Is Squier becoming the Standard Of Excelence Within Fender ?

I think the Squier stuff is exciting. However I think Fender really need to deal with their MIM stuff. I was wholely unimpressed with the half dozen MIM P basses I tried last summer before I bought a Washburn. Thats right, I took a Washburn over the big F because the MIM stuff is so lackluster. Even the Classic '50s P bass is a historically wrong and fairly bland instrument. Too bread and butter for Fender to make that stuff and then pump out all this interesting, surprisingly good quality stuff in the Squier line.

I still perfer the American product, although I do have a MIM Nashville Deluxe telecaster which is better than my original 1978 Fender Telecaster custom and just as good as my 2008 ash body Fender American Standard Telecaster.

Maybe we should start sanding the Fender decals off our Teles, Strats, Jazz and Precision basses. We could then replace them with fake Squier decals. That will really shoot the value of them up :twisted:

My Squier Affinity, with all it's mods (and still less than £150 total cost) is a very good guitar and it is very flexible.

Only a week ago I used it to play in my "technical" rehearsals band playing Dream Theater, Satch and Maiden.

You no longer always get what you pay for.

Brian.

Should say it is not a patch I quality on my PRSi or Nik Hubers - they are 40 worlds apart!

Now that we have pretty much exhausted this topic, I've come up with a couple that might not be so controversial:

1. RELICS---"Why scratch up a perfectly good guitar" and Are the people that do it just Poseurs?

2. Fenders v.s. Gibsons---which ones are the crappiest?

3. TONE---is it the Gear or is it in the Fingers?

I know you all have probably never considered these topics before, so lets get get rollin!!!!:twisted::lol:

Now that we have pretty much exhausted this topic, I've come up with a couple that might not be so controversial:

1. RELICS---"Why scratch up a perfectly good guitar" and Are the people that do it just Poseurs?

2. Fenders v.s. Gibsons---which ones are the crappiest?

3. TONE---is it the Gear or is it in the Fingers?

I know you all have probably never considered these topics before, so lets get get rollin!!!!:twisted::lol:

You forgot whether or not John Mayer has got soul or if he just plays for teenage girls

Completely agree w/ 3 Chord. In action in the band, or esp a jam w/ volume wars, the MIA is the axe of confidence. Am STD Tele, ash body, maple neck, and crank it up, you will keep tone integrity, IMHO.

Just minutes ago, I just heard on the news that China was the #1 importer of BC lumber. So let's not upset the dragon, okay?

not just for guitars though..

i'm a skateboarder, and canadian maple is the only choice for our boards.

its still cheaper for them to ship it all the way to china and get it pressed and screened there than make it on home soil.

even the biggest american brands now get the decks made in china, only a few woodshops remain in the states, and one just over the border in mexico. (the MIM skateboard workshop is one of the best in the world..)

if you think this MIA vs everything else is bad, you should hear some of the crazy arguments about that.

Anybody remember when you could buy Japanese Strats in the Pawnshops for no more than $150? This was in the mid 80's...everybody said they weren't any good..despite what their eyes and ears told them. hahahahahahahahah

The Epiphones that The Beatles played were high quality American made instruments. Epiphone was Gibson's main competitor long before they were Gibson's budget brand.

Danelectro also was a well made American brand with some key name players before the name was bought by Evets or whoever else owns the name now.

It's amazing that there even is a Fender USA in this day and age.

Sorry to come all the way back to this, but this is slightly wrong.

Epiphone was bought by Gibson in 1957 and was immediately retooled from there. The original factory in NY, NY was shut down and all efforts were refocused on making slightly less expensive guitars based on Gibson designs, at Gibson's own factory in Kalamazoo, MI. The Gibson ES330 came out before the Casino was introduced as a way to get people into the Gibson product. Paul McCartney bought one of those Casinos, showed it to the rest of the band, recorded the "Drive My Car" solo with it, and history was made for Epiphone.

During that time, Epiphone served the same purpose it does now: to produce cheaper Gibson designs. Its reputation as a fine guitar maker was intact until production was moved to Japan in the early 1970's, when they started putting the Epiphone name on the headstock of cheap knockoff guitars that were hurting Gibson's profit margins. Epiphone is just now beginning to recover.

Danelectro is a fun brand...which was introduced via Sears catalog to a generation of young guitar players who were just starting to pick up on the electric guitar revolution. They were made cheaply, out of cheap materials. They had models which shipped unassembled. They had models which had no truss rod.

Squier was a string company which was nearly bankrupt when Fender bought it. Eventually CBS and Fender started feeling the burn of increasing numbers of counterfeit guitars, which had begun to come stateside with troops returning from deployment in Vietnam. After waiting many years, they decided (like Gibson had) to set up a system where these counterfeits would provide profit by throwing the Squier name on them. Early models were well made by Fujigen and other factories which had vastly improved their manufacturing methods in the decade since Gibson and Epiphone set up shop. Eventually, in the search to find the lowest bottom line, they became crap, and only in the last 10 years are starting to be made better.

My point in all this is that Squier and Epiphone are producing guitars for the master company, and therefore can't be considered the standard. Keep in mind that this could be a passing phase for Squier and FMIC. They could go back to making crap Squiers any day. They could also go back to making crap MIA Fenders any day (anyone remember CBS? Fender has made some AWFUL guitars). In the grand scheme of things, every single one of us will live to see a day where these brands will come to mean totally different things than they mean now. It all depends on their decisions in the next few years.

I personally think Fender is going to overcome Gibson as the standard of excellence in American guitar manufacture...but that's just me. :mrgreen:

Anybody remember when you could buy Japanese Strats in the Pawnshops for no more than $150? This was in the mid 80's...everybody said they weren't any good..despite what their eyes and ears told them. hahahahahahahahah

I do remember them,and they weren't any good.That the Japanese got better at it is no surprise.

They could also go back to making crap MIA Fenders any day (anyone remember CBS? Fender has made some AWFUL guitars).

Everytime I see something like this I gotta post.

I still have my '76 Tele over 30 years now. It's like fine wine, mature wood, tough as nails, and zero issues. Haven't felt GAS for a new guitar since the 80's. Guess I'm one of the few lucky ones, but I don't think so.

Wouldn't trade it for 10 Squiers,

Yes, and China likes exporting much more than importing. That's why they've implemented an aggressive strategy to expand their own tree production for over a decade now.

The day is approaching when the only thing China will be importing is money.

I was just taking an opportunity to poke fun at a fellow Canuck in B.C., it's a fun pastime here in eastern Canada.

I do remember them,and they weren't any good.That the Japanese got better at it is no surprise.

I got a Japanese ESP Traditional 400 62 Reissue that is amazing---but YMMV.

I was just taking an opportunity to poke fun at a fellow Canuck in B.C., it's a fun pastime here in eastern Canada.

I can appreciate that feud. Helps keep the USA out of your crosshairs. :mrgreen:

Danelectro is a fun brand...which was introduced via Sears catalog to a generation of young guitar players who were just starting to pick up on the electric guitar revolution. They were made cheaply, out of cheap materials. They had models which shipped unassembled. They had models which had no truss rod.

And yet Jimmy Page used them.

Anybody remember when you could buy Japanese Strats in the Pawnshops for no more than $150? This was in the mid 80's...everybody said they weren't any good..despite what their eyes and ears told them. hahahahahahahahah

Same with the 70's Fenders. Now owners are fetching 3k and laughing too. :lol:

I think the Squier stuff is exciting. However I think Fender really need to deal with their MIM stuff. I was wholely unimpressed with the half dozen MIM P basses I tried last summer before I bought a Washburn. Thats right, I took a Washburn over the big F because the MIM stuff is so lackluster.


Their MIM products have really improved over the last couple of years. The '09 and '10 models are very good and are much better than they were several years ago.

Even the Classic '50s P bass is a historically wrong and fairly bland instrument.

That has nothing to do with where they are made and everything to do with whoever designed that guitar and whoever approved the design - and all of that would have happened in Fender's California facilities.

Even the Classic Vibe '50s Teles are not historically accurate. The Fender Classic Series ones are (to the best of my knowledge) but the Squier ones are not.

Yeah-I had several 70's Strats..and that was what they mainly griped about ---the teles remained about the same. The Strats had less prominant curves and they were heavier---but they seemed to sound about the same., if I remember correctly---lotta miles since then.

I don't see any "Standard of Excellence" from Squier. The CV Series has good fretwork, other than that its a cheap guitar.

Yeah-I had several 70's Strats..and that was what they mainly griped about ---the teles remained about the same. The Strats had less prominant curves and they were heavier---but they seemed to sound about the same., if I remember correctly---lotta miles since then.

My last 70's Strat I bought for $300 at a pawnshop and traded for a Parachute Container---This was in the early 80"s and $300, was worth more at that time, of course.

You've obviously never tried to hug a pine tree!

Does having one fall on me count?

You've obviously never tried to hug a pine tree!


I'm pretty sure I have at some point while loaded around Christmastime.

My last 70's Strat I bought for $300 at a pawnshop and traded for a Parachute Container---This was in the early 80"s and $300, was worth more at that time, of course.

If you had waited you probably would've gotten the parachute along with the container.

Sorry to come all the way back to this, but this is slightly wrong.

Epiphone was bought by Gibson in 1957 and was immediately retooled from there. The original factory in NY, NY was shut down and all efforts were refocused on making slightly less expensive guitars based on Gibson designs, at Gibson's own factory in Kalamazoo, MI. The Gibson ES330 came out before the Casino was introduced as a way to get people into the Gibson product. Paul McCartney bought one of those Casinos, showed it to the rest of the band, recorded the "Drive My Car" solo with it, and history was made for Epiphone.

During that time, Epiphone served the same purpose it does now: to produce cheaper Gibson designs. Its reputation as a fine guitar maker was intact until production was moved to Japan in the early 1970's, when they started putting the Epiphone name on the headstock of cheap knockoff guitars that were hurting Gibson's profit margins. Epiphone is just now beginning to recover.

Danelectro is a fun brand...which was introduced via Sears catalog to a generation of young guitar players who were just starting to pick up on the electric guitar revolution. They were made cheaply, out of cheap materials. They had models which shipped unassembled. They had models which had no truss rod.

Squier was a string company which was nearly bankrupt when Fender bought it. Eventually CBS and Fender started feeling the burn of increasing numbers of counterfeit guitars, which had begun to come stateside with troops returning from deployment in Vietnam. After waiting many years, they decided (like Gibson had) to set up a system where these counterfeits would provide profit by throwing the Squier name on them. Early models were well made by Fujigen and other factories which had vastly improved their manufacturing methods in the decade since Gibson and Epiphone set up shop. Eventually, in the search to find the lowest bottom line, they became crap, and only in the last 10 years are starting to be made better.

My point in all this is that Squier and Epiphone are producing guitars for the master company, and therefore can't be considered the standard. Keep in mind that this could be a passing phase for Squier and FMIC. They could go back to making crap Squiers any day. They could also go back to making crap MIA Fenders any day (anyone remember CBS? Fender has made some AWFUL guitars). In the grand scheme of things, every single one of us will live to see a day where these brands will come to mean totally different things than they mean now. It all depends on their decisions in the next few years.

I personally think Fender is going to overcome Gibson as the standard of excellence in American guitar manufacture...but that's just me. :mrgreen:

Corrections noted but...(re Danelectro)

Having no adjustable truss rod is not a hallmark of a bad guitar. Many of the very best Martins had no adjustable truss rod. Original Danos had killer necks and the one I owned from '63 was no exception. Adjustable truss rods are in many ways an invitation for disaster anyway.

Danelectros were used often in Nashville (Tic Tac bass), and Jack Bruce as well as John Entwistle used them. Randy California (Spirit) - his main guitar was a Silvertone (by Danelectro). I'm not a fan of the resissues. Original Danelectros however are things of beauty.

You've obviously never tried to hug a pine tree!

vYRb64lYxbM&feature=related

You bet, I wished I had kept every guitar I ever bought---Had a beautiful 73 Deluxe Les Paul.....etc....sad to think of them all---who knew????

Danelectro wasn't made for Sears. Danelectro however did make Silvertone instruments for Sears (as did Harmony).

Having no adjustable truss rod is not a hallmark of a bad guitar. Many of the very best Martins had no adjustable truss rod. Original Danos had killer necks and the one I owned from '63 was no exception. Adjustable truss rods are in many ways an invitation for disaster anyway.

Danelectros were used often in Nashville (Tic Tac bass), and Jack Bruce as well as John Entwistle used them. Randy California (Spirit) - his main guitar was a Silvertone (by Danelectro). Today's Danos are cheap pieces of junk. Original Danelectros are things of beauty.

I have a Martin with a non-adjustable truss rod--it is a 76---bought it brand new- Martin thought if you made them right--you wouldn't need a truss rod----hahahaha-the factory can adjust them, somehow...-I've never had to have it adjusted, although , Martin WILL if you need it.

It's all wood in the dark! :lol:

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

Everytime I see something like this I gotta post.

I still have my '76 Tele over 30 years now. It's like fine wine, mature wood, tough as nails, and zero issues. Haven't felt GAS for a new guitar since the 80's. Guess I'm one of the few lucky ones, but I don't think so.

Wouldn't trade it for 10 Squiers,

Oh I know, I've played some fantastic Fenders from this era...including my best friend's 78 PBass. There are some really nice ones from around this period. For the most part, however, they were known for being subpar, heavy, shoddily made instruments that really detracted from the Fender name they were given upon completion. I'm glad you're happy with yours. There is a reason this comment keeps on popping up, though. 70's Fenders are, in general, the least renowned and most dogged on Fenders the company has ever released. People rag on CBS Fenders like they rag on Norlin Gibsons...of course there were gems, but there was a TON of bad product.

And yet Jimmy Page used them.

Corrections noted but...(re Danelectro)

Having no adjustable truss rod is not a hallmark of a bad guitar. Many of the very best Martins had no adjustable truss rod. Original Danos had killer necks and the one I owned from '63 was no exception. Adjustable truss rods are in many ways an invitation for disaster anyway.

Danelectros were used often in Nashville (Tic Tac bass), and Jack Bruce as well as John Entwistle used them. Randy California (Spirit) - his main guitar was a Silvertone (by Danelectro). I'm not a fan of the resissues. Original Danelectros however are things of beauty.

I don't disagree with either of you. Dano's are cool, and they have a very unique sound. They were never meant to be finely made guitars. They were meant to produce a playable instrument with reasonably nice tone for as cheap as they could. They were made of masonite and sometimes plywood. The "lipstick" pickup was a cost saving measure, using discarded lipstick containers to house the electronics. And there wasn't a truss rod in many because that took time to install.

And no, truss rods are not the hallmark of a cheap guitar, but when you take into account the other cheap parts it is reasonable to say that the neck was probably not made of quartersawn maple or a similarly strong wood that would effectively counter the pull of the strings on the neck. Because of that, you do not see many 50's and 60's Danos floating around that are playable...even though thousands were produced, they just tended to fall apart. Again, there are always exceptions to the rule.

I would love to own a Dano just to have around. They fill a sound that no other guitar can really fill. Jimmy Page enjoyed his, and he got some really cool sounds out of it too. Just because he and a lot of other players had one doesn't mean it was ever made to be a fine instrument.

The difference between early Dano and Fender is intent. Dano sold all their guitars through Sears catalogs (look it up, I swear its true...there wasn't a Danelectro product sold by a non-Sears company for years). Fender sold its guitars in instrument shops.

While we are talking about cheaper guitars, I would say that the Squier is the exact opposite from the Danelectro examples...Squier is attempting to produce a guitar for the professional player in the CV series. Dano was trying to produce a guitar for the beginner on the cheap.

I am just trying to illustrate that things change in every company. The Dano I tried out the other day that was MIC was awesome...had a ton of vibe. And it completely hit the point of the guitar: it is fun to play, easy to play, sounds good, and is cheap. You would almost want one to be made of plywood...to be vintage-correct :mrgreen:

Again, I don't think Squier is the standard. If it WERE, then the incredibly successful Squier '51 would be emulated by Fender. The Classic Vibe would have a Fender that copied all of its specs. The fact of it is, Fender is the leader and Squier is there to bolster the lower end of the cost spectrum.

There are always exceptions. Look at the Gibson ES330...the only Gibson that owners ever clamored to modify to resemble an Epiphone product. Maybe one day Squier's R&D team will come out with a design that Fender will emulate! Or maybe they will create something so original out of a classic design that owners will scramble to get the same tone out of their instruments! Until then, Squier is the follower.

A very good follower at that. Heck, they've even cured my GAS for a very high-quality Tele!

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

I agree! I love this board because on TGP this would have devolved into a "oh you don't spend $3000 on a guitar, clearly you have no idea what you're talking about" vs. "hahahahahahahah you cork-sniffing newbs drinking the USA koolade" thread. Here we can rationally discuss what is a pertinent question for those of us who appreciate what the FMIC is trying to do these days.

Oh, and we all love Telecasters, so that helps :mrgreen:

Back to your post: Feel, tone, and mojo are all what I found lacking in the MIA stuff I tried before finally buying the CV50. I guess they got it right on "vibe"...it is just so much fun to play. Of course, not every CV50 is created equal, and there are some dogs out there...but surprisingly there aren't many at all. I think they just did a good job at creating a fine-quality instrument, regardless of cost.

EDIT: You also highlight a key thing for me in this whole debate: context. IF we hadn't ever heard of Fender and Squier and IF we didn't have the context of who owns who and who follows who, then it would be unfathomably difficult to sell the Fender. I'm not saying that Fender relies solely on its name to keep sales up (I don't think it does), I'm just saying that in context, people would rather have the Fender because it is what everyone else plays. I admit, I want to find a sick Fender Tele to buy just because it would be fun to own a real, MIA, Fender again. They are just cool, and all the history and glamour associated with the name is very desirable, at least to me. I love the history of the Telecaster design and I would love to own another MIA Fender product that would dispel the doubt given to me by my previous MIA Strat. I think that what you are selling when you sell a Fender as opposed to a Squier is the context of what Fender means to music and what the Fender Telecaster means to electric guitar and rock and roll.

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

I don't have a quantitative answer for this, and I may not even be correct. But I believe when you get up to very loud volumes (probably louder than most bar gigs) the small differences such as inferior pots, input jack, and even pickups get magnified times the level of the volume. So very loud cleans could get a little muddy.

That could be wrong, just a guess. And I'm not sure that helps you convince anyone to buy MIA because it probably doesn't affect many customers.

I wouldn't take either of my Squiers to work.The CII SQ '51 plays nicely around the house but it feels as though it were made of balsawood and would fly apart if I dug into it.The MIC Duo-Sonic feels a little more substantial (better materials,lower labor cost) and probably wouldn't lose structural integrity if I hit it hard.It'd just stop working.
There's no law against using one of them on the gig,but on an actual-cost basis,they're in the same price range and fill the same niche as the late-'50s Danelectros and Silvertones,(and Teisco Del Reys a few years later)which were intended for mass sale to people who wanted the lowest-outlay instrument they could find for Little Johnny to use to try out the guitar.If it was too much work for Little Johnny,the guitar could sit in the closet or get Hendrix'ed and go to the dump.If he did like it and got to gigging at the Sock Hop,he'd move up to a Strat or a Paul.What those low-end instruments did NOT target,then or now,is the serious musician.

I love the fact that people are talking up the Squier and or MIM products... they're good values and I'm actually looking for something comparable to keep in the house for my buddies who are tough on gear. I would recommend a good quality lower cost guitar to any young kid, or someone just giving guitar playing try.

