Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
lawsuit guitars
Re: lawsuit guitars
rct wrote:
> White Spirit wrote:
>> rct wrote:
>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
>> That's bullshit.
> The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
> 70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
> owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
> with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
> experience may vary.
Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's not
the experience of many players.
>> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.
> Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang in
> there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH Schooligans
> were pretty good at dishing.
If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
>> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
>> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
>> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
>> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
>>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
>>> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
>> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
>> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
>> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
>> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
> That's bullshit.
No - that's Fender quality control for you.
rct wrote:
> White Spirit wrote:
>> rct wrote:
>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
>> That's bullshit.
> The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
> 70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
> owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
> with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
> experience may vary.
Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's not
the experience of many players.
>> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.
> Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang in
> there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH Schooligans
> were pretty good at dishing.
If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
>> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
>> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
>> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
>> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
>>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
>>> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
>> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
>> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
>> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
>> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
> That's bullshit.
No - that's Fender quality control for you.
Re: lawsuit guitars
White Spirit wrote:
> Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
> bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's not
> the experience of many players.
OK. The experience of VERY many players is that they certainly
weren't on a par with, or better than, American Fedners of that time.
At that time, I will add.
> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
I've been playing the guitar since 1971. I've probably owned and
gigged and recorded and other wise mis-handled more Les Pauls than
most of todays guitar players have owned guitars in general. I
wouldn't hesitate to subject one to my particular vigorosities. My
current, 7 year old, many gig miles specimen is in great shape. They
stand up just fine. And since I'm definitely not the only one that
has done that, it can't be an accident.
> >> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
> >> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
> >> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
> >> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
> >> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
> > Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
I'm quite sure he had one in the picture. I'm quite sure he used
one. The picture itself indicates that by three to one a Greco player
himself preferred Fedners!
> >>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
> >>> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
> >> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
> >> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
> >> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
> >> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
> > That's bullshit.
> No - that's Fender quality control for you.
"quality control" is highly overrated.
rct
White Spirit wrote:
> Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
> bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's not
> the experience of many players.
OK. The experience of VERY many players is that they certainly
weren't on a par with, or better than, American Fedners of that time.
At that time, I will add.
> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
I've been playing the guitar since 1971. I've probably owned and
gigged and recorded and other wise mis-handled more Les Pauls than
most of todays guitar players have owned guitars in general. I
wouldn't hesitate to subject one to my particular vigorosities. My
current, 7 year old, many gig miles specimen is in great shape. They
stand up just fine. And since I'm definitely not the only one that
has done that, it can't be an accident.
> >> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
> >> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
> >> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
> >> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
> >> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
> > Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
I'm quite sure he had one in the picture. I'm quite sure he used
one. The picture itself indicates that by three to one a Greco player
himself preferred Fedners!
> >>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word "Lawsuit" to
> >>> imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
> >> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than almost
> >> every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact, I've
> >> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
> >> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
> > That's bullshit.
> No - that's Fender quality control for you.
"quality control" is highly overrated.
rct
Re: lawsuit guitars
rct wrote:
> White Spirit wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> "quality control" is highly overrated.
>
YUP.
> rct
--
Les Cargill
rct wrote:
> White Spirit wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> "quality control" is highly overrated.
>
YUP.
> rct
--
Les Cargill
Re: lawsuit guitars
rct wrote:
> OK. The experience of VERY many players is that they certainly
> weren't on a par with, or better than, American Fedners of that time.
> At that time, I will add.
Maybe I've just seen the good ones?
>> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
> I've been playing the guitar since 1971. I've probably owned and
> gigged and recorded and other wise mis-handled more Les Pauls than
> most of todays guitar players have owned guitars in general. I
> wouldn't hesitate to subject one to my particular vigorosities. My
> current, 7 year old, many gig miles specimen is in great shape. They
> stand up just fine. And since I'm definitely not the only one that
> has done that, it can't be an accident.
Fair enough. It's just that I've heard so many horror stories of necks
being cracked or headstocks broken off that I'm glad I play Stratocasters.
>>>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
>>>> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
>>>> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
>>>> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
>>>> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
>>> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
>> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
>> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
> I'm quite sure he had one in the picture. I'm quite sure he used
> one. The picture itself indicates that by three to one a Greco player
> himself preferred Fedners!
True, but, as a professional musician, he must have rated them enough to
have one when he could have had his pick of Fenders. I'd bet he saw it
while on tour in the Far East. It looks nice, too. In the 'photo, he
has two seventies Strats, a pre-CBS '60s Strat, a CBS sixties Strat and
the sunburst Greco '50s copy.
rct wrote:
> OK. The experience of VERY many players is that they certainly
> weren't on a par with, or better than, American Fedners of that time.
