Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Squier Tele Forum' started by jshape, Jun 17, 2019.
Well, the squires I've played have all tended to have pretty thin necks, and I don't like them very much. I'm sure there are great ones and there are dogs. There are a million well-CNCed cheap guitars with decent pickups in them these days, Squier makes them and so does everyone else. I am puzzled by the intensity of the love for the CV and VM squires - they are fine, and you could rock many a stage with them, but they're not "fine instruments" at least none of the ones I have seen. They are commodities. The actual sonic and playability difference between a fine instrument and a commodity one seems to be a lot smaller than it used to be, however.
I don't know how to suggest anyone reconcile the heel adjustment vs headstock adjustment except to suggest that any model with a heel adjustment would be significantly more costly and so would purchasing any neck with that feature.
If it's solely the neck profile of a CVC and it's lack of girth swap the neck for one you prefer. Both my CVC have necks from a 2006 Nashville Deluxe because from personal experience it's the neck profile I've found most comfortable to play. I have one other MIM with that same neck as well.
In both instances I was able to swap my CVC necks for those necks with someone who preferred the profile of a CVC neck. But even if I bought those necks and sold my CVC the cost difference would have been anywhere from $100-$130 each. One is maple and the other rosewood.
The original Chinese manufactured CVCs are no longer available. If they were they would be priced at $450 due to their rosewood board. In their place and those of other former CV models Fender has relabeled some VM models as CV and used Indian Laurel boards. These models are not the same as the original MIC CV Series.
If someone can buy a used CVC in top condition for $300 I'd call that a bargain. And if you can replace the neck with one you prefer from those Fender or The Stratosphere offer and sell the CVC neck for $150 or less in difference and $400-450 spent in total you can have the guitar you prefer.
Another suggestion I can make is to try one of the many G&L Tribute Series Tele style models. Leo designed those as well and they do have somewhat more girthy necks. I have an ASAT Special with MFD pickups but there are several others to choose from.
I paid just over $300 for mine used with a gig bag in like new condition. Other may sell used for even less and new for up to $500 or less. They are all made in Indonesia by Korean Cortek and many have the very same pickups and bridges as their US made counterparts. All are CV/CVC quality or above and they are also great playing guitars.
This is probably the best solution and what I will end up doing. Thanks for the input.
I think, for me anyway, and I would guess for a lot of other players, one of the things that originally drew me to picking up a guitar a couple decades ago, and what still inspires my playing to a degree today, was seeing the iconic images of my heroes playing their vintage Fender and Gibson guitars. As a result, I think the appeal of the CV and VM type guitars is the fact that they are true Fender designs that closely replicate iconic instruments, but can still be had at an affordable price for mere mortals. At the same time, because they are affordable and easily obtained, they can provide a good platform for mods and upgrades without being concerned about resale value or ruining an original.
I totally get that there are also a lot of players that couldn't care less about what name is on the headstock or how closely their instrument's design replicates another professional's, as long as it sounds and feels the way they want and need it to in order to accomplish what they are going for. There are also lot of players who can afford and justify dedicating resources to fulfill a combination of both of those desires. That's why Fender and Gibson both have successful custom shops that pull in lots of money making replicas of iconic guitars that also play and sound phenomenal. But those come with a hefty price tag. I'd love to have one, and may some day. But for now, I've got a day job and 3 mouths to feed in my house, so I'll probably be sticking to CV and VM-type guitars in $200-$500 range for a few more years before I can justify 4 figure guitars again. I'm guessing there are a lot in the same boat, which explains the popularity of these models, even if they are just commodities and sonically inferior to their more expensive cousins and some other comparably-priced instruments without the same name or design recognition.
I took a risk with the VM 72TL. I tried them out everywhere and they felt substantial. The one I purchased was good enough for my preference though. I owned a early 2000s '69TL MIM reissue neck, and it had the same dimensions as my '72TL Squier, and it was supposedly a U profile.
The Classic 50s Lacquer Tele was not chunky enough, but it wasn't as thin as any CV I played.
