Opinions on new American Standards

Tele_MEL · March 4th, 2008, 05:42 PM

Hi,

After getting the Tele bug about 6 months ago, ( I got a used G&L Tribute ASAT that I really like,) but might spin off my American Strat that I rarely play, to get a bonafide Fender Tele. !! Eeh hah!

I see the marketing material from Fender talk about the 'new American Standard ' and they refer to redesigned bridge plate, saddles, neck etc.

I know a lot of times ' new ' is not better, especially with something so revered and established as a Tele.

I don't know what the Delta Tone circuit is about ( or for that matter the Hwy. 1 Greasebucket circuit ).

I've read that the Classic 50's and Classic 60's are good values ( about $700 new ), and Hwy. 1 are about $750, and I see the American Standards are about $999 new.

I'd be really interested in hearing some opinions in what separates these models so I can be informed as I go play them.

Thanks!
Mark

PJ · March 4th, 2008, 06:02 PM

Kinda hard to tell. I took a look the other day at GC, but didn't play one. It looked pretty similar to what we all know as an American Tele, except for the Strat bridge saddles, which on first look, seem
odd to me. I have the older American bridge on one of my Teles and I didn't see it as anything that needed Strat-izing. But, what do I know?

Tom S · March 4th, 2008, 08:51 PM

Well, here are the "improvements:"

A redesigned bridge (really...and what's good about that? Also, who asked for one?)
New bent-steel saddles with elongated string slots (We needed old strat saddles on a tele?)
A new neck and body finish (with a thinner undercoat? Huh?)
A Fender-exclusive high-tech molded case (whoopee, but this is probably the biggest improvement)

IMHO, This is Fender's saddest attempt ever to claim that the guitar has been "revamped."

Nashter · March 4th, 2008, 08:58 PM

The undercoat on the American guitars was VERY thick before.
I had a H1, that I started stripping and am still not through the undercoat.

jivetrain · March 4th, 2008, 09:46 PM

i wouldn't write the bridge changes off as worthless, all the vintage tele enthusiasts here complain about how the 6 saddle bridge doesn't have enough resonance and sustain, and now that fender's improved it the same people are criticizing the changes... without even having tested them, i imagine. perhaps you're just afraid that the mighty 3 saddle bridge may finally be made obsolete yet?

the thing that bugs me is that the bridge plate now has two screws on the end near the pickguard, supposedly improving the resonance a little by helping to press the plate down on all sides... why did it take 60 years to do this?

91xlntS-3 · March 5th, 2008, 03:31 AM

I don't think the new saddles "look" good on a Tele. Have seen a few, but haven't "wanted" to play one. I never had any complaints about the bridge or saddles and I think the old style has a "sleeker" look to it. I'm just not sure Strat saddles on a Tele is for me. Just my opinion.

BTW, Mark, check out the Classifieds. There's a Limited Ed. HW1 for sale @ $720.00. If I had the $$$, I'd be grabbing this one! Don't know why no one has picked this up yet, very good price, IMO.

Jellecaster · March 5th, 2008, 07:28 AM

As I have said in other threads (the subject keep recycling around here!), I love my new Am Std. In fact, I am seriously considering selling-off the majority of my Tele collection and the Am Std will be one of the few that I keep.

Before I got the guitar, I didn't think a whole lot of the changes. Now that I have one, I can tell you that the neck feels just awesome, and there really is something about that bridge. I can't say for sure what it is, but the guitar twangs and has resonance that a lot of my other "modern" Teles lack. It's a keeper!

11 Gauge · March 5th, 2008, 08:29 AM

Someone may want to inform Brent Mason, Keith Richards and others that the modern 6 (5 in Keith's case) saddle design doesn't have it's merits.

I can see why the modern bridge would be an advantage or even necessity for some.

I'd venture a guess that the Am. Std. has probably added more Tele players to the fold, thanks to the bridge design, extra fret, and more "mainstream" neck.