> At that time, I will add.
Maybe I've just seen the good ones?
>> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les Paul.
> I've been playing the guitar since 1971. I've probably owned and
> gigged and recorded and other wise mis-handled more Les Pauls than
> most of todays guitar players have owned guitars in general. I
> wouldn't hesitate to subject one to my particular vigorosities. My
> current, 7 year old, many gig miles specimen is in great shape. They
> stand up just fine. And since I'm definitely not the only one that
> has done that, it can't be an accident.
Fair enough. It's just that I've heard so many horror stories of necks
being cracked or headstocks broken off that I'm glad I play Stratocasters.
>>>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I have a full-page
>>>> interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now Iron Maiden). He's in
>>>> the dressing room surrounded by four Stratocasters - two American '70s
>>>> models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat copy.
>>>> Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
>>> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
>> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
>> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
> I'm quite sure he had one in the picture. I'm quite sure he used
> one. The picture itself indicates that by three to one a Greco player
> himself preferred Fedners!
True, but, as a professional musician, he must have rated them enough to
have one when he could have had his pick of Fenders. I'd bet he saw it
while on tour in the Far East. It looks nice, too. In the 'photo, he
has two seventies Strats, a pre-CBS '60s Strat, a CBS sixties Strat and
the sunburst Greco '50s copy.
Re: lawsuit guitars
White Spirit wrote:
> rct wrote:
>
>> White Spirit wrote:
>
>>> rct wrote:
>
>>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
>
>>> That's bullshit.
>
>> The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
>> 70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
>> owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
>> with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
>> experience may vary.
>
> Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
> bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's
> not the experience of many players.
I don't know if the guitars in your area were different in quality from the
ones I saw, but IMO rct is exactly on the money re Greco guitars in the 70s.
>
>>> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.
>
>> Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang
>> in there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH
>> Schooligans were pretty good at dishing.
>
> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les
> Paul.
>>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I
>>> have a full-page interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now
>>> Iron Maiden). He's in the dressing room surrounded by four
>>> Stratocasters - two American
>>> '70s models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat
>>> copy. Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
>
>> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
>
> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
>
>>>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word
>>>> "Lawsuit" to imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
While I'm here .... I always thought "lawsuit" referred to the guitars that
looked exactly like Fenders, not that they were better guitars. The Tokai
and Fernandes were nice, no doubt, but even in the store, they had a range
of quality not unlike Fender ... some great, some not so great.
Don
>
>>> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than
>>> almost every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact,
>>> I've
>>> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
>>> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
>
>> That's bullshit.
>
> No - that's Fender quality control for you.
White Spirit wrote:
> rct wrote:
>
>> White Spirit wrote:
>
>>> rct wrote:
>
>>>> Greko was just another crappy copy.
>
>>> That's bullshit.
>
>> The three Greko(Grecco, Greco) Les Paul Copies I played in the late
>> 70's, all three black, were all piles of stool that their respective
>> owners couldn't wait to get rid of. That, though it doesn't agree
>> with what you think of them, is not bullshit. Your mileage and
>> experience may vary.
>
> Mileage and experience does vary - but to dismiss Greco out of hand is
> bullshit, imo. You played three that you felt were crappy. That's
> not the experience of many players.
I don't know if the guitars in your area were different in quality from the
ones I saw, but IMO rct is exactly on the money re Greco guitars in the 70s.
>
>>> Maybe they were - brandname snobbery was in fuller effect then.
>
>> Or, they wanted a decent guitar that was pretty well proven to hang
>> in there through some pretty good(or bad) abuse that us HIGH
>> Schooligans were pretty good at dishing.
>
> If you want a guitar that takes abuse, I wouldn't recommend a Les
> Paul.
>>> On the other hand, on the back of a music magazine from 1982 I
>>> have a full-page interview with Janick Gers (then with Gillan, now
>>> Iron Maiden). He's in the dressing room surrounded by four
>>> Stratocasters - two American
>>> '70s models, one early '60s model and the other is a Greco 50's Strat
>>> copy. Not everyone had their heads up their arses back then.
>
>> Wow. It was on the back of a magazine. It MUST be true!
>
> I'll scan it and put it online if you'd prefer to see the evidence. The
> guitar is clearly identifiable as a Greco amidst several Fenders.
>
>>>> No, I don't. My beef is quite simply the use of the word
>>>> "Lawsuit" to imply some kind of quality. It doesn't.
