People are sure upset with the new Indonesian made Fender Standard series guitars what's the deal there?

[GilmourD]

OK, having now actually had my hands on a Tele and a couple Strats in Guitar Center, I can definitively say that the only problem with them is that they have the standard desperate need of a setup that Guitar Center imparts upon every guitar it sells.

[Larry Mal]

Yeah, good to know. I mean I'm sure they are fine guitars. I guess I'm just confused by some of the choices, like the ceramic pickups.

[GilmourD]

Yeah, good to know. I mean I'm sure they are fine guitars. I guess I'm just confused by some of the choices, like the ceramic pickups.

The original MIM Standards also had ceramic pickups.

Honestly, the satin finish feels much thinner than the finish on my '94 MIM Standard. Neck shape feels like the American Fenders moreso than the Squiers. Finishes were pretty nice looking, too.

I'd buy one with the intent of swapping pickups, but otherwise they're nice.

[Larry Mal]

The original MIM Standards also had ceramic pickups.

Honestly, the satin finish feels much thinner than the finish on my '94 MIM Standard. Neck shape feels like the American Fenders moreso than the Squiers. Finishes were pretty nice looking, too.

I'd buy one with the intent of swapping pickups, but otherwise they're nice.

I didn't actually know that about the MIM Standards.

[andy_tchp]

I actually liked some of those ceramic (MIM Standard Strat) pickups.

[GilmourD]

The original MIM Standards also had ceramic pickups.

Honestly, the satin finish feels much thinner than the finish on my '94 MIM Standard. Neck shape feels like the American Fenders moreso than the Squiers. Finishes were pretty nice looking, too.

I'd buy one with the intent of swapping pickups, but otherwise they're nice.

I didn't actually know that about the MIM Standards.

Oh, yeah, my black Strat was my first pickup swap many moons ago. The factory pickups made fantastic fridge magnets, too.

Same with my son's birth-year 2010 Standard in CAR. His stock pickups still live on our fridge.

[bessieboporbach]

I actually liked some of those ceramic (MIM Standard Strat) pickups.

A lot of guitar bros are completely incapable of grasping that other people play in different genres and that different genres have different requirements.

It's the same type of thinking that led to Jaguars being denigrated for years because they are as unlike a Les Paul as it is imaginable for an electric guitar to be. Or the idea that Jag and JM bridges are bad because of the sympathetic vibrations behind the bridge. Or the idea that Bigsbys are bad because they can't be divebombed...or the idea that Floyds are bad because of whatever.

Consider the obsession with "sustain". If I'm playing swing, I absolutely, positively do not want "sustain." I do not want the elements of guitar design that might facilitate skreeeeeee style "blues" bends. A swing player would not want sustain, would not want a compound or very flat neck radius, would not want slinky strings that bend easily. But a lot of guitar bros consider all of those things objectively good and their opposites objectively bad (or less "advanced"). A surf player would similarly have very different requirements than someone who was trying to play like David Gilmour.

The attitude toward ceramic pickups is another example of that. The prevailing attitude is ceramic=bad because ceramics do not really lend themselves to a "classic rock" sound. But there are lots of types of music that ceramic pickups (or EMGs, for example) are very suited to.

[JSett]

The attitude toward ceramic pickups is another example of that. The prevailing attitude is ceramic=bad because ceramics do not really lend themselves to a "classic rock" sound. But there are lots of types of music that ceramic pickups (or EMGs, for example) are very suited to.

I agree with everything you said.

People tend to forget that a ton of 'Classic Rock's from the late 70s onwards came via Dimarzio Super Distortion... a ceramic magnet pickup. Those sound great.

[Futuron]

I think most of the ire towards things like all those pickups, is that they don't sound EXACTLY LIKE what typical vintage Strats & Teles sound like.

Same with the Ultra Jazzmaster. It didn't sound like a vintage one, so they changed the body shape to something with no expectations and now nobody hates the sound...

[andy_tchp]

But a lot of guitar bros consider all of those things objectively good and their opposites objectively bad (or less "advanced").

See also: "Modern"

Same with the Ultra Jazzmaster. It didn't sound like a vintage one, so they changed the body shape to something with no expectations and now nobody hates the sound...

I didn't hate it because it didn't sound like a vintage one - I just thought it sounded awful in every context I heard it in.

[bessieboporbach]

This being said, I would hate to give the impression that I was defending this instruments. They are very clearly aimed at high school kids too embarrassed to be seen playing Squiers, and who have convinced their parents a Fender decal is worth $200+.

