Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Telecaster Discussion Forum' started by The-Kid, Jan 18, 2020.
There's already a thread somewhere.
Trust Im not an Acoustic/Electric player but these look amazing.
Electric guitar necks. Shape. Countour....look.
I know they have done similar before but not quite like this
They'll do as acoustic for people who prefer to play electric. Kind of like the Boss AC-3 let's you get acoustic types of tones from your electric. But they will never replace an actual acoustic guitar. So, no. They're not the way of the future. But they look fun.
A Player thinline would do just fine.
Got it right here. Just look fun for us Electric guys.
Admitedly only Acoustics I like are Martins but ima wait for my retirement before I go of and buy ones of those again.....Gibson and Taylors are nice....but Martin makes a damn fine guitar.
I don’t think it will do either very well
As many have commented on similar threads, I’d rather spend that amount of money on two separate guitars that function well to their intended purpose.
Someone once told me....
“If you’re lucky enough to know how to do something well, do what you know.”
I realize Fender is seeking to expand its customer base and sales and have something new for NAMM, but...
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The Tele-bodied version came out last year; the Strat-bodied version was just released. I briefly messed around with a Tele-bodied version last summer, they're kinda cool but also nothing that I would drop the $2K MAP on either. Lots of fairly new technology from Fishman in them, at least it hasn't been on-board the guitar (I think some of the tech is a new version of their Aura system and it incorporates what was on a floor pedal into the guitar).
I tried the Tele version almost a year ago. Pros & Cons...
If feels and plays like a Tele, and sounds like a thin-bodied acoustic/electric guitar with piezo UST. Into a PA or presumably an acoustic amp like a Fishman Loudbox Mini, it sounds good. I said "presumably" because when I asked to plug into an acoustic amp in the store, I was thinking about something like a Loudbox Mini or a Fender Acoustic 100 (they had both of those in the store). Instead, the guy got off on a tangent about how he'd played it through a PA, and I had to hear that. So he plugged me into a PA, and yes, it sounded good. But as a consequence I haven't actually heard the Tele Acoustasonic through a dedicated amp.
Plugged into a DRRI, the noiseless bridge pickup sounded mostly right. It wasn't quite the sound I was used to from the bridge pickup in my teles, but that could be just because that was my first experience with a noiseless pickup.
A downside has to do with the type of amplifier you're plugged into. Of course, you could use an ABY box and switch your signal from say a Vox Pathfinder 15R to a Fishman Loudbox Mini (or whatever, those are the amps I'd use). That's more work than a simple flip of the switch and twist of the knob on the guitar, but it's doable.
But a big downside is the strings. And I'm not just talking about my preference of brand, or even gauge, per se. I'm talking about metal alloy. You have to pick what type of strings to put on the guitar, whether steel strings with phosphor bronze wraps or nickel steel. Whichever one you choose, that's what you're playing, whether utilizing the Acoustasonic's various acoustic guitar models or playing the bridge pickup.
That means no matter what you choose, something's not gonna sound right. If you go with nickel steel, then playing on that noiseless bridge pickup will sound like a Tele, but when you switch to the acoustic models, it will sound thin and metallic. Yeah, twisting knobs might fatten up the sound a bit, you might be able to warm up the tone somewhat. But your acoustic models just won't sound quite right. And vice versa. The guitar's acoustic models will sound their best with phosphor bronze strings, but then your Tele tones will be off.
This problem with the guitar is one inherent to the design, so I see it as a deal breaker. If you try to make this a "one guitar to rule them all" application, there's going to be that tonal trade-off. Some may find that compromise acceptable; I don't. If you want your acoustics to sound acoustic (well, as much as possible while amplified) and your teles to sound like teles, you just need two guitars onstage, not one.
Love my Tele, love my Strat, love my Taylor, however, I can only play one at a time. And usually I only want “The” sound from the one I’m loving at that moment.
Call me old fashioned, I drive nails with a hammer, not a screwdriver. Listening to the video, they sound great. The disconnect would be in my head, ears and hands. I just don’t have the talent, ear or inclination to make either one shine!
I guess I’m stuck with what I’ve got lol!
Its new its a thing doing its thing. And they look pretty good and sound good doing that thing.
I agree with all of the above. However, I still wouldn’t mind having the Telecaster version. I would simply play it as an acoustic/electric guitar with acoustic strings and use it’s unique voice for country or roots rock. I would not use it for lead playing except in an acoustic context (like a bluegrass style lead in a country song). Yes, it’s not a Martin or an electric Telecaster, but it does have its own vibe which may appeal to a lot of players.
I mean this. Im not in the market for one or have money for something like that but it sure is neat. Sounds good and looks fun. Two important things that matter the most. Your sound first and then fun.
This checks both. If I had one Id use it mainly as acoustic with acoustic strings and plug in when needed.
I agree the Tele Acoustasonic has its own vibe. After all, it did appeal to me/pique my interest enough to give it a test drive. And I agree it's strengths are as an acoustic/electric. But like you, I'm not in the market for one, not only because of the inherent disadvantages I mentioned above, or the price, but because I already have a tele-style acoustic/electric...
Ultimately I think the biggest knock on the Acoustasonic line is the price point. Even at street prices, I can’t justify spending $1500 - $2000 on a guitar that for me would have a rather narrow use. I’m sure they could develop a MIM version with simpler options for about half that price. Then, maybe I’d be interested...
The best Martins are equal to the best guitars in the world. But Martin like Gibson and Taylor make a lot of guitars in a year. This means that they have to make decisions about building that might not be the best for a particular set of wood. Smaller builders like Santa Cruz Guitar Company and Collings build in smaller lots and can be flexible enough to find a way to get the most out of a particular set of wood. So they get more consistent results instrument to instrument.
There are also loads of individual luthiers who build amazing guitars without getting the press that Martin does.
Acoustics are a whole world unto themselves.