While I'm here .... I always thought "lawsuit" referred to the guitars that
looked exactly like Fenders, not that they were better guitars. The Tokai
and Fernandes were nice, no doubt, but even in the store, they had a range
of quality not unlike Fender ... some great, some not so great.
Don
>
>>> Well, the 'lawsuit' Tokai and Grecos I'ved play are better than
>>> almost every '60s, '70s, '80s, '90s and '00s America Fender. In fact,
>>> I've
>>> only played one American Stratocaster that I thought was worth the
>>> asking price - back when they were half the price they are now.
>
>> That's bullshit.
>
> No - that's Fender quality control for you.
Re: lawsuit guitars
Greko was just another crappy copy. Do you think we were all like
covetin them Grekos back then? No man, anybody that had onea them was
just foaming to get a real les paul. It was crap. Crap then, crap
now. A copy. Nothing more. Ibanez was not just copies anymore, but
for a large portion of this here USAmerican guitar playing world, they
were and always have been and always will be makers of copies, hence
guitar players like me, and a whole bunch more mind you, that have
never owned one because we remember when they did nothing but copies,
and they just weren't all that great. Yamaha always made great
guitars and had nothing to do with the copyists.
---
I had an ibanez strat copy and an Ibanez les paul black custom copy. the
strat copy wasn't real good but the LP copy was nice, guild style head
stock. As good as any epiphone LP I've played. nice low action and 60's
taper neck. got it in about 84. a friend had an Ibanez LP standard that was
pretty close, not ply. solid mahogany with a maple cap.
Greko was just another crappy copy. Do you think we were all like
covetin them Grekos back then? No man, anybody that had onea them was
just foaming to get a real les paul. It was crap. Crap then, crap
now. A copy. Nothing more. Ibanez was not just copies anymore, but
for a large portion of this here USAmerican guitar playing world, they
were and always have been and always will be makers of copies, hence
guitar players like me, and a whole bunch more mind you, that have
never owned one because we remember when they did nothing but copies,
and they just weren't all that great. Yamaha always made great
guitars and had nothing to do with the copyists.
---
I had an ibanez strat copy and an Ibanez les paul black custom copy. the
strat copy wasn't real good but the LP copy was nice, guild style head
stock. As good as any epiphone LP I've played. nice low action and 60's
taper neck. got it in about 84. a friend had an Ibanez LP standard that was
pretty close, not ply. solid mahogany with a maple cap.
Re: lawsuit guitars
"rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
news:a4ff87e8-dbbe-44b7-91da-bcd9de73ac28@w5g2000prd.googlegroups,com ...
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> > Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
> > indicate some level of high quality.
> It can be, in the same way that there are dogs made by Fender USA too.
How can it be used to indicate some level of high quality?
> Every MIJ replica I have played has been great quality. And its more
> than a few too. Same deal with Korea.
Great! What does that have to do with lawsuits?
> > Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
> > by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
> I don't look at it like that. I don't care what you call it, the MIJ's I
> have played have been good guitars. Especially from that late 70's to
> mid 80's. Can call it frog's wings for all I care. Its just a name.
If it is just a name, why put the word "Lawsuit" in front of the word
"copy"? Just call it what it is, instead of frogs wings.
> Close, Fender were retooling the US after the CBS sale. They relied on
> Japan even for sales in the US for that period.
Very brief period, yes, there were no American Fenders. I remember it.
> Even today there are still some models sold outside of Japan by FMIC.
> Jazzmasters, Jags etc.
> Even some specific Strat and Tele models.
That is today and has nothing to do with lawsuits or the initial
reasons for Japanese production.
> The main reason the MIJ Fenders were sold only to the Japanese market is
> also because sales of
> MIA fenders needed bolstering after tooling was up and running.
Not at all. The main reason was because OTHER COMPANIES WERE MAKING
MONEY ON FENDER COPIES. Period. End Of Story. The fellas that
bought the company off CBS did what Leo was too nice to do and CBS was
too lazy to do, and that was to stop the other companies from making
money off the backs of Fender. The lag in American production due to
not owning the equipment was probably farther back than thirdendary,
not at all a main reason.
> > Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
> > guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
> > tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
> > machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
> > down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
> I am sure I have read somewhere that the Japanese were consulted during
> the retooling, because they were already doing it.
Well yeah, consulting is a pretty vague word, don't you think? And
where did Schultz come from? Or was it Smith? Onea them guys.
> Mind you there is a hell of a lot of mythology surrounding MIJ Fenders.
Yes, usually spread by those that covet MIJ Fenders.