Another note of interest - some years back, a close friend of mine went into the studio armed with quite a few guitars, one of which was an Am. Std. I could easily pick it out amongst all of the other guitars (many of them Fenders), despite all of the differences between the modern design and the old one.

ReddRanger · March 5th, 2008, 10:31 AM

I've only had a chance to play the new Am Std unplugged at my local shop. I played both the RW and maple neck versions.

I always strum a few Teles during every trip to the store, even if just for 5 minutes. These new Am Std Teles definitely seem to feel more alive than the previous version. The necks look much nicer than before, and feel very comforatable to play (IMO).

I wasn't sold on the new bridge idea at first, but now even having only played it unplugged I think it's an improvement. I can't wait to go back and plug one in this weekend.

fenson · March 5th, 2008, 12:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ReddRanger

I've only had a chance to play the new Am Std unplugged at my local shop. I played both the RW and maple neck versions.

I always strum a few Teles during every trip to the store, even if just for 5 minutes. These new Am Std Teles definitely seem to feel more alive than the previous version. The necks look much nicer than before, and feel very comforatable to play (IMO).

I wasn't sold on the new bridge idea at first, but now even having only played it unplugged I think it's an improvement. I can't wait to go back and plug one in this weekend.

+1 I said new bridge thinner undercoat ya ! ya! B.S. to stir sales and raise price, so I played a few guess what ,they are nicer than the average AM series and the price did not go up, in fact here in Canada the price went down ,mostly I guess count of the dollar thing. First time in decades that a Canadian pays the same as an American, 999.
The classic MIM are great also but for someone wanting a MIA I think IMO nows the time, Not much more than the MIM classic if you consider you get a case with the MIA.

Easydog · March 5th, 2008, 01:27 PM

Quote:

perhaps you're just afraid that the mighty 3 saddle bridge may finally be made obsolete yet?

HA HA HA HA HA

Those brass saddles and ashtray bridge add alot. I threw a G-dale replacement bridge & saddles on my AM Std and NOW it sounds like a tele. I could hardly believe it. 110% improvement. As for the new Am Std I couldnt say- havent tried them yet.... but have little interest thus far.

I raise my glass to the "Mighty 3 saddle bridge & saddles". Prost!

PJ · March 5th, 2008, 01:50 PM

The argument for stamped Strat saddles seems odd to me, since the
"players" like Richards, Summers, etc., who use the American Std. bridge, seem to use the solid brass saddles. But, I have to admit, I've not played this new model, so I can't say for sure, what the new bridge does to tone. I'm probably more of a purist and and like the traditional brass-saddle bridge the best. But, I'm open to new ideas, so I'll have to go check one out, based on the positive press noted above.

Tom S · March 5th, 2008, 02:19 PM

Well, Fender certainly has a ripe audience here. C'mon folks, this time around, you've got to be at least a little skeptical...

According to Jay Piccirillo, marketing manager (for basses), “So we set out on a journey; asking ourselves, ‘What makes a great Strat® great?’ We stripped these instruments back to blank bodies and wood, and tested individual specs one at a time—alloys of bridge blocks, saddle material, neck and body finishes; rebuilding them from the ground up. We left no tonal stone unturned. These experiments helped us distill the recipe.”

So apparently, previous Fender Strats do not have "the" recipe. I guess that somewhat negates all the comments by famous players that Fender uses in the video on the American Standard site. And further, how does this necessarily translate to the Telecaster?

Supposedly, the new bridge plate increases resonance and sustain. Oh, really? Is there any way to document this? Is this due to old-style strat saddles or the two extra screws? If two extra screws makes an obvious difference, why aren't those similar Squier bridges all the rage? I must have missed all the buzz about how much more resonant Squier Teles were with these extra screws. And where is the hue and cry over how poorly resonant the modern-style bridge plate is in the previous American Standard? I haven't heard it.

