Thinline-style ASAT Classic encounter

[editorjuno]

Local shop has a used one -- amazingly light, very (almost excessively, even for me) flat neck radius, and a decently good performer even with the stock pickups. I like the standard-size Tele pickguard and control plate too -- makes reversing the control plate and/or an Esquire conversion much easier than with a Fender Thinline. Really ugly headstock, otherwise I'd be GASing like mad -- dang, it was nice...

[BB]

I've played several thinline asats and tributes in the past few months. All but one were very toneful and very playable. Cool guitars.

[TwinReverb]

should be mandatory

Great quality, tone, etc. And developped by Leo.
I love my Classic. Twangs like hell.

cheers
Erik

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by TwinReverb

One ASAT should be mandatory

I agree!!! I love my ASAT Special. The craftsmanship of those guitars can kick the crap out of Fender (at least the latest stuff) big time.

[jwells393]

Got to disagree with the ugly headstock comment. Since the Fender Telecaster headstock can't be used, I think G&L has come up with the second best design................... and this headstock was created while ole Leo was still in charge.

[guitar_ed]

And I really like it. I have also ordered an ASAT Z3 semi-hollow w/Bigsby. I ordered it just before NAMM, so it will 2 or 3 months before I get that one.

Oddly, I have no Fender made Tele's, just my home brews.

Guitar Ed

[jwells393]

You may already know this but G&L routs a recess for the Bigsby to sit in.

[cvansickle]

I had a Thinline ASAT Classic encounter myself today! I've been jonesing for a Tele lately, but I was completely disappointed with the Fender selection at Guitarget the other day. Today, I stopped in my local G&L dealer to try those.

I have decided that the Tele for me is going to be an ASAT Classic semi hollow. I tried a great specimen today. Perfect neck, perfect body balance, lovely bridge pickup and vintage style bridge. I would have bought it on the spot, except it had a neck humbucker. I really want a traditional Tele pickup setup, becasue I want to use the middle sound. I've already got the humbucker guitar sound covered.

The dealer said they would order. I have to think....

[harlycarly]

I love my ASAT Special, as well as 2 other G&Ls I have. My Legacy is simply a super strat, and a supposed low end SC3 really is a great guitar by itself.

Can't get behind the headstock criticisms, it is what it is. The "company" is responsible for it and I've never noticed it while I was playing.

If you owned a G&L, you probably know what the praise is about.

[editorjuno]

Originally Posted by jwells393

Got to disagree with the ugly headstock comment. Since the Fender Telecaster headstock can't be used, I think G&L has come up with the second best design................... and this headstock was created while ole Leo was still in charge.

Not everything St. Leo oversaw was a masterpiece -- I've seen several headstock shapes on Tele-style guitars that are more pleasing to look at than G&L's design imo, but of course the famous "eye of the beholder" factor definitely applies. Another example: The ASAT Classic's six-saddle ashtray-style bridge is no better than Fender's version of the same idea. That said, I was still mightily impressed by that guitar, and compared to Fender Thinlines it's a buyer's market for G&L's (imo superior) rendition of the semi-hollow Tele idea!

[jwells393]

OK ........... editorjuno......... let's see some of those better looking non-Fender headstocks on Telecaster style guitars.

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement.

The ASAT Classic's six-saddle ashtray-style bridge is no better than Fender's version of the same idea.

They're essentially the same. Are you using the fact that he didn't make a dramatic improvement to his original design from 40 years earlier, as an example of a non-masterpiece.

[editorjuno]

Originally Posted by jwells393

OK ........... editorjuno......... let's see some of those better looking non-Fender headstocks on Telecaster style guitars.

I'm not sure what you mean by this statement.

They're essentially the same. Are you using the fact that he didn't make a dramatic improvement to his original design from 40 years earlier, as an example of a non-masterpiece.

Sure the ASAT Classic bridge an example of a non-masterpiece -- Leo had an opportunity to improve on his classic Tele bridge and in one respect he did, only to actually degrade the part in another. A truly masterful change is always an overall improvement, wouldn't you agree? The six-saddle ashtray-style bridge represents one step forward (to intonation accuracy) and one step back (away from stability -- some would say from performance too).

[jwells393]

Maybe I'm missing something here. How did he degrade it? But better yet ........ tell me how you would have improved it.

[Reno Sepulveda]

Originally Posted by jwells393

let's see some of those better looking non-Fender headstocks on Telecaster style guitars.