> Mostly because of the crappy documentation, it spilled over to MIK as
> well. Ask Fender who
> made what and they don't know either.
I don't agree. There are a few small periods of time, right after the
sale, when overseas production was new, that there may have been some
minor confusions,
mostly because parts were made in one place and assembled in another.
They actually CAN tell you whom made what when and where, people just
don't ask because it might make their guitar worth what a copy is
actually worth: not much.
> I agree. I'd also go on to add a modern MIA Fender is still pretty much
> a copy too.
I don't agree. A Fender is precisely whatever Fender says it is, and
nothing else. I may not agree with what they call a Telecaster, but
it is still a Telecaster because they say it is.
A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you and
I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we make
them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll get
sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
rct
---
bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender designed the damn
things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing anyone. some third hand
company making guitars that they don't even have the plans or jigs for goes
around suing all and sundry for a guitar design they didn't even have the
plans to build themselves. a guitar design that was built better overseas,
while the company they bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
Fair?
David Byrne got it right . . .
"Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better
Call this the law of justice, call this freedom and liberty
I thought I perjure myself, right in front of the jury!
Is this a crime against the state? no!
This is the verdict they reach:
Someone controls electric guitar."
"rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
news:a4ff87e8-dbbe-44b7-91da-bcd9de73ac28@w5g2000prd.googlegroups,com ...
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> > Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
> > indicate some level of high quality.
> It can be, in the same way that there are dogs made by Fender USA too.
How can it be used to indicate some level of high quality?
> Every MIJ replica I have played has been great quality. And its more
> than a few too. Same deal with Korea.
Great! What does that have to do with lawsuits?
> > Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
> > by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
> I don't look at it like that. I don't care what you call it, the MIJ's I
> have played have been good guitars. Especially from that late 70's to
> mid 80's. Can call it frog's wings for all I care. Its just a name.
If it is just a name, why put the word "Lawsuit" in front of the word
"copy"? Just call it what it is, instead of frogs wings.
> Close, Fender were retooling the US after the CBS sale. They relied on
> Japan even for sales in the US for that period.
Very brief period, yes, there were no American Fenders. I remember it.
> Even today there are still some models sold outside of Japan by FMIC.
> Jazzmasters, Jags etc.
> Even some specific Strat and Tele models.
That is today and has nothing to do with lawsuits or the initial
reasons for Japanese production.
> The main reason the MIJ Fenders were sold only to the Japanese market is
> also because sales of
> MIA fenders needed bolstering after tooling was up and running.
Not at all. The main reason was because OTHER COMPANIES WERE MAKING
MONEY ON FENDER COPIES. Period. End Of Story. The fellas that
bought the company off CBS did what Leo was too nice to do and CBS was
too lazy to do, and that was to stop the other companies from making
money off the backs of Fender. The lag in American production due to
not owning the equipment was probably farther back than thirdendary,
not at all a main reason.
> > Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
> > guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
> > tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
> > machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
> > down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
> I am sure I have read somewhere that the Japanese were consulted during
> the retooling, because they were already doing it.
Well yeah, consulting is a pretty vague word, don't you think? And
where did Schultz come from? Or was it Smith? Onea them guys.
> Mind you there is a hell of a lot of mythology surrounding MIJ Fenders.
Yes, usually spread by those that covet MIJ Fenders.
> Mostly because of the crappy documentation, it spilled over to MIK as
> well. Ask Fender who
> made what and they don't know either.
I don't agree. There are a few small periods of time, right after the
sale, when overseas production was new, that there may have been some
minor confusions,
mostly because parts were made in one place and assembled in another.
They actually CAN tell you whom made what when and where, people just
don't ask because it might make their guitar worth what a copy is
actually worth: not much.
> I agree. I'd also go on to add a modern MIA Fender is still pretty much
> a copy too.
I don't agree. A Fender is precisely whatever Fender says it is, and
nothing else. I may not agree with what they call a Telecaster, but
it is still a Telecaster because they say it is.
A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you and
I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we make
them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll get
sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
rct
---
bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender designed the damn
things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing anyone. some third hand
company making guitars that they don't even have the plans or jigs for goes
around suing all and sundry for a guitar design they didn't even have the
plans to build themselves. a guitar design that was built better overseas,
while the company they bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
Fair?
David Byrne got it right . . .
"Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better
Call this the law of justice, call this freedom and liberty
I thought I perjure myself, right in front of the jury!
Is this a crime against the state? no!
This is the verdict they reach:
Someone controls electric guitar."
Re: lawsuit guitars
Grinner wrote:
<snip>
>
> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>
> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>
> Fair?
