Tough Tele decisions....help!

[garcia]

So, I had a '50s Classic Tele for a short period of time because I really struggled with the vintage radius/small frets. I know that old argument sounds ridiculous to some long time Tele players, but I think that I just got used to the more modern stuff first before playing anything else. I now am ready to buy another Tele and I am stuck wondering if the reason that I wrestled with my '50s Classic was because of the size of the neck more so than the vintage radius. I mean, the neck on this thing was prett large, particularly compared to some of the '60s RIs that I have picked up. Would a '60s Classic Tele be a bit easier to play, ie. bends and such, due to the fact that the neck shape is a bit thinner feeling than that of the '50s? I really wish I had access to some of these models so I could try them out ('60s Classic, '62 RI, Baja) just for comparison. FWIW, I had my '50s Classic set up twice by a really good local tech. Sorry about the long post but I want to make the right decision. Thanks for any input.

Garcia

[RollingThunder75]

I'm in the same boat right now. I've got a 50s Strat that I've had since 2003, and it always cramps my hand after playing a while. I basically only play rhythm, open and barre chords. I've pretty much concluded that nothing about a vintage neck is for me, and everything about a more modern neck feels better. Satin finish, thinner profile, bigger frets and flatter radius all add up to better playability for me. I'm probably going to end up with a Standard Tele, and maybe swap pickups and the bridge along the way.

[PK]

I think the marketing people at Fender prey on the idea most people have that the old stuff was better. In some areas older IS better, but I"m of the belief that modern guitar makers are building guitars better suited to a wider set of needs individual players have. Me? I like the freakin baseball bat tele! I also like my Gibson's thin neck (going from the baseball bat to the gibson is like going from my jeep to my vette!). The answer? One of each please :)

PK

[MulliganChebichev]

unscrew the four bolts that hold the neck, sell the neck, and buy one that suits your needs

[BritishBluesBoy]

Originally Posted by MulliganChebichev

unscrew the four bolts that hold the neck, sell the neck, and buy one that suits your needs

Listen to Mulligan... He knows what he's on about...

[Stubee]

What Mulligan said, if you still have the guitar. Sounds like you don't as you speak of it in past tense.

I have a '50s Classic. I love the axe, but I couldn't handle the neck. Sold it to a guy here that loves it--they are very nice necks--and put a '90s MIM Tele Deluxe neck on it. Kinda sticky (heavily played gloss) so I've cleaned the heck outta it, but far easier for me to play. Some guys like the big necks, I just don't, purely personal preference.

BTW, I also have a '60s Classic, the neck is quite a bit slimmer & I handle it well. I even put that on my '50s body for awhile. The RW looked great with the SB, but when I got the Deluxe neck, I put the '60s neck back with it's body. Neck swaps are easy. If you can figure out what you want, you can find it somewhere, like EBay. Or if ya don't have a Tele at all, the '60s Classic is worth a look. Or maybe a used American Standard or American Series. Their necks seem, to me, pretty slim. They will have 9.5" radius & larger frets, too, if that's yer wish.

I don't have any problem with vintage radius & frets, but also like 9.5" stuff with a bit larger frets, too. Again, some guys swear by one or the other, not me. Probably just because I'm not good enough to appreciate the difference.

[blacklove]

I've played vintage radius/fret necks and found them exceptionally hard to play if the guitar isn't set up to my liking (a tiny, tiny amount of bow and medium-low action). A friend of mine has a '69 Thinline Reissue that he loves but I can barely do chords on. The finish on that neck was really weird, too.

I have a 60's Classic and although it has the same radius and frets, it's just a different beast. I set it up how I want it, and that helps a lot.

[garcia]

Originally Posted by blacklove

I've played vintage radius/fret necks and found them exceptionally hard to play if the guitar isn't set up to my liking (a tiny, tiny amount of bow and medium-low action). A friend of mine has a '69 Thinline Reissue that he loves but I can barely do chords on. The finish on that neck was really weird, too.

I have a 60's Classic and although it has the same radius and frets, it's just a different beast. I set it up how I want it, and that helps a lot.

What do you mean when you say it is a different beast? I have played exactly 1 '60s Classic next to a '50s Esquire and the '60s was so much easier to play and I can't figure out why.

[blacklove]

Originally Posted by garcia

What do you mean when you say it is a different beast? I have played exactly 1 '60s Classic next to a '50s Esquire and the '60s was so much easier to play and I can't figure out why.

