Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Telecaster Discussion Forum' started by Backbeat8, Jul 5, 2018.
Medicine can work wonders these days!
I have a minor point about the ceramic magnet anilco magnet issue. Personally it is in the ears. I have heard both that sound great and both that should be in a wood chipper.
You get the choice, and its your $$$$$s at stake
I love the sound of this
now there's some effects like some light vibrato and tremolo etc but the fundamental sound of the guitars here, this is like "Tele" tone to me....however you can see, neither of them are actually playing a Tele.
This why I say,
that there is really "two" things going on here.....
1. There is a "Twangy" sound, and by sheer cause and effect, when you pick up a "Tele", you almost always divert into that type of loosey Twangy style, because that's what you associate it with. The "Tele" is just a guitar, it has no inherent "Twang" "Style" embedded into it's pickups or strings, you are choosing, to make it Twang.
2. When you pick up a Les Paul, you feel compelled to play it without a "Twang", but instead with a "Zip" and a "Gruuuuunnnnk", how much of that is just you subconscious association with who has played one and they played it, CHOSE to play it....they are both guitars, they both have pickups, and the strings are the exact same. Output is different, that's really it, other than the obvious scale length etc. that stuff.
Reality is, you can play it however you want to. You just feel compelled to play it a certain way. This is just collective peer pressure, to act appropriately. The other aspect is that, you can't PURPOSELY try to do unorthodox things, like that is just silly. If you play heavy metal, you don't buy a Tele, just to prove you can play heavy metal on it.
Tones? Good tones?
Here's some good tones, I am not even really a Clapton fan, but here, in these first few pieces, first is 000 acoustic Martin micd up/piezo, THAT is Tone. Real tone. (His vocal mic is way too loud though imo).
Next up, he plays a hollow body Gibson. That is some Tone right there
He actually uses that 000 Martin for most of the first 40 minutes, then he switches around the 40:00 mark to that Strat with the Funky weird design on it. Now, just to be honest here, that Strat tone, in contrast to the previous two tones, sounds quite unappealing. It sounds empty and honky, not twangy. Now when he overdrives for the solo???-----now that sounds good. Huge sustain there, and fat. Using a solid body Electric to play "clean" tones, is kind of not really using it very well, the electric shines when it is overdriven and it screams with the type of sustain that is impossible in the acoustic realm.
Then near the end, he switches it out for another Strat, same SSS, but it is gold/bronze coloured.
In this clip, I want you to play it, without looking at the screen, listen to it, then tell me what guitars are being used by both players. This is a "Tele" sound imo.
In this clip,
it's again a live recording, And there is no footage of the guitars from the front. To me, it sounds like a definite single coil on at least one of them. The other idk. But I wouldn't be surprised if neither was actually a Tele.
The "Tele" Tone, might be coming from a Gibson, or a Jazzman, it depends on how you play it.
I just think "Twang" and Telecaster are two separate things. You can "Twang" with any guitar.
I get twang with many guitars, not just Teles.
But the Telecaster does it best. Twang defined as playing the melody on the low strings. Ala Luther Dickinson. It's that confounded bridge pickup configuration in a vintage style Tele that does it.
The sounds in that first Stones vid were pretty effect-laden, but at root you have a bridge humbucker (Woody) and a pair of P90s (Keith). Put those in a Tele, and you have a much hotter, yet still quite bright, sound, compared to Tex Mex, or some nameless random slightly overwound Tele single coil.
I suspect until you go there, you aren't gonna be happy with Telecasters. Teles accept all manner of pickups, so what are you waiting for.
Makes sense to play lower notes on the bridge pup position, thanks for that tip!
Isn't is the same basically as a Strat? They are both single coils and angled? What makes the Tele different and unusual?
I like both of their playing and interplay, but tone wise in this clip I definitely have a leaning towards Woody. Maybe I should be looking at humbuckers. The thing is, when I was trying all those gibsons I was completely focused only on the actual playability of the frets and necks, and I wasn't even caring to plug in much. That was what I like to do, is not focus on the sound of the amp and only focus on which one I feel plays well and weighs right in my hands.
I think the thing, or sound I don't like much, is a really "buzzy" kind of overly fuzzy sound, that could be as much being a bit to overdriven or it could be just part of the P90, I played two les pauls today, one incidentally had two P90s and the other was the normal Humbuckers. Luckily I guess. So I can further iterate my feelings. I thought I liked P90 since I tried it on couple guitars, but to me the sound just seems to be too un focused, I don't like the over focused sound either though. I like the "clang" of the Woody guitar here. Keed here, whether it's the P90s specifically or not, sounds abit too buzzy to me, but he sounds like that in other clips to with different guitars so that's just more his sound, which compliments the other "clangy" sound. I guess there's a time for Buzz and a time for Clang.
I have been avert to even thinking about putting buckers into the Tele, I feel like it would just not be right, and not give me an authentic Tele experience. I want a true "standard" Tele, hence why I made this thread because I don't want any "special" gimmicks on it, I just want a normal one, with the proper historic fittings. I look at it like a type of Paint, it's like Oil Paint, vs Acrylic, if you put a humbucker in it, it is not Oil Paint any more. Maybe if it was my 5th or 6th Tele and I had been playing only the normal setup for 5 years. But this is my first one.