>
> David Byrne got it right . . .
>
> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no!
> This is the verdict they reach:
>
> Someone controls electric guitar."
Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
And to be fair it is possible.
Mark
Grinner wrote:
<snip>
>
> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>
> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>
> Fair?
>
> David Byrne got it right . . .
>
> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no!
> This is the verdict they reach:
>
> Someone controls electric guitar."
Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
And to be fair it is possible.
Mark
Re: lawsuit guitars
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> Grinner wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
>> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
>> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
>> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
>> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
>> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
>> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>>
>> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
>> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
>> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
>> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
>> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
>> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
>> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>>
>> Fair?
>>
>> David Byrne got it right . . .
>>
>> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
>> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
>> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no!
>> This is the verdict they reach:
>>
>> Someone controls electric guitar."
>
> Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
> Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
>
> That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
> Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
> Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
> were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
>
> And to be fair it is possible.
>
> Mark
To make it sound a little less absurd, why don't we substitute USA for NJ.
Don
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> Grinner wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
>> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
>> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
>> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
>> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something
>> was, but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that,
>> because everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>>
>> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
>> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
>> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
>> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
>> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
>> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
>> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>>
>> Fair?
>>
>> David Byrne got it right . . .
>>
>> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
>> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
>> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no!
>> This is the verdict they reach:
>>
>> Someone controls electric guitar."
>
> Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
> Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
>
> That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
> Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
> Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
> were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
>
> And to be fair it is possible.
>
> Mark
To make it sound a little less absurd, why don't we substitute USA for NJ.
Don
Re: lawsuit guitars
"Mark Bedingfield" <atari030@nomorespamplease.optusnet,com .au> wrote in
message news:u05Xj.1395$IK1.638@news-server.bigpond,net .au...
> Grinner wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
>> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
>> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
>> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
>> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something was,
>> but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that, because
>> everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>>
>> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
>> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
>> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
>> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
>> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
>> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
>> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>>
>> Fair?
>>
>> David Byrne got it right . . .
>>
>> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
>> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
>> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no! This
>> is the verdict they reach:
>>
>> Someone controls electric guitar."
>
> Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
> Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
i did with a tele copy, (i'll take rct's point of view that they can't be
called telcasters as that is merely a company name) from parts unknown
except the PUps and tuners. the neck has a veneer of rosewood on it which
i'm told suggests japan. and possbily makes it a little brighter than a
normal rosewood/maple neck. again if it's the right shape and same woods,
and plays well, what's the difference.
>
> That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
> Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
> Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
> were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
>
> And to be fair it is possible.
hehe. allans music is a good example. guitars are a lottery, brand names
mean nothing. i wasn't impressed at all with the american standard strat i
played the other day, the neck seemed to be made of a softer sort of maple.
very light guitar.
>
> Mark
>
"Mark Bedingfield" <atari030@nomorespamplease.optusnet,com .au> wrote in
message news:u05Xj.1395$IK1.638@news-server.bigpond,net .au...
> Grinner wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>
>> A Mustang looks nothing like a Model T, but it is a Ford. And you
>> and I can not, no matter how much we want to, no matter how good we
>> make them, can not make identical cars and call them Rustangs. We'll
>> get sued, no matter how good or how crappy our cars are. The lawsuit
>> itself has and had absolutely nothing to do with how good something was,
>> but you just can't tell the modern day Guitar Genius that, because
>> everyone gets all their smartz from the eBay.
>>
>> rct --- bottom line is....at the end of the day.... leo fender
>> designed the damn things, they are his baby, he didn't bother suing
>> anyone. some third hand company making guitars that they don't even
>> have the plans or jigs for goes around suing all and sundry for a
>> guitar design they didn't even have the plans to build themselves. a
>> guitar design that was built better overseas, while the company they
>> bought it off (CBS) let it all go to shit.
>>
>> Fair?
>>
>> David Byrne got it right . . .
>>
>> "Electric guitar is copied, the copy sounds better Call this the law
>> of justice, call this freedom and liberty I thought I perjure myself,
>> right in front of the jury! Is this a crime against the state? no! This
>> is the verdict they reach:
>>
>> Someone controls electric guitar."
>
> Amen, heres what I think, There's nothing mystical about making a
> Strat. Shit, I did it. From US and Japanese parts.
i did with a tele copy, (i'll take rct's point of view that they can't be
called telcasters as that is merely a company name) from parts unknown
except the PUps and tuners. the neck has a veneer of rosewood on it which
i'm told suggests japan. and possbily makes it a little brighter than a
normal rosewood/maple neck. again if it's the right shape and same woods,
and plays well, what's the difference.