Here's a good one: "Thinner finish undercoat lets the the body breathe and improves resonance." How? Are they kidding? Lets the body breathe? Under the "top" finish? Are previous American Standards a little suffocated? And just what is the "finish undercoat"? How does thinning it improve resonance? Does anyone seriously believe that by solely using a "thinner" undercoat (whatever that is), and leaving the rest of the finish as before, the guitar will now "breathe" better? If that were true, and assuming a guitar body "breathes" at all, why not just eliminate the "finish undercoat"? Wouldn't that make more sense? Bottom line, this is all gobbledygook. Try covering your head with two plastic bags of the same thickness, then switching the inner bag with a thinner one to see if you breate any better.

"A new neck treatment-tinted for a richer presentation, with the fingerboard buffed to a high gloss, The back of the neck still has that silky satin finish." This says nothing about the neck other than the finish. If they have made any actual geometric changes to the neck (changes that could actually be worth talking about), they haven't mentioned them. So the only conclusion one can make is that this is purely a cosmetic change, probably in response to the fact that a lot of people complain about the too-light look of current necks (that look too much like less-expensive models).

I generally like Fender guitars, and I'm not saying the new American Series are not perfectly fine guitars. In fact, I believe Fender is making a better product in recent years than they ever produced in thier entire history. But are these latest changes really improvements or an attempt to once again breath some new life (with new hype) into an ongoing bread and butter product line?

Telemarkman · March 5th, 2008, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom S

Try covering your head with two plastic bags of the same thickness, then switching the inner bag with a thinner one to see if you breate any better.

Hee, hee

!

But generally speaking, you make sense to me...

AjayTele · March 5th, 2008, 03:38 PM

OK guys. Let's leave our preconceived ideas behind (especially about bridges - God how boring the 3 saddle vs anything else arguement is

) and just assess the new Tele on it's merits.

I have, over the last few years, managed to collect what is now a very large collection of Telecasters in their various forms and mutations. When I buy each guitar, naturally I play them to find out if they are good bad or indifferent playing guitars. Sometimes when I play a guitar it becomes immediately obvious that the guitar is a real player, as opposed to one that goes on the wall as a collectable.

I recently bought a brand new American Standard Tele, mostly because of the fact that it's the first new Tele model in quite a while. I had also read quite a few posts on this forum and others, where eveyone was raving about how good the new Tele is.

Well, I have to say that I absolutely LOVE my new American Standard Tele. It's a real player and the changes that have been made to the design appear to be all aimed at achieving that fact. Also, I have had several comments from people on how great it sounds as well, indeed my band mates asked me last night "why aren't you playing the new Tele?"

And by the way, the new hard case is great as well.

So, do yourself a favour and try one... I'm pretty sure you'll be gassing for one shortly afterwards. I am now seriously considering buying another one, in a different colour to put on the wall, as I think this model will be remembered fondly by history as a good move in the evolution of the Tele.

tiktok · March 5th, 2008, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PJ

The argument for stamped Strat saddles seems odd to me, since the "players" like Richards, Summers, etc., who use the American Std. bridge, seem to use the solid brass saddles.

The don't use Am Std bridges--they're using something like Schecter or Mighty Mite bridges from the era when brass was considered the Tone Metal.

Am Std Tele's have never had "Tele" saddles, they were always sharing pieces with the Am Std Strats.

Frank B · March 5th, 2008, 05:47 PM

I read positive comments from people who actually tried them and... negative comments from people who haven't tried them.

New saddles : I have them & love them. Do i like them better ? Yes.
New neck : I have tried it & loved it. Do i like it better ? Yes.

All the reasons why I like the improvements have been mentioned above.

Jellecaster · March 5th, 2008, 06:47 PM

A lot of people seem to want to dump on this model without having actually played it. That seems strange to me - like criticizing a movie you've never seen or book you've never read. I have a "few" Teles in my collection and this is one of the best.

Tom S · March 5th, 2008, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jellecaster

A lot of people seem to want to dump on this model without having actually played it. That seems strange to me - like criticizing a movie you've never seen or book you've never read. I have a "few" Teles in my collection and this is one of the best.