BUT

Don't attempt to bring down American guitars to justify your purchase.

...and for the guy with a Lamborghini, Yachts, and dozens and dozens of 20K vintage USA guitars, but you choose your Squier over all of them... (because this guy always shows up) you're full of sh** - people with that kind of money don't know what a Squier is.

...and for the guy with a Lamborghini, Yachts, and dozens and dozens of 20K vintage USA guitars, but you choose your Squier over all of them... (because this guy always shows up) you're full of sh** - people with that kind of money don't know what a Squier is.

How do you think he saved up for that Lambo? :lol:

...and for the guy with a Lamborghini, Yachts, and dozens and dozens of 20K vintage USA guitars, but you choose your Squier over all of them... (because this guy always shows up) you're full of sh** - people with that kind of money don't know what a Squier is.

I can't remember his name right now, but there is someone on this forum that has about 50 Teles and one of his favs is a Classic Vibe.

I don't think anyone here has been insulting American guitars. On the contrary, many here have said what I say, that MIC Squiers are fantastic guitars and the MIA Fenders are the standard by which all others are judged.

I took a Fender Squier Classic Vibe Telecaster '50s (bought in July 2010) out of its hard case last week. It had been sitting in the closet undisturbed for a couple months. Plugged in and whaddyaknow... the bridge pickup doesn't work! Dead pickup? Bad wiring? I don't know. Now I've got to schlep the guitar across town to an authorized Squier repair shop. Another Fender Squier Classic Vibe Telecaster '50s was on 'that auction site' with a dead neck pickup. Coincidence? Anybody else have experience w/ dead pickups or bad wiring?

I agree! I love this board because on TGP this would have devolved into a "oh you don't spend $3000 on a guitar, clearly you have no idea what you're talking about" vs. "hahahahahahahah you cork-sniffing newbs drinking the USA koolade" thread. Here we can rationally discuss what is a pertinent question for those of us who appreciate what the FMIC is trying to do these days.

I love this place, too!

FWIW... bigot = a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices.

and... Cork-sniffers are just smelling cork! You can LOOK at a cork to see if it is moldy or cracked, you can SQUEEZE it to confirm that it is still soft, not dried out and brittle, and you can READ it to make sure it's the cork from the original bottler. But if the cork is alright and you want to know about the wine, you look at the color and clarity, smell the bouquet of the wine, and then drink it! If you're smelling corks, you might as well get a screw-cap and smell it. :grin:

So... instead of being a bigot one way or the other, and instead of uselessly sniffing corks, PLAY!

charisjapan

[snip]... Anybody else have experience w/ dead pickups or bad wiring?

from what i've read, the pickups seem to be the achilles of the cv squiers. which would also be a possible answer to Cooper's question above. there's an owner's club thread for cv squiers where they talk about the pickup/electronics problems.

Again, I don't think Squier is the standard. If it WERE, then the incredibly successful Squier '51 would be emulated by Fender. The Classic Vibe would have a Fender that copied all of its specs. The fact of it is, Fender is the leader and Squier is there to bolster the lower end of the cost spectrum.

the '51 wasn't that successful surely!? i thought the story went that the 'weird' design put people off and thats why they were discounted to as low as $69.

once i got the guard off of mine i was pretty shocked, its pretty bloody badly put together!

however the reason i switched from the electro acoustic i had to a tele was down to the neck on a friends '51. another friend has an affinity tele and i find the neck on that too narrow. once the '51 opened my eyes i ended up buying a tele with the same neck dimensions and only recently picked up a '51 as my #2.

Haven't owned a Squire CV but have played them. They are real nice guitars, and for their price point, really, really nice guitars.
I think American Standards are the standard.
I think MIM is the the one you all are missing, especially the ones from a few years ago with alnico pickups and vintage frets.
I have or have had an early 60's Tele, a 69 (or maybe 70) Tele Thinline, an early 70's Strat, an early 00's MIM Strat (with upgraded pickups), an 04 MIM Tele (with upgraded pickups) and an 00's CIJ Tele 72 RI. All real good but my faves are the MIM Tele, the old Thinline, and the CIJ (those Japanese Fenders are nice).
I've gigged with the MIMs, no problem. H***, I've even gigged with an Agile. But I know what you mean. I've got some cheap guitars I love, sound great, will jam or record with, may use for a song or two, but cannot be depended upon for a few hours live, again and again, and stay in tune, etc. The American Fenders, the Gibsons, the Japanese Ibanezes and Fenders have got that. I'd say the MIM Fenders do too. Do the CV Squires? Don't know.

its kinda down to what Paul Reed Smith said once in an interview, (paraphrasing) "you buy a PRS as a heirloom, not just a fantastic guitar. just like violins in ages gone by they were passed down through the family, i want that violin to be a PRS guitar"
its the same with a MIA telecaster.

something as cheap as a CV, would you pass it on?

its kinda down to what Paul Reed Smith said once in an interview, (paraphrasing) "you buy a PRS as a heirloom, not just a fantastic guitar. just like violins in ages gone by they were passed down through the family, i want that violin to be a PRS guitar"
its the same with a MIA telecaster.

something as cheap as a CV, would you pass it on?

Good point.

its kinda down to what Paul Reed Smith said once in an interview, (paraphrasing) "you buy a PRS as a heirloom, not just a fantastic guitar. just like violins in ages gone by they were passed down through the family, i want that violin to be a PRS guitar"
its the same with a MIA telecaster.

something as cheap as a CV, would you pass it on?

As opposed to being buried with it?

As opposed to being buried with it?

Well, you probably could dig a grave with a Tele, depending on soil conditions. :lol:

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q246/biliousprudence/Blasphemer.jpg

For me the CV line is MY standard of excellence.

I noodle and I jam with amatuers and semi-pros.

I have picked up probably a dozen MIM Standard Teles, played acoustically and none of them had an appearance, fret work, or feel that I prefered over the CV's.

I also have a exceptional example of an Squire Affinity Tele. The Affinity gives me everything I need for my amatuer status.

The CV's represent self indulgent splurges for me.

If I were making a living or working semi-professionally as a guitar player, I would probably buy as complete and solid an instrument that needed no modification as possible. I guess that would probably be a MIA instrutment. I could justify that purchase even if it were (3) times the cost of a CV......BUT the CV would still by MY standard for excellence until something took its place.

I'm sure there are examples of low-end guitars that are superior to "pro models". I've read many posts where it's stated that "my CV is better than my MIA" and I beleive these aren't just hyperbole but if someone needs to have an instrument for professional or semi-professional purposes then it seems like it would make more sense to FIRST consider the brand that is built for that purpose.

It's fun though finding low cost instruments that rival, or in many cases, exceed the quality of higher cost examples.

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

I can't speak for others,but my Squier Tele custom 2 is my gigging guitar. I don't carry a back up and it's never let me down. I replaced the jack with an electro socket and that was it.

It lies in a cold trailer outside between gigs if I haven't room to bring it home.

It was the guitar that turned me on to what some would call 'proper Telecasters',yet so far they have remained at home.

Outside of jingoism I have no idea why someone would think my Squier is not fit to come out of a case in public. Maybe I just got lucky and all the other Squiers are dogs? :wink:

Anybody else have experience w/ dead pickups or bad wiring?

As I've posted a few times already, I purchased my beloved new CVC at the end of last year ($299 & received Festivus Eve!) and the bridge pup has already died. Totally croaked about 3 weeks in...?

I've read many posts here & on other boards mentioning similar issues with both neck & bridge pups. Although I'm more than happy with my "upgraded" bridge pup, a '95 Tex-Mex orig stock from Telecaster Special, was a bit disappointed the stock one stopped working as soon as it did.

What's up with that?

Just had an absent minded thought.. which twists the subject line slighty..

If Squier (- becoming) is the baseline Standard Of Excelence Within Fender..

It means that Fenders output at worst, and their budget end is judged by the Squier line, which.. if this post is to believed is of a good standard (for what you pay).. then standard of the 'proper' Fender stuff (MIA QC issues aside) is above and beyond that.

In short. The newbie Squier player of today who has as good experience could be the pro Fender playing musician of tomorrow.

Its a trick about retaining brand and model loyalty.

Right now I have to equate the guitars were seeing out of China, to the late 60's/early 70's guitars we saw out of Japan: SERIOUS CONTENDERS! And many of us had blinders on during this era.

Deja-vu...............

Does this mean that if we wait 10 years we'll be able to but CVs as good as JVs?

This thread has made me a think a bit more .I just realized that when I road tested a blacktop strat I was comparing it to my CV strat .No problem it was up to my CV's standard ,same tuners as my Baja and CV ,weight nice ,stayed in tune etc .sounded good through a Blackstar .I also got a belated Christmas present from my Daughter and her bloke ,a new grandson delayed it::grin: . A Mustang 1 .It sounds good and though I doubt its as good as a deluxe reverby RI etc ,its cured my wanting one as it sounds fine to me and has lots of other options .Times are changing,technology strides away , and the world with it .I still want a MIA Fender but not bad enough to actually buy one .Why bother ,all the others work and amazingly survive three hour long jams without snapping in two or going out of tune or dissolving into dust .

The best thing about this board is that we can have discussions like his one without acting like jerks. So I say this very, very respectfully:

Can anyone point to a reason why the CV Squiers could not be used for a gig? I would personally replace the jack with an electrosocket, but I do that with Fenders too. Perhaps, if you really want to, a switch and pots upgrade. So now you've spent base price + $25. Not a big deal. Other than that . . .

1: The fretwork is on par with MIA instruments. I say "on par with" only because I don't want to incur the wrath that will surely follow saying "better than."

2: The pickups sound great.

3: The tuners are solid.

4: What else . . . ? What is the magic ingredient that makes higher priced guitars more "giggable?" If it's "feel," "tone," or "mojo" . . . those things are very subjective. Imagine you're buying a guitar from me, and you've never heard of Fender or Squier. What can I say that will convince you to spend 3x the money? Feel, tone and mojo?

I ask this because I'm genuinely interested in the answer. I'm a salesman, remember? And I'm having a hard time with this.

This is what I've been trying to find out in this thread and have asked this multiple times without an answer.

Of course much has to do with reputation. It's the same reason why I own a Honda and not a GM car. I'm sure there's a few gems in the GM lineup but why would I bother when I already know Hondas have been tried/tested/regarded as the safest/best value/etc etc cars out there? Yes there are lemons in every lineup but that goes without saying.

Unfortunately squiers just have a bad rep to them. Maybe things are slowly changing but they're basically known as a childs beginner guitar. No one wants to know they're buying a lower end item especially if they're going to be gigging with it.

For me if I were to get a budget guitar I might as well get another rondo sx because what's the point of spending 3x for another budget guitar just with the fender/squier name on it? Do people here consider the squier that many times better than an sx tele copy? I don't think so.

I think everyone jumping on this CV wave has a lot to do with Internet hype and seeing everyone else "accepting" it as a fit guitar makes people feel more justified with their purchase.

Either way I'm sure the cv is entirely giggable but thats just not happening at all with the majority of active musicians who play teles.

I don't think CV's, squiers, or any guitar for that matter are 'ungigable'.

I think the bottom line is that there are certain people that appreciate the small little touches/options the MIM and MIA lines offer. To those who think Squiers are perfect - that's great! I think you guys are looking for this huge difference between a CV and MIA, which doesn't exist. A strat or tele is a couple of hunks of wood screwed together with a few simple electronics mounted. There's not a whole lot of room to really screw that up.

I've played a perfect Squier - I mean an absolutely perfect, could-take-no-issue with it Squier. So I understand what people are talking about. With that said, I've also played perfect MIA's. Were the MIA's any more perfect? No, perfect is perfect, but the MIA had features I appreciated more and I've already given some other reasons for my preference. My personal experience is that when looking for that one axe that's going to be a keeper - the odds are better that I'll find it in the MIA section - I find them to be more consistent with less need to 'upgrade'.

There seems a need to 'battle' - on one side you have the Squier guys who are shouting out loud that their Squiers are just as good as anything else. And on the other side you have everybody else saying - 'it's fine you think that way, but I don't necessarily agree'.

As someone who appreciates MIA guitars, I'll say it - Squiers are the new standard of excellence, not just within Fender, but for all instruments of any kind, anywhere. I'm hoping all of my fellow MIM and MIA enthusiasts will join me in this sentiment. I think if we all are willing to say this, we could end this annoying conversation and possibly avoid a new thread for a whole two weeks.

^^^ It is the nature of opinion that we each have our own. Again, I don't quite agree with the sentiment that Squier is the standard, but my reasons lie more in product lineage versus quality. I think you will find quality instruments in both the MIA and CV spectrum.

You do touch on something that I think is worth focusing on. We aren't talking about Gibsons here. We aren't talking about guitars with set necks, that have ornate carved tops and lots of glue. We aren't talking about maple caps or 14 degree angled headstocks or anything like that. We are talking about Telecasters: one of the simplest guitars ever produced. It is extremely straightforward to build, extremely easy to build in large quantities, and extremely fun to play.

With today's CNC machines cranking out Les Pauls, Strats, SGs, and everything in between, it is important to remember that out of all the guitar designs in the recognized canon of great guitar designs, the Telecaster is the easiest to manufacture. CNC machines can cut a 50's spec body in seconds. Hundreds of Tele necks can be roughed out in a day, and they can all be finished out quite easily, too.

This makes the Telecaster an enigma among modern day guitars. It is really easy to make a fantastic Telecaster on a budget. I guarantee you that any one of us could pick up a Turser or SX Tele, a CV Tele, an MIA Tele, and an AVRI Tele, and notice a difference in quality...but would that difference be huge? The gap between a cheap Les Paul and a Gibson is huge (for the most part). The gap between a Tele and a Tele by any other name is relatively small.

Now, am I saying that MIA guitars aren't worth it? NO! I think the MIA Teles represent something that is at the pinnacle of its evolution, something that has taken 60 years and thousands of models in stride and still kicks. But consider this: there are literally hundreds of thousands of Teles out there, and I'm willing to bet that the ones in the top 5% of cost aren't remarkably different from the top 50%. It is the nature of the Telecaster. It was originally designed to be ASSEMBLED (not handcrafted, not masterbuilt) by factory workers (not luthiers) quickly, efficiently, and without too much variation. It is a testament to Leo's foresight that he decided to create the Tele this way...he must have seen the potential for fierce competition in the sales of solidbody electrics, and he must have seen (as a businessman and an engineer) that this design was so simple and effective that it was capable of killing the competition by sheer volume.

No, Telecasters were never meant to be a budget guitar...however, I'm willing to bet that the profit margin for the Telecaster model of guitar has always been and will always be higher than that of the Les Paul. It is far simpler to create an excellent low-cost Tele than anything out there.

Squier capitalizes on Leo Fender's brilliant, simple, and effective design. All they have needed in the past was to polish out the fretwork and nut, take a little bit more time with the electronics, and they would be good to go. I think they've accomplished this with the CV line and are now producing extremely high quality Telecasters.

I think we'd all be kidding ourselves if we said that it is impossible for a $300 guitar to be as nice and well made as a $1000 guitar. I've ASSEMBLED over 25 Telecasters for friends out of various parts. When I have everything there in front of me, it has never taken me more than 4 hours total to get it all put together, set up, frets leveled out, nut cut, electronics in, action dialed in and ready to go. Out of all of these I liked some more than others, but I never played one I hated, and I never played one that was better than anything I've ever played. The gap between my least favorite and most favorite was very small. The cost differences in parts could reach as high as $500, though.

My $.02. It ain't easy to screw up something so brilliantly simple.

^^^ It is the nature of opinion that we each have our own. Again, I don't quite agree with the sentiment that Squier is the standard, but my reasons lie more in product lineage versus quality. I think you will find quality instruments in both the MIA and CV spectrum.

You do touch on something that I think is worth focusing on. We aren't talking about Gibsons here. We aren't talking about guitars with set necks, that have ornate carved tops and lots of glue. We aren't talking about maple caps or 14 degree angled headstocks or anything like that. We are talking about Telecasters: one of the simplest guitars ever produced. It is extremely straightforward to build, extremely easy to build in large quantities, and extremely fun to play.

With today's CNC machines cranking out Les Pauls, Strats, SGs, and everything in between, it is important to remember that out of all the guitar designs in the recognized canon of great guitar designs, the Telecaster is the easiest to manufacture. CNC machines can cut a 50's spec body in seconds. Hundreds of Tele necks can be roughed out in a day, and they can all be finished out quite easily, too.

This makes the Telecaster an enigma among modern day guitars. It is really easy to make a fantastic Telecaster on a budget. I guarantee you that any one of us could pick up a Turser or SX Tele, a CV Tele, an MIA Tele, and an AVRI Tele, and notice a difference in quality...but would that difference be huge? The gap between a cheap Les Paul and a Gibson is huge (for the most part). The gap between a Tele and a Tele by any other name is relatively small.

Now, am I saying that MIA guitars aren't worth it? NO! I think the MIA Teles represent something that is at the pinnacle of its evolution, something that has taken 60 years and thousands of models in stride and still kicks. But consider this: there are literally hundreds of thousands of Teles out there, and I'm willing to bet that the ones in the top 5% of cost aren't remarkably different from the top 50%. It is the nature of the Telecaster. It was originally designed to be ASSEMBLED (not handcrafted, not masterbuilt) by factory workers (not luthiers) quickly, efficiently, and without too much variation. It is a testament to Leo's foresight that he decided to create the Tele this way...he must have seen the potential for fierce competition in the sales of solidbody electrics, and he must have seen (as a businessman and an engineer) that this design was so simple and effective that it was capable of killing the competition by sheer volume.

No, Telecasters were never meant to be a budget guitar...however, I'm willing to bet that the profit margin for the Telecaster model of guitar has always been and will always be higher than that of the Les Paul. It is far simpler to create an excellent low-cost Tele than anything out there.

Squier capitalizes on Leo Fender's brilliant, simple, and effective design. All they have needed in the past was to polish out the fretwork and nut, take a little bit more time with the electronics, and they would be good to go. I think they've accomplished this with the CV line and are now producing extremely high quality Telecasters.

I think we'd all be kidding ourselves if we said that it is impossible for a $300 guitar to be as nice and well made as a $1000 guitar. I've ASSEMBLED over 25 Telecasters for friends out of various parts. When I have everything there in front of me, it has never taken me more than 4 hours total to get it all put together, set up, frets leveled out, nut cut, electronics in, action dialed in and ready to go. Out of all of these I liked some more than others, but I never played one I hated, and I never played one that was better than anything I've ever played. The gap between my least favorite and most favorite was very small. The cost differences in parts could reach as high as $500, though.

My $.02. It ain't easy to screw up something so brilliantly simple.

I don't buy into this logic at all.

Simple to make = generally a good quality product? Hell no.

I don't buy into this logic at all.

Simple to make = generally a good quality product? Hell no.

It's cool...that's what opinions are for :mrgreen:

"Something as cheap as a Squire, would you pas it on?"

Duncas, if I can ever get my CV 50@s off my son I will gladly leave it to him! His SG is sitting redundant. Just glad I obviously passed my taste on to!

Standard of excellence in the production fender line? No

Standard of value? Yes

Is a CV50s as good as a AVRI 52 thin skin? No

The CV is close though and amazing for the money.

Succinctly said and 100% truth.

The best of Squiers can beat the worst of the older MIM's. The new Standards are nice guitars though, and the 72 Deluxe with the strat neck is a damned joy to play.

The thing with the Classic Vibes is that they just don't feel or sound cheap at all. Most other Squiers do to some degree.