>
> That being said the only conclusion I can reach is that all the
> Japanese shit was sent to New Jersey and the good stuff was sent to
> Australasia and Europe. Conversely the average to crap MIA Fenders
> were sent to Australasia and Europe and the good ones to New Jersey.
>
> And to be fair it is possible.
hehe. allans music is a good example. guitars are a lottery, brand names
mean nothing. i wasn't impressed at all with the american standard strat i
played the other day, the neck seemed to be made of a softer sort of maple.
very light guitar.
>
> Mark
>
Re: lawsuit guitars
On Wed, 14 May 2008 07:17:01 -0700 (PDT), rct <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov>
wrote:
>A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
>Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
>nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
Exactly.
Tejas Pedro
On Wed, 14 May 2008 07:17:01 -0700 (PDT), rct <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov>
wrote:
>A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
>Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
>nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
Exactly.
Tejas Pedro
Re: lawsuit guitars
"rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
news:240b9285-a6c2-4e6f-951a-842a17dec441@h1g2000prh.googlegroups,com ...
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> >> Here's one take on lawsuit guitars.
> > It's not one take, it's the only take.
> I thought it was common knowledge? Tho the term "Lawsuit' is generally
> used in reference to any Japanese clone from the 70's to the early 80's
> these days. I wonder how many factories there actually were?
Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
indicate some level of high quality.
> >> I wonder how true this is.
> > The only thing I remember different is that Fedner was involved in a
> > minor way, script used for logos and headstock shape. They also used
> > the courts later, early - mid 80's in there somewhere, Valley Arts I
> > believe was sued by Fedner for headstock and script.
> They did, and that's how Fender Japan came about.
Sorta.
> I always thought Valley Arts used their own headstock design? Nice guitars
> tho.
> > I'm usually the first one in usenet to point and laugh at the
> > "lawsuit" Bee Ess, because that's what it is. It's especially
> > offensive when some guitar joker that wasn't even born when I got
> > married starts telling me this krap.
> Don't know how age effects truth? Why is it offensive?
Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
> Here's some more history tho (iirc), after Fender was sold by CBS, FMIC
> went to Japan and
> actually got the Japanese to instruct the Americans in how to build
> accurate vintage replica's. Mostly because CBS had squandered the talent
> that was doing it originally.
You do not recall correctly. Fender chose to have guitars made in
Japan and sold only in Japan because the Japanese demonstrated clearly
that they would like real Fender guitars, but that because of export
costs etc, real Fenders just didn't make it over there that much. The
fakes and copies, however good or bad, were making money that Fender
could have been making. They chose a company to make them, put the
word Fender on them, and sell them there and only there. That was the
original intent of Fender Japan, no matter what anyone tells you that
doesn't work for that company. It's only written in...oh probably a
halfa dozen books.
Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
---
I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
---
> Strangely I'm sitting here now intonating my MIM 50's reissue;-) My MIJ
> bass is in the corner, lol. Actually that P-bass is probably about the
> right age too, mid to late 70's. Sakai. Stuffed if I know who actually
> built it tho.
A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
rct
"rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
news:240b9285-a6c2-4e6f-951a-842a17dec441@h1g2000prh.googlegroups,com ...
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> >> Here's one take on lawsuit guitars.
> > It's not one take, it's the only take.
> I thought it was common knowledge? Tho the term "Lawsuit' is generally
> used in reference to any Japanese clone from the 70's to the early 80's
> these days. I wonder how many factories there actually were?
Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
indicate some level of high quality.
> >> I wonder how true this is.
> > The only thing I remember different is that Fedner was involved in a
> > minor way, script used for logos and headstock shape. They also used
> > the courts later, early - mid 80's in there somewhere, Valley Arts I
> > believe was sued by Fedner for headstock and script.
> They did, and that's how Fender Japan came about.
Sorta.
> I always thought Valley Arts used their own headstock design? Nice guitars
> tho.
> > I'm usually the first one in usenet to point and laugh at the
> > "lawsuit" Bee Ess, because that's what it is. It's especially
> > offensive when some guitar joker that wasn't even born when I got
> > married starts telling me this krap.
> Don't know how age effects truth? Why is it offensive?
Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
> Here's some more history tho (iirc), after Fender was sold by CBS, FMIC
> went to Japan and
> actually got the Japanese to instruct the Americans in how to build
> accurate vintage replica's. Mostly because CBS had squandered the talent
> that was doing it originally.