What have they done to it that could possibly affect playability? Tinted the neck? The strat saddles? As I said before, there's no reason to think it wouldn't be a fine guitar, but there aren't any improvements over the last version that are worth talking about. If these features appeal to someone, then by all means they should buy one. But calling this a major revision that ihere mproves the guitar is pure bull, IMHO. There simply aren't any "improvements" that would motivate me to even play one.

Unless someone can show me where Fender details what they have done to change the neck other than the finish, I have to assume it's the exact same neck with a (more?) polished fretboard. If that's an improvement, then enjoy.

Telarkaster · March 5th, 2008, 07:03 PM

Tom S makes some really good points, well written!

My 2 cents: I played two of them, and so far they're batting .500.

The first one buzzed so bad on the open E string that I didn't even bother to plug it in (see the thread about trying and buying electric guitars unplugged). It was the wierdest thing, I couldn't even isolate where the buzz was coming from. Junk. Back on the wall. Too bad, because the natural finish was absolutely gorgeous.

The second one had a neck that reminded me of the one on my 2005 American Series Strat, the reason why I bought it. Modern satin C neck, really nice. The pickups were great, it sounded and felt like a Tele. Ain't nothing wrong with that guitar. If you can't play well on that guitar, it's because you suck, not because of the guitar.

But I put it back on the wall. Why? I already have an American Standard Tele. From 1995. Before they changed the name to Series and back to Standard as part of some silly marketing gimmick. Mine has a wider neck across the nut, thinner (shallower) neck, and comparable pickups. I don't need another Am Std. But if I didn't have one already, I'd pick one up for sure! One that didn't buzz...

AjayTele · March 5th, 2008, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom S

What have they done to it that could possibly affect playability? Tinted the neck? The strat saddles? As I said before, there's no reason to think it wouldn't be a fine guitar, but there aren't any improvements over the last version that are worth talking about. If these features appeal to someone, then by all means they should buy one. But calling this a major revision that ihere mproves the guitar is pure bull, IMHO. There simply aren't any "improvements" that would motivate me to even play one.

Unless someone can show me where Fender details what they have done to change the neck other than the finish, I have to assume it's the exact same neck with a (more?) polished fretboard. If that's an improvement, then enjoy.

Wow! What a negative response!

I think that changing the feel of a neck of a guitar is VERY likely to affect playability isn't it?

Hmm... have you actually played one?

All I can say is sometimes the little things can make big differences - and this appears to be the case with the new American Standard.

Go try one today - you might get a pleasant surprise...

Tom S · March 5th, 2008, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AjayTele

Wow! What a negative response!

I think that changing the feel of a neck of a guitar is VERY likely to affect playability isn't it?

It can, but does a fretboard "buffed to a high polish" affect the playability? I personally can't imagine that it could in any dramatic, or frankly, noticeable way. According to Fender the satin back has not changed. Nothing Fender has provided mentions any other changes in the neck other than the tinted finish. If there were any, they'd be falling all over themselves to tell us about them.

So if the fretboard finish has been a stumbling block to playability, I guess it is an improvement. Yet it's odd how on a site devoted to telecasters, full of tele aficionados and tele-loving players, I've never once seen anyone complain that their American Standard fretboard would have been so much better to play had it been more polished. Like the strat saddles, this is a "solution" to a problem that doesn't exist.

My post may sound negative, because I often react negatively when someone is trying to feed me a line of BS. That's what Fender is doing IMO. Once again and for the final time, I'm sure the new American Standard is a wonderful guitar. But Fender, don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. I spent 25 years in the advertising business.

The OP solicited opinions on the new American Standard, specifically mentioning Fender's marketing materials and the new "improvements." I am offering mine. I'll stop offering opinions when it becomes mandatory that all opinions of Fender's marketing efforts are unquestioning and positive.