What units are your measurements in? I lost ya a bit on those numbers.
Well, sure - there's nothing wrong with "commodity" instruments per se, at all. In fact I own an Epiphone, a Korean-made PRS, and a Blueridge acoustic that are all basically "squier-level" instruments, and I play them all the time and use them at gigs. What I was addressing was the perception that the squier line is somehow way, way over and beyond an expected price-to-quality ratio. There are lots of brands coming out of Asia with high quality and low prices, and the squiers are among them, that's all. Look at the Korean Gretsches, look at the PRS SE guitars, the G&L Tribute line, etc. All are pretty consistent, nice playing and sounding instruments for not a lot of money.
Not sure why our experience was so different, but boy what it ever ! My VM72TL was so far from my classic 50s neck it's nite and day. (actually had 2 C50s) VM=as thin as the thinnest neck i ever felt. Classic 50= as thick as i can go before it's too much for my liking. I can only imagine they changed the VM but mine was painfully thin, and i like thin necks yet it was too much for me.
Crazy discussion. Don't like it ? Best way to vote on this you can do is not to buy it.
Poly finished necks are inferior ?
Maybe to some , but it doesn't mean a thing to me.....and thousands of others.
Neck too thin ? It's just how it is.....these days , both Fender and Gibson players on forums only want fat-ish necks , it seems.............decades ago , it was the opposite.
And still these big manufacturers turn out thousands of guitars with the wrong specs........?
Someone must buy them..........maybe those that don't read about neck profiles or nitro laquer on the internet ?
Seriously , I have 4 Les Paul's , I believe one is a 60's neck shape , and the rest are 50's ( fatter ) , but I'm not even sure. It just doesn't matter to me , I just play them.
There are so many options out there , just buy what you like
What's so crazy about this discussion? I haven't bought a CV yet, that's the whole point. I want to buy one, but I haven't because I haven't liked a neck on one so far. I know there are a lot of options out there - that's why I'm posting, trying to narrow the search and hopefully point myself in the direction of one I like.... then buy that one, since I didn't buy the one I didn't like.
I never said poly necks are inferior at all. I personally prefer the feel of nitro or tung oil necks, but respect that there's plenty of players out there with a different preference and guitars with different options. I was a little surprised to find that Fender put a thick poly-finished neck on a model labeled "Classic Vibe", but it also makes sense that that name does not necessarily equate to all vintage specs. You wouldn't know that, however, until you do a little research and play one.
That's great for you if you're indifferent about the finish and thickness of the necks on your guitars. I've got over 20, with all different kinds of necks. Some I like better than others. For my next one I'm looking for a strat or tele with some vintage specs and a chunky neck for under $400. The CVs I've played check all of those boxes except the chunky neck (and some other minor things that I mentioned in the OP), so I threw the post out to see if the thin neck is the spec on all CV models. I realize I can spend more money to get what I want, but I'm not looking to do that right now.
Glad to help even if it was only my own experience.
It's the conclusion I finally came to and I'm happy with the decision. Even with a few other upgrades on both I still have less into each than a new MIM would run and both are in excellent condition.
Best of luck with yours.
I think many just prefer fatter necks, so Fender, being a business makes note of that and figures if you want a chunkier neck, you have to pay to play. I like a bit of a chunkier neck as well, and my favorite Fender neck is the Classic 50's neck and older 52AVRI necks. Luckily Fender offers the Classic 50's neck still as an aftermarket option, but who knows for how much longer since they're replace the Classic Series guitars with the Vintera line.
With all that said, I still don't think the neck on my CVC is a deal breaker. It's not just a darn fine guitar for the price, it's a darn fine guitar and I easily got over the slimmer neck.
Lucky for the OP, Fender has a massive catalog and offer a bunch of different neck shapes/profiles. Just gotta find the one you like. I actually bought my CVC with the intent of replacing the neck, but after getting it home and playing it decided the original neck isn't going anywhere, and I even had a Classic 50's neck that's been sitting in a box under my bed for months.