They're made of good well finished wood. Very good fretwork, but slightly softer frets. Solid hardware that works well. They have good pickups that seem to fail some but not frequently. They have noiseless pots with a nice feel. The jacks are crap, but that's true with almost anything, IMHO. I have two American guitars with loctite in the jacks just like my CVC.

All on sale for 315 bucks.

A standard of value.

Let's look at the low end of the spectrum for a while. If Fender's MIM are their bottom end product where does that leave Squier? Affinity, SE or maybe Bullet? How does this viewpoint affect the "standard of exellence" question?

I don't think so. But I'm very impressed with CV, and the John 5 I had - and my sons mini strat isn't bad either. I also really like my MIM products. i don't know if I'd buy another USA Fender. I'm not a professional or even very good, but I've been playing a few years and the CV and MIM are good enough for me.

Oh, and I want one of these:

http://img3.musiciansfriend.com/dbase/pics/products/4/3/7/796437.jpg

This belief is true already will many who believe the Japanese line of Fender is superior to all other Fenders. :wink:


You know, those people are getting harder and harder to find.

As Fender Japan models shrink out of the USA marketplace (replaced by high end Squiers) so the need to extoll fender Japan virtues is going extinct fast.

++

Don't get me wrong. FMIC Corona production needs to feel pressure; Corona need to feel pushed by someone even if the competition is for the moment still "captive".

But it is funny than USA Fender owners never need to start threads suggesting that maybe their guitars are almost as good as, as good as, or better money than the import substitute. This role is always assigned to the underdog; the Squier line of contractor made guitars. After a while I get sort of weary of the dogged re-assertion that Squiers deserve more respect. The real way you get taken seriously is just to get out there and make music with them and create a self sustaining, independent entity based upon them. Until then, Squier is defined by its relationship to Fender and FMIC and I would prefer to be judged strictly on my own terms, if I was really for real.

By my count, I've owned 39 Squiers. They're good for making music and great as gifts. I encourage people to buy them for what they are. I'm just not interested in defending my purchase of these guitars as anything other than what they are. Solid, rough tough substitutes because access to most any guitar today is better than no guitar at all and once upon a time many bargain guitars were not good enough - better to go without in those days.

As I've posted a few times already, I purchased my beloved new CVC at the end of last year ($299 & received Festivus Eve!) and the bridge pup has already died. Totally croaked about 3 weeks in...?

I've read many posts here & on other boards mentioning similar issues with both neck & bridge pups. Although I'm more than happy with my "upgraded" bridge pup, a '95 Tex-Mex orig stock from Telecaster Special, was a bit disappointed the stock one stopped working as soon as it did.

What's up with that?

My bridge pickup is dead, also (I posted above, already). Hoping to get to the Squier authorized repair shop yet this week. If I learn anything, I'll pass info along. As for this thread's title, "Is Squier becoming the Standard Of Excelence Within Fender?"... I certainly hope not!

something as cheap as a CV, would you pass it on?

If my father played guitar and gave me his main instrument before his passing, I would treasure that guitar forever, money worth would not matter at all...

Give the CS $379 and let them go nuts... I'm kidding of course but they wouldn't get out of bed for that money.

That might pay for the tuners. :lol:

This is what I've been trying to find out in this thread and have asked this multiple times without an answer.

Of course much has to do with reputation. It's the same reason why I own a Honda and not a GM car. I'm sure there's a few gems in the GM lineup but why would I bother when I already know Hondas have been tried/tested/regarded as the safest/best value/etc etc cars out there? Yes there are lemons in every lineup but that goes without saying.

Unfortunately squiers just have a bad rep to them. Maybe things are slowly changing but they're basically known as a childs beginner guitar. No one wants to know they're buying a lower end item especially if they're going to be gigging with it.

For me if I were to get a budget guitar I might as well get another rondo sx because what's the point of spending 3x for another budget guitar just with the fender/squier name on it? Do people here consider the squier that many times better than an sx tele copy? I don't think so.

I think everyone jumping on this CV wave has a lot to do with Internet hype and seeing everyone else "accepting" it as a fit guitar makes people feel more justified with their purchase.

Either way I'm sure the cv is entirely giggable but thats just not happening at all with the majority of active musicians who play teles.

Well im an active musician who plays telecasters and Strats and I gig my CVC in my Police Tribute band.Im absolulely thrilled with my Classic Vibe Custom. I have made a few modifications with new saddles and neck humbucker. I really really think this guitar gets me closer to the sound I need for my band.Sure I have other Telecasters but for me the CVC is a fantastic guitar ..Period.I DONT CARE WHAT IS ON THE HEADSTOCK.I do care what it sounds like.So accepting it as a fit guitar? Yep.I already have an American tele....This one sounds better, i dont know how else to explain it..........

Partly because of the kind of constant banging on about how great the CV is, I convinced myself it would be good to own one. In fact, I convinced myself twice on two different occasions. And now I don't own a CV tele... because quite simply neither of them, or any of the others I tried at the time, were as great as everyone seemed to make out.

Good for the price, sure. But not better than another tele that I already owned, which is marginally more expensive and made in Mexico.

Haven't read the responses but ...seriously?

i've been wondering this as well, seeing as the employees at squier and mexico fender factories are going to be much more long term and available why isn't anyone capitalizing on training programs from fender masterbuilders (kinda like the classic player thing they did but much further down the line)

i've played bullet, affinities and classic vibe (not strictly telecasters) and yeah squier can output some really low quality guitars as well as high end. but being a standard of excellence essentially means its baseline product, the bullet and se, has to be of reputable value and consistency right now i don't think it is but 10 years with more training and education given to its employees then yeah;
but really would fender invest here or in its american workers? obviously they'd much rather widen the gap between MIA and MIM/MIC/MIK than shift it closer; but really the best they could do is move MIM/MIC/MIK up then make MIA production much more competitive being that the workers are risking they're jobs if they output guitars with QC worse than MIM/MIC/MIK and hopefully we'd have better guitars over all price ranges :)

If my father played guitar and gave me his main instrument before his passing, I would treasure that guitar forever, money worth would not matter at all...

You've sidestepped the question.

Note to all Fathers of Stature:

Leave your kid a sweet guitar. Don't stick him with a Squier or even a MIM Fender. My grandparents, paternal and maternal, had different tastes and different budgets. Consequently my paternal grandparents left a few really nice collectible items. And from my maternal grandparents, I have memories only. :wink:

What a "Ben Hur", Epic thread this has turned into!! I have learned a lot about guitars and even more about the people who play them..interesting stuff!! Cheers! JIMO

A few years ago you could get really OUTSTANDING Korean-made guitars for $300-$400, Epiphone, Washburn, Schecter, PRS SE (still MIK but more pricey now),G&L Tribute. etc. In a quest for even cheaper labor companies went from Korea to China, Vietnam, Indonesia The quality of the MIC guitars has in no way caught up to where the MIKs were.
Take a look at the switch on a Squier compared to a MIA Fender, or the cheap little zinc bridge block on a Squier compared to the big piece or steel on a MIA Strat.
Comapanies now charge what MIM or MIK guitars used to cost for MIC,etc., in addition to saving on labor they have really cheapened the parts.

Let's face it, Fender has done what most other USA manufacturers have done..they've gone off shore in order to stay in business due to high labor costs. So far they have kept their highest quality parts in their USA models. This is not to say that the off shore models have bad parts, in fact some of the parts, tuners for example, are better that what was being produced forty or fifty years ago, but for reliability reasons you're better off with the higher quality parts.
They are also aware that the majority of new sales are to the beginner, or intermediate market, and can sell the affordable guitars at a higher volume, therefore a higher profit
margin.

....i would settle for one of those $132 broadcasters made on a wobbly bandsaw in leo's workshed

http://www.sweetpollyband.com/001.jpg

I guess I've got to appreciate different folks idea of value and stature. Been left a couple of homes and some 'antiques', that is stuff that has been used in the family for generations. Probably the items with the most 'value' are a marking gauge left by my grandfather and some micrometers my engineering dad left. When I pull this simple stuff out I swear I can smell those men and feel them present. There is no money that could buy them from me.
I choose to play a CV 50's cause to me its in tune with the original Fender ethos, music for the masses. Anyone who comes to the house can pick it up and play it. Its of little monetary value or 'stature'. Is it valuable in our home? To right it is. Whoever finally gets the thing will get the feeling of our hands on it. I guess what Im trying to say is that of themselves things have no value, its only the value we invest in them. If this cheap guitar could say, 'fun times with dad', whats its value?

I guess I've got to appreciate different folks idea of value and stature. Been left a couple of homes and some 'antiques', that is stuff that has been used in the family for generations. Probably the items with the most 'value' are a marking gauge left by my grandfather and some micrometers my engineering dad left. When I pull this simple stuff out I swear I can smell those men and feel them present. There is no money that could buy them from me.
I choose to play a CV 50's cause to me its in tune with the original Fender ethos, music for the masses. Anyone who comes to the house can pick it up and play it. Its of little monetary value or 'stature'. Is it valuable in our home? To right it is. Whoever finally gets the thing will get the feeling of our hands on it. I guess what Im trying to say is that of themselves things have no value, its only the value we invest in them. If this cheap guitar could say, 'fun times with dad', whats its value?

sentimental value is an entirely different beast and really not in context with this thread at all. but if you think cv50s are ideal for 'music for the masses' due to its low price then wouldn't a cheap $100 SX tele copy be even more in tune with that ethos? or does the headstock all of a sudden count for something when its at the low end?

Iblastoff, Ive never tried an SX, never seen them in the UK so cant comment on them. My CV though is of fantastic quality, the neck is a dream and everyone likes to play it. I would not say all the Squire line is the same and I do not belive that Squire is ' The Standard of Excellence'. My son has a Gibson SG and also a Vintage SG, he says the Vintage has 'something' and is better than the Gibson. Thats his judgement value.
Under my sons bed is a Selmer VI 1955 Alto Sax that his grandfather played. It is his prized possesion because his grandfather gave it to him. He has no idea of its huge monetary value as no-one has told him. It may be sentiment to you but to him and me its value.
This guitar of mine is a keeper because its got mojo for us, we give it great value. In this consumer age many keep searching for the 'right one' spending thousands and choping and changing never settled. My notion is that something only has value if we as people give it such.
Many people know the price of everything but the value of nothing.

....i would settle for one of those $132 broadcasters made on a wobbly bandsaw in leo's workshed


Which, adjusted for inflation (http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm), would be $1,096.96 today. You can still pick up a nice Telecaster for $1100 dollars -- I'm pretty certain I've read posts by people who put together special offers and coupons and bought '52 AVRIs for less.

The quality of low-end guitars has come way up since I started playing in the early 60s -- before Fender had a low-end line and when Epiphone, Gibson's second tier line, was built in the same plant, with the same wood, by the same guys who built the first tier guitars (and they were, comparitively, much more expensive than today's Epis).

Squier is getting more attention because they are willing to do some non traditional things, like the VM Thinline with a 24 3/4 scale, the midi ready Rock Band 3 squier strat coming out next week, the low cost Jazzmaster and Jaguar that are quite a bit different from the originals. Fender American just brings out new colors of old stuff.

Squier is getting more attention because they are willing to do some non traditional things, like the VM Thinline with a 24 3/4 scale, the midi ready Rock Band 3 squier strat coming out next week, the low cost Jazzmaster and Jaguar that are quite a bit different from the originals. Fender American just brings out new colors of old stuff.

I dunno, they've redesigned the original Tele a lot in the last 20 years or so. Not everyone likes the changes (I wish they would come out with an AmSpec with more colors and the AmStand neck...that way I could justify buying an MIA Tele, I need the vintage spec stuff). They are willing to listen to what players need and change things accordingly.

Squier is getting more attention because they are willing to do some non traditional things, like the VM Thinline with a 24 3/4 scale, the midi ready Rock Band 3 squier strat coming out next week, the low cost Jazzmaster and Jaguar that are quite a bit different from the originals. Fender American just brings out new colors of old stuff.

horrible idea considering those crappy rock band/guitar hero games have been in massive decline in sales. guitar hero is already being canceled altogether.

. . .
Comapanies now charge what MIM or MIK guitars used to cost for MIC,etc., in addition to saving on labor they have really cheapened the parts.

Agreed.

In 2004, I paid exactly the same for my MIM standard telecaster that a CV50 goes for new today. I don't see the value today.

Crazy.

Squier may not be the "standard of excellence" for FMIC.

But Squier is central to the "standard of value and accessibility" that exists today for musicians.

When I visit "School of Rock" type programs and day camps the Squier brand is pervasive and if there is any lesser quality of music, it's NOT related to the gear that's being used. Unlike budget instruments of previous generations, the guitars/basses stay in tune and produce tones as good as the players' skill levels allow. No longer is a player hindered by the poor quality of their instrument.

More experienced players have also found that Squier instruments (whether they are Affinitys, Bullets, Standards, Vintage Modified or CV lines) are good enough for their requirments whether that means noodling, jamming, home recording, bar gigs or beyond.

For the higher level of professional activity it's clear that there is a willingness to spend A LOT more money for relatively minor incremental benefits and that actually makes sense. Higher quality and hopefully more reliable "components" - even when there is nominal advances in playability or tone - are valued more by professionals but for non-begginer hobbyists who CAN afford higher priced instruments, as evidenced on this forum, many are finding that the Squier line offers everything AND MORE than they need. This is NOT "internet hype" that's driving this conclusion. I'm sure there is a lot more internet messaging that sends the "Squier Sucks" message than "CV's now outclass MIM and MIA". Certainly that's the case with the kids in these music programs that say "it's only a Squier", "it's not a real Strat", or "my parents bought me this POS guitar" despite the actual quality of their instrument. THAT's real marketing hype at it's best.

I really hate to even comment in this thread because of the sensationalistic title, but I just wanted to point out that a lot of the people saying that squiers don't live up to fenders are talking about squier affinity, standard, and vm models. I don't think the squier vs fender argument really has any validity unless you're talking about the classic vibe series. So to a lot of the pro-fender guys in here, yes, I agree that your affinity/standard/vm is crap compared to your fenders. It's the classic vibe you haven't played yet that might give your fender a run for its money.

Squier may not be the "standard of excellence" for FMIC.

But Squier is central to the "standard of value and accessibility" that exists today for musicians.

When I visit "School of Rock" type programs and day camps the Squier brand is pervasive and if there is any lesser quality of music, it's NOT related to the gear that's being used. Unlike budget instruments of previous generations, the guitars/basses stay in tune and produce tones as good as the players' skill levels allow. No longer is a player hindered by the poor quality of their instrument.

More experienced players have also found that Squier instruments (whether they are Affinitys, Bullets, Standards, Vintage Modified or CV lines) are good enough for their requirments whether that means noodling, jamming, home recording, bar gigs or beyond.

For the higher level of professional activity it's clear that there is a willingness to spend A LOT more money for relatively minor incremental benefits and that actually makes sense. Higher quality and hopefully more reliable "components" - even when there is nominal advances in playability or tone - are valued more by professionals but for non-begginer hobbyists who CAN afford higher priced instruments, as evidenced on this forum, many are finding that the Squier line offers everything AND MORE than they need. This is NOT "internet hype" that's driving this conclusion. I'm sure there is a lot more internet messaging that sends the "Squier Sucks" message than "CV's now outclass MIM and MIA". Certainly that's the case with the kids in these music programs that say "it's only a Squier", "it's not a real Strat", or "my parents bought me this POS guitar" despite the actual quality of their instrument. THAT's real marketing hype at it's best.

its definite internet hype as evidenced by this very thread alone started by someone saying CV's are higher in quality and consistency than MIM/MIA's based on purely nothing but subjective ranting.

the only people that seem to be playing the CV's are people posting on forums. i have yet to see any live gigging musician (not the pros with tons of money but the 'middle class' touring bands who have most to gain by spending very little on supposed 'standard of excellence' guitars) play a squier and playing/going to shows has basically been my #1 past time for the past 15 years. i'm sure there are a few bands that do, but there has to be another reason why 99% of gigging musicians play actual fenders other than the 'cool' factor.

still, not saying the CV is a bad instrument but thats just how it is.

I really hate to even comment in this thread because of the sensationalistic title, but I just wanted to point out that a lot of the people saying that squiers don't live up to fenders are talking about squier affinity, standard, and vm models. I don't think the squier vs fender argument really has any validity unless you're talking about the classic vibe series. So to a lot of the pro-fender guys in here, yes, I agree that your affinity/standard/vm is crap compared to your fenders. It's the classic vibe you haven't played yet that might give your fender a run for its money.

+1

I really hate to even comment in this thread because of the sensationalistic title, but I just wanted to point out that a lot of the people saying that squiers don't live up to fenders are talking about squier affinity, standard, and vm models. I don't think the squier vs fender argument really has any validity unless you're talking about the classic vibe series. So to a lot of the pro-fender guys in here, yes, I agree that your affinity/standard/vm is crap compared to your fenders. It's the classic vibe you haven't played yet that might give your fender a run for its money.

what utter tosh. the vm's cost the same as the cv series guitars, in some cases more.

the squier standard is a decent guitar too.

you cv guys really do get carried away with the hype.

i love my vm, but i'd never make the outlandish claims and sweeping statements like you just did.

its all hype.. the cv series is the new vm series..

vm series - mod a retro looking guitar

"Vintage. Versatile. Vibe. Value. That’s the Squier Vintage Modified Series."
"combines chop-shop looks with hot pickups in the traditional Telecaster® design"

cv - just make it look old, ditch the hot rodding add-ons, twist the materials used..

new hype for old rope


after the new cv bsb's coming they'll be doing cv roadworns next, same hardware but i bet they'll play as good as a custom shop roadworn! :twisted:

its definite internet hype as evidenced by this very thread alone started by someone saying CV's are higher in quality and consistency than MIM/MIA's based on purely nothing but subjective ranting.

the only people that seem to be playing the CV's are people posting on forums. i have yet to see any live gigging musician (not the pros with tons of money but the 'middle class' touring bands who have most to gain by spending very little on supposed 'standard of excellence' guitars) play a squier and playing/going to shows has basically been my #1 past time for the past 15 years. i'm sure there are a few bands that do, but there has to be another reason why 99% of gigging musicians play actual fenders other than the 'cool' factor.

still, not saying the CV is a bad instrument but thats just how it is.

Come to my shows and you'll see my CV50's, you'll see an Agile Les Paul too. No one in the audience cares what kind of guitar I play as long as it sounds good.

It's the player, not the brand. Personally I think it's cooler to play an underdog guitar that kicks ass. If you can't make a well setup CV guitar sound good, it's not the guitars fault.

i've got a friend that gigs a squier custom tele (its got fender on the headstock though - he didn't do that) and a squier '51.

ok his band only recently back together after 10 years and maybe with more gigs he'll have more cash, but he's very happy as is. he got the custom tele in a swap for a fender cyclone II and some cash.

Sorry Overseer, while you are essentially in the same, defend the squires band camp as us, i have a VM Custom 2 tele and a CV tele and a CV 60 strat. The CV is definatley a step up from the Custom 2 VM in terms of fret work etc.

Don't get me wrong, i love my C2 and enjoy the fuller neck etc but the CV range IS (to me anyway) a bit more polished in final product.

Back to the debate raging here (good info coming from this, im enjoying it)

I STILL say anyone who can't gig a CV or even the Custom 2 (not limiting others, just what i have experience with) is incompetent.

Sure they may not stand up to 300 gig s a year but what guitar does with out a tech and service etc.