Well, you might be right. I think they are a tool, and there is a place for them, that other guitars can't give you, there is just a unique "experience", it isn't just the Sound, it's the experience and inherent limitations of the Instrument itself, the physical tactile aspect. I would never just write Teles off without even trying one (actually buying one and trying to get on with it). That being said, I don't like to focus on too many things at once, and that is why I have been trying to play as many different guitars and styles, to eliminate the entire process of another bad guitar experience like my previous Strat was. I am going to start plugging in Les Pauls now, and considering them again, since I haven't really fully explored them, like I have been doing with the Teles and Strats.
Even if I decided I wanted both a Tele and a Les Paul, and a Strat, I still haven't concluded which one I would want. And call me obsessed with the details, but if you can tell the difference between these smaller details, then it would be silly to ignore them. You should assess the situation and gather as much relevant information as possible. You just have to know what info has value to you, and what is just noise. It isn't just about buying a guitar, it's about learning about guitars and how they work as a technology and instrument. I was obsessed with synthesizers and sound design, and music production for 5 years. I spent almost zero time learning about guitar technology during that time. Because it wasn't relevant to what my Vision is. I don't do things unless there is a reason. Even if I can't quite quantify why. It is never a bad thing, to learn more about what actually interests you, instead of what doesn't, no matter how seemingly residual it might seem. It's all part of your Mastery of the Craft of Music.
If you took out the SC bridge though you would have to use a Mini HB because there's only the smaller space I thought.
Ok, what should I buy? I'll go tomorrow and buy a guitar.
<face palm> Boy, ah say Boy...
Here's a good history of the Tele bridge pickup and all it's variations.
In short, it couldn't be more different from the Strat.
If I were you, before leaving single coils behind, spend time with both a modern hot wound A5 bridge pickup, and a vintage style pickup based on the Broadcaster. Alnico 3, usually 43 AWG wire, fairly high output overall (but not compared to the modern Tele bridge), and extremely clean and clear, with some warmth and no icepick. I play the latter, in the form of Stuart Blackguard pickups. There are too many makers of the Broadcaster formula to list.
IMO, most any pickups you find in a MIM Tele need to be replaced with something better. Some will disagree. Depends on your ears, what you want, style of music, etc. But at least try some really good ones, if you can. Don't dismiss Fender pickups. Not exactly your sound, but the AV64 set are some of the best pickups I've ever played, period.
You're gonna need to play / hear them in various contexts to rule out amp circuit, speaker, and settings, and much more. Personally, I like P90s the least, because they don't seem very complex as a clean sound. No matter what, they always sound pretty much the same. I can get a lot more variation and nuance from either Fender single coils, or PAFs. Or Dynasonics. Keep in mind, I play clean, so the well-loved P90 crunch and grit holds no interest for me.
That's cool. I don't put HBs in my Fenders either. I have Gibsons for that sound. So, even more, you need to seek out a vintage spec Tele, IMO. The cheap stamped steel bridge is a tone thing. The pickups, as described...
Tele neck is obviously easier to swap, because no integrated bridge. Usually if you put something different in the bridge position, you ditch the typical Tele bridge, and go with some form of 'chopped' version, like this, from Marc Rutters:
For me, a Tele can cover a ton of ground. A Strat, while I would never be without one, is a niche sound, for special use only. Everyone has their versions of these, but it's different for each person. Perhaps for you, the Tele is that vintage, Vince Gill sounding thing that you only need once in a while, and you just can't get anything else useful out of it. But the ... LP, SG, whatever, is your "go to".
You don't have to like Teles like anyone else does. But it does seem lately here that you're beating your head against the wall trying to like the Tele - but don't because it doesn't ... sound like a Gibson. Sort of. Take your time, and definitely go play a few more Telecasters. With vintage vs hot-hot pickups. With min HBs in the neck, with gold foils, etc. Enjoy the process.
Man I love my bsb FSR tele. Partially reliced by the P.O. and finished by me. It bangs in to everything that looks at it wrong and I love it.
I played a bunch of LPs today, and I just can't get past how heavy they are. The necks just feel too bulky, it basically feels like I'm playing acoustic too much. Went back to the Tele, and I am not just saying this, to convince myself, I am not emotional about this, but it just felt like "going home". Even right as I was ending playing the LPs, I could already feel the need to go back and play the Tele. I played some Strats too though, I still like the Strat also. It's the lightest, and I was playing a Deluxe, which has a 12" radius, I think that supposedly unorthodox radius spec on a Fender, does have some value to it, it fills a hole, where you want more of a LP/flat playing feel, but you want the SSS or just the body and neck of the Fender. For some reason, when I played that, the song "Love me two times" just started emanating from the guitar, I've never learned that song, it just started playing itself that openining riff.
I think their are certain specs that will just naturally make you play certain things as opposed to others, but you can still play what you want.