You do not recall correctly. Fender chose to have guitars made in
Japan and sold only in Japan because the Japanese demonstrated clearly
that they would like real Fender guitars, but that because of export
costs etc, real Fenders just didn't make it over there that much. The
fakes and copies, however good or bad, were making money that Fender
could have been making. They chose a company to make them, put the
word Fender on them, and sell them there and only there. That was the
original intent of Fender Japan, no matter what anyone tells you that
doesn't work for that company. It's only written in...oh probably a
halfa dozen books.
Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
---
I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
---
> Strangely I'm sitting here now intonating my MIM 50's reissue;-) My MIJ
> bass is in the corner, lol. Actually that P-bass is probably about the
> right age too, mid to late 70's. Sakai. Stuffed if I know who actually
> built it tho.
A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
rct
Re: lawsuit guitars
Grinner wrote:
> "rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
> news:240b9285-a6c2-4e6f-951a-842a17dec441@h1g2000prh.googlegroups,com ...
> Mark Bedingfield wrote:
>
>>>> Here's one take on lawsuit guitars.
>
>>> It's not one take, it's the only take.
>
>> I thought it was common knowledge? Tho the term "Lawsuit' is generally
>> used in reference to any Japanese clone from the 70's to the early 80's
>> these days. I wonder how many factories there actually were?
>
> Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
> indicate some level of high quality.
>
>>>> I wonder how true this is.
>
>>> The only thing I remember different is that Fedner was involved in a
>>> minor way, script used for logos and headstock shape. They also used
>>> the courts later, early - mid 80's in there somewhere, Valley Arts I
>>> believe was sued by Fedner for headstock and script.
>
>> They did, and that's how Fender Japan came about.
>
> Sorta.
>
>> I always thought Valley Arts used their own headstock design? Nice guitars
>> tho.
>
>>> I'm usually the first one in usenet to point and laugh at the
>>> "lawsuit" Bee Ess, because that's what it is. It's especially
>>> offensive when some guitar joker that wasn't even born when I got
>>> married starts telling me this krap.
>
>> Don't know how age effects truth? Why is it offensive?
>
> Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
> by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
>
>> Here's some more history tho (iirc), after Fender was sold by CBS, FMIC
>> went to Japan and
>> actually got the Japanese to instruct the Americans in how to build
>> accurate vintage replica's. Mostly because CBS had squandered the talent
>> that was doing it originally.
>
> You do not recall correctly. Fender chose to have guitars made in
> Japan and sold only in Japan because the Japanese demonstrated clearly
> that they would like real Fender guitars, but that because of export
> costs etc, real Fenders just didn't make it over there that much. The
> fakes and copies, however good or bad, were making money that Fender
> could have been making. They chose a company to make them, put the
> word Fender on them, and sell them there and only there. That was the
> original intent of Fender Japan, no matter what anyone tells you that
> doesn't work for that company. It's only written in...oh probably a
> halfa dozen books.
>
> Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
> guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
> tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
> machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
> down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
> ---
> I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
> so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
> standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
> calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
> knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
> and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
> too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
> year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
>
> ---
>
>> Strangely I'm sitting here now intonating my MIM 50's reissue;-) My MIJ
>> bass is in the corner, lol. Actually that P-bass is probably about the
>> right age too, mid to late 70's. Sakai. Stuffed if I know who actually
>> built it tho.
>
> A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
> Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
> nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
>
> rct
>
>
'85 MIJ Strat. Lefty. Bought her at the Dallas guitar show, new. Put
Lindy Fralin SP43's in her and re-fretted w/ medium jumbo's (Dunlop
6100's). The wood resonates straight through me when I play her. ***** mvm
Grinner wrote:
> "rct" <Ron.Thompson@faa.gov> wrote in message
> news:240b9285-a6c2-4e6f-951a-842a17dec441@h1g2000prh.googlegroups,com ...
> Mark Bedingfield wrote:
>
>>>> Here's one take on lawsuit guitars.
>
>>> It's not one take, it's the only take.
>
>> I thought it was common knowledge? Tho the term "Lawsuit' is generally
>> used in reference to any Japanese clone from the 70's to the early 80's
>> these days. I wonder how many factories there actually were?
>
> Yes, the term "Lawsuit" is WAY over used, and is most often used to
> indicate some level of high quality.
>
>>>> I wonder how true this is.
>
>>> The only thing I remember different is that Fedner was involved in a
>>> minor way, script used for logos and headstock shape. They also used
>>> the courts later, early - mid 80's in there somewhere, Valley Arts I
>>> believe was sued by Fedner for headstock and script.