I can appreciate they may not be CS levels but come on, (i say again) How good does a guitar have to be before it is down to brand, fitment and just personal preference on neck depth, pickup tone, colour etc.

This is NOT the original point. I owuld say maybe not quite but the Squire CV line is definately CLOSE to becoming the standard of excellance in Fender.

How many people have had ACTUAL faults with thier CV range. I see far more complaints of faults with MIM and MIA guitars than I do of the CV AND VM lines here......

How many people have had ACTUAL faults with thier CV range. I see far more complaints of faults with MIM and MIA guitars than I do of the CV AND VM lines here......

maybe the cv owners dont mind so much for the money, and the MIM/MIA people are expecting more out of theirs..

what utter tosh. the vm's cost the same as the cv series guitars, in some cases more.

the squier standard is a decent guitar too.

you cv guys really do get carried away with the hype.

i love my vm, but i'd never make the outlandish claims and sweeping statements like you just did.

its all hype.. the cv series is the new vm series..

vm series - mod a retro looking guitar

"Vintage. Versatile. Vibe. Value. That’s the Squier Vintage Modified Series."
"combines chop-shop looks with hot pickups in the traditional Telecaster® design"

cv - just make it look old, ditch the hot rodding add-ons, twist the materials used..

new hype for old rope


after the new cv bsb's coming they'll be doing cv roadworns next, same hardware but i bet they'll play as good as a custom shop roadworn! :twisted:

yes. Possibly the most over-hyped guitar ever. I've played plenty of bad ones - either extremely heavy, or really badly set up/rattling, one with a pickup not soldered properly. I've owned two which were OK, but not better than most other teles I have tried. They DO have very good pickups, although so do the MIM Classic Players (in fact probably better ones).

the main thing is that it is actually quite hard to go completely wrong with a telecaster - they are basic guitars... so it becomes almost possible to make the claim that your £300 Squier is as good (or almost as good) as a Nocaster. The differences are always going to be relatively subtle.

But this harping on about the CV's greatness, even if it was true, is most annoying because it has become SO boring... like listening to Stairway to Heaven over and over and over and over again.

its definite internet hype as evidenced by this very thread alone started by someone saying CV's are higher in quality and consistency than MIM/MIA's based on purely nothing but subjective ranting.

the only people that seem to be playing the CV's are people posting on forums. i have yet to see any live gigging musician (not the pros with tons of money but the 'middle class' touring bands who have most to gain by spending very little on supposed 'standard of excellence' guitars) play a squier and playing/going to shows has basically been my #1 past time for the past 15 years. i'm sure there are a few bands that do, but there has to be another reason why 99% of gigging musicians play actual fenders other than the 'cool' factor.

still, not saying the CV is a bad instrument but thats just how it is.



Yeah your post is not even vaguely reminiscent of a subjective rant. Thanks for the objective analysis.

Standard of Excellence?......No.

Standard of the 80's Japan Squiers......No.

Getting better than they have been for the last 20 years.....Yes.


Across the lineup Squiers don't stand up to MIA or even MIM Fenders.

A Squier Bullet Strat isn't as good as an MIM Standard Strat.

A Squier Affinity Tele isn't as good as a Nashville or HWY 1 Tele.

A Squier CV isn't as good as a Baja or AVRI 52.


The definition of Excellence = superiority.

And the Squier line is in no way superior to the MIM or MIA lines.

Yeah your post is not even vaguely reminiscent of a subjective rant. Thanks for the objective analysis.

Are you saying the majority of bands you've seen who rock teles are in fact squiers and not 'real' fenders then?

A few years ago you could get really OUTSTANDING Korean-made guitars for $300-$400,


You can get great North American built guitars in the $500 range these days if you buy a Godin (or any of their other lines like Seagull, Simon & Patrick, Art & Lutherie, LaPatrie, Norman, and Richmond). Their guitars are of excellent quality.

If I was to buy a $400 Epiphone acoustic it would be made in China somewhere and, from my experiences with other Epi products, would be of questionable quality. However, if I buy a $400 acoustic from any line in the Godin family I will be getting a quality instrument that was made right here in Canada (they have three factories in Canada and one in new Hampshire).

If Godin can produce such high quality instruments (both acoustics and electrics) and sell them for the prices that they do, why can't the other North American companies do the same? Why do they have to farm production out to Asia?

The CV (when I bought mine) was just a really good $299 guitar. It just happened to be
a real nice Tele. I don't mind where it was made. I'll keep mine.

what utter tosh. the vm's cost the same as the cv series guitars, in some cases more.



How does the fact that FMIC inexplicably asks nearly the same price for VMs as for CVs help your position?

The fact that they're nearly the same price does not make them equivalent in quality. This is, instead, a perfect poster child for why the Squier label is still undercooked and the contractors are not regulated closely enough and hence there's no proportionality between Squier prices and Squier value. This also suggests that if Eric and the plant where CVs are made "gets away" and begins making their own guitars or starts making T models for some other label, that FMIC is in deep trouble and must return to Square One.

I will say, in the used market, CVs are worth far more than VMs are, although that doesn't help your position, either. :wink:

maybe the cv owners dont mind so much for the money, and the MIM/MIA people are expecting more out of theirs..


This could absolutely be true but from my perspective, there appears to be no misfitting parts, nothing really to complain about even if had paid triple the price.

However, it would appear that MASSIVE quantities of the CV guitars have sold in comparison to the others......and i don't see that reflected in the ratio of complaints.....

The CV (when I bought mine) was just a really good $299 guitar. It just happened to be
a real nice Tele. I don't mind where it was made. I'll keep mine.


Dito...I think im gonna keep my inferior cheap piece of Indonesian TrashMaster as well :wink:

G_td5ycdIjE

One problem I have with the VM and CV series, is their tendency to fall back out of tune after a good 30 mins of play.
As far as fretwork, it was pretty impressive on most of the models I've played, but I agree with those who've complained of jagged frets.
When I pick up my partscaster, the american standard neck just molds to my hands, hell, even the baja molds to my hands, but I consistently have a hard time molding to squier necks, and it really has nothing to do with the profiling (I enjoy many many different neck profiles)
just my 2cents I guess

The Bends.

How can your guitars go out of tune after 30 minutes...no agro, genuine itnerest. I have band practiced mine for hours at a time, played them all day etc and had no problems. VM and CV.

I honestly can't see how......especially seen as you are talking multiple / different guitars.....

Are you saying in comparison that your MIA and MIM don't do this under the same circumstances?

I'm saying from the ones I've played at a handfull of shops in my area, they would go slightly flat after some intensive play. I don't own a baja, or an American tele, Just my partscaster with an am. stnd. neck. I was just using the baja comparatively.
It's not like the CV's went out of tune by a huge margine, but the tuners/hardware and nut really aren't anything to ride home about. That's not to say they aren't good guitars at all, I think it's a great series, but for gear heads like me, the best bang for the buck is mixing and matching. (which for some, includes working with the CV/VM)

I've always been a firm believer that quality products are not by any means unique to America.

I guess a while back I was so excited to get my hands on every CV I could find because EVERYONE raved about them, and I was kind of disappointed because of what I was expecting from the instrument :cry:

The guy who pays to play,plays Squier.

I'm saying from the ones I've played at a handfull of shops in my area, they would go slightly flat after some intensive play

WHAT, you don't own one and you draw a conclusion that they are not gigable?

Sorry but that is illogical. How new were the strings? Had they been tuned up properly in the first place, tensioned in the nut slots and so on. Were they factory strings which are notorious for being like rubber bands...

Your reasoning doesn't prove either way and to say that you cant gig them fom a couple of shop tests is slandering a product under extremely poor circumstances.

Sure the MIA and MIM may not go out of tune in the same casual test but they probably have branded strings etc. But surely a lack of a branded and stable set of strings is not enough to reason to bad mouth a whole series of guitar?

Just about every reason given for NOT being gigable so far has been, personal taste, brand, perception related to country of origin or vague impressions of tuning instability which are almost universally (I repeat, almost) universally unfounded.

At least we could gain a consensus based on actual experience and not "I don't THINK" if we are going to slander a product many,many people here are convinced ARE gigable....

Sorry the bends, the majority of this wasn't aimed specifically at you... :oops:

The Squier offerings are priced as they should be.

It's the Fender pricing that's Premium Pricing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricing#Premium_pricing).

It's got nothing to do with quality and everything to do with shareholders, wealth creation and an increasingly ignorant consumer.

Hi Nick. Absolutely I agree.

And the more the aura (real or not) of quality and component level is perpetuated to the Fender product the happier they are.

The Squier offerings are priced as they should be.

It's the Fender pricing that's Premium Pricing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pricing#Premium_pricing).

Perceptive.And it does have a certain logic to it.Even in the US,American Fender prices seem to cause more sticker shock to today's buyers than their similarly or slightly-higher priced(in terms of absolute purchasing power) counterparts did from the '50s to the '70s.I said earlier that the offshore(including MIM) instruments are better than the Danelectros/Silvertones/Harmonys/Kays they displaced from the bottom-tier market,but I wonder whether the offshores' close to exact copying of American Fenders,combined with the offshores being dumped(unfairly,albeit legally) on the world market has had the effect of making them look better than they are,and making American Fenders appear overpriced when they really aren't.
FMIC is in the money business as much as the guitar business,and they went for the quick buck by licensing knockoffs,but it might have been healthier long term for the brand if the offshores had been designed to look noticeably different from the Americans,in body and headstock shape,pickup and switching configurations,et cetera.

WHAT, you don't own one and you draw a conclusion that they are not gigable?

Sorry but that is illogical. How new were the strings? Had they been tuned up properly in the first place, tensioned in the nut slots and so on. Were they factory strings which are notorious for being like rubber bands...

Your reasoning doesn't prove either way and to say that you cant gig them fom a couple of shop tests is slandering a product under extremely poor circumstances.

Sure the MIA and MIM may not go out of tune in the same casual test but they probably have branded strings etc. But surely a lack of a branded and stable set of strings is not enough to reason to bad mouth a whole series of guitar?

Just about every reason given for NOT being gigable so far has been, personal taste, brand, perception related to country of origin or vague impressions of tuning instability which are almost universally (I repeat, almost) universally unfounded.

At least we could gain a consensus based on actual experience and not "I don't THINK" if we are going to slander a product many,many people here are convinced ARE gigable....

Sorry the bends, the majority of this wasn't aimed specifically at you... :oops:
No worries :mrgreen:
out of the 5 cv's at my ma and pa local shop, I think 3 of them were strung with GHS boomers 9's which are what I use with my tele. I'm not quite sure what the other 2 were strung with. I know the owner fairly well and he sets up all of the instruments personally.(almost everything is in tune off the wall)
I can safely say it wasn't the stereotypical guitarcenter environment. I don't remember when the last time I set foot in one was.
That being said, I like the CV series! I just set my expectations too high based on crazy pumped up reviews is what I'm saying.
Set up correctly, they are a PERFECTLY reasonable instrument for gigs etc.

No bad mouthing here sir.

and as far as country of origin, I am japanese guitar lover!
hell, I've been restoring this fuji gen ibanez for the past few months, and it only cost me 125 bucks for the stock guitar haha. Little over a hundred bucks for a 5 piece maple bubinga neck with a solid mahogany body? yes sir.
here's my build thread:
http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/luthiery-modifications-customizations/140860-ibanez-ax7-521-restoration-update-pic-dump.html

Haha, i reread what i wrote and thought, bugger he's gonna hit me for that! (hence the added bit at the end).

Why do you think they went out of tune? I ask because some people say this and i just can't see how or why...

The tuners seem equal to any others (low to mid price at least) that i have played with, the strat trem seems similar (excl the thin block, but many people say equal to a wilkinson etc) and the tele bridge seems more than respectable.....

Weird.

(i'm just about to check out your build thread,my first ever guitar was a new, 97 RG470. Great guitar!)

I will agree that squiers have increased their quality , but have to disagree with the standard of excellence argument. Where they may be the best $ to quality ratio, I'll take my mims over my squier any day. Maybe one day I will be lucky enough to have a mia

Haha, i reread what i wrote and thought, bugger he's gonna hit me for that! (hence the added bit at the end).

Why do you think they went out of tune? I ask because some people say this and i just can't see how or why...

The tuners seem equal to any others (low to mid price at least) that i have played with, the strat trem seems similar (excl the thin block, but many people say equal to a wilkinson etc) and the tele bridge seems more than respectable.....

Weird.

(i'm just about to check out your build thread,my first ever guitar was a new, 97 RG470. Great guitar!)

Honestly I think it might have a lot to do with the fact that I installed locking tuners on my build with a thick as hell callaham stainless steel neckplate and bridge plate. Plus, this time of year in chicago, it's really hit or miss with some guitars because of how up and down the temps have been. Then again, I've played some real nice CV's that intonated just fine.

I've always been the kinda guy to throw money where it really doesn't have to go, but tinkering has always been a side hobby to guitar playing. :mrgreen:
Doesn't make my guitar any superior to anyone else's. You know when you've got somethin nice because you don't have to convince anyone to convince yourself.

by the way, how's everything out there by you?

I've had my new Sunburst CVC in my hands for the last five hours, and I can unequivocally say that it has exceeded my expectations in all categories. After reading about all of the "internet hype" about these guitars from so many skeevy sources (:mrgreen:) I decided to investigate for myself and this guitar is nothing short of brilliance.

The finish and fittings are immaculate, the body grain is almost perfectly matched up between the three pieces used, the neck is just sick and slick, fretwork smooth as a newborn, even the hardware seems very solidly set and dependable, which is the one thing I was anticipating really not digging.

Can I tell you about the sound??? I haven't even plugged her in yet and I am in love. Nearly acoustic loud with sustain for days. Once I tuned her up to 440 proper, what little fret buzz out of the box was gone, the action was low and slick, intonation pretty much spot on, and she was screaming to be played. In five hours of playing I have barely had to do anything tuning-wise once tuning up to 440.

I'll put 10's on her tomorrow and will probably have to tighten up the truss a smidge, but that's it.

Internet hype? Please. This is a player's guitar. I have owned (and still do own) MIA's and MIM's, and this guitar feels and plays just as good if not better.

I've been followng this thread. It's all Fender to me. The Squiers are getting better (read CNC). If someone "gives" me a custom shop I will take that first, but i will not buy one...On my lifestyle budget I have two Squier tele's that are just fine for me. Affinity Esquire and the cv50's. I would like to get the CVC, played one at GC, very, very nice. I like the American Standard very much, also. All are good guitars, my friends. I find I like the Squier line more so than the epiphone line, and i was a Gibson guy long before I crossed the road over to Fender (read Tele).

I've had my new Sunburst CVC in my hands for the last five hours, and I can unequivocally say that it has exceeded my expectations in all categories. After reading about all of the "internet hype" about these guitars from so many skeevy sources (:mrgreen:) I decided to investigate for myself and this guitar is nothing short of brilliance.

The finish and fittings are immaculate, the body grain is almost perfectly matched up between the three pieces used, the neck is just sick and slick, fretwork smooth as a newborn, even the hardware seems very solidly set and dependable, which is the one thing I was anticipating really not digging.

Can I tell you about the sound??? I haven't even plugged her in yet and I am in love. Nearly acoustic loud with sustain for days. Once I tuned her up to 440 proper, what little fret buzz out of the box was gone, the action was low and slick, intonation pretty much spot on, and she was screaming to be played. In five hours of playing I have barely had to do anything tuning-wise once tuning up to 440.

I'll put 10's on her tomorrow and will probably have to tighten up the truss a smidge, but that's it.

Internet hype? Please. This is a player's guitar. I have owned (and still do own) MIA's and MIM's, and this guitar feels and plays just as good if not better.

Pretty much a prime example of Internet hype exaggerated by the fact that you're clearly in the honeymoon period. An electric guitar you've owned for 5 mere hours that you haven't even plugged in yet = multi paragraph praise on the Internet? When you come back to your senses try reading your review again and how silly it sounds. "nearly acoustic loud?" lolololll.

I went through the exact same thing with my cheapo sx stl ash.

Can I tell you about the sound??? I haven't even plugged her in yet and I am in love.

I'm blinking my eyes. I'll read this one more time.

++

Ok.

I've expressed a lot of positive things about the CV range, especially some of the CV Thinlines I've played.

But your review, with all due respect, actually does more damage to the argument in favor of Squiers because it apparently has nothing to do with how the guitar actually does the job it is intended for, as I understand it.

Or is the CV a sort of Virtual Guitar, picking up where Guitar Hero left off? :twisted:

Perceptive.And it does have a certain logic to it.Even in the US,American Fender prices seem to cause more sticker shock to today's buyers than their similarly or slightly-higher priced(in terms of absolute purchasing power) counterparts did from the '50s to the '70s.I said earlier that the offshore(including MIM) instruments are better than the Danelectros/Silvertones/Harmonys/Kays they displaced from the bottom-tier market,but I wonder whether the offshores' close to exact copying of American Fenders,combined with the offshores being dumped(unfairly,albeit legally) on the world market has had the effect of making them look better than they are,and making American Fenders appear overpriced when they really aren't.
FMIC is in the money business as much as the guitar business,and they went for the quick buck by licensing knockoffs,but it might have been healthier long term for the brand if the offshores had been designed to look noticeably different from the Americans,in body and headstock shape,pickup and switching configurations,et cetera.

Nice post.

I can see a steady increase in the cost of living where the nicest Squiers are made; at the moment FMIC can order CVs and price them as they have been doing but at some point the wholesale and consumer prices have to go up.

Meanwhile, for whatever reason or reasons, CVs are now being found on discount and that initial phenomenon of guys selling used CVs for nearly retail prices has run its course. Demand is losing its lead over supply and that's a real issue for FMIC in the near future. The impact of the CV was big, but it is subsiding now. IMO they're rolling out new models faster than they ought to be but I'm not sure they have a choice.

CV = Cult of Viral marketing

O.k., so after reading all of these great posts I'm really wondering now what to buy as my "First Tele." I've got $400 saved up, and really want to get one soon. I've considered the new CV Tele (around $350), and am also looking at the MIM Tele (closer to $500, new). However, I have recently come across a 2000-2001 MIM Tele that someone "refurbished." They sanded, repainted, clear coated, polished all the hardware, and added a new electro socket jack. It's a sweet little tele, and I may be able to get it under $400.

So, if you were me, what would you do? Wait till you had $500 for the new MIM, go ahead and buy the Squier CV, or seriously consider the refurbished MIM?

O.k., so after reading all of these great posts I'm really wondering now what to buy as my "First Tele." I've got $400 saved up, and really want to get one soon. I've considered the new CV Tele (around $350), and am also looking at the MIM Tele (closer to $500, new). However, I have recently come across a 2000-2001 MIM Tele that someone "refurbished." They sanded, repainted, clear coated, polished all the hardware, and added a new electro socket jack. It's a sweet little tele, and I may be able to get it under $400.

So, if you were me, what would you do? Wait till you had $500 for the new MIM, go ahead and buy the Squier CV, or seriously consider the refurbished MIM?

i'd try out the MIM's first for sure. i personally wouldn't spend $350 on a squier if i can stretch that a bit to get a good quality MIM.

O.k., so after reading all of these great posts I'm really wondering now what to buy as my "First Tele." I've got $400 saved up, and really want to get one soon. I've considered the new CV Tele (around $350), and am also looking at the MIM Tele (closer to $500, new). However, I have recently come across a 2000-2001 MIM Tele that someone "refurbished." They sanded, repainted, clear coated, polished all the hardware, and added a new electro socket jack. It's a sweet little tele, and I may be able to get it under $400.

