The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
- Mechanical Birds
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:24 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
It’s hard for some people but important nonetheless to remember that every facet of music is subjective. Sometimes you’ll see some herb try and do a “ACTUALLY BECAUSE OF PHYSICS...” thing where they have figured out that on paper the wood/paint/parts have varying effects on what you get. But honestly, I think the real meat and potatoes of what we can hear comes from the kind of pickups, scale length, then maybe neck joint where certain stuff does result in a dampening of sorts with whatever resonance you might get one way or the other.
Maybe some of the bad cbs hardcandy finishes changed that resonance in ways but the claim that a nitro finish lets a guitar breathe in any kind of way, let alone a better way, over a modern poly finish, yeah that sounds dumb as hell.
For me the nitro thing has always been because of how they look and age. Even people that are annoyed by relic stuff I think are hardwired to appreciate how it looks because subconsciously, at least at first, our brains process that in way that instantly associates it with old Fender, real Fender, etc. I just think it looks cool, personally. I don’t like the forearm wear that’s on every single example of pre relived guitars - I mean I get it that it’s common because it’s common on the real ones, it just looks cheesy to me.
Maybe some of the bad cbs hardcandy finishes changed that resonance in ways but the claim that a nitro finish lets a guitar breathe in any kind of way, let alone a better way, over a modern poly finish, yeah that sounds dumb as hell.
For me the nitro thing has always been because of how they look and age. Even people that are annoyed by relic stuff I think are hardwired to appreciate how it looks because subconsciously, at least at first, our brains process that in way that instantly associates it with old Fender, real Fender, etc. I just think it looks cool, personally. I don’t like the forearm wear that’s on every single example of pre relived guitars - I mean I get it that it’s common because it’s common on the real ones, it just looks cheesy to me.
- blunderbuss
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 3:58 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
I like all the little dings and whatnot when I do them. I’m like. That’s mine I did that. Evidence of living you know? The rest feels like bs.
Ryan
- StrangeIdols
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:19 am
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
It might be a bit off topic but I've always wondered if some of the hate for offsets and stuff came from the need for most of them to be shimmed, and the idea some players have that a neck should never be removed from a bolt on for any reason whatsoever.Mechanical Birds wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:03 pmBut honestly, I think the real meat and potatoes of what we can hear comes from the kind of pickups, scale length, then maybe neck joint where certain stuff does result in a dampening of sorts with whatever resonance you might get one way or the other.
Slightly more on topic, but I also wonder if fender using an (anachronistic) angled neck pocket in the AV65s was to make them more playable out the box, and try to get around that to appeal to players who hold onto the "never remove the neck" idea
- ShatoonBringerOfCorn
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:49 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
If you let the atoms of Californian air escape from the neck pocket you lose all your tones
- Mechanical Birds
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:24 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
The shim thing has always seemed to be pretty rare knowledge to me. Most people still call the tremolo unit the bridge on these things. Until like 8 years ago I was one of those people lolStrangeIdols wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:24 amIt might be a bit off topic but I've always wondered if some of the hate for offsets and stuff came from the need for most of them to be shimmed, and the idea some players have that a neck should never be removed from a bolt on for any reason whatsoever.Mechanical Birds wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 5:03 pmBut honestly, I think the real meat and potatoes of what we can hear comes from the kind of pickups, scale length, then maybe neck joint where certain stuff does result in a dampening of sorts with whatever resonance you might get one way or the other.
Slightly more on topic, but I also wonder if fender using an (anachronistic) angled neck pocket in the AV65s was to make them more playable out the box, and try to get around that to appeal to players who hold onto the "never remove the neck" idea
- StrangeIdols
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:19 am
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
About the shims not being common knowledge, i wonder if fender following vintage correct designs has caused them to shoot themselves in the foot a bit by not using the angled neck pocket on more models. Plenty of people like the look of offsets but might not have the time or knowledge to set them up, seems daft to keep such a player friendly feature for their top of the line stuff almost exclusively (at least as far as I can tell)Mechanical Birds wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:58 pmThe shim thing has always seemed to be pretty rare knowledge to me. Most people still call the tremolo unit the bridge on these things. Until like 8 years ago I was one of those people lol
- Larsongs
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 2414
- Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 9:39 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
I’ve always wondered why Fender would design them to need a Shim in the first place? Then doing so why they weren’t already included, installed & the necks adjusted?
- Mechanical Birds
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 3617
- Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:24 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
The old ones p much universally did come with shims, but I think the myths surrounding them all come from the 80s/70s tech guys who form very open and shut opinions on stuff, and then that stuff is repeated to the layman, and then repeated further, etc. my guy was like that and has straight up refused to do commissioned work for me involving offset parts haha! I wanted him to install an offset vibrato on my Starcaster reissue and within about 30 seconds he just said no. I had an 80s Epiphone Firebird that I busted my ass to get cuz it looked so cool and I knew nothing about guitars and asked him to put an offset/dynamic vibrato into it and again he said no and only agreed to work on it if it included a Kahler.
I trust him pretty much unconditionally in terms of what the smart or right thing to do is, but I’ve learned that with some stuff he’s just never gonna come around and TL;DR - I think this is very common with other guys doing similar work.
Also yeah I don’t understand why the neck pocket being. Angled isn’t just a stock feature on all guitars with the offset trem and bridge, seems silly to say the least, like why not eliminate that point of adjustment/annoyance for customers?
I trust him pretty much unconditionally in terms of what the smart or right thing to do is, but I’ve learned that with some stuff he’s just never gonna come around and TL;DR - I think this is very common with other guys doing similar work.
