What makes them so special?

[Coyote]

I was at the Fender website a few minutes ago, and I was looking through the Teles and the Strats and whatnot, and I noticed the years on the models.

'57 Strat, '62 Strat, '52 Tele, etc.

Of course that's not the first time that I've noticed these years, but it's the first time I've ever inquired about them.

What happened in these years concering these guitars that makes these years deserving of their own model? Did the guitar undergo a change in said years?

[Rufus]

I would take those specific years with a grain of salt. From what little I know, Fender tries to give you the spirit of the vintage stuff, but its not necessarily 100%accurate in terms of all the little details - i.e. 12th fret dot spacing, fret sizes, neck radius, etc., etc.

That bugs some folks ... and I guess I can't blame them. If you're gonna represent something as a specific year, imo it should be accurate. But I guess overall, they do a pretty good job. Just my 2 cents...

[Mike Rice]

I read an article on this ages ago that I believe involved primarily Dan Smith. Keep in mind that this line of guitars was conceived of prior to the CBS sale of Fender back to Mr. Schultz and company. For lack of a better way to word this, the year's were chosen because they were period correct and history had good recollection of them. Or, in some cases, history didn't have negative recollection of those years.

I don't recall the logic for picking '52, since the wiring specs are close to '53, but it may have had something to do with a general mystique about that particular year Telecaster. '57 is very fondly remembered in automotive history, especially with GM. The Corvette got fuel injected and they introduced what would become the most collectible cllassic of all time, the '57 Belair.

Picking a year from the early 60s became tougher as these were some tense times. '61 was Bay of Pigs, but '63 was the Kennedy assasination. Even though the Cuban Missile Crisis occured in '62, I guess by and large that's viewed positively by American historians.

I'm not making this stuff up! I wish I could find the original article where I read about this. Quite fascinating for a history buff like myself!!

[Dacious]

They chose '52 because although some '51s may have got a 'Telecaster' label most people think 'Nocaster' for '51 and they like the Broadcaster have a pickup blend control for the two pickups rather than a tone control.

So the pre '52 guitars can be called the 'product development' versions. The full '52 year was the combination of features which then lasted with minor variations until the rosewood board and alder body.

It the case of the '57 Strat, it is where the stained alder body and three-tone suburst came together with maple neck to form the classic Strat still sort of made today in standard form.

The 62 was the intro of the veneer rosewood board which again is the landmark year for a long-standing version, with the combination of finish and features still made today in developed form for standard Strats. This is also true for the '62 Tele, whcih also of course icorporated the Custom binding.

That's as far as I can see - there are certainly other significant years, which have standard Custom Shiop models commemorating them like '54 Strat, '51 Nocaster etc.

[Brian blaut]

I would take those specific years with a grain of salt. From what little I know, Fender tries to give you the spirit of the vintage stuff, but its not necessarily 100%accurate in terms of all the little details - i.e. 12th fret dot spacing, fret sizes, neck radius, etc., etc.

I would bet the economics of manufacturing plays a big roll in that specifically. They "could" make it exactly but they're already setup to make modern 12th fret dots etc...Maybe it would too expensive to go all the way so they just go for the essence. Maybe it would be more correct to call them "Inspired by..." instead of "reissue".

[Mike Rice]

Originally Posted by Dacious

It the case of the '57 Strat, it is where the stained alder body and three-tone suburst came together with maple neck to form the classic Strat still sort of made today in standard form.

I thought all Strats were still Ash in '57?

Originally Posted by Dacious

The 62 was the intro of the veneer rosewood board

I thought late '59 and early '60 was when the rosewood lam board was introduced?

[timgreene]

59-mid 62 slab rosewood neck, post 62 thinner veneer rosewood necks.

[Mike Rice]

Smith recalls "because in the USA 1957 is the classic year for automobiles".

We were both spot on regarding the '62! "We knew that that the vintage guys liked the slab board, so we felt that if we had neck problem we could always go to the curved fretboard and still call it a '62 without scrapping our price lists and catalogs". Smith also notes that 1962 has no bad memories for most Americans.

This is out of the Bacon/Day Fender Book. I know there was a more complete interview on this topic with Smith as well, but this is the best I can do for now.

[Dacious]

Originally Posted by Brian blaut

I would bet the economics of manufacturing plays a big roll in that specifically. They "could" make it exactly but they're already setup to make modern 12th fret dots etc...Maybe it would too expensive to go all the way so they just go for the essence. Maybe it would be more correct to call them "Inspired by..." instead of "reissue".

The idea of reissues is to give you a new guitar that looks like an old one, and sounds and feels similar; not the same. In some ways I; glad they're not too close - we already have a degree of unscrupulous fraudsters with misrepresented 'old' guitars.

In reality most of those old guitars would to us have had an amazing degree of variation, just by virtue of their hand-made nature. Some would be gems and some would be real clunkers. When they were making them they weren't gearheads or sentimental or interested i tone - they were making goods to be sold.

[Mike Rice]

Originally Posted by Dacious

The idea of reissues is to give you a new guitar that looks like an old one, and sounds and feels similar; not the same.

I so wish I could find that entire Smith interview, but I'm beginning to suspect that I probably lost it in the house fire. In support of what Dacious is saying I distinctly remember Smith talking about how they were trying to make a Tele and a couple Strats true to a particular era. Choosing the exact year associated with each was done after the fact with marketting as much in mind as anything else.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by Dacious

The idea of reissues is to give you a new guitar that looks like an old one, and sounds and feels similar; not the same. In some ways I; glad they're not too close - we already have a degree of unscrupulous fraudsters with misrepresented 'old' guitars.

If its "similar" and not "the same" as a '52 Tele or a '62 Strat, then they shouldn't label it as such. Case closed.

I understand about keeping the co$t down, etc....They could easily call it a " '50's Tele" or a " '60's Strat" instead of listing a particular year, which isn't really accurate.

I don't have a beef with the guitars, just with misrepresentation - on purpose or by accident. Most people would agree that the word "REissue" implies an exact copy - rather deceptive marketing to me. Websters defines reissue as "to issue AGAIN; a second or subsequent issue; a reprinting of postage stamps from unchanged plates."
If I buy a reissue or reprinting of a book, the story has not been changed, it doesn't have a different ending. It is "the same", not "similar".

As far as someone mistaking a modern '52 Reissue with an actual vintage '52, I have a hard time believing that you couldn't tell the two apart.

In this case, I think its Fender themselves that are, as you say "misrepresenting old guitars". Just call them 50's Teles or 60's Strats and the problem is solved.

Just my 2 cents; ymmv 8)

Edited to correct quotes

[Heather Anne Peel]

I thought 2004 was an especially good year for Fenders, actually. I own several from that year. Maybe in 2032 an '04 Tele will command big bucks! Ya never know...
8) Heather

[TG]

It comes to my mind that over the years I've read about quite a few players with cherished old strats which were '62s. So maybe it was a good year for them.