So, if you were me, what would you do? Wait till you had $500 for the new MIM, go ahead and buy the Squier CV, or seriously consider the refurbished MIM?

If I were you..I wouldn't let any of this persuade you one way or the other..rather, I would try them all out or whatever options you have before you and see what axe speaks to you. At the end of the day..it doesn't matter what any of us think or prefer..your the one that has to play it :wink:

I have a cv tele custom and its superb.

Its as good as if not better than my mim tele std. Except the pickups could be better. Its an indonesian guitar though not a chinese one.

O.k., so after reading all of these great posts I'm really wondering now what to buy as my "First Tele." I've got $400 saved up, and really want to get one soon. I've considered the new CV Tele (around $350), and am also looking at the MIM Tele (closer to $500, new). However, I have recently come across a 2000-2001 MIM Tele that someone "refurbished." They sanded, repainted, clear coated, polished all the hardware, and added a new electro socket jack. It's a sweet little tele, and I may be able to get it under $400.

So, if you were me, what would you do? Wait till you had $500 for the new MIM, go ahead and buy the Squier CV, or seriously consider the refurbished MIM?

If you're patient you can find a used MIM at or under $300, then spend the rest of that money customizing it to your liking. I'm not sure, but at $500 you may be able to find a deal on a used Baja, Nashville, or Hwy1 (haven't checked used prices on those in a while though). As has been noted in this thread, both the CV and MIM have put out major duds so make sure you are able to play it before buying and get a feel that you like it.

Yeah Matty...you're right. I need to not get lost in any of the hype, but get what's right for me. I guess my only concern is the "longevity" of the Squiers. I want to make sure that whatever I get is going to last...it's not very often I have $500 lying around to purchase a new axe...know what I mean?

Thanks.

I like the CVs, and a lot of the other Squiers, cause they look cool, all vintage and retro-y, with cool personality. They are on their game right now.

To me, the Squiers have big-time shelf appeal and make me want to jam on them. Then you check out the price and think, heck, for $200 what do I have to lose? I'm currently dying to pick up a butterscotch tele for $120 off the used rack at GC.

Anyway, I'd like to see somebody tear open a MIM and a CV and compare the quality of the pots and switches. Has anybody done that on here? I don't have a MIM to compare.

Yeah Matty...you're right. I need to not get lost in any of the hype, but get what's right for me. I guess my only concern is the "longevity" of the Squiers. I want to make sure that whatever I get is going to last...it's not very often I have $500 lying around to purchase a new axe...know what I mean?

Thanks.

I can assure you that none of these guitars will desolve in your hands over time..perhaps a refret or pup change as time goes on...but they will last if you respect them. By the time your axe is ready for the grave..Im sure your own personal situation will have changed many many times over :wink:

I can assure you that none of these guitars will desolve in your hands over time..perhaps a refret or pup change as time goes on...but they will last if you respect them. By the time your axe is ready for the grave..Im sure your own personal situation will have changed many many times over :wink:

Musicmatty,

A side note...I just noticed you're in Germantown, MD. I've got in-laws (or should I say out-laws :smile:) in Baltimore, the Eastern shore, and Dundalk. Have you ever gone over to tour the PRS factory on Kent Island? I did it two summers ago, and it was fantastic.

Musicmatty,

A side note...I just noticed you're in Germantown, MD. I've got in-laws (or should I say out-laws :smile:) in Baltimore, the Eastern shore, and Dundalk. Have you ever gone over to tour the PRS factory on Kent Island? I did it two summers ago, and it was fantastic.


Boy this is funny..my ex-wife was from Georgia and I have been to kennesaw GA..but I've never seen the PRS factory up here. However, I did use a PRS about 10yrs ago for a song I wrote when I recorded it..just a small lead near the end of the tune..a nice sounding axe :wink:

ypKCwM7gU40

O.k., so after reading all of these great posts I'm really wondering now what to buy as my "First Tele." I've got $400 saved up, and really want to get one soon. I've considered the new CV Tele (around $350), and am also looking at the MIM Tele (closer to $500, new). However, I have recently come across a 2000-2001 MIM Tele that someone "refurbished." They sanded, repainted, clear coated, polished all the hardware, and added a new electro socket jack. It's a sweet little tele, and I may be able to get it under $400.

So, if you were me, what would you do? Wait till you had $500 for the new MIM, go ahead and buy the Squier CV, or seriously consider the refurbished MIM?

Depends....If you're playing recreationally the CV or the used MIM will do fine.If you're doing it (or want to do it) for money on a regular basis,it's a good idea to bite the price bullet and go American.

I'm blinking my eyes. I'll read this one more time.

++

Ok.

I've expressed a lot of positive things about the CV range, especially some of the CV Thinlines I've played.

But your review, with all due respect, actually does more damage to the argument in favor of Squiers because it apparently has nothing to do with how the guitar actually does the job it is intended for, as I understand it.

Or is the CV a sort of Virtual Guitar, picking up where Guitar Hero left off? :twisted:

You guys and your 'internet hype' paranoia. :lol: Has anyone noticed that when someone says "with all due respect" there's usually very little proffered? :wink:

I never said that the Squier was made better or of better materials than any higher end guitars I own or have owned (or anyone else's for that matter) but that it plays and feels on the same level as all of them and better than some.

Now, by my own admission, the guitar had not been plugged in yet (it was late and I'm apartment bound in NYC) but don't tell me that you've never had a guitar just sing in your hands when you pulled it off the wall, and you knew that there was something going on there. Ok - "nearly acoustic loud" was the beer talking a little bit, but it has a beautifully loud and ringing tone to it unplugged that sustains much like my neck-through-body Carvin that I can hit a note on, go make coffee, drink the coffee and smoke a cigarette, and then finish the note with. Oh, wait...does that bit of 'hype' damage Carvin? :mrgreen: That's always been one of the standards I judge my electrics by. If it doesn't have good ring and sustain unplugged, the pickups are only polishing a turd anyway.

What about it doing its intended job could my "honeymoon" review cause damage to? It is known that the neck pickup is a little weaker than the bridge. Not in dispute. Some people have issue with that, some don't. It is known that the electronics are a bit lower quality than in the higher models. Duh, for $329, not in dispute. Some people swap them out, some don't.

The build quality of the guitar is rock solid, far above the Affinity Tele's that I've picked up, and the CVC looks/feels on par with my current MIM Tele, which rivals most of the MIA's I've played. The neck and fretwork are gorgeous. No rough edges coming off the fretboard, neck is fast and plays like butter. Some people aren't crazy about the poly on the back of the neck when they start to sweat, some people don't mind it. I don't mind it. The finish is spectacular, what I'd expect of a guitar costing twice or three times as much. Not what I'd expect on a guitar that cost me $329 out the door (shipped to my door) brand spanking new.

The morning after: she's still there, I didn't sneak out the door, she still looks good, I'm still in love after playing around with her some more.

Depends....If you're playing recreationally the CV or the used MIM will do fine.If you're doing it (or want to do it) for money on a regular basis,it's a good idea to bite the price bullet and go American.

The guy in this video does it for a living and plays that Japanese reissue in the video. He told me he also owns a cheap PRS copy. He's a highly regarded guitarist here in Canada and makes his living playing. His amp is an old solid state yamaha.
One night while I was at his house talking gear with him, the differences between us were quite evident. While I seemed preoccupied with the great gear I owned, he regarded them as tools. All his equipment together couldn't buy one of my guitars. Yet he plays like I wish I could. I realize it doesn't matter whether its Japanese, Mexican, made in China or American. He could make a living with any of them.

BQnhQ0qDmlE

I like the CVs, and a lot of the other Squiers, cause they look cool, all vintage and retro-y, with cool personality. They are on their game right now.

To me, the Squiers have big-time shelf appeal and make me want to jam on them. Then you check out the price and think, heck, for $200 what do I have to lose? I'm currently dying to pick up a butterscotch tele for $120 off the used rack at GC.

Anyway, I'd like to see somebody tear open a MIM and a CV and compare the quality of the pots and switches. Has anybody done that on here? I don't have a MIM to compare.

Even the MIM standard has CTS pots and at least as good of switches in them, the same components of a MIA standard. So you cant compare the CV line to the MIM as far as guts go. The electrical components of the MIMs are top notch for sure which I cant say about the CV's. I am by no means saying this justifies the higher price because you can replace it on the CV's for cheap I am just answering this mans question...

welcome to a free market global economy.


boycotting a product because of where it is made is ridiculous; it's capitalism 101. someone is making a product that rivals another product but can make it at 1/2 the cost. what does that mean? it means the US have to update their standards so they can make similar products at the same cost. competition is not a bad thing unless we approach it in a way that we shut them out.

their guitars are great. I would put their classic vibe series on par with Japanese Fenders which I like more than the American series (unless you get into the really pricey stuff like the AVRI).

Even the MIM standard has CTS pots and at least as good of switches in them, the same components of a MIA standard. So you cant compare the CV line to the MIM as far as guts go. The electrical components of the MIMs are top notch for sure which I cant say about the CV's. I am by no means saying this justifies the higher price because you can replace it on the CV's for cheap I am just answering this mans question...



Thanks! Do we know that the CVs have the lesser electronics typical of Squiers? I've never opened mine up.

Actually, searching classic vibe volume pot has turned up a few pictures and threads - seems like the CV does have lesser electronics than the MIM, so there is that to consider.

The guy in this video does it for a living and plays that Japanese reissue in the video. He told me he also owns a cheap PRS copy. He's a highly regarded guitarist here in Canada and makes his living playing. His amp is an old solid state yamaha.
One night while I was at his house talking gear with him, the differences between us were quite evident. While I seemed preoccupied with the great gear I owned, he regarded them as tools. All his equipment together couldn't buy one of my guitars. Yet he plays like I wish I could. I realize it doesn't matter whether its Japanese, Mexican, made in China or American. He could make a living with any of them.

BQnhQ0qDmlE

That is some marvellous playing,indeed.Thanks for posting the vid...You're right,he could make a living playing a Teisco Del Rey or a Harmony Stratotone.Right again about talent and practice,not high-end gear,making a great player like he is.But low-end gear won't make you good,either.
What low-end gear,especially from Communist China WILL do for you is give you a pretty good non-professional rig,and an inexpensive entree into the world of radical-chic.I think Fender China is missing out by not producing a Che Guevara/Mao Tse-Tung signature model.They'd sell everywhere English is spoken.

Amazing some of the egos and opinions in this thread.

A guitar is a guitar, either it sounds good or it doesn't. We're talking about 2 pieces of wood screwed together. It's not rocket science, there's no magic tone dust that gets sprinkled on MIA guitars.

They're just guitars, they don't know where they come from. A label is just a sticker glued to the wood.

I've owned and played awesome MIA guitars. I've also owned and played MIA junk.

Same for MIM and MIC. And at the end of the day it's what you can do with a guitar that matters. The rest is just opinions.

Comments like "non-professional rig" and "no pro would play a squier on stage" are just laughable.

A good guitar is a good guitar. It doesn't matter where it comes from.

Amazing some of the egos and opinions in this thread.

A guitar is a guitar, either it sounds good or it doesn't. We're talking about 2 pieces of wood screwed together. It's not rocket science, there's no magic tone dust that gets sprinkled on MIA guitars.

They're just guitars, they don't know where they come from. A label is just a sticker glued to the wood.

I've owned and played awesome MIA guitars. I've also owned and played MIA junk.

Same for MIM and MIC. And at the end of the day it's what you can do with a guitar that matters. The rest is just opinions.

Comments like "non-professional rig" and "no pro would play a squier on stage" are just laughable.

A good guitar is a good guitar. It doesn't matter where it comes from.
So would YOU buy a Che Guevara signature Squier?

Mmmmm.I bought a Blacktop Strat yesterday MIM.Nice player ,decent tones ,nice guitar ...ecept it had a weird routing to the whammy block area .There was route where there should have been wood .The bridge was also slightly at an angle .Couldnt find another strat with the offending hole in question so I took it back .Its not that its a non player,its trivial really , but if I come to sell it ,it has a defect .great pity.It also didnt stay in tune at all due to worse case of nut clench I have ever come across.The headstock string butterfly had no spacer so jammed the strings hard against the surface of the headstock .I should have looked harder when I bought it .When the whammy bar or heavy bends were use it pinged like crazy at the slots .No great problem but I would like a talk with the guilty Mexican who signed this one off on the tag .in the end I changed it for PRS SE... like you do . Very disappointed .This is the second MIM I have had a problem with .No great issues all solvable but all there and As I can repair my own gear no problem .The PRS is perfect and except for a nut clench on the G string which again I quickly cured no problems .Its just stayed in tune for 3 hours hard playing and bending .So far my CV Strat is fine and was frankly better quality overall than the MIM .I must admit that I really like My PRS SE hollowbody with P90's so it all did me a favour .For my Blacktop project ,I think a CV strat with a new humbucker pickguard and a super switch would be a better bet frankly .Great pity .

[
Same for MIM and MIC. And at the end of the day it's what you can do with a guitar that matters. The rest is just opinions.

Comments like "non-professional rig" and "no pro would play a squier on stage" are just laughable.
A good guitar is a good guitar. It doesn't matter where it comes from.[/QUOTE]

Plain & simple truth in your statement. :wink:

An short answer to the initial question; Yes.

That is some marvellous playing,indeed.Thanks for posting the vid...You're right,he could make a living playing a Teisco Del Rey or a Harmony Stratotone.Right again about talent and practice,not high-end gear,making a great player like he is.But low-end gear won't make you good,either.
What low-end gear,especially from Communist China WILL do for you is give you a pretty good non-professional rig,and an inexpensive entree into the world of radical-chic.I think Fender China is missing out by not producing a Che Guevara/Mao Tse-Tung signature model.They'd sell everywhere English is spoken.

Only among the clueless mindlessly consumerist Western university students who know very little about Marxists/Maoists, Che, and Mao. Incidentally, one of the best ways to piss on Che's and Mao's graves and turn them into renewable electric generators IS to plaster their faces on consumer goods like T-shirts, buttons, and especially signature electric guitars and encourage their purchase. I'm all for it for that very reason. :mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

Most of the actually radical left-Marxist/Maoists I knew at my college would regard someone wearing such T-shirts/buttons as "bourgeois capitalist poseurs" and sometimes even fly into rage at seeing a "Revolutionary hero" being "reduced" into a mass consumer product being marketed by capitalist firms like Fender/Squier.

So would YOU buy a Che Guevara signature Squier?

I'd play a Hello Kitty guitar if it felt good and sounded good. All I care about is the sound that goes into people ears and whether the guitar is set up well.

The rest is nit-picking.

I'd play a Hello Kitty guitar if it felt good and sounded good. All I care about is the sound that goes into people ears and whether the guitar is set up well.

The rest is nit-picking.

Here's a demonstration:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::
5Nh0hvTiCPo

Incidentally, the sound he gets from that guitar and amp sounds almost identical to the "rattling cheap tin garbage cans" sound I get out of my Squier champ 15. :mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

Most of the actually radical left-Marxist/Maoists I knew at my college would regard someone wearing such T-shirts/buttons as "bourgeois capitalist poseurs" and sometimes even fly into rage at seeing a "Revolutionary hero" being "reduced" into a mass consumer product being marketed by capitalist firms like Fender/Squier.[/QUOTE]

Now THAT'S ideological purity! Realpolitik says "Capitalist poseur"="useful idiot"....

We seem to be tobogganing down that slippery political slope again.Sorry,mods.I just couldn't resist:lol:

Im nearly 50 years old and been around guitars at least 35 years, learnt on creations that made my fingers bleed, learned to raise the actions of those 'beasts' with beermats, and I've just realised that I've been a victim of 'internet hype' by some inscrutable Chinese fella's regarding my CV 50's. The indoctrination must be really strong here in Wales because a friend who has CV P-bass says he prefers it to playing a Fender one from 1961 the year of our birth. Of course the guy who informed me about the internet hype has double my posts on this forum, he's been here one month I've been here two years. It must be my age! Now where did I put that darned guitar?

5Nh0hvTiCPo

OMG this is the tone I have been looking for, a million mods later and all I had to do was buy this.. Oh wait no it must be in the fingers you cant box this kind of eargasm....


On a serious note this could be the soundtrack in hell...:twisted::twisted::twisted: :twisted::twisted::twisted:

That's pretty bad.

Though I always pictured the soundtrack in hell being 20 teenage kids with out of tune guitars, attempting to play the 'Sweet Child O' Mine' intro over and over for eternity.

Or you know.........Guitar Center.

Standard of Excellence?......No.

Standard of the 80's Japan Squiers......No.

Getting better than they have been for the last 20 years.....Yes.


Across the lineup Squiers don't stand up to MIA or even MIM Fenders.

A Squier Bullet Strat isn't as good as an MIM Standard Strat.

A Squier Affinity Tele isn't as good as a Nashville or HWY 1 Tele.

A Squier CV isn't as good as a Baja or AVRI 52.


The definition of Excellence = superiority.

And the Squier line is in no way superior to the MIM or MIA lines.



In your humble opinion.

Are you saying the majority of bands you've seen who rock teles are in fact squiers and not 'real' fenders then?


No, I'm just saying your post is just as subjective as the guy who says CV's are the best Tele's ever.

If you want to buy American made anything it's very hard. Look at the label on your Levis, your T shirt, your shoes, socks etc..Where is it made?

I am fully aware my country is guilty for that too.:twisted:
Please allow me to mention that Squier Jazzmaster & Jaguar are CII, Crafted in Indonesia guitars, belonging in Squier`s Vintage Modified series. They look like MIC CV`s in finish, though.:shock:

Myself i own a 2TSB Jazzmaster. Very good, we in Sweden are aware of quality & price worthy products. We manufacture products of very high quality which are expensive, and export it in masse, despite our strong currency. How come?:cool:

I can understand some of points OP has said. I own/have owned many guitars and basses made in USA. Fenders and Gibsons. Very good stuff.
But competitors from Asia are improving fast. The Japanese have been excellent over 30 years, others will not need much more than a couple of years time.:neutral::neutral:

When I bought my CV, it just felt like a good, solid (a bit heavy) Tele. The pickups are good and the workmanship is as good as Fender is (mass) producing thesedays in Mexico. And, since you can never have too many Teles, I took it home. It's just a good Tele. Not fantastic - not AS or CS level, by any stretch, but very good. And, very inexpensive. In all fairness, the neck is a bit slim for my taste, but on the edge of being OK. I sure can't replace it for the $300 I paid for it.

I would have to respectfully disagree as well.

Although the quality of the Squier line has improved tremendously over the past few years, I feel that the MIM Fenders are the best overall quality guitars in the Fender line up. You are always going to find guitars made in all the Fender plants that have minor quality control issues, but to me the Mexico plant makes the most consistanly fine instruments.

The last three guitars I have purchased have all been MIM guitars. Great value for the money, but most importantly, the best bang for the buck.


...to this far. I have 3 MIM`s, a Baja Tele BSB, which needed some tweaking, but it is very nice after that. :roll::grin: Precision Bass Standard LPB and Classic 60`s Strat 3TSB are perfectly assembled and great playing & sounding instruments straight from the box.:grin:

OK, my next post will be about Squiers, I promise! After all, i have 6 of them, 5 good, one so-and-so. Will get more of them.

Quick edit: All 4 MIA Fenders i have owned we`re good, despite some quirks, but nothing some tweaking could not cure.:cool:

Amazing some of the egos and opinions in this thread.

