Username: Password:

Author Topic: Strats  (Read 10255 times)

PhilKing

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3655
Re: Strats
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2009, 02:49:54 PM »
I have a late '60's totally original Strat in the workshop right now; alder body, rosewood fingerboard and it is incredibly bright, almost thin sounding. The owner has just paid a fortune for it and wants to know why it sounds like that. There's no such thing as a "Definitive Strat"
My first Strat was a 67 and it sounded thin too, especially at the side of a firend's 66.  I traded it in on a LP 55 Special (which I then traded for a 71 LP Custom - sadly I should have kept both of those guitars).  I think the early CBS years produced some of the most variable Fenders.  I have played some really nice ones and some dogs. 
So many pickups, so little time

Prawnik

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
A hardtail Strat I made, for anyone who cares
« Reply #31 on: May 04, 2009, 09:56:45 AM »
The specs correspond to a very late production 1968 or a very early production 1969, but in either case with some odd features. An "ugly duckling," in the Stratocaster world, if you will.

For one thing, you do not see many maple board Strats in 1968/early 1969, especially with a hardtail and a wide neck. This would suggest that someone ordered this guitar special, but why? In the 1970's, when the fashion was for bright guitars with lots of sustain, the maple board/hardtail combination was pretty common, but not with a D neck. Wide necks were more an '80's phenomenon and even then, they liked them thin. This neck is like a baseball bat or a club, which is also weird for a guitar made then. Anyway, this guitar seems to have been either a freak or ahead of its time.

If you look closely, you can see that the neck is a maple veneer, which is correct through early-mid 1969. For some reason, Fender Custom Shop guitars which purport to recreate this era get it all wrong.

The neck is shot in nitro; the body in poly. When Fender was transitioning to poly finishes in 1968-1971 or so, you saw a LOT of guitars with all combinations of nitro and poly necks, bodies, and clear coats. The only constant was that the headstock fact was always finished in nitro, as the decals Fender used were incompatible with the poly.

Look closely at the decal.

The neck pickup is a BKP rewound Fender CS '69. The middle pickup is a BKP rewind of a 1975 or so flat pole. My explanation would be that it was a replacement for a blown pickup. The bridge pickup is a Fender TexMex. The tone cap is a NOS green chicklet, which would only be correct for a 1968, but some spilled over into the next year.

The pickguard is a "pearlback", correct for 1969-early 1970 Strats. CBS/Fender bought a ton of pearloid pickguard material; Mustangs got mother-of-toilet-seat pickguards; Strats in those years used the same material, but with the pearloid on the inside. I have no idea why Mustangs got the "fancy" pickguards and Stratocasters did not. I also have no idea why Fender cannot get this right on their Custom Shop guitars, especially for that price tag.

The sound? Bomb-ass. The neck and middle pickups are sweet and stinging with no icepick. Countree Music! The bridge does a freakish Guns and Roses imitation, the kind that make people think Slash has walked into the room. Actually, so do the neck and middle pickups. Especially since I tuned down to E flat.

Oh yeah, note the bridge saddles. Not the cheezy "Fender - Fender" cr@p that Fender tries to pass off as "vintage" nowadays.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2009, 10:14:01 AM by Prawnik »

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: A hardtail Strat I made, for anyone who cares
« Reply #32 on: May 04, 2009, 01:53:48 PM »
Oh yeah, note the bridge saddles. Not the cheezy "Fender - Fender" cr@p that Fender tries to pass off as "vintage" nowadays.

Even though that picture is bigger than a football pitch, I'm afraid I still can't read what it says on the saddles.

But I'm very much in favour of hardtail Strats!  :D
« Last Edit: May 04, 2009, 02:00:15 PM by Philly Q »
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

dheim

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1945
  • DON'TPANIC!
Re: Strats
« Reply #33 on: May 04, 2009, 02:00:54 PM »
the trick with completely out of focus pics is to shrink them! :)
Mule, MQ, Stockholm, CS, RY, MM, PK, ANB, CNB, AWP, CWP, PiG90...

too many? ;)

Prawnik

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
Re: A hardtail Strat I made, for anyone who cares
« Reply #34 on: May 04, 2009, 08:56:06 PM »
Oh yeah, note the bridge saddles. Not the cheezy "Fender - Fender" cr@p that Fender tries to pass off as "vintage" nowadays.

Even though that picture is bigger than a football pitch, I'm afraid I still can't read what it says on the saddles.

But I'm very much in favour of hardtail Strats!  :D

Sorry about the photo size.

The saddles are lightly aged but read: "Fender - Pat. Pending"

For legal reasons, Fender cannot or will not use this on saddles, although this logo would be correct for a vintage-style saddle. Somewhere I read one of Fender's '56 Strats is the exception, but I do not know whether that would be true.

Prawnik

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
Re: A hardtail Strat I made, for anyone who cares
« Reply #35 on: May 04, 2009, 08:58:54 PM »
este el foo double-post.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 08:02:06 AM by Prawnik »

AndyR

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 4715
  • Where's all the top end gone?
    • My Offerings
Re: Strats
« Reply #36 on: May 05, 2009, 12:28:28 PM »
Oh yeah, note the bridge saddles. Not the cheezy "Fender - Fender" cr@p that Fender tries to pass off as "vintage" nowadays.

Even though that picture is bigger than a football pitch, I'm afraid I still can't read what it says on the saddles.