I don't know, I always kind of liked the very fist G&L headstocks especially compared to the new ones. Then there's this one from Don Grosh. And this from Sadowsky. And even Hamer's T-51

But that's just me, to each his own.

[KingPussBlues]

It's a used 2004 G&L Tribute ASAT Classic Semi-Hollow. It has a beautiful ash body in sunburst with a maple board. The MFD pickups are loud, smooth and toneful. The pots and switch are first rate. The body is very resonant. The neck is finished well and it plays like a dream. The guitar is light and comfy to shoulder. I shielded the pickguard and I play with a Fender ashtray (bridge cover) onboard for additional grounding and a very quiet ride. Played it out at church a few times now. Tone and looks drew a number of compliments. After my Fender AV '52 RI, it's my favorite. Oh yes, I like the headstock. All in all, I'm very pleased with the ASAT, and the Tribute line offers quality at a great price.

John 8)

[editorjuno]

Originally Posted by jwells393

Maybe I'm missing something here. How did he degrade it? But better yet ........ tell me how you would have improved it.

The six-barrel versions of the ashtray-style bridge are inherently unstable -- the saddles tend to wander sideways and they also tend to twist around on their intonation screws and tilt onto one setscrew, especially when changing strings. I cured this by going to a modern L-shaped non-ferrous Gotoh bridge with elongated Strat-style saddles, others have simply reverted to a vintage-style three-barrel ashtray-style bridge with compensated saddles.

Imo either of those alternatives would have improved the ASAT Classics as compared to Leo's decision, which was essentially to swap one deficiency (imprecise intonation) for another (unstable saddles). By sticking with the thin flanged steel bridge plate, he also perpetuated the tendency of the bridge pickup to squeal at rock & roll stage volumes due to the bridge plate acting like a crude microphone diaphragm -- imo another missed improvement opportunity. Bottom line for me: a non-masterpiece.

Many players also report performance improvements when reverting to a three-barrel setup, but I can't testify to that -- I do know that my modern bridge has eliminated both the saddle instability and any tendency toward microphonic squealing from the bridge pickup as well as vastly improving right hand comfort and freedom of motion/position due to the absence of a vestigial flange.

[Reno Sepulveda]

I think the standard ASAT Saddle-Lock bridge addresses all those issues.

[dhdfoster]

I had an ASAT thinline and it was an incredible sounding guitar.

[rcrecelius]

Hmmm, this has turned into quite a conversation.
First off, I am an ASAT Classic owner and I love it and would definitely like to have another, maybe even a semi-hollow version like the one that started this thread.

Headstock...IMHO, a guitar that plays and sounds as good as my ASAT could have a pointy headstock for all I care! Seriously though, I dont think any tele style headstock will ever be as beautiful as the original tele design but I like (G&L's) version better than most others I have seen.

The bridge plate...as I see it the bridgeplate is a nod toward the originals, hence the designation suffix "Classic" while not exactly like the originals because it has 6 instead of 3 saddles.
When I first got my ASAT, the bridgeplate flange kinda bothered me but now that Im used to it, I like it better than the flat bridgeplates.
To some, it is an improvement, to others it is not.

To each his own.

I like mine, I would buy another, and IMHO a G&L guitar is a better quality instrument than an equally priced American made Fender.

YMMV :)

[guit145]

You know, I'm actually quite suprised that G&L doesn't get more lip service on this forum. In my experience they are better than modern Fenders in EVERY way. For heavan's sake, G&Ls are more "Fender" than Fender (R) . Leo's widow is still part of the ownership.

The bline allegence to companies like Fender and Gibson completely baffle me.

That being said, the only thing I've had to do to my '97 ASAT Classic, was replace the bridge and saddles. It shouldered a pretty heavy load from '98-2001. Finger acid tore up two sets of saddles before I decided to go with a new bridge setup, stainless w/3 barrel compensated.

[cvansickle]

I played a G&L Tribute ASAT Classic Semi-Hollow today at the same store I went to yesterday. The American ASAT Classic Semi-Hollow Blues Boy was still there, so I got to A/B them for close to one hour.

I found the Tribute to be significantly lighter than the American ASAT, and the Tribute's neck was much more comfortable for me to play. I liked the Tribute's neck pickup tone too (a regular G&L single). In side by side acoustic playing, I found the Tribute to every bit as high quality as the American ASAT.

Unfortunately, this Tribute was used, and the previous owner had switched out the bridge pickup with a Duncan Hot Rails. So again, I was unable to get the classic Tele tone I crave.

I'm going to keep looking for the right ASAT, and I think it's going to be a Tribute. I know my budget will appreciate that!