A guitar is a guitar, either it sounds good or it doesn't. We're talking about 2 pieces of wood screwed together. It's not rocket science, there's no magic tone dust that gets sprinkled on MIA guitars.

They're just guitars, they don't know where they come from. A label is just a sticker glued to the wood.

I've owned and played awesome MIA guitars. I've also owned and played MIA junk.

Same for MIM and MIC. And at the end of the day it's what you can do with a guitar that matters. The rest is just opinions.

Comments like "non-professional rig" and "no pro would play a squier on stage" are just laughable.

A good guitar is a good guitar. It doesn't matter where it comes from.



Ah, the voice of reason. Your comments make more sense than most of the replies in this thread (including mine!).

Unfortunately, the argument will go on, it's been discussed before, and before. Always the same arguments, People on both sides are convinced they are correct and the people on the other side are nuts.

When I read this thread, I picture two posters arguing with the following words:

"Did too" "Did not" "Did too" "Did not"

It has been pointed out before but this thread asked the question of whether Squier is becoming the standard of excellence for Fender or words to that effect.

Because the answer for some is a resounding no, people get offended and cite egos, and "opinions" etc. etc.

This is ridiculous.

Squier is a good guitar - for some a great guitar - but still a guitar made by Cort or whoever for Fender, truly en masse. Chinese or Indonesian origins have nothing to do with my own belief that they are NOT the standard of excellence for Fender. Fit, finish, electronics, action, sound, intonation, feel...these are my criteria.

I have played a Squier on stage and on record for many years - I don't have any brand snobbery. I simply like guitars and have grown to appreciate their qualities over the years. It would be great if there was a Squier plant and a Squier tradition but there isn't, not in the way that there's a Fender factory in the States. Does that make them (Squiers) automatically bad guitars? No. Do I get a sense of maybe less of a caring maker's hand than American Fenders? Yes.

There's some wildly contradictory stuff coming from the Squier camp though... Apparently Fenders are by nature cheap and basic cranked out by a big standardized CNC machine. Okay, explain why there are duds and beauties... That's odd. Shouldn't they all be equally fantastic?

There is a magic and a craft or science to really good - as in excellent - guitars and I'm not going to bore anyone (including myself) by explaining what that magic is. If the Squier name is getting affixed to the type of quality guitars once associated with the Pro Tone series or the JV series (or Silver Series) and they're even cheaper, that's great.

Standard of excellence for Fender? :roll: Sorry.

I admit that alot of my comments come from my decision to not own MIC guitar stuff. That is a choice I have made for reasons other than the MIC guitars are junk. Of course they are not junk, lots of good folks on this forum and others are saying the CV's are great. I do not doubt these folks.

But I still maintain that in my experience MIA Fenders have never let me down when gigging. Good stability and good sounding electronics and USA guitars seem to have a heft, a quality that I just can't put my finger on. I can't say the same for some of the Squiers I have spent time with. But recent Squiers have changed but I was not totally blown away with the CV's I played in the various music shops. Just my opinion.

But in the end it is about what make a person happy. For some it is buying that new CV and for myself it choosing not to. Neither is wrong.

For some of us, well me anyway, it is hard to accept that a real good Fender copy can be made elsewhere than the USA. sigh...

But honestly a question for the CV owners, would you actually choose a CV over a nice playing MIA if they cost the same? Who knows, the way things are going, 20 years form now the Chinese and the American worker might make the same wage.

I admit that alot of my comments come from my decision to not own MIC guitar stuff. That is a choice I have made for reasons other than the MIC guitars are junk. Of course they are not junk, lots of good folks on this forum and others are saying the CV's are great. I do not doubt these folks.

But I still maintain that in my experience MIA Fenders have never let me down when gigging. Good stability and good sounding electronics and USA guitars seem to have a heft, a quality that I just can't put my finger on. I can't say the same for some of the Squiers I have spent time with. But recent Squiers have changed but I was not totally blown away with the CV's I played in the various music shops. Just my opinion.

But in the end it is about what make a person happy. For some it is buying that new CV and for myself it choosing not to. Neither is wrong.

For some of us, well me anyway, it is hard to accept that a real good Fender copy can be made elsewhere than the USA. sigh...

But honestly a question for the CV owners, would you actually choose a CV over a nice playing MIA if they cost the same? Who knows, the way things are going, 20 years form now the Chinese and the American worker might make the same wage.


Honestly, I did. I bought a new 52RI a few years ago, I never bonded with it. Sold it. Got my CVC over a year ago, the honeymoon is still on, I'll never sell it.

Money was not, and is not the issue, I just like the CVC better. Maybe I got lucky, it was one of the first ones. Not many pictures in this thread so, Here is my CVC!

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m95/1977cj5/cvcustom.jpg

20 years form now the Chinese and the American worker might make the same wage.

Likely what the Chinese worker makes now.

Likely what the Chinese worker makes now.

:lol:

Good stability and good sounding electronics and USA guitars seem to have a heft, a quality that I just can't put my finger on.

This is actually very eloquent. Very well put. I know exactly what you're talking about.

"Let me remind you we are making cheap inexpensive guitars here ! Quit your
talking and get back to work!"

guitar shop supervisor somewhere in asia

Pretty sure no one here is talking about 2003 Squiers.

Fomomo was commenting somebody saying he has a 2003 Squier Tele, but his AmStd blows it out of water.

Yes, i have a 2003 Squier Std Strat, and my Fender 60s Classic Strat blows it out of water too. But it is 2011 now, it do NOT blow out a 2009 CV 50s Strat.
They are only slightly different, as they should, but close to equal guitars. Frankly, i am not sure which is better, and i don`t care.:cool:

My VM Jazzmaster is, as The OP says, a remarkable guitar!:twisted:
It`s built in 22nd Oct 2010. Something is happening.:shock:

When the Chinese and Japanese and whoever else invents anything to equal or surpass Leo's design y'all wake me up, OK? I'm not disputing the manufacturing ability of any of these countries. Just waiting on them to give the world something original.

I might also add for what it is worth that "buying American" still means something where I come from. I can't put a dollar value on that.

http://i102.photobucket.com/albums/m95/1977cj5/cvcustom.jpg


This sure is a beautiful looking guitar. Nice photo!

None of my guitars are high end at all..if I had to make a ball park guess..all 4 of them together would amount to $1500. Yankee dollars. But the notion that these are not playable..gigable..get layedable is laughable :lol:

The 100 proof is in the Bottle below..someone tourch this thread and send it on it's way :lol::lol:



8o7SIjCHsSY

No, I'm just saying your post is just as subjective as the guy who says CV's are the best Tele's ever.

what did i say that was even remotely subjective? i don't think anyone here will disagree that most active gigging musicians play fenders, not squiers. thats just a fact. hardly subjective at all. i'm sure the CV is a pretty nice guitar but thats just how it is.

thats not even CLOSE to saying "oh i bought a squier. wow its the best guitar ever. better than MIA/MIMs for sure. most MIA/MIMS need set up. this squier did not. therefore squiers are better"

Was Buddy playing a Squier on that one? :twisted:

Sorry brother, I couldn't resist, no harm intended. Peace... it's gonna all be good :smile:

what did i say that was even remotely subjective? i don't think anyone here will disagree that most active gigging musicians play fenders, not squiers. thats just a fact. hardly subjective at all. i'm sure the CV is a pretty nice guitar but thats just how it is.


A fact that may be just as much a product of heavy cork sniffing peer pressure from fellow musicians in many venues as the perceived superiority of the Fenders from what I've overheard from many musicians at many gigging venues and from friends who are gigging musicians.

However, a few have made it a point to play Squiers partially as a way of giving a finger to the brand snobs in their own communities. In fact, I did remember one indie/punk band guitarist gigging a stock Squier Affinity Strat partially for that expressed purpose as well as for the sounds.

Personally, I have heard and noticed that Fender/Squier quality has improved all around over the last few years. A great demonstration of that was when a professional guitarist/bass player A/Bed his 2003 MIM Strat with my 2008-9 Strats and we both agreed that the neck and general feel was superior on the post-2008 strats.

Was Buddy playing a Squier on that one? :twisted:

Sorry brother, I couldn't resist, no harm intended. Peace... it's gonna all be good :smile:

Better question. Would Joe Strummer insist on an MIA or would he also be willing to play an MIM or Squier?

Okay, for the argument that most gigging players are using fenders.

Most of us saying CV squires are great guitars AND gigable are pointing to a guitar that has been out 2 years. Of COURSE the majority is Fender, they have had over 40+ years to build up a clientele with that product. CV Squires have had 2 years and a bad/not so good/beginners rep to get over on top.

In my opinion, another non sensical argument.



I'm impressed Boris, you can admire a guitar you wouldn't purchase for your own convictions (which is fair enough enough I guess :wink: ) and compliment it. Nice!

Actually this leads me to another point, most of us non American posters have had 99% of all production ripped from our shores years ago. Made in (insert obscure country here) generally means little to us, we are WELL used to it.

Yes, I am sure we would try and support our own manufactered product given the chance (price and quality differences notwithstanding) but we were left with zero choice in that matter.

I suspect eventually the US will slowly eqaulise at a sustainable manufacturing level due to its massive internal market size, hopefully that level is not what the majority of the rest of us have had to accept!

Okay, for the argument that most gigging players are using fenders.

Most of us saying CV squires are great guitars AND gigable are pointing to a guitar that has been out 2 years. Of COURSE the majority is Fender, they have had over 40+ years to build up a clientele with that product. CV Squires have had 2 years and a bad/not so good/beginners rep to get over on top.

In my opinion, another non sensical argument.


except you're talking about one specific squier guitar. if thats the ONLY 'good' squier in the lineup, then basically this whole thread is moot and squier is clearly not the 'standard of excellence'

When the Chinese and Japanese and whoever else invents anything to equal or surpass Leo's design y'all wake me up, OK? I'm not disputing the manufacturing ability of any of these countries. Just waiting on them to give the world something original.



They are making American Instruments. They also have their own ... a few thousand year history of making instruments, most of which you will have never heard of.

Now consider that China is 20% of the world. Far more people know about Guqins and Erhus than Teles. :grin:

The belief that one's own culture is somehow superior to another's is the road to ruin if we open the history books...

Tar is Persian for "String" (the origin of the word "guitar" is Middle Eastern) ... Leo got his ideas from what the Iraqis invented :mrgreen:.

Actually CV is a line of guitars/basses. To a lesser degree (finish not quite as good) are the VM's.

That is 10-20+ different models......

The belief that one's own culture is somehow superior to another's is the road to ruin if we open the history books...
Thank you for being one of the few on this thread who have a perspective more than four inches wide. Or perhaps I should say "more than 100 mm wide", since the USA is just about the last country to still be mired in the use of ancient and completely illogical Imperial units. :mrgreen:

I'm pretty amazed that here in the USA a significant majority of people - and an overwhelming majority of guitarists - still use the phrase "Made in China" as a pejorative, even while many of the same people sing the praises of Apple's iPhone as the pinnacle of technological achievement. I'm sure those people, convinced Apple is the top of the technology tree, never stop to wonder where exactly the iPhone is made. Yup, you guessed right, it's made in China!

So, apparently, Chinese workers in Chinese factories are somehow able to put together this premium-quality, extremely complicated electronic device with a thousand tiny little parts in it, but the same people haven't quite figured out how to screw together two bits of wood, paint them, and string some some metal wires over them.

And yes, Fenders don't have bolt-on necks, they have screw-on necks. Those are wood-screws, not bolts! While there is some ambiguity between the definition some types of bolts and some types of screws, there is no ambiguity in the case of a wood screw: "An externally threaded fastener that has thread form which prohibits assembly with a nut having a straight thread of multiple pitch length is a screw. (Example: wood screws, tapping screws.)"

Back to the quality of Fenders and Squires, all I can say is that personally, I'm not interested in expensive guitars for their snob value. I'm interested in guitars that feel and sound good to me, and that I can buy with cash I already have in my pocket (no credit purchases for me), so the lower the price, the better, if it sounds and plays the same.

With that mindset, last year I spent some time trying various Fender and Squier guitars from roughly the $100 price point up to roughly $500. I didn't like any of the Fenders priced up to $500, so I also looked at Fenders up to $1000 or so, though I wasn't keen to spend that much unless I found something exceptional.

Well, I found out I strongly did not like the feel of the $100 Affinity Squires that many people do like, and I also didn't like the feel of any of the $350 CV series Squires. I didn't like the sound or feel *any* of the Fenders I tried, period, all the way up to that $1000 self-imposed upper limit.

Finally I stumbled across a Squier Standard Strat for $230 that fired most of the right neurons in my brain. It's neck was a little thinner and a little narrower than I prefer, just like every other Fender/Squier product I've ever tried, and the three-piece body had rather poorly matched grain that showed through the translucent finish. But the frets felt good, the neck was straight and smooth and very playable despite the cramped width and thickness, and the guitar sounded good.

So that's the one that went home with me, and it's the only one from the "Brand F" side of electric guitar design that I own. In my tiny universe of one, then, the best under $1000 guitar Fender makes is - a Squire.

But then I'm Gnobuddy, and I Gnow Gnothing, so I'll leave it to the experts to prove that $5000 made in America guitars will always be superior to everything made anywhere else on the planet. :mrgreen:

-Gnobuddy

The belief that one's own culture is somehow superior to another's is the road to ruin if we open the history books...

That's a nice little tidbit, but nobody said anything even remotely like that. Even those of us who try to purchase 'Made in USA' goods when possible never said anything remotely bad about another culture or about ours being superior.

So, apparently, Chinese workers in Chinese factories are somehow able to put together this premium-quality, extremely complicated electronic device with a thousand tiny little parts in it, but the same people haven't quite figured out how to screw together two bits of wood, paint them, and string some some metal wires over them.




I don't see what's the problem here. I don't think the phones' assembly requires any knowledge of how it is to be used. And there's no evidence folks over here understand or make better use of this brand new product, than folks where it is assembled. ( And my cellphone is an old one made in mexico :twisted: as you might have guessed ).

But I personally think a musical instrument can't get past a certain threshold unless the assemblers "speaks the language" of music in a very sophisticated way. It may seem to some that this is just bits and pieces but that view is, in my opinion, an insult to the remarkably gifted people who create the fewer in number guitars that at least some of us aspire to in the most desperate way.

Things can and do get lost in translation when the product is redacted over and over, by industrial engineers and non guitar players. In some ways what we have in the Cvs is a snapshot of a guitar, and some guys are good with that and some never will be happy with that. This is where the rubber meets the road, IMO.

The belief that one's own culture is somehow superior to another's is the road to ruin if we open the history books...



America's culture is the difference between being able to pay the bills and being impoverished in material terms like many other cultures are.

You can call it arrogance, but confidence in the worth of one's own culture can bring happiness and it appears to me it is this confidence that made the USA the dream of so many who are outside its borders. To take away this sense of superiority or whatever you want to call it, creates more peril for the USA and its residents than if all our guns and bombs suddenly vanished into space.

I may heave involuntarily at the thought of Madonna or Michael Jackson but the fact is, they pay the rent.

But I personally think a musical instrument can't get past a certain threshold unless the assemblers "speaks the language" of music in a very sophisticated way.


Apart from Skub's posts there's some tripe on this thread, but that is the biggest load yet.

Are you suggesting that Western music is superior to Eastern? That a tone deaf American (or more likely, migrant) worker at Corona can put together a better guitar than a Chinese worker in Beijing who's a virtuoso yeqin player? That to build a guitar one must be a musician? Or what?

Tar is Persian for "String" (the origin of the word "guitar" is Middle Eastern) ... Leo got his ideas from what the Iraqis invented :mrgreen:.

Well, not to pick nits, but it would have been the Iranians... :mrgreen:

America's culture is the difference between being able to pay the bills and being impoverished in material terms like many other cultures are.

You can call it arrogance, but confidence in the worth of one's own culture can bring happiness and it appears to me it is this confidence that made the USA the dream of so many who are outside its borders. To take away this sense of superiority or whatever you want to call it, creates more peril for the USA and its residents than if all our guns and bombs suddenly vanished into space.

I may heave involuntarily at the thought of Madonna or Michael Jackson but the fact is, they pay the rent.

I wouldn't call it arrogance, I would call it ethnocentrism. I don't really know why people are so afraid that we're losing our culture or identity...isn't the American ideal one of progression and evolution?

Apart from Skub's posts there's some tripe on this thread, but that is the biggest load yet.

Are you suggesting that Western music is superior to Eastern? That a tone deaf American (or more likely, migrant) worker at Corona can put together a better guitar than a Chinese worker in Beijing who's a virtuoso yeqin player? That to build a guitar one must be a musician? Or what?

Oh yeah, don't forget the part where Leo Fender wasn't a guitar player. Nor were most of his workers.

Apart from Skub's posts there's some tripe on this thread, but that is the biggest load yet.

Are you suggesting that Western music is superior to Eastern? That a tone deaf American (or more likely, migrant) worker at Corona can put together a better guitar than a Chinese worker in Beijing who's a virtuoso yeqin player? That to build a guitar one must be a musician? Or what?

Give me a break.

Read the post again without the attitude.

The post clearly is about the state of mind and the perspective the of the USA buyer and player and consumers everywhere who buy in to the USA dream.

The post has NOTHING to do with what is intrinsically "better" or "superior". That sort of discussion is fine but it is IMO just a distraction. And none of my concern. You are free to like or dislike any type of music as you see fit but you are not free to pretend that the USA and the 6 string electric guitar are not joined at the hip. Playing a yegin does not have anything whatsoever to do with understanding the distinction between a $ 275 import guitar and a hand made custom USA guitar assembled by a USA based person who has been immersed in the product and its supporting culture for most of his life. That does not make that person or his culture "better" it just means he/it is better suited for the task at hand. Experience of the right type is worthwhile.

Now that you understand my point, am I still wrong? :neutral:

This is the type of thread that'll go on forever. I read a bunch of posts (not all) until this point and there is one important fact that I did not see mentioned: Squier guitars (of which I own a few) are made to a price point.

This is so of many of the mass produced Korean and Chinese built instruments made as 2nd line, lower-priced, versions of similar appearing American makes including Squier/Fender and Epiphone/Gibson.

Because Gibson guitars are more traditional in construction the 'price-point' manufacturing changes between them and the Epis are more obvious and more interesting. These include the use of a single plastic overlay to the headstock that mimics the appearance of the traditional inlays on the Gibson. That can be seen here:

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af5/Don_Sucher/Headstocks.jpg

Because Fender guitars broke the luthier-built tradition from the git go with the use of bolt on necks, solid bodies and sprayed on paint instead of a hand applied multi-stepped finish, the cost saving methodologies used to make a Squier are often more subtle but they are there none the less.

On a Fender Stratocaster each PU is individually hung from the pickguard. On my Squier Affinity Strat however that is not the case. Viewed from above the pickguard and PUs look like just any Strat, but remove the guard and flipping it over reveals something very different. The PUs and pickguard are totally different from the standard Fender design and would not be interchangeable.

The design of the Tele is so basic that finding cheaper ways to make it is more challenging. The replacement of the through-body strings with some simple holes in the backplate was available however and that was done.

My observation having owned many American Gibson and Korean Epis and numerous American Fenders and Chinese-built Squiers is that there is a difference between them. This has nothing to do with the skill and capability of each nation's workers - it goes deeper to the very purpose of making the foreign made instruments available: Lower prices.