I'll respectfully disagree here regarding the CVC's with the Indian laurel fretboards being different from the original CVC's with rosewood. I've owned several of the "older" CVC's with rosewood and just a few days ago picked up a 2017 Chinese made CVC with an Indian Laurel board. Absolutely identical in looks, fit, finish, feel, sound, etc, with the ONLY difference being the fretboard. Quality is the same between them as well and is superb. But if you're going to swap out the neck, that's pretty much a moot point I guess! And my 2017 weighs 7.4lbs, which is a lot lighter than some of the later CVC's. The early ones were light, then they seemed to get pretty darn heavy for a while.
I really think a new Classic 50's aftermarket neck from Fender in the poly finish for $199 is a true bargain. It's a killer neck, and pretty chunky, but not Nocaster or PV52 neck chunky. More like the 52AVRI neck. I had a 2008 52AVRI and the Classic 50's neck is basically a spitting image of that neck. My only worry is Fender will stop making them not that they've seemingly replaced the Classic Series with the Vintera line.
First I've heard of an MIC CVC with an Indian Laurel board. So I'll stand corrected. Must have taken place in one of the last production runs because I believe by 2018 the CVC was discontinued along with the '60s Jazz Bass and by then even the maple neck CVs were listed at $400.
What I was posting on though was Fender having simply relabeled some of the former Indonesian made VM models as Classic Vibes and pricing them in the same range as the CVs had typically sold for in the past. My belief is that it's a little deceptive on their part. A bit like Honda discontinuing it's Accord Series and simply relabeling Civics with different paint schemes as Accords.
If you were selling one of the original MIC Series it just required some explanation about pricing is all.
But given what I'm reading as resistance on the part of many to the look of the Pau Ferro and/or Indian Laurel I believe a neck with a rosewood board will attract a little higher price even sold separately should someone decide to do a neck swap as I have with both of mine. Now that Fender is selling several models of their necks and Stratosphere even more models a neck swap is pretty easy to accomplish.
For sure the rosewood boards 99% of the time do look much nicer/more traditional and can see why they are more desirable. My CVC says Made in China on the back of the headstock with a SN starting with CGS17, making it a 2017. Here's a pic of it below. Looks like Indian laurel to me, but I'm always up to be corrected and educated.
I also have a 2008 Classic Vibe 60's Jazz bass. The fretboard on that is a nice, dark rosewood. Incredible bass. It’s a touch on the heavy side, but man I cannot believe how good this bass feels and sounds and it’s 100% stock/original.
Agreed, the Classic 50s has one of my favorite necks. Really nice and comfortable.
Could be Indian Laurel but it sure looks like rosewood to me.
Here's the two side by side.
I'm genuinely bummed about the downgrade of the CV line....
We had it a little too good for a little too long.
I guess it's rosewood then! I just thought for whatever reason they switched to Indian rosewood a few years ago while they were being made in China. Didn't know the Indian laurel was started when they switched production over to Indonesia. I've been out of the loop for a few years and really haven't been keeping up. Thanks for the clarification, and guess I got lucky scoring this 2017 in mint condition.
And kind of off-topic, but I see in your signature you have a CV Precision. I have to say, as much as nice as the CV Teles are, I think the CV Precision and Jazz basses are maybe even a step above the guitars. The CV 60's Jazz I have is mind-blowingly good!
I've mentioned numerous times, possibly In this thread somewhere. I think the CV's are average in their size (.85ish). I wouldn't call them skinny unless you're comparing them to another line.
I've heard everyone mentioning the CVC's being even smaller & I dont doubt it. It might be just the nature of the Chinese/Indonesian manufacturing but I'll use Rondo as an example as I have a few SX's & their RW board necks are smaller too. Their maple boards are a toss up between average(again, that .85) and fatter (.89ish?).
I think that's just the cost of buying into their budget line. If they changed the specs I'd assume you'd get a price tag to match.