But again, the main thing is not the sound for me, I am pretty sure I can get a "LP" sound from a Tele if I really want and vice versa. The more important thing to me, is the body, neck, fretboard, and design of it.
The big takeaway though from today was simply that, I think the main reason why I want the Tele, is it is just built well and it is simple, the LPs feel so heavy but fragile and considering it's neck can snap if you drop it, and the four knobs are good, but any way.
Those are more the things I am focused on, I want a guitar that I can use as a workhorse, not a novelty or nuanced sound. And I am not talking in terms of "Sound", I talking terms of the physical instrument, and how it is designed and makes playing.
The Tele simply is a big slab of wood, I wouldn't be worried if I dropped it, or banged it, it will fine if I smack it alot like I like to do for some playing.
It's that aspect of it, that really is the over arching attribute for me. The sound will be what it is. you can change it with differnt pups.
But obviously I feel like Ash/Maple are the best combo in my ears.
Teles just feel sturdy and dependable and simple. They are not "light" but they are WAY lighter than LPs. They are not too light but not too heavy, relatively speaking. Although I still think you should find one that feels lighter.
Am I going to get this Deluxe Tele idk, I really don't feel I can go wrong with it at this point. Although I have to do the un-reversal. That is required, not an optional thing for me.
I'd say don't overthink it, just get the darn thing. But I think that moment passed long ago
You're screwed. Join the club.
I used to refuse the notion of "Telecasters", I would never, ever, ever, have considered getting one. Never. Maybe that is why I have felt so alone all these years. I've just been denying what was always there.
It just feels like the only "correct" choice to make. The bottom line though, is alot of the reasons I used to ignore Teles, were superficial, and surface level ignorance. I couldn't get past the abrupt pick guard right angle it's like it just stops like someone cut it in half, and threw away the other piece, then screwed it on.
It still looks that way, but now I see the geometry, how it lines up parallel to the bridge plate (and frets). It makes it look more like a "tool" as opposed to a "beautiful instrument". But it is my lack of caring for flashy stuff, and more caring about what is practical and dependable, it's more about function.
That and the headstock, it had always looked so "wimpy" to me, like it was "drooping" and misformed. But now, I see it as "Stream-lined", it's out of the way, so you can move your arms wherever you want, there's no pointy thing jutting out. Again, it's the utilitarian aspect of it.
Then there was just the overall ignorant preconceptions that it was just "old fashioned" and not very "rock" or "punk" enough. And to a certain extent no it doesnt look like a flying V or an Explorer, but it's not about that. It's about the practicality of the tool in my hands. And it's like a notion of it being this---- "Original" "tool", that just "worked", at least the first one out of the early prototypes that worked well enough, to do what it needed to do.
So it wasn't focused on like this secondary thing, or that nuanced thing. It was just made to make the guitar playing "loud" and to not like break apart, and I guess built to last, like all good "products" are supposed to be.
Or a lack of spelling and pronunciation thing. Schools don’t teach either these days.
You know the people on here are trying real hard to help you but in spite of not trying, you’re coming of as a dick. You ask questions, you got answers, you didn’t like so you got agitated. There is a wealth of real knowledge on this forum and you’ve been given a lot of it very freely. Don’t shoot yourself in the foot because you don’t like the answers.
Not only are nearly all of these members very knowledgeable , they are friendly and courteous too. That’s not the case on other forums.
When you ask a question you don’t know the answer to, you need to at least be considerate of those people trying to help you.
Moose, you’ve got the patience of a saint !
Thanks for that link. It pulled me way out onto a tangent, i needed to confirm why the guitar is tuned to EADGBE. The long story short in case you didnt know, is that because of the way we play the instrument, ie. hold it perpendicular to our upright body, it makes ordering the strings in perfect 5th intervals basically unplayable. With perfect 4ths, it allows us to play melodically connected without having to move our hand from the first position. Then the reason, we don't tune the 2nd to C, and the 1st to F, is because basically, it isn't pleasing to have a Minor 2nd interval of E>F, and so it is dropped to E, and then, naturally, E is the perfect 4th of B, so we just dropped that also.
That's a good question to ask yourself. There are a few rationales, but most centering around similar ideas. Like it's because of the way the human hand is shaped.
Sounds like a good idea for a new thread. Or google TDPRI and you'll find many earlier discussions - but that's not quite as fun.
That's interesting! They used to put huge steel lap guitar pickups on the first Teles!
The lap steel pickup was one of Leo's early inventions. He made and sold lots of lap steels. From that perspective, it's easy to see the Tele as a guitar-shaped steel... sorta. Completely different than anything else at the time.
yea! I noticed that in this pic, the two knobs are exactly the same as the Tele basically, looks the same. The bridge here appears to have just one big saddle, like on my acoustic, and most acoustics, but it looks like you can slant each side. I still don't understand why Electrics don't just use one single saddle, like acoustic, with compensation carved into it.
Gretsch rocking bar bridge is a single saddle, without even compensation. The Compton and Tru-Arc Gretsch bridges are compensated singles.