No two instruments are alike nor are any two musicians. There are good guitarists who have great working relationships with these less expensive instruments. I have had several that I enjoy owning and using. But the changes made were in almost every case a compromise. In the end I have found my relationships with American-built Gibsons and Fenders more satisfying. And frankly I think that is what the manufacturers intended.

-don

Robin Trower, Peter Green, and Jeff Heally would disagree..:shock:

I've seen Trower twice in the last 5 years. Looked like the Robin Trower signature Strat and an older Fender Strat he was playing and I was pretty close. Did he say something in an interview about Squires?

Are you saying the majority of bands you've seen who rock teles are in fact squiers and not 'real' fenders then?

You know CVs have been out like 2 years and almost everyone in a touring band has been playing guitar way longer than that right and already owned guitars and picked their favorite guitars and possibly are like you and think it's uncool to play a guitar unless you have seen a bunch of people already play it?

You can get great North American built guitars in the $500 range these days if you buy a Godin (or any of their other lines like Seagull, Simon & Patrick, Art & Lutherie, LaPatrie, Norman, and Richmond). Their guitars are of excellent quality.

If I was to buy a $400 Epiphone acoustic it would be made in China somewhere and, from my experiences with other Epi products, would be of questionable quality. However, if I buy a $400 acoustic from any line in the Godin family I will be getting a quality instrument that was made right here in Canada (they have three factories in Canada and one in new Hampshire).

If Godin can produce such high quality instruments (both acoustics and electrics) and sell them for the prices that they do, why can't the other North American companies do the same? Why do they have to farm production out to Asia?

Those Godin lines are the craziest by the way, right? The quality is just insane for the money, awesome guitars, total anomaly that they're made in N.A. and so cheap.

I haven't considered buying a USA-made Fender since the old model Highway 1 Teles were 500 bucks new. IMHO, there has since always been much better quality/price values to be found in CIJ's.

More recently, I bought one of the very early Squier CV50's & I still love it 2/+ years later & after very heavy use. It was purchased to be converted into an Esquire, and it's been a fine gigging guitar that's never let me down. I still look at that guitar & wonder what the hell Fender was thinking because it should easily wipe out sales for the standard MIM's & some higher level offerings, but it seems pretty clear that Fender knew some of their customers only care about what the headstock says.

Those Godin lines are the craziest by the way, right? The quality is just insane for the money, awesome guitars, total anomaly that they're made in N.A. and so cheap.


Yeah I just don't understand how they can do it, and do it so very well, but Fender and Gibson can't.

But I personally think a musical instrument can't get past a certain threshold unless the assemblers "speaks the language" of music in a very sophisticated way. It may seem to some that this is just bits and pieces but that view is, in my opinion, an insult to the remarkably gifted people who create the fewer in number guitars that at least some of us aspire to in the most desperate way.


This is nice to believe, but if there was anything to it you would provide some actual concrete example of how this is true other than just it being some weird ethereal opinion.

A guy who has never played guitar can still put a guitar together fine if he knows the correct way to do it, it's not magic, it's not brain surgery, the guys in the American factory aren't sitting there playing 4 hours of music on it to make sure "it speaks".

You take a piece of wood, you cut and rout it until it's the right shape. You put a finish on it, you add electronics and hardware, then it is a guitar. If you f up any of those steps, it will not be a good guitar. If you do all those steps perfectly, it will be.

Everyone on here can add all the weird feeling and politics to it and believe whatever they want so that they don't feel like their expensive guitars are somehow lessened by the existence of good cheaper guitars, or so that they can tell themselves that America is #1 and China can't do everything, but guys, it's wood and metal and either it's put together well or not, it's not magic, it's not some magic spirit that "talks to you". It's a bleeping guitar, it just sits there and lets you play it, and it's about 5% of the reason whether any music you play on it is bad or good.

Yeah I just don't understand how they can do it, and do it so very well, but Fender and Gibson can't.

The real question isn't why can Godin make an amazing acoustic for $400 and Fender/Gibson can't, but why can Fender/Gibson get away with selling stuff for $2000 that other guitar companies have to charge way less for.

And we all know the answer, a HUGE majority of people care about the label and aren't really evaluating instruments 100% on the other factors. I am guilty too, I love the fact I have a couple of really nice Fenders and Fender is a cool brand who broke some ground in guitar-making and has a lot of cool history. But despite that, I'm not going to go pay $2000 for something just for the label and trick myself into thinking it is some magical thing.

"...but it seems pretty clear that Fender knew some of their customers only care about what the headstock says..."

Not all of us, I own 3 Squiers, but none MIC.:wink:

The real question isn't why can Godin make an amazing acoustic for $400 and Fender/Gibson can't, but why can Fender/Gibson get away with selling stuff for $2000 that other guitar companies have to charge way less for.

And we all know the answer, a HUGE majority of people care about the label and aren't really evaluating instruments 100% on the other factors. I am guilty too, I love the fact I have a couple of really nice Fenders and Fender is a cool brand who broke some ground in guitar-making and has a lot of cool history. But despite that, I'm not going to go pay $2000 for something just for the label and trick myself into thinking it is some magical thing.

Certainly not....Buy (or build) the knockoff guitar and the fake decal and start sanding the headstock.

You know CVs have been out like 2 years and almost everyone in a touring band has been playing guitar way longer than that right and already owned guitars and picked their favorite guitars and possibly are like you and think it's uncool to play a guitar unless you have seen a bunch of people already play it?

this thread is supposed to be about the entire squier line, not one measly guitar. but since you're trying to say the CV is basically the only 'good' squier out there right now, you've basically proven the point that no, squiers are indeed not the 'standard of excellence'

and please do not reply with utter idiocy by trying to stuff words into my mouth. i've toured tons of times with an epiphone and not a 'real' gibson with no problems.

I haven't tried any other Squiers, and I'm not putting words in your mouth, every second sentence you say is how no musicians play Squiers live.

I await your next post in 10 seconds after someone replies to you.

I didn't read this whole thread. But is the 'pine' an issue at all?


This meaningless bickering begins to feel like one Monty Python sketch, The Argument.
And then pine...which is not only one species of tree, with soft wood, but numerous group of species. Some of the produces QUITE HARD & TOUGH WOOD. I have tried to inform this fact awful lot of times, in vain, it seems.
Leo Fender used pine, of most probably Canadian Rockies pine species`wood to TELECASTER prototypes. I furthermore believe Bruce Springsteen`s No.1 is of pine, as he said in 2 interviews ib newspapers when visiting Stockholm & Gothenburg during his European Tours during the years. One of his statements i was able to see and hear in TV News in late 90s or early 2000 s.
Our own pine over here is tough and hard enough for guitar body.
Other Squier CV`s than CV50 Tele have alder bodies. Some VM`s have alder bodies.

what did i say that was even remotely subjective? i don't think anyone here will disagree that most active gigging musicians play fenders, not squiers. thats just a fact. hardly subjective at all. i'm sure the CV is a pretty nice guitar but thats just how it is.

thats not even CLOSE to saying "oh i bought a squier. wow its the best guitar ever. better than MIA/MIMs for sure. most MIA/MIMS need set up. this squier did not. therefore squiers are better"

Originally Posted by iblastoff View Post
its definite internet hype as evidenced by this very thread alone started by someone saying CV's are higher in quality and consistency than MIM/MIA's based on purely nothing but subjective ranting.

the only people that seem to be playing the CV's are people posting on forums. i have yet to see any live gigging musician (not the pros with tons of money but the 'middle class' touring bands who have most to gain by spending very little on supposed 'standard of excellence' guitars) play a squier and playing/going to shows has basically been my #1 past time for the past 15 years. i'm sure there are a few bands that do, but there has to be another reason why 99% of gigging musicians play actual fenders other than the 'cool' factor.

still, not saying the CV is a bad instrument but thats just how it is.



This is what you said and it is more than remotely subjective. It is subjective and opinionated. What's the big deal?

Quote..."They are making American Instruments. They also have their own ... a few thousand year history of making instruments, most of which you will have never heard of."

No they aren't. They are copying American instruments. It also surprises me to learn you can read my mind and state what I do and don't know?

I bow to your superior intellect. I'm gone.

OK...let's get realistic - a few really nice, inexpensive guitars offered over the past few years. But, for the past 10, Squier's been nothing to write home about. Neither has Epiphone. But, the China stuff is getting better, from both manufacturers. But, Squier's got a long way to go to become the standard of excellence.

I think the Squier CV line might be considered a good value for guitars from China regardless of make. I'm new to all this and in the last few weeks of shopping around it seemed to me that for the price I got a lot of guitar with a CV Custom at $340 with taxes. Of course for more money I could get a better guitar, but I'm just starting and that's what these seem to be good for - guys like me who'll play them in the basement until they get good. Then I'll get a MIA Tele, or build my own! :grin:

You can get great North American built guitars in the $500 range these days if you buy a Godin (or any of their other lines like Seagull, Simon & Patrick, Art & Lutherie, LaPatrie, Norman, and Richmond). Their guitars are of excellent quality.



You are right, I forgot all about Godin/Seagull etc., GREAT values!!

whomever keeps talking about seeing people play them live needs to let that argument go. i've seen more people play live with Squiers than Ron Kirn's guitars, a Hahn, etc. and most would agree that those are of exceptional quality.

i'd argue that the standard of Fender is Vintage Fender. i'd say that that's why they have RI/Tribute models across all their brands. and yet, i still rarely see a pre-1960 Fender being gigged.

In your humble opinion.

More that an opinion. The fact is the Squier has cheaper parts specified in it's design than a MIM or MIA Fender.

This is nice to believe, but if there was anything to it you would provide some actual concrete example of how this is true other than just it being some weird ethereal opinion.

A guy who has never played guitar can still put a guitar together fine if he knows the correct way to do it, it's not magic, it's not brain surgery, the guys in the American factory aren't sitting there playing 4 hours of music on it to make sure "it speaks".

You take a piece of wood, you cut and rout it until it's the right shape. You put a finish on it, you add electronics and hardware, then it is a guitar. If you f up any of those steps, it will not be a good guitar. If you do all those steps perfectly, it will be.



If I remember correctly, Leo himself couldn't play a note.

. Neither has Epiphone. But, the China stuff is getting better, .

China-made Epiphones have not caught the previously Korean-made Epiphones in quality.

It has been pointed out before but this thread asked the question of whether Squier is becoming the standard of excellence for Fender or words to that effect.

Because the answer for some is a resounding no, people get offended and cite egos, and "opinions" etc. etc.

This is ridiculous.

Squier is a good guitar - for some a great guitar - but still a guitar made by Cort or whoever for Fender, truly en masse. Chinese or Indonesian origins have nothing to do with my own belief that they are NOT the standard of excellence for Fender. Fit, finish, electronics, action, sound, intonation, feel...these are my criteria.

I have played a Squier on stage and on record for many years - I don't have any brand snobbery. I simply like guitars and have grown to appreciate their qualities over the years. It would be great if there was a Squier plant and a Squier tradition but there isn't, not in the way that there's a Fender factory in the States. Does that make them (Squiers) automatically bad guitars? No. Do I get a sense of maybe less of a caring maker's hand than American Fenders? Yes.

There's some wildly contradictory stuff coming from the Squier camp though... Apparently Fenders are by nature cheap and basic cranked out by a big standardized CNC machine. Okay, explain why there are duds and beauties... That's odd. Shouldn't they all be equally fantastic?

There is a magic and a craft or science to really good - as in excellent - guitars and I'm not going to bore anyone (including myself) by explaining what that magic is. If the Squier name is getting affixed to the type of quality guitars once associated with the Pro Tone series or the JV series (or Silver Series) and they're even cheaper, that's great.

Standard of excellence for Fender? :roll: Sorry.


Best worded and thought out post of this thread....thank you.

That's why the China stuff is so cheap. It's not very good (in general). Fender lucked-out with a vendor who makes nice guitars and (obviously) can meet their (Fender's) cost targets. So, why not make a bunch more models there? Price is right - products are good. Customers like 'em. You're right about Epiphone. I really don't like most of the models - some are fine. And, like the previous Squiers, you have to see and play a few to find one you'd buy. Sheratons & Dots are OK - I miss the Elitist stuff - never got a chance to grab one. Discontinuing those was a huge step-back for Epiphone.

12 pages and counting? Jeez I'm gonna go buy SDPRI.com

I just saw this posted on another site----they are discussing Les Pauls:

If you're trying to imply that a Historic LP is better than an $800 Jr, Studio or Faded my reply would be "I hope to hell so".....:lol:

HAHAHAHA:shock::lol:

http://americaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/fork-small.jpg

http://americaexplained.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/fork-small.jpg



Nah, I get the feeling this one is going to go on for a while longer.

You know, I just remembered seeing this a while ago and it took me a while to find it.

This is for the folks who think that no one ever plays Squiers when they make it big...not really my favorite style, but hey, they're on Letterman and I'm not :mrgreen:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jreWR0i06_A

For the record, that is in fact a Squier CV50, not an AmSpec.

EDIT: Not trying to editorialize and say that it is somehow indicative that Squier is superior (I have mentioned numerous times that I think MIA is still king). I just wanted to show that people will still play their CV50s on national television during their big break.

EDIT2: Just in digging around on the web a bit more, looks like that guitarist had at one point a Gibson LP Special...looks like he's been playing the CV50 ever since Letterman, he also played it for their set at SXSW and ACL. Cool. The band is a little garagey for me, but they definitely rock.

The guy who pays to play,plays Squier.

The guy who drinks whisky, pays for whisky. You think every pro had a CS Fender when first attempting to play?

Nothing against Fender or MIAs, owning now /having owned 7 of them.
Still: Squier quality is improving all the time.

Didn't Kurt Cobain kinda make it cool to play Fender student-model guitars like Mustangs? I think the name on the peghead seemed (at least to me) to diminish in importance during the 80s & 90s. Personally, I'd rather gig with a CV than a Mustang - I had one when I was 13 and I don't remember it being anything special.

On guitars, from what I've observed and know about gigging Chinese musicians, nearly all of them buy American or Mexican Fenders as there's an uncritically strong perception carried over from the past that foreign products from North-American or European countries are always superior to domestic products.



At least the Chinese musicians still recognize which product is superior and are willing to save up their hard earned cash to buy it. A good lesson learned for American musicians.

I think the name on the peghead seemed (at least to me) to diminish in importance during the 80s & 90s.
What you wrote above ties in neatly with something I was thinking.

Late last night I was paging through the Musicians Friend catalog that the company so thoughtfully mailed to me because they like me so much. :rolleyes:

When I reached the page featuring Ibanez electric guitars, I was rather shocked to see guitars featured that sell for prices of $1500 and up. I had tended to think of Ibanez guitars as relatively inexpensive, but clearly I hadn't been paying attention. The catalog featured one Ibanez guitar selling for $2500, and the MF website lists one Ibanez selling at $3000. Needless to say, there were a whole slew of Ibanez guitars priced between $500 and $1000 or so.

What's my point? There are younger American electric guitar buyers out there who have already decided that if you have $1000, or $1500, or maybe even $3000 to spend on a guitar, the best guitar you can get for your money is made in China, and carries an Ibanez label on the headstock. That much money would buy you all sorts of made in America Fender guitars, but those players do not want them - they want Ibanez guitars instead.

Which made me realise that most of the people on this thread vociferously claiming that the best guitars in the world are all made in America are likely from an older generation, a generation that grew up listening to and reading about and watching Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton playing Fender Strats. In 1951, there was a lot of evidence to support the hypothesis that America really did make the best electric guitars, probably because most other countries had not yet made any electric guitars at all. That state of affairs probably continued well into the next decade, when Hendrix and Clapton and a few others were dominating the minds of guitar-conscious youth everywhere.

The people buying those $2500 Ibanez guitars - and more importantly, the $700 and $1000 and $1200 Ibanez guitars - did not grow up being impressed by Hendrix and Clapton as much as by Steve Vai and Joe Satriani and others like them. And those guys played Ibanez guitars, not Fenders.

Combined with all the nonsense on this thread claiming that Squiers have to be bad because not enough people gig with them, the whole thing becomes blindingly clear: many people simply and blindly believe that whatever guitar their hero played is the best guitar. If the hero guitarist from your youth, the guy or gal whom you worshipped when you were young, played a MIA Fender, then you probably believe MIA Fenders are the best guitars on earth. If your hero played an Ibanez, you quite likely believe that made in China Ibanez's are the best guitars. And so on.

As I said, this is really blindingly obvious in hindsight, when you consider that all the major guitar companies rely on signature "artist models" to lure people to spend more money - the Eric Clapton signature strat, or Steve Vai signature Ibanez, or whatever. Unthinking customers, blinded by the illogical and superstitious belief that the talent and ability of those great guitarists will somehow magically transfer to a chunk of wood with their name painted on it, will then fork out double the regular price for the aforementioned signature models.

So most of this thread isn't about Squier, Fender, America, China, good guitars, or bad guitars. It's simply about early mental conditioning, the subtle brainwashing each of us undergoes as we go from infancy to adulthood, each immersed in our own particular shade of human culture.

There are, of course, some percentage of people who do manage to see past their unconscious conditioning. Those are the people who make decisions on merit, and not on advertising and cultural cues. I commend the person who started this thread for being willing to consider the possibility that a "lesser" brand like Squier might be just as good as a "better" brand like Fender.

-Gnobuddy

At least the Chinese musicians still recognize which product is superior and are willing to save up their hard earned cash to buy it. A good lesson learned for American musicians.
Did you miss the part about "uncritically strong perception" and "carried over from the past", or did you misunderstand it? The person you quoted is saying that these musicians believe something they do not critically analyse (the opinion is not based on evaluation, but on blind belief), and that the belief is left over from the past, not based on the present state of affairs. In other words, he's saying the belief is illogical and not based on reality.

Just so we understand each other, I'm not saying I agree with the person you just quoted, nor am I saying I agree with you. I'm simply pointing out that you seem to have drastically misunderstood the words you quoted.

-Gnobuddy

Some of you guys appear to be so blinded by your "rah-rah" buy American ideals that you're overlooking some great values. That's your call, but just because you may personally be against products built elsewhere this doesn't mean they're inferior. It just proves you have ulterior motives to hate them &/or claim they're crap.

It just proves you have ulterior motives to hate them &/or claim they're crap.
Indeed. Take a look at what's written under "Location" under XKnight's avatar, for instance. Not the name of the state - the two words in front of it. XKnight is still living in a reality that ended a hundred and sixty five years ago, in 1846: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Texas

-Gnobuddy

"...but it seems pretty clear that Fender knew some of their customers only care about what the headstock says..."

Not all of us, I own 3 Squiers, but none MIC.:wink:


I never said all of us, just some... obviously including one of the owners of this one (note the headstock photo):

http://cgi.ebay.com/TELE-Telecaster-86-MIJ-Japan-Squier-FENDER-/330534685312

Oh, and as far as pros playing 'em live... Chuck Prophet qualifies (not that there's not dozens & dozens of other examples):

http://www.delawareonline.com/blogs/uploaded_images/cp-750066.jpg

At least the Chinese musicians still recognize which product is superior and are willing to save up their hard earned cash to buy it. A good lesson learned for American musicians.

I'm betting the same was the case with the Japanese musicians during the 60's-80's. Nowadays, most Japanese musicians and folks I've met with few exceptions tend to prefer buying Japanese stuff because they uncritically believe Japanese built stuff is superior to everything else.*

Considering this, it wouldn't surprise me if in 10-20 years that Chinese musicians will do the same assuming quality/technological standards improve greatly and thus, they realize the quality gap is so minor/nonexistent that they'd prefer buying Chinese products over US assuming they continue to learn from the successes and mistakes of Japan, ROC(Taiwan), South Korea,etc.*

Fortunately, Fender seems to be anticipating this by ramping up the quality of all of their lines whether they're MIC, MIM, or MIA. Any word about ramped up quality in the MIJ line?