A question for the ages, my friend. At the time, I really didn't think much about why it was such a poor playing guitar. It just was...and that was all I needed to know.

Actually, the first time I played my friend's aforementioned Thinline, I happened to be pretty drunk. He had just gotten it and I picked it up and admired its beauty. Then I tried to play it and didn't have much success. I blamed it on being too wasted to play. But later, in a completely sober state, I tried it again. It wasn't the whiskey.

[Telemarkman]

Originally Posted by garcia

What do you mean when you say it is a different beast? I have played exactly 1 '60s Classic next to a '50s Esquire and the '60s was so much easier to play and I can't figure out why.

I had both the '60s and the '50s for about a year (still have the '60s), and I agree that the '60s is somewhat easier to play, though I wouldn't say the difference is great.

There can only be two reasons for this, (as they have the same vintage frets/fretboard radius) : 1) neck profile 2) fretboard material/finish

If you measure the necks, you'll find that '50s neck is slightly deeper at 1st fret, but that there's practically no difference at 12th fret. (Though there may be individual differences). Widths are similar.

What makes the '60s neck seem noticeable slimmer - and easier playing to some, is the profile. The '50s neck has more shoulders and tends towards a "U" - it may even have a very soft "V" shape at the first frets - while the '60s neck is a typical classic "C", making the circumference of the neck noticeable smaller. "It ain't too big, it ain't too small - the medium size fits all!"

The second reason - fretboard material and finish - can make a big difference to some. Many players find the feeling of the unfinished rosewood board more agreeable than the poly covered maple board of the '50s. (Personally I find them equally playable).

To me the difference between a modern, flat fretboard with big frets vs. a vintage spec neck, is much more noticeable than between a '50s and a '60s neck.

And why a thinner neck with a flat radius fretboard and big frets should be better for barre chords, is beyond me. To me that's the recipe for cramps.....But then we're all different I guess.

[beep.click]

Here's a wrinkle: I love the baseball bat on my Baja... A LOT. It's the whole reason I bought the guitar. It just feels totally right.

One night, I was trying out different amps and stomp boxes. I had a tone going that felt good, and I could playing anything -- fingers flying.

As soon as I changed the tone, it was as if someone had put glue on the neck. Couldn't bend; slide; NOTHING.

That was a BIG lesson. Obviously, the neck didn't change; the guitar didn't change. But when the SOUND I heard wasn't right, the guitar literally wouldn't PLAY right...

[garcia]

Thanks for all of the info, guys. I am still trying to decide between the '60s Classic and the Baja. I don't like all the switching options on the Baja but I do like the neck. Does anyone else think the '60s Classic is less "stiff" than the '50s, even given that they have the same neck radius? Thanks again for all input.

Garcia

[Flashback]

I own a Baja, well its a Baja Body, Neck, and Neck Pickup. The rest was replaced with Glendale parts, Better Tuners, and a Fralin Blues Special in the bridge. Now I am in hog heaven! Plus I dig the simple tele controls of a 3 way and tone and volume. The other tones I never used anyway.

Get the Baja its a STEAL for a neck and neck pickup that nice.

[boris bubbanov]

I'm a little confused. The Baja is clearly the biggest diameter of the MIM Classic necks. The Classic 60's is clearly the smallest. The Classic 50's Tele and Esquire, and the '69 Thinline fall about halfway between, diameter wise, with very subtle differences in profile.
To me fret size and board radius are way less important than the basic neck size, things to which one simply adapts. I could be wrong.
I've just bought a couple VMT boatneck rosewood necks from Warmoth, and my two favorite Fender necks are my two Bajas, so I prefer a decent size neck, a neck that need not necessarily be maple.
To me, the Classic 60's is just a bit too small, better than an Am Se but still stumble city. I can't figure why a Baja and a 60's would work for somebody but a 50's would not. I would expect someone to like either the 60's Classic or the Baja but not both, with the 50's and '69 Thinline being the middle ground.
I guess sometimes an individual guitar is special enough one can overlook a serious problem in its basic dimensions.

Bubbanov

[Big Lug]

Originally Posted by MulliganChebichev

unscrew the four bolts that hold the neck, sell the neck, and buy one that suits your needs

If you prefer the 50's Classic tele I would do exactly what Mulligan suggested.