>
>> They did, and that's how Fender Japan came about.
>
> Sorta.
>
>> I always thought Valley Arts used their own headstock design? Nice guitars
>> tho.
>
>>> I'm usually the first one in usenet to point and laugh at the
>>> "lawsuit" Bee Ess, because that's what it is. It's especially
>>> offensive when some guitar joker that wasn't even born when I got
>>> married starts telling me this krap.
>
>> Don't know how age effects truth? Why is it offensive?
>
> Because it is some guy trying to sell his pretty much worthless copy
> by calling it a Lawsuit Copy, when there is no such thing.
>
>> Here's some more history tho (iirc), after Fender was sold by CBS, FMIC
>> went to Japan and
>> actually got the Japanese to instruct the Americans in how to build
>> accurate vintage replica's. Mostly because CBS had squandered the talent
>> that was doing it originally.
>
> You do not recall correctly. Fender chose to have guitars made in
> Japan and sold only in Japan because the Japanese demonstrated clearly
> that they would like real Fender guitars, but that because of export
> costs etc, real Fenders just didn't make it over there that much. The
> fakes and copies, however good or bad, were making money that Fender
> could have been making. They chose a company to make them, put the
> word Fender on them, and sell them there and only there. That was the
> original intent of Fender Japan, no matter what anyone tells you that
> doesn't work for that company. It's only written in...oh probably a
> halfa dozen books.
>
> Schultz and Smith then went into the storeroom and got out some 50s
> guitars they had laying around that Leo had built and they started re-
> tooling the company to make them just like these. See, they had no
> machinery or equipment when they bought it from CBS. It's all written
> down. Nobody from Japan showed them how to do anything.
> ---
> I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
> so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
> standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
> calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
> knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
> and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
> too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
> year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
>
> ---
>
>> Strangely I'm sitting here now intonating my MIM 50's reissue;-) My MIJ
>> bass is in the corner, lol. Actually that P-bass is probably about the
>> right age too, mid to late 70's. Sakai. Stuffed if I know who actually
>> built it tho.
>
> A good guitar is wherever you find it. You don't have to put the word
> Lawsuit in front of it. It just didn't happen, and the lawsuit had
> nothing to do with how good a guitar was.
>
> rct
>
>
'85 MIJ Strat. Lefty. Bought her at the Dallas guitar show, new. Put
Lindy Fralin SP43's in her and re-fretted w/ medium jumbo's (Dunlop
6100's). The wood resonates straight through me when I play her. ***** mvm
Re: lawsuit guitars
Grinner wrote:
<snip>
> ---
> I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
> so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
> standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
> calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
> knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
> and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
> too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
> year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
83 was the CBS-FMIC transition wasn't it? It was the year of the Squier.
I was reading a old Sonic's mag from 83 this morning. Reviews of the new
Standards and Elites. Also a review of the JV's in the same issue. Very
enlightening;-)
I have 2 12" rad Strat's, bend city mate;-) Still I have no trouble
bending on a 7.25" rad either;-)
Mark
Grinner wrote:
<snip>
> ---
> I have a smith series 83 strat, with the smaller headstock and four screws,
> so that is not a CBS guitar ? They must have been the first American
> standards built after the CBS period then with the old plans, and they were
> calling them 'american standard' as well but cheaper with only one treble
> knob and a jack in on the scratchplate. Other than that it has a good neck
> and pickups, 12" neck radius. the jack pops but the pots are still good, so
> too the PUps. Might value well someday. According to VampX, 86 was a good
> year for strats, must have been when they hit their straps again.
83 was the CBS-FMIC transition wasn't it? It was the year of the Squier.
I was reading a old Sonic's mag from 83 this morning. Reviews of the new
Standards and Elites. Also a review of the JV's in the same issue. Very
enlightening;-)
I have 2 12" rad Strat's, bend city mate;-) Still I have no trouble
bending on a 7.25" rad either;-)
Mark
Re: lawsuit guitars
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> I have 2 12" rad Strat's, bend city mate;-) Still I have no trouble
> bending on a 7.25" rad either;-)
I have 2 12" radius guitars - my S9 and my CN Strats. If anything, I
find bending slightly harder on them - maybe because they have lower
action. They're great for fast runs and tapping, though.
Mark Bedingfield wrote:
> I have 2 12" rad Strat's, bend city mate;-) Still I have no trouble
> bending on a 7.25" rad either;-)
I have 2 12" radius guitars - my S9 and my CN Strats. If anything, I
find bending slightly harder on them - maybe because they have lower
action. They're great for fast runs and tapping, though.