March 4th, 2008, 05:42 PM	#1 (permalink)
Tele_MEL Tele-Meister Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Hillsboro, OR Age: 52 Posts: 106	Opinions on new American Standards Hi, After getting the Tele bug about 6 months ago, ( I got a used G&L Tribute ASAT that I really like,) but might spin off my American Strat that I rarely play, to get a bonafide Fender Tele. !! Eeh hah! I see the marketing material from Fender talk about the 'new American Standard ' and they refer to redesigned bridge plate, saddles, neck etc. I know a lot of times ' new ' is not better, especially with something so revered and established as a Tele. I don't know what the Delta Tone circuit is about ( or for that matter the Hwy. 1 Greasebucket circuit ). I've read that the Classic 50's and Classic 60's are good values ( about $700 new ), and Hwy. 1 are about $750, and I see the American Standards are about $999 new. I'd be really interested in hearing some opinions in what separates these models so I can be informed as I go play them. Thanks! Mark

March 4th, 2008, 06:02 PM	#2 (permalink)
PJ Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 1,918 4 Photos	Kinda hard to tell. I took a look the other day at GC, but didn't play one. It looked pretty similar to what we all know as an American Tele, except for the Strat bridge saddles, which on first look, seem odd to me. I have the older American bridge on one of my Teles and I didn't see it as anything that needed Strat-izing. But, what do I know? __________________ PJ "I don't know if it's art, but I like it."

March 5th, 2008, 07:28 AM	#7 (permalink)
Jellecaster Friend of Leo's Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New Hampshire, USA Age: 40 Posts: 2,085	As I have said in other threads (the subject keep recycling around here!), I love my new Am Std. In fact, I am seriously considering selling-off the majority of my Tele collection and the Am Std will be one of the few that I keep. Before I got the guitar, I didn't think a whole lot of the changes. Now that I have one, I can tell you that the neck feels just awesome, and there really is something about that bridge. I can't say for sure what it is, but the guitar twangs and has resonance that a lot of my other "modern" Teles lack. It's a keeper! __________________ It was born at the junction of form and function...

March 5th, 2008, 08:29 AM	#8 (permalink)
11 Gauge Friend of Leo's Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: The East Coast Posts: 2,898 10 Photos	Someone may want to inform Brent Mason, Keith Richards and others that the modern 6 (5 in Keith's case) saddle design doesn't have it's merits. I can see why the modern bridge would be an advantage or even necessity for some. I'd venture a guess that the Am. Std. has probably added more Tele players to the fold, thanks to the bridge design, extra fret, and more "mainstream" neck. Another note of interest - some years back, a close friend of mine went into the studio armed with quite a few guitars, one of which was an Am. Std. I could easily pick it out amongst all of the other guitars (many of them Fenders), despite all of the differences between the modern design and the old one. __________________

March 5th, 2008, 01:50 PM	#12 (permalink)
PJ Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Philadelphia, PA Posts: 1,918 4 Photos	The argument for stamped Strat saddles seems odd to me, since the "players" like Richards, Summers, etc., who use the American Std. bridge, seem to use the solid brass saddles. But, I have to admit, I've not played this new model, so I can't say for sure, what the new bridge does to tone. I'm probably more of a purist and and like the traditional brass-saddle bridge the best. But, I'm open to new ideas, so I'll have to go check one out, based on the positive press noted above. __________________ PJ "I don't know if it's art, but I like it."

March 4th, 2008, 08:51 PM	#3 (permalink)
Tom S Friend of Leo's Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,208 49 Photos	Well, here are the "improvements:" A redesigned bridge (really...and what's good about that? Also, who asked for one?) New bent-steel saddles with elongated string slots (We needed old strat saddles on a tele?) A new neck and body finish (with a thinner undercoat? Huh?) A Fender-exclusive high-tech molded case (whoopee, but this is probably the biggest improvement) IMHO, This is Fender's saddest attempt ever to claim that the guitar has been "revamped."

March 4th, 2008, 08:58 PM	#4 (permalink)
Nashter TDPRI Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Beaverton, OR Age: 36 Posts: 18	The undercoat on the American guitars was VERY thick before. I had a H1, that I started stripping and am still not through the undercoat.