* There's also something to be said for neck thicknesses/preferences as many Asian guitarists I've talked with have noticed that most MIA necks can be a bit too thick/chunky for their fretting hands. Similarly, I've heard many complaints on here and IRL about how Asian made guitars have necks far too thin for many with big fretting hands.

<edited>

Don't want to provide any more fodder for this mess.

Some of you guys appear to be so blinded by your "rah-rah" buy American ideals that you're overlooking some great values. That's your call, but just because you may personally be against products built elsewhere this doesn't mean they're inferior. It just proves you have ulterior motives to hate them &/or claim they're crap.


There are plenty of us in this thread who are not American and who do not live in America who are supporting the MIA and MIM models (personally, I favour the MIM models) over the MIC ones who cannot be accused of being blinded by any kind of rah-rah buy American ideals.

Epiphone did build the "standard" which Gibson could not attain for themselves which became their own competition; therefore cancelled the line... The Elitist series. I own a 2008 Epiphone Elitist Byrdland.

Squire is the "standard" and the standard is low, a guitar built to a price point. Affordable is the keyword here. Value is in the eye of the beholder.

The Japanese made Squire of the late 80's was quite good, I owned a Strat. I miss it. Is Prophet's Squire Japanese made ?

Would I buy a new Squire ?.. there are inexpensive used MIM's out there for close to the same price.

However, Fender should be commended for producing such a product, it fills a hole if you choose to buy off shore products.

Did you miss the part about "uncritically strong perception" and "carried over from the past", or did you misunderstand it? The person you quoted is saying that these musicians believe something they do not critically analyse (the opinion is not based on evaluation, but on blind belief), and that the belief is left over from the past, not based on the present state of affairs. In other words, he's saying the belief is illogical and not based on reality.

Just so we understand each other, I'm not saying I agree with the person you just quoted, nor am I saying I agree with you. I'm simply pointing out that you seem to have drastically misunderstood the words you quoted.

-Gnobuddy

My reading comprehension is just fine, but thanks for the concern. I have my opinion and you have yours. The fact that they are diametrically opposed to each other is clearly as it should be. This thread is all about perceptions. I perceive American made guitars to be far superior to guitars made in China regardless of the price and I choose to spend my hard earned money as I please. I have no interest in supporting the Chinese government. Since we can't discuss politics here I really can't explain my position any further, but rest assured it has nothing to do with guitars or musicians.

XKnight.

I think there are many who believe as you do who are simply reluctant to voice their opinion.

Where possible, for many reasons, I choose to buy American made; to a point. Quality and value are strong considerations. I try my best not to compromise.

I simply want an American made Tele (or Strat) with wide nut and wide string spacing.

Indeed. Take a look at what's written under "Location" under XKnight's avatar, for instance. Not the name of the state - the two words in front of it. XKnight is still living in a reality that ended a hundred and sixty five years ago, in 1846: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Texas

-Gnobuddy

And the poster's state flag says:

"California Republic"

Some of you guys appear to be so blinded by your "rah-rah" buy American ideals that you're overlooking some great values. That's your call, but just because you may personally be against products built elsewhere this doesn't mean they're inferior. It just proves you have ulterior motives to hate them &/or claim they're crap.

Absolutely! Any number of foreign designs are first-rate....The V-2,Messerschmitts 163 and 262 (and certain chemical compounds) were best at what they were designed and built to do.Soviets too.The Germans were so impressed with the T-34 battle tank they seriously considered copying it.The Soviets returned the compliment by knocking off the Focke-Wulf TA-183 and then the B-29.You know them as the MiG-15 and the TU-4.North American Aviation used German data in the design of the swept-wing F-86.The list goes on and on.
I think some of us are trying to say that Chinese expertise in making Fender knockoffs does not not make them the good guys.

that was beaten..sadly....has died.....

And for the funeral,The OP will play standard-of-excellence guitar on his similarly standard-of-excellence Squier.

my position ...<snip> has nothing to do with guitars or musicians.
Clearly. Which is why your comments don't really fit in this thread, since the thread is about guitars.

My opinions about the systematic destruction of the American industrial manufacturing base and its effects on everyday Americans are not dissimilar to yours. But that is a whole other subject, and one that cannot be discussed on this forum.

Have a wonderful day, and I mean that sincerely. No reason we can't be nice to each other simply because we don't feel the same way about one silly consumer brand.

-Gnobuddy

And the poster's state flag says:

"California Republic"

And I, of course, must be the person who designed that flag. :rolleyes:

-Gnobuddy

What you wrote above ties in neatly with something I was thinking.

Late last night I was paging through the Musicians Friend catalog that the company so thoughtfully mailed to me because they like me so much. :rolleyes:

When I reached the page featuring Ibanez electric guitars, I was rather shocked to see guitars featured that sell for prices of $1500 and up. I had tended to think of Ibanez guitars as relatively inexpensive, but clearly I hadn't been paying attention. The catalog featured one Ibanez guitar selling for $2500, and the MF website lists one Ibanez selling at $3000. Needless to say, there were a whole slew of Ibanez guitars priced between $500 and $1000 or so.

What's my point? There are younger American electric guitar buyers out there who have already decided that if you have $1000, or $1500, or maybe even $3000 to spend on a guitar, the best guitar you can get for your money is made in China, and carries an Ibanez label on the headstock. That much money would buy you all sorts of made in America Fender guitars, but those players do not want them - they want Ibanez guitars instead.

Which made me realise that most of the people on this thread vociferously claiming that the best guitars in the world are all made in America are likely from an older generation, a generation that grew up listening to and reading about and watching Jimi Hendrix and Eric Clapton playing Fender Strats. In 1951, there was a lot of evidence to support the hypothesis that America really did make the best electric guitars, probably because most other countries had not yet made any electric guitars at all. That state of affairs probably continued well into the next decade, when Hendrix and Clapton and a few others were dominating the minds of guitar-conscious youth everywhere.

The people buying those $2500 Ibanez guitars - and more importantly, the $700 and $1000 and $1200 Ibanez guitars - did not grow up being impressed by Hendrix and Clapton as much as by Steve Vai and Joe Satriani and others like them. And those guys played Ibanez guitars, not Fenders.

Combined with all the nonsense on this thread claiming that Squiers have to be bad because not enough people gig with them, the whole thing becomes blindingly clear: many people simply and blindly believe that whatever guitar their hero played is the best guitar. If the hero guitarist from your youth, the guy or gal whom you worshipped when you were young, played a MIA Fender, then you probably believe MIA Fenders are the best guitars on earth. If your hero played an Ibanez, you quite likely believe that made in China Ibanez's are the best guitars. And so on.

As I said, this is really blindingly obvious in hindsight, when you consider that all the major guitar companies rely on signature "artist models" to lure people to spend more money - the Eric Clapton signature strat, or Steve Vai signature Ibanez, or whatever. Unthinking customers, blinded by the illogical and superstitious belief that the talent and ability of those great guitarists will somehow magically transfer to a chunk of wood with their name painted on it, will then fork out double the regular price for the aforementioned signature models.

So most of this thread isn't about Squier, Fender, America, China, good guitars, or bad guitars. It's simply about early mental conditioning, the subtle brainwashing each of us undergoes as we go from infancy to adulthood, each immersed in our own particular shade of human culture.

There are, of course, some percentage of people who do manage to see past their unconscious conditioning. Those are the people who make decisions on merit, and not on advertising and cultural cues. I commend the person who started this thread for being willing to consider the possibility that a "lesser" brand like Squier might be just as good as a "better" brand like Fender.

-Gnobuddy

This may be regional and generational based, but the most popularity of Ibanezes I've seen were during the '80s and extreme early '90s and mostly among suburban metalheads.

The kids who were into alternative rock and/or later..Indie rock scene like the ones in NYC at present tend to gravitate much more towards Fender/Squier, Danelectro Reissues, and Gibson type guitars from what I've seen.

In fact, the only folks I know who buy Ibanez guitars in my area are either members of 80's metal cover bands or suburban adolescents who want a "cool lookin' metal guitar" from their parents.....and they're not usually buying the $1000+ models.

What you're probably seeing may be the effects of many well-off suburbanite/metalhead adolescents whose parents are similar to the ones I saw at the 48th street Sam Ash who had no issues dropping $3000+ for a Gibson Les Paul, some high end tube amp, and oodles of accessories just so their 12 year old can start guitar lessons.

I'm not sure too many (if any) folks are buying $3000 Ibanez guitars. They're few and far between. I think the Beck CS Esquire is (or was) in there for $20 large. Not too sure many of those flew out the door at MF either.

I never said all of us, just some... obviously including one of the owners of this one (note the headstock photo):

http://cgi.ebay.com/TELE-Telecaster-86-MIJ-Japan-Squier-FENDER-/330534685312

Oh, and as far as pros playing 'em live... Chuck Prophet qualifies (not that there's not dozens & dozens of other examples):

http://www.delawareonline.com/blogs/uploaded_images/cp-750066.jpg


Nothing against Squier as I'm sure it's had a hard life.. but isn't he missing a tuner key?

i think this pic explains it..

http://www.turnituporturnitoff.com/Photos/2008/20080315/ChuckProphet2-6.jpg

theres a post a post about it here >> http://www.tdpri.com/forum/telecaster-discussion-forum/92783-chuck-prophets-tele.html

Fast info! Thanks!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7raIAJTxeqA&feature=related

Oh, and as far as pros playing 'em live... Chuck Prophet qualifies (not that there's not dozens & dozens of other examples):

http://www.delawareonline.com/blogs/uploaded_images/cp-750066.jpg

"I still play the same 1984 Fender Squire Telecaster that Green On Red bought me when I joined them. Yeah, yeah, yeah: I know there’s some kind of irrational attachment going on."

Chuck Prophet (http://chuckprophet.com/blog/)

Maybe the same kind of irrational attachment that MIA guys have?

Glad Chuck Prophet was mentioned in this thread. I could NEVER understand why he isn't a household name.

Proof that the talented don't always (hell, "hardly ever" is more like it) get the air time due them.

Glad Chuck Prophet was mentioned in this thread. I could NEVER understand why he isn't a household name.

Proof that the talented don't always (hell, "hardly ever" is more like it) get the air time due them.

Proof that playing a Squier is bad for your career.:razz:

Poorish people like me NEED Squier...with a bit of work, (in my case a bone nut and professional set up, ...I also replaced the bridge pup on the White One) they are fine...I'd get a Fender if i could frickin' afford it...Why do i get Squiers? Because I have two Teles now that I love, whereas I could have just one Highway One Tele...it's worth it to me to bear the strange and supposed disgrace of having "Squier" on the headstock to have two Teles rather than just one...:wink:

Poorish people like me NEED Squier...with a bit of work ...I'd get a Fender if i could frickiin' afford it...Why do i get Squiers? Because I have two Teles now that I love, whereas I could have just one Highway One Tele...it's worth it to me to bear the strange and supposed disgrace of having "Squier" on the headstock to have two rather Teles than just one...:wink:

I CAN afford a Fender and have yet felt the need to spend more money to get one. I have to say that I have stuck with the classic vibe series which are great guitars. I have some Vintage Modifieds which are a little less appealing in terms of workmanship, but doable. I had one standard strat which I thought was great. I think the necks on the American strats are really nice. Every time I contemplate getting an MIM or MIA I just think about how nice my CV teles and strats are and decide I don't really need it. I have nothing against buying an MIM or MIA, I just haven't felt the need or want for one.

It is the same for me with the PRS bunch. I was lusting after a Santana PRS and since PRS put a carved top and bird inlays on the newly released Santana SE model, there just isn't a need to pay $2K+ more for the MIA model.

We spend money on what we value. You'd be hard pressed to get me to pay $200 for a pair of shoes. Or to buy jeans that cost more than $30. My friend on the other hand spends lots of money on cloths, but is still playing her Gemeinhardt student flute that she has had for years. She is classically trained, can play by ear and is absolutely phenomenal during praise and worship. She drives a Lexas and CAN afford a Yamaha professional flute, but she likes the one she plays because she has played it so long and it works for her.

Well,Squiers are what they are,just wood and wire,and not self-aware.
This would be true of all guitars... I think...maybe not the Gibson robot guitars.:shock:

The singer in our band showed up today with a new Squier Thinline..the one with the 24' scale. Monster of an axe..the Duncan pups it comes with are terrific and the neck is ...well..you couldn't ask for anything better with regards to fretwork and superb action. Yeah..I know..where not in the big time at all..but I tell ya..your preaching to the choir if your saying this axe is nothing more than a budget guitar that shouldn't be considered for gigging or recording or whatever else..contrary..more Tele's should be as sound as this axe was today..a very competant player it was. :wink:

Nothing against Squier as I'm sure it's had a hard life.. but isn't he missing a tuner key?
He looks like he's chewing on it.

I think I made it through 5 pages or so of this thread before I decided to skip ahead.

To answer the OP's original question, I'll give my stock answer: it depends. For one thing, it depends on what you mean by "standard" -- are we talking something to aspire to, or something that forms a baseline of expectations? The Fender American Standard by and large splits the difference between the more budget conscious MIMs and the premium CS brands. In other words, if you are looking for a Stratocaster that defines the beast not only in terms of parts and how they are put together, but also in terms of how a strat is supposed to sound and how well it is supposed to feel; then the FAS does the job pretty consistently. For the CV strat or a MIM strat to be a bang-for-the-buck, it will have to come into the ballpark of the FAS to make the budget buyer (say, someone like me) feel it is worth plunking down a few hundred bucks for it -- as opposed to saving up for a few more months to get the FAS. IOW, it has to look like a strat, sound like a strat and feel like a strat, even if the parts are cheaper. If the quality of the parts have gone up, well -- gravy!

I know I have just listed a lot of subjective criteria, but there is just no getting away from that. From FMIC's perspective, the quality uptick in Squiers may have much to do with the competition from Xaviere, SX and Ibanez (as others have mentioned above) as well as the ability to hire competent workers in China or Indonesia for less than in North America. These factors can be drivers of higher quality, at least insofar as the North American brands need to justify their price points when the budget models are so comparably good.

To sound like everyone else: I've tried the CVs. The CVC Tele is awesome, it sorely tempted me, but I found more love for the CV 60s Strat, which I am going to get out of lay-away next month. Maybe. I sometimes think I might roll the money over into a Deluxe Player (the store's policy allows such transfers of credit), if it tests better to justify the extra $250 I will need to plunk down to get it. The jury is still out. I am concerned about the quality of the rosewood FB, really, and the trem. But this is the cost-benefit analysis we budget-conscious weekend warriors tend to engage in. And I'm sure FMIC (and Ibanez and Epiphone, etc.) knows it, hence all the high quality budget guitars they put on the market.

I think I made it through 5 pages or so of this thread before I decided to skip ahead.

To answer the OP's original question, I'll give my stock answer: it depends. For one thing, it depends on what you mean by "standard" -- are we talking something to aspire to, or something that forms a baseline of expectations?
************************************************** *******

I say a combination of both. Most anyone...not everyone..but most who have had some experience with one of the CV or CVC or the VM models, canot deny that they are superb. Are they the best thing since indoor plumbing...mostly depends on who you talk to:lol: But most will agree that they are easily up for the task of makin some fine music and are very accessible in today's ecconomy which is another PLUS for the starving musician :cool: I do believe that if these models didn't carry the BIG S on the headstock and had the big F by itself...these posting boards would be lighting up like a Comet in the sky over what an exceptional axe is now being offered. I think the day is comming soon that the big S is going to be much sougt after in a different light...it's already happing if some would take there Blinders off and get past where they are made and what they cost :wink:

I think the number of posts on this thread is evidence in favor of...yes. I have a Fender tele, 1985 MIJ 62 reissue custom or something like that. Bought it used for 800 I think. Great guitar. I now also have a 1996 Korean Squier tele that I picked up for 100 and plopped 166 more into it. I play it more than the Fender, I think I like it more, and heck they´re both made in the far east. I hope Squire does get known for being the standard of exellence just because they make affordable guitars!

CNC technology has made it possible to produce instruments of good quality using lower end materials and labor skills....I'm sure this has been covered in this lengthy thread. I bought a Squier Custom II Tele from MF last year (mostly out of curiosity) it was used, in ex. condition, missing the toggle knob. As far as $200 guitars go, it's top of the line....very playable....when I was a kid, instruments of this quality, in this price range just weren't available.

btw...my two beauties were made in India....i doubt if many (OR ANY) people, would be able to tell that they are not "professional grade" from out in the audience...sound-wise OR looks...people have to walk right up and look closely to see (gasp) Squier instead of Fender on the headstock...and then it's like this.....
"Oh! the horror! all that guitar work you did...all that music that I just enjoyed...oh...please, give me a cutip..I must purge the memory of this sub-grade abomination from my beguiled and abused ears....":lol:

btw...my two beauties were made in India....i doubt if many (OR ANY) people, would be able to tell that they are not "professional grade" from out in the audience...sound-wise OR looks...people have to walk right up and look closely to see (gasp) Squier instead of Fender on the headstock...and then it's like this.....
"Oh! the horror! all that guitar work you did...all that music that I just enjoyed...oh...please, give me a cutip..I must purge the memory of this sub-grade abomination from my beguiled and abused ears....":lol:


Yeah, that was one of the most unfortunate & ludicrous generalizations I've ever read on this forum in many years. It was obviously motivated by a bunch of factors that have nothing to do with craftsmanship, which is fine, but it can't be taken the least bit seriously in terms of rating the build quality. In a blind playing test, most guys making these outlandish claims wouldn't have a clue where which guitar was made.

Japan, Korea, Mexico & China have all taken their lumps over the years... I'm sure there will be others in the future, too.

Interesting thread - and the diverse views expressed are proof that everyone has an opinion. But even though I agree heartily with Musicmatty and Fungusyoung, the opposing views are nothing more than subjective opinions, as are ours. To refer to the OP's question, I don't think you have to limit the discussion to Fender/Squier. Gibson/Epiphone is fair game as well, when you think about the quality of Elitist or Masterbilt products as opposed to the Big G. Those instruments offered at lower price points are MUCH better now than they used to be, so let's enjoy them!

In any case, someone who believes that Squier equals inferior is not going to be swayed by any arguments to the contrary. If a person believes that Squier is not pro-grade, they should have every right to spend the extra money to buy an American or CS instrument which satisfies their definition of what an instrument should be, using their own criteria. And although I don't hold that position, their arguments are going to be no more successful convincing those of us who find the craftsmanship and quality of Squier more than acceptable that we are wrong. I know where my money is going - to purchase an instrument that satisfies my idea of quality, regardless of price. it's not based on brand name, country of origin, "mojo", or history.

I remember when I started out in the '60s, and the difference between inexpensive instruments as opposed to the pro line stuff was huge. Players today have such a great range of choices available to them that there is truly something for everyone out there. So if Squier isn't for you, so be it. But one's statement that a Squier isn't worthy of being considered a pro quality instrument is just an opinion. And my view that Fender CS instruments are severely overpriced, and don't represent value, is just MY opinion. Neither should be considered as the definitive answer - they just represent differing perspectives.

I've enjoyed reading these posts, but my position hasn't changed. Nor have, I will assume, any of those with opposing views been "converted". I think we should tip our hats to Fender for providing us with so many choices.