Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Squier Tele Forum' started by TeleOrLes, Apr 15, 2017.
Fred & Ethell!
Fred & Ethell!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There's a lot to be said for gigging in near darkness.
Tool's Maynard does this as (I've heard) it helps him connect better with the material - and therefore give a more sincere performance.
...or he could just have really bad skin...
Either way - I think he's onto something. No labels, no cork-sniffing, just MUSIC - the reason we got into this game in the first place.
All guitars in the world should be made in one place.
the problem is squarely located between the ears and a need to participate in conspicuous consumption seems to exacerbate the problem.
Let's all give Dan Electros a big cheer
Some people have their eyes and ears swapped. When they see a Squier, it is bad, but when they hear a Squier they cannot tell the difference between a Squier and a Fender.
Of course there are some differences, but not primarily in the sound (pickups are a matter of personal preference). Some parts are lower quality on Squiers. Like saddles, electronics and tuners, but not to the point that they are worthless. My experience tells me that especially on the Affinity a fret job is usually needed. All guitars (including expensive ones) can use a goot setup, so that does not count.
The higher end Squiers are really good IMHO. I've played a MIM and it was a very good experience, nothing wrong with it. But was it better than a CV or VM? Not to me. Was it worse, NOPE. Was it different? yes, because of different specs. I don't dislike three barrel bridges, but I like 6 saddle bridges a bit more and the MIM had 6 saddles. And I suppose the quality of the hardware is a bit better, but not to a point that is that "clear".
Of course some people also seem to prefer guitars with a higher resale value. But if a guitar is good enough to play, Does resale value really matter? They usually cost more in the first place, and it is not that strange that Fenders have a higher resale value.
So I totally agree: if a Squier works for the job, what's the problem?
PS: I do have a few Fender telecasters as well
I think the affinity squier sounds different than a usa telecaster. The telecaster is usually ash and the affinity i have is a thinner piece of alder. I like the sound of alder better and for whatever reason i like the more dynamic twangier sound of my bottom model bsb chinese affinty squier tele than the usa telecasters i compared it to. After a good setup with fretwork the affinity plays as pro as it needs to be. Through a fender blues deluxe RI the guitar with stock pickups sound fantastic. I dont apologize for my guitar and it doesnt apologize for me.
An observation about my unconscious /hovering assumptions regarding Fender Squier Telcasters... zzzzzz
fender American standard is best better than (excluding custom shop )Squiers are poorly made and cheap,
I know that these assumptions, when addressed consciously, are patently false, completely untrue never having played a custom shop how would I know anything about custom shop guitars.
Advertising, who players this or that model? Some players have testified that their Squier John 5 Teles are great.v as good as any that they have played. hmmmm, my assumption seems wrong again.
Then there is the G&L vs Fender guitars
Again I've never played a G&L guitar, but hey! Leo makes'em, so they have to be better and I prefer the style of the G&L appointment options: finishes pick up selection, etc. etc. they are better than Fenders options , this is just plain ole'stick stupid.
the error is in how I think or don't think about tools, let me rethink or unthink my erroneous assumptions, and ask, does : Form Follows Function, apply first and foremost.
a classic 1958 tobacco sunburst (Les Paul finish) will not help extend my reach up and down the fret board while giving me deep insight into harmolodic theory
Ornette Coleman's harmolodic theory