March 4th, 2008, 09:46 PM	#5 (permalink)
jivetrain Tele-Meister Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: iowa Posts: 434 4 Photos	i wouldn't write the bridge changes off as worthless, all the vintage tele enthusiasts here complain about how the 6 saddle bridge doesn't have enough resonance and sustain, and now that fender's improved it the same people are criticizing the changes... without even having tested them, i imagine. perhaps you're just afraid that the mighty 3 saddle bridge may finally be made obsolete yet? the thing that bugs me is that the bridge plate now has two screws on the end near the pickguard, supposedly improving the resonance a little by helping to press the plate down on all sides... why did it take 60 years to do this?

March 5th, 2008, 03:31 AM	#6 (permalink)
91xlntS-3 Tele-Holic Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 694	I don't think the new saddles "look" good on a Tele. Have seen a few, but haven't "wanted" to play one. I never had any complaints about the bridge or saddles and I think the old style has a "sleeker" look to it. I'm just not sure Strat saddles on a Tele is for me. Just my opinion. BTW, Mark, check out the Classifieds. There's a Limited Ed. HW1 for sale @ $720.00. If I had the $$$, I'd be grabbing this one! Don't know why no one has picked this up yet, very good price, IMO.

March 5th, 2008, 10:31 AM	#9 (permalink)
ReddRanger Tele-Meister Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: California Posts: 253	I've only had a chance to play the new Am Std unplugged at my local shop. I played both the RW and maple neck versions. I always strum a few Teles during every trip to the store, even if just for 5 minutes. These new Am Std Teles definitely seem to feel more alive than the previous version. The necks look much nicer than before, and feel very comforatable to play (IMO). I wasn't sold on the new bridge idea at first, but now even having only played it unplugged I think it's an improvement. I can't wait to go back and plug one in this weekend.

March 5th, 2008, 02:19 PM	#13 (permalink)
Tom S Friend of Leo's Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,208 49 Photos	Well, Fender certainly has a ripe audience here. C'mon folks, this time around, you've got to be at least a little skeptical... According to Jay Piccirillo, marketing manager (for basses), “So we set out on a journey; asking ourselves, ‘What makes a great Strat® great?’ We stripped these instruments back to blank bodies and wood, and tested individual specs one at a time—alloys of bridge blocks, saddle material, neck and body finishes; rebuilding them from the ground up. We left no tonal stone unturned. These experiments helped us distill the recipe.” So apparently, previous Fender Strats do not have "the" recipe. I guess that somewhat negates all the comments by famous players that Fender uses in the video on the American Standard site. And further, how does this necessarily translate to the Telecaster? Supposedly, the new bridge plate increases resonance and sustain. Oh, really? Is there any way to document this? Is this due to old-style strat saddles or the two extra screws? If two extra screws makes an obvious difference, why aren't those similar Squier bridges all the rage? I must have missed all the buzz about how much more resonant Squier Teles were with these extra screws. And where is the hue and cry over how poorly resonant the modern-style bridge plate is in the previous American Standard? I haven't heard it. Here's a good one: "Thinner finish undercoat lets the the body breathe and improves resonance." How? Are they kidding? Lets the body breathe? Under the "top" finish? Are previous American Standards a little suffocated? And just what is the "finish undercoat"? How does thinning it improve resonance? Does anyone seriously believe that by solely using a "thinner" undercoat (whatever that is), and leaving the rest of the finish as before, the guitar will now "breathe" better? If that were true, and assuming a guitar body "breathes" at all, why not just eliminate the "finish undercoat"? Wouldn't that make more sense? Bottom line, this is all gobbledygook. Try covering your head with two plastic bags of the same thickness, then switching the inner bag with a thinner one to see if you breate any better. "A new neck treatment-tinted for a richer presentation, with the fingerboard buffed to a high gloss, The back of the neck still has that silky satin finish." This says nothing about the neck other than the finish. If they have made any actual geometric changes to the neck (changes that could actually be worth talking about), they haven't mentioned them. So the only conclusion one can make is that this is purely a cosmetic change, probably in response to the fact that a lot of people complain about the too-light look of current necks (that look too much like less-expensive models). I generally like Fender guitars, and I'm not saying the new American Series are not perfectly fine guitars. In fact, I believe Fender is making a better product in recent years than they ever produced in thier entire history. But are these latest changes really improvements or an attempt to once again breath some new life (with new hype) into an ongoing bread and butter product line?