The best defenses of them I have read just say "they would be good with a proper setup" which is the case for almost the entire Squier line.

[GilmourD]

The best defenses of them I have read just say "they would be good with a proper setup" which is the case for almost the entire Squier line.

I would dare say that a proper setup is necessary for everything from the cheapest Squiers right up to the most costly PRS. During my MI retail years there wasn't a single brand new guitar I unboxed that didn't need a few tweaks since they were built somewhere else and likely during a different time of year/season (it was rare to get stuff that wasn't in a warehouse for a little bit of time).

Honestly, the amount of fucks I give about the geographic location of a guitar being built is absolute zero. I've played garbage made in the US and absolute stunners made overseas.

Good is good.

[bessieboporbach]

The best defenses of them I have read just say "they would be good with a proper setup" which is the case for almost the entire Squier line.

I would dare say that a proper setup is necessary for everything from the cheapest Squiers right up to the most costly PRS. During my MI retail years there wasn't a single brand new guitar I unboxed that didn't need a few tweaks since they were built somewhere else and likely during a different time of year/season (it was rare to get stuff that wasn't in a warehouse for a little bit of time).

Honestly, the amount of fucks I give about the geographic location of a guitar being built is absolute zero. I've played garbage made in the US and absolute stunners made overseas.

Good is good.

No argument from me. My best guitar was mostly made in China.

There was a way to make this product make sense. And Fender's own guys have acknowledged it. The way was to eliminate the Squier brand altogether and (like Jackson) have everything up and down the line say "Fender" on the headstock regardless of price point and where it's made.

But they didn't want to do that, because so much of their business model is based on getting people to "climb the ladder." If your Affinity says Fender on the headstock, then maybe you won't dutifully climb the ladder when you get your first job, for example. But there was a gap in their catalogue and presumably their market research showed (and the debacle of the anniversary Squiers shows this as well) that, in the current market, there was no persuading consumers to pay more than $500 US for a Squier.

They had the opportunity to take that information and make instruments to an even higher standard than the Squier Contemporary series or Classic Vibes, and still hit a $600 price point while making a lot of money on each guitar. But they didn't do that. Instead they opted to churn out ho-hum guitars with nothing to recommend over their own models that are half the price. It's hard to read their reasoning as anything but contempt for their customers.

[distressed]

No argument from me. My best guitar was mostly made in China.

There was a way to make this product make sense. And Fender's own guys have acknowledged it. The way was to eliminate the Squier brand altogether and (like Jackson) have everything up and down the line say "Fender" on the headstock regardless of price point and where it's made.

But they didn't want to do that, because so much of their business model is based on getting people to "climb the ladder." If your Affinity says Fender on the headstock, then maybe you won't dutifully climb the ladder when you get your first job, for example. But there was a gap in their catalogue and presumably their market research showed (and the debacle of the anniversary Squiers shows this as well) that, in the current market, there was no persuading consumers to pay more than $500 US for a Squier.

They had the opportunity to take that information and make instruments to an even higher standard than the Squier Contemporary series or Classic Vibes, and still hit a $600 price point while making a lot of money on each guitar. But they didn't do that. Instead they opted to churn out ho-hum guitars with nothing to recommend over their own models that are half the price. It's hard to read their reasoning as anything but contempt for their customers.

What are your main complaints regarding playability and sound of those new standards? If we put aside vintage/modern specs differences.

[bessieboporbach]

No argument from me. My best guitar was mostly made in China.

There was a way to make this product make sense. And Fender's own guys have acknowledged it. The way was to eliminate the Squier brand altogether and (like Jackson) have everything up and down the line say "Fender" on the headstock regardless of price point and where it's made.

But they didn't want to do that, because so much of their business model is based on getting people to "climb the ladder." If your Affinity says Fender on the headstock, then maybe you won't dutifully climb the ladder when you get your first job, for example. But there was a gap in their catalogue and presumably their market research showed (and the debacle of the anniversary Squiers shows this as well) that, in the current market, there was no persuading consumers to pay more than $500 US for a Squier.

They had the opportunity to take that information and make instruments to an even higher standard than the Squier Contemporary series or Classic Vibes, and still hit a $600 price point while making a lot of money on each guitar. But they didn't do that. Instead they opted to churn out ho-hum guitars with nothing to recommend over their own models that are half the price. It's hard to read their reasoning as anything but contempt for their customers.

What are your main complaints regarding playability and sound of those new standards? If we put aside vintage/modern specs differences.

My complaint is the price. What about them merits costing $200 US more than a Contemporary Strat? More than twice as much as an Affinity?