But I'm very much in favour of hardtail Strats!  :D

Sorry about the photo size.

The saddles are lightly aged but read: "Fender - Pat. Pending"

For legal reasons, Fender cannot or will not use this on saddles, although this logo would be correct for a vintage-style saddle. Somewhere I read one of Fender's '56 Strats is the exception, but I do not know whether that would be true.

That's interesting... "Fender Japan" seem to have less qualms about it :lol:

My old (83) JV Squier's original saddles had "Fender - Pat. Pending" on them :D (they wore out big time over hundreds of gigs though - still got them in a box somewhere). I'd have to check my more recent CIJ 62 reissue, I suspect they're "Fender Fender" though...
Play or Download AndyR Music at http://www.alonetone.com/andyr

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Strats
« Reply #37 on: May 05, 2009, 12:43:49 PM »
I know this is an extremely non-tonehound-ish thing to say, but I hate vintage-style bent-metal saddles. 

The height adjustment screws are always too tall and feel really irritating under my hand.  I replace them with Graph Tech ones (String Savers, Tusq or Ferraglide, don't really mind which).
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

Bob Johnson

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 445
    • http://www.legraguitars.co.uk
Re: Strats
« Reply #38 on: May 05, 2009, 01:20:44 PM »
I know this is an extremely non-tonehound-ish thing to say, but I hate vintage-style bent-metal saddles. 

The height adjustment screws are always too tall and feel really irritating under my hand.  I replace them with Graph Tech ones (String Savers, Tusq or Ferraglide, don't really mind which).

Amen to that Phil; after all this is 2009 for chrissake, let's move on.
Regards,
Bob Johnson
Legra Guitars

dheim

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 1945
  • DON'TPANIC!
Re: Strats
« Reply #39 on: May 05, 2009, 02:43:03 PM »
I know this is an extremely non-tonehound-ish thing to say, but I hate vintage-style bent-metal saddles. 

The height adjustment screws are always too tall and feel really irritating under my hand.  I replace them with Graph Tech ones (String Savers, Tusq or Ferraglide, don't really mind which).

i hate fender-style saddles too! i think they're one of the most irritating features in what i regard as a cheap guitar design incidentally turned out much better than the project itself... do the string savers have shorter screws?
Mule, MQ, Stockholm, CS, RY, MM, PK, ANB, CNB, AWP, CWP, PiG90...

too many? ;)

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Strats
« Reply #40 on: May 05, 2009, 03:20:54 PM »
i hate fender-style saddles too! i think they're one of the most irritating features in what i regard as a cheap guitar design incidentally turned out much better than the project itself... do the string savers have shorter screws?

Yes, they're all the same height, not taller on the middle four saddles like Fender ones.  And because the saddles are solid blocks rather than bent metal strips, there's enough thread to hold the screw even if the saddle is set quite high.

And as an added bonus, the screws are stainless, so they don't get rusty.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

marantz1300

  • Bantamweight
  • **
  • Posts: 195
Re: Strats
« Reply #41 on: May 05, 2009, 05:40:58 PM »
I,ve had a few Strats.MiJs,MiAs MiMs and Squiers. This was the best of the lot. As I'm an idiot ,I traded it. It had a real nice r tone and felt great.  It's a MiJ JV Squier. If you ever come across one try it. Real vintage spec.USA pups ,Big contoured cutaway , proper steel block. Great Strats.I still prefer Tele's though.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   

PhilKing

  • Welterweight
  • ****
  • Posts: 3655
Re: Strats
« Reply #42 on: May 05, 2009, 07:16:38 PM »
i hate fender-style saddles too! i think they're one of the most irritating features in what i regard as a cheap guitar design incidentally turned out much better than the project itself... do the string savers have shorter screws?

Yes, they're all the same height, not taller on the middle four saddles like Fender ones.  And because the saddles are solid blocks rather than bent metal strips, there's enough thread to hold the screw even if the saddle is set quite high.

And as an added bonus, the screws are stainless, so they don't get rusty.
There are 3 lengths for the real Fender bent saddles.  Usually the 2 shorter ones work best to avoid proud screws.  I have both the otiginals and graph tech (and some brass ones too).  I prefrer the sound of the bent metal ones, I find the graph techs a bit too bright.  Avoid the cast 70's saddles like the plague though.
So many pickups, so little time

Philly Q

  • Light Heavyweight
  • ******
  • Posts: 18109
Re: Strats
« Reply #43 on: May 05, 2009, 08:09:44 PM »
I prefrer the sound of the bent metal ones, I find the graph techs a bit too bright.  Avoid the cast 70's saddles like the plague though.

That's interesting, I do think the Graph Techs sound a little thinner... or maybe more "lightweight".  But I'm never quite sure. 

On the other hand, they seem to round off the initial pick attack, in a way I like - there's a bit too much "snap" with the bent metal saddles.
BKPs I've Got:  RR, BKP-91, ITs, VHII, CS set, Emeralds
BKPs I Had:  RY+Abraxas, Crawlers, BD+SM

Prawnik

  • Featherweight
  • ***
  • Posts: 470
Re: Strats
« Reply #44 on: May 06, 2009, 10:19:49 AM »
I do not know what it is, but the Pat. Pend saddles I use seem to give a lot more depth and harmonics than the bent metal Fender saddles.

I want to get hold of a set of brass saddles from the 1970's, though.

I should just shut up and play my guitar.