Also yeah I don’t understand why the neck pocket being. Angled isn’t just a stock feature on all guitars with the offset trem and bridge, seems silly to say the least, like why not eliminate that point of adjustment/annoyance for customers?
- timiscott
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 422
- Joined: Thu Jan 25, 2018 12:38 am
- Location: London
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
It's all mad. I don't get people who only want a vintage correct guitar but then put in a shim, add Mastery or Staytrem bridge and trem stuff, then change out the pickups for Seymour Duncans or whatever. Don't get me wrong, I've done most of these things myself and I own two offsets with AoM bridges. The only thing I don't like too much is that my CP Jaguar has the trem moved closer to the bridge; it just doesn't look as elegant as the proportions are off. And that, right there, is the personal hell I crawl through daily.
- JPCordingley
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 270
- Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 1:28 am
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
I'm 34 and have grown up with 9.5" radius necks and modern hardware on my guitars. The music I make isn't particularly retro - I like finding new sounds and textures. I want a guitar that sounds good, looks fairly classic (but not rigidly so) and feels comfortable. I had a Mexican Tele in my early-mid 20s with a modern six-saddle bridge and I much preferres that both practically and aesthetically to the vintage ashtray bridge. The only vintage feature I do definitely prefer is the 7.25" radius - I've never owned a guitar with that but the ones I've played have felt so goddamn comfortable. I quite like the look of pau ferro unlike others who think it isn't dark enough to look like rosewood - I like the orange hue that can sometimes pop through the darker grain. It's not meant to be the same as rosewood but it is for now a more sustainable alternative that has its own look.
- HarlowTheFish
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 7:09 pm
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
Hell, when the SRV Strat launched the Pau Ferro board was pitched as a premium option. Suhr and a bunch of other boutique shops sell it as a special neck and fretboard (it's a $150 option for just the fretboard vs. $0 for Indian rosewood). I like it as a warm, brownish wood option -- which looks sweet with a lot of Fender colors -- that also feels more like ebony and isn't as grainy as rosewood under the fingers.JPCordingley wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 5:33 amI quite like the look of pau ferro unlike others who think it isn't dark enough to look like rosewood - I like the orange hue that can sometimes pop through the darker grain. It's not meant to be the same as rosewood but it is for now a more sustainable alternative that has its own look.
- fuzzpop
- PAT PEND
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2021 5:44 am
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
I'm guilty of this to a degree. My absolute favorite guitars are my AV and AVRIs. For me, it's about the look and feel of those 50s and 60s Fenders. It's a very personal and unmeasurable thing. My AV and AVRI Strats all have different pickups than they came with. And my '62 AVRI JM has a Mastery and Novaks. I like to use the vintage correct(ish) AVs and AVRIs as a platform. You know, like everyone did in the 70s—except no Floyds!timiscott wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:27 amIt's all mad. I don't get people who only want a vintage correct guitar but then put in a shim, add Mastery or Staytrem bridge and trem stuff, then change out the pickups for Seymour Duncans or whatever. Don't get me wrong, I've done most of these things myself and I own two offsets with AoM bridges. The only thing I don't like too much is that my CP Jaguar has the trem moved closer to the bridge; it just doesn't look as elegant as the proportions are off. And that, right there, is the personal hell I crawl through daily.
- MrFingers
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 1560
- Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 11:50 am
- Location: Puss Creek - Brussels - Belgium
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
This "annoys" me... Annoying is not the right term, it's more serious than that. It angers me. You're doing the effort either way to provide inlays in a fretboard, and trim that off with a binding. And your factory is already churning out Stratocaster necks with a big headstock anyway... So why not do it the right way, and use the correct sizing for the headstock AND the block inlays.
- StrangeIdols
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:19 am
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
Controversial here, but I'm not big on the CBS headstock, just looks a bit /too/ big, to me throwing some of the balance off the overall look. There was a thread a while back discussing the new blocks and why they changed them, honestly i prefer the old style block inlays, but the new ones have grown on me a bit, then again, my main guitar is a black 60th anniv so i might be a bit biasedMrFingers wrote: ↑Fri Feb 12, 2021 7:36 amThis "annoys" me... Annoying is not the right term, it's more serious than that. It angers me. You're doing the effort either way to provide inlays in a fretboard, and trim that off with a binding. And your factory is already churning out Stratocaster necks with a big headstock anyway... So why not do it the right way, and use the correct sizing for the headstock AND the block inlays.
- marqueemoon
- PAT. # 2.972.923
- Posts: 7343
- Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 9:37 pm
- Location: Seattle
Re: The 'Vintage Correct' Obsession
A lot of this shit is pretty dumb.
My “51 Nocaster” has all slothead screws because Philips wasn’t a thing at the time, and yet it has a 9.5” radius. The relicing is weird too. There’s fretboard “wear” and yet the back of the neck is showroom glossy.
It also has non-compensated saddles and a non-cutaway bridge so I can install that sweet ashtray in the sealed bag in the case or just so I can enjoy having my picking interfered with for no reason.
Great playing and sounding guitar, but I couldn’t care less about most of the “vintage correct” features.
My “51 Nocaster” has all slothead screws because Philips wasn’t a thing at the time, and yet it has a 9.5” radius. The relicing is weird too. There’s fretboard “wear” and yet the back of the neck is showroom glossy.
It also has non-compensated saddles and a non-cutaway bridge so I can install that sweet ashtray in the sealed bag in the case or just so I can enjoy having my picking interfered with for no reason.
Great playing and sounding guitar, but I couldn’t care less about most of the “vintage correct” features.