Menu
--- IVAN PONGRACIC <> wrote:
<I think Fender is doing a GREAT job, and I just want
to know how all of you are coming to a conclusion that
the guitars aren't as good as they used to be.>
This is something that always gets argued into the
ground and I really don't have enough experience with
vintage guitars to make a quantifiable, "They don't
make 'em like they used to" statement...I think it was
Dick Dale that said following that statement, "...they
never did." But I've seen a number of vintage's that
have held up very well with time and still felt and
played fantastic...but I'll admit I was only spouting
opinion. I'm not anti-Fender by any means. The only
instruments I own are Fenders.
<I'd much rather have a new car, with a fuel-injected
engine, better fuel consumption, AC, power windows,
locks, airbags, etc.>
That's a good point.
> > As for how much Fender charges for its
> instruments,
> > I'll say (being the owner of two Fender
> instruments)
> > they're definitely kind of kicking back on their
> > laurels and the fact that they're "Fender"...
>
> On which basis can you make this statement?
I wasn't singling Fender out. I think all notable
companies do that to a certain extent. You have to
admit that automatic, American classic brand
recognition has its perks.
> Well, then you just contradicted your above
statements.
Again, I didn't mean to say that "You pay too much for
a Fender guitar." I was saying that for the same
amount of money Fenders are on par with pretty much
any other guitar on the market. Considering the
budget of the average player and how much/seriously
they actually play, you couldn't blame someone for
thinking that you simply can't put that much money
into a top dollar instrument. Part of my point, which
led to my following statement, is that if you want an
American made Fender, you're going to pay...the
standard models can be had a lot cheaper, but if you
want the best, you're going to PAY for the best, like
anything else I've ever gotten into. It's debateable
to many whether or not it's worth spending that much
money on an instrument period. Obviously I think so,
because I did.
> I have a Japanese '95 Limited Edition Jazzmaster,
> which is a very good
> guitar (after changing the pickups). I love playing
> it, and it sounds
> great.
I have a Vista series Jagmaster which is made of the
same stuff, and with stock pups I think it sounds
great, and I'll probably never replace it. I paid
about a third of what I didn't for my MIA pbass.
> I bet you that the ratio of Fender-played surf
> albums is a LOT more than
> 50/50 - more like 95/5.
I dunno, there were a lot of Kays and Danos and even
some Gibsons and Ricks on some of the albums I've
seen. My "half" statement was admittedly off the
cuff...I haven't really taken a count...but I don't
know if I'd go so far as to say 95/5 unless you only
count the real hit stuff from the early '60's, but
(and please note, I'm not trying to slam Fender or
imply that they used any method other than building
great guitars to achieve their popularity) a lot of
bands got Fender endoresement deals as well (and
again, I'd like to reiterate that that's not the only
reason people played them.) There were also a lot of
bands that played less expensive stuff earlier on and
then went for the Fenders later.
I apologize if anybody took offense to any of my
statements.
~R
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