March 5th, 2008, 03:38 PM	#15 (permalink)
AjayTele Tele-Holic Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sydney, Australia Age: 47 Posts: 956 12 Photos	OK guys. Let's leave our preconceived ideas behind (especially about bridges - God how boring the 3 saddle vs anything else arguement is ) and just assess the new Tele on it's merits. I have, over the last few years, managed to collect what is now a very large collection of Telecasters in their various forms and mutations. When I buy each guitar, naturally I play them to find out if they are good bad or indifferent playing guitars. Sometimes when I play a guitar it becomes immediately obvious that the guitar is a real player, as opposed to one that goes on the wall as a collectable. I recently bought a brand new American Standard Tele, mostly because of the fact that it's the first new Tele model in quite a while. I had also read quite a few posts on this forum and others, where eveyone was raving about how good the new Tele is. Well, I have to say that I absolutely LOVE my new American Standard Tele. It's a real player and the changes that have been made to the design appear to be all aimed at achieving that fact. Also, I have had several comments from people on how great it sounds as well, indeed my band mates asked me last night "why aren't you playing the new Tele?" And by the way, the new hard case is great as well. So, do yourself a favour and try one... I'm pretty sure you'll be gassing for one shortly afterwards. I am now seriously considering buying another one, in a different colour to put on the wall, as I think this model will be remembered fondly by history as a good move in the evolution of the Tele.

March 5th, 2008, 05:47 PM	#17 (permalink)
Frank B Tele-Meister Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Quebec city, canada Posts: 314 10 Photos	I read positive comments from people who actually tried them and... negative comments from people who haven't tried them. New saddles : I have them & love them. Do i like them better ? Yes. New neck : I have tried it & loved it. Do i like it better ? Yes. All the reasons why I like the improvements have been mentioned above. __________________ "Don't play what's there, play what's not there.” Miles Davis

March 5th, 2008, 06:47 PM	#18 (permalink)
Jellecaster Friend of Leo's Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: New Hampshire, USA Age: 40 Posts: 2,085	A lot of people seem to want to dump on this model without having actually played it. That seems strange to me - like criticizing a movie you've never seen or book you've never read. I have a "few" Teles in my collection and this is one of the best. __________________ It was born at the junction of form and function...

March 5th, 2008, 07:03 PM	#20 (permalink)
Telarkaster Tele-Afflicted Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Montreal Quebec Canada Posts: 1,607	Tom S makes some really good points, well written! My 2 cents: I played two of them, and so far they're batting .500. The first one buzzed so bad on the open E string that I didn't even bother to plug it in (see the thread about trying and buying electric guitars unplugged). It was the wierdest thing, I couldn't even isolate where the buzz was coming from. Junk. Back on the wall. Too bad, because the natural finish was absolutely gorgeous. The second one had a neck that reminded me of the one on my 2005 American Series Strat, the reason why I bought it. Modern satin C neck, really nice. The pickups were great, it sounded and felt like a Tele. Ain't nothing wrong with that guitar. If you can't play well on that guitar, it's because you suck, not because of the guitar. But I put it back on the wall. Why? I already have an American Standard Tele. From 1995. Before they changed the name to Series and back to Standard as part of some silly marketing gimmick. Mine has a wider neck across the nut, thinner (shallower) neck, and comparable pickups. I don't need another Am Std. But if I didn't have one already, I'd pick one up for sure! One that didn't buzz...