tele that had a 9" radius. Didn't some G&L's have 9"?

User avatar
JDandCoke
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 105
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 8:09 pm
Location: Cambridge - UK

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by JDandCoke » Sat Feb 23, 2008 4:51 pm

idiotbear wrote:
JDandCoke wrote: all i know is that ive only seen two for sale in the UK. and the one i got to play was incredibly nice (shoreline gold  :?)
Where'd you play it?
somewhere in denmark st i think

it sounds stupid but i cant really be sure  :-[

it was a while back and i have a habit of entering every music shop i see.
i remember comparing it to an orginal refin in burgendy that was really really nice even though it did need some work (knobs were loose, just setup issues really)

User avatar
RumorsOFsurF
Mods
Mods
Posts: 17599
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by RumorsOFsurF » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:11 pm

Surfoverb wrote: True. I think the 9.5" is great for people who want it. Just give people like me and RumorsOfSurf the option of 7.25" (and a handfull of others in the World 90% of Offsetguitars.com members
Edited  ;)
Damn kids, get off my lawn!

User avatar
scottme
Expat
Expat
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 6:57 pm
Location: Newcastle
Contact:

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by scottme » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:19 pm

RumorsOFsurF wrote:
B wrote:
JDandCoke wrote: do we know how many of these thinskins have been made?

are they limited at all?
I can look up exact production numbers, but they were right around 20 each I believe.  Meaning 20 in each color (Sonic Blue, Shoreline Gold, SeaFoam Green and Fiesta Red).  I expect the same kind of numbers with the new ones.  Of course, that number will vary when you figure in the ones that were sent back due to some sort of shipping damage.  I think Fender still owes us one SeaFoam Green JM.  We just got our Fiesta Red replacement JM in.

So yes, these are genuinely a limited run of instruments.  When you consider that Fender USA hasn't done these colors with a matching headstock since way back when (not including Custom Shop stuff), I think they're definitely rare gems.

Of the colors from this last year, our Sonic Blue JM models were almost all spoken for before they even arrived at our shop from Fender.  The only reason I was able to get mine is that I had a customer change his order to a Fiesta Red.  I am seeing as much if not more inquiries about the new 59 model.  :)
Do you think the '59 will sell out really quickly?  How do I reserve one, should I decide to do so?
Also, what will be the rough magnitude of 59 RIs being produced? tens? hundreds? Any chance that these will be lightweight sorted?  :?

User avatar
GUITARmole
PAT. # 2.972.923
PAT. # 2.972.923
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Dec 23, 2007 10:50 pm
Location: Portland

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by GUITARmole » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:23 pm

Surfoverb wrote:
True. I think the 9.5" is great for people who want it. Just give people like me and RumorsOfSurf the option of 7.25" (and a handfull of others in the World)  :-[
By giving you the option of 7.25" you'd be denying the majority that likes 9.5".  That'd be like me saying just give me the option of a 1" +  U shaped neck profile, jumbo stainless steel frets,  clay dots, wiring with  no-load tone pots and treble bleed on the volume, 1pc ash bodies, etc etc...my preferences are (unfortunately for me) in the minority so it's unreasonable for me to expect Fender to cater to my personal needs with a production guitar.

Honestly, I don't see what the big deal about the radius is.  It's not like 9.5" is some heavy metal shredder compound 12"-16" radius for shit's sake!  You probably wouldn't notice much of a difference other than being able to bend easier with more sustain on the higher frets.

Fret size on the other hand I can see...jumbos have a distinctly different feel than narrow vintage frets and it all comes down to preference.

Surfoverb wrote: It's funny I was just reading about a documented 1950 Tele that had a 9" radius. Didn't some G&L's have 9"?
There were 50's Teles with 9-10" raduis. 
scottme wrote: [

Also, what will be the rough magnitude of 59 RIs being produced? tens? hundreds? Any chance that these will be lightweight sorted?  :?
WTF??  We're talking Fender here.... dream on brudduh!!

User avatar
OffYourFace
Mods
Mods
Posts: 13776
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 2:59 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by OffYourFace » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:25 pm

Surfoverb wrote: Eric Johnson doesnt have a problem bending strings on his 57 strat with 7.25" yet the EJ Strat has a 12" radius. SRV's 'number 1' also was 7.25" and became compound after years of playing/refretting. What happens to a 12" radius after years of refrets? Does it become even flatter? What's next 16" radius on 52 Tele RI?

It's just annoying.
EJ actually had his old strats ('54-'62)  refretted & radius changed  to 10" I believe...  do a search for 'setups of the star'.  I believe he did this waaaayy before vintage strats became super high $$$

User avatar
RumorsOFsurF
Mods
Mods
Posts: 17599
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:55 pm
Location: Oregon

Re: "Thin skin" JM

Post by RumorsOFsurF » Sat Feb 23, 2008 5:57 pm

GUITARmole wrote:
Surfoverb wrote:
True. I think the 9.5" is great for people who want it. Just give people like me and RumorsOfSurf the option of 7.25" (and a handfull of others in the World)   :-[
By giving you the option of 7.25" you'd be denying the majority that likes 9.5".  
According to our poll here, most Jazzmaster/Jag fans prefer 7.25".  Who says the majority likes 9.5" radii 'boards anyway?  Just because 95% of new Fenders come that way?  Just because it's readily available, doesn't mean it's preferred.  We've been through all this before.  Nobody's going to change anyone's mind.  It's all personal preference.  ;)
Damn kids, get off my lawn!

Post Reply