Mustang / and fender 51 / 72 (+ CV Tele colour pg 8)

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:20 pm

Good shout.

There was lots of talk when it was discontinued that it was being axed because it was too poular. A hardtail strat with a tele neck and different pups is an appealing prospect, and given that it's something out of the ordinary, you can see why Fender would think they ought to charge a fair whack for it rather than have it be one of the cheapest guitars in their line.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:22 pm

And then the question becomes what took them so fucking long to do it? Did it really take nearly six years to decide to slap an F-hole on it to distinguish it from the Squier?

SGJarrod · Post by **SGJarrod** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:02 pm

ekwatts wrote: I end up thinking that the vast majority of guitarists out there are knuckledragging fools in the end

yes

ekwatts wrote: because of the sheer amount of semi-naked failed porn stars that tend to appear in guitar magazines (although this seems to be a uniquely American problem, in fact).

is this really a problem? I tend to like it

Billy3000 · Post by **Billy3000** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:54 pm

ekwatts wrote:And then the question becomes what took them so fucking long to do it? Did it really take nearly six years to decide to slap an F-hole on it to distinguish it from the Squier?

probably so that the market that was interested in them would have hype built up for a fender version. If they had done it right after they discontinued the '51, a lot of people would probably have just thought to buy a used '51 for cheaper. But after a few years, and used ones are consistently selling for more than they originally sold for new, it's the right time for them to release a fender version.

Billy3000 · Post by **Billy3000** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:56 pm

SGJarrod wrote:
ekwatts wrote: because of the sheer amount of semi-naked failed porn stars that tend to appear in guitar magazines (although this seems to be a uniquely American problem, in fact).
is this really a problem? I tend to like it

Are you 12? Cause that's the only time I enjoyed seeing those guitar world former porn star models skanking up the guitars in the magazine.

jcyphe · Post by **jcyphe** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:08 pm

GuitarWorld is much worse about this than GuitarPlayer.

I want to read about guitars and music and not have the lady next to me give me a nasty look cause she thinks I'm reading a lad's magazine.

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:26 pm

Guitar magazines seem to be following Motorcycle magazines with the glamor model trend, perhaps because its stereotypically Rock N Roll.. chicks, riffs, etc. You dont see it in say Fishing magazines.

ekwatts wrote:Aye, the 51 was one of the most popular guitars Squier ever made, so I'd have thought a reissue wouldn't exactly be a bad move.

But I said years ago that Squier was beginning to turn into a bit of a testbed for future Fender products when the 51 and the Tele Custom II came out.

The 51 almost has a cult status, there is even a healthy Squier 51 forum (something some brands dont have never mind a single model). Fender will probably cash in on that.

jcyphe · Post by **jcyphe** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:16 pm

Did the '51 do that well in sales? I seem to remember it was only when they started selling them for next to nothing that people bought them and started modding them like crazy and that makes sense.

Will be people be as willing to mod them if they have to pay $400-700 for one and it's a Fender?

Fran · Post by **Fran** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:24 pm

jcyphe wrote:Did the '51 do that well in sales? I seem to remember it was only when they started selling them for next to nothing that people bought them and started modding them like crazy and that makes sense.

Will be people be as willing to mod them if they have to pay $400-700 for one and it's a Fender?

I really dont know. I was quite oblivious to the model until i bought one at a local cash converters to flip on ebay, after some research it appears they have a loyal following. Mine sold for Â£170 and i paid Â£60 for it. Cracking neck though.

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:33 pm

I paid Â£95 for mine but thought they were something like Â£140 new, which is still cheap as fuck for what it is.

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:15 am

Billy3000 wrote:
SGJarrod wrote:
ekwatts wrote:because of the sheer amount of semi-naked failed porn stars that tend to appear in guitar magazines (although this seems to be a uniquely American problem, in fact).
is this really a problem? I tend to like it
Are you 12? Cause that's the only time I enjoyed seeing those guitar world former porn star models skanking up the guitars in the magazine.

tone it down a notch, yeah?

they're good looking chicks, and you can see their nipples. and they're not porn stars, they're playboy models (except one). i don't see how this is even a problem unless you prefer dudes.

OH YES, TITS AND A BLACKTOP JAZZMASTER. HOW DISGUSTING.

SKC Willie · Post by **SKC Willie** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:26 am

hotrodperlmutter wrote:OH YES, TITS AND A BLACKTOP JAZZMASTER. HOW DISGUSTING.

Maybe her tits are covering the perfect amber switch tip?

Billy3000 · Post by **Billy3000** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:33 am

hotrodperlmutter wrote:
Billy3000 wrote:
SGJarrod wrote: is this really a problem? I tend to like it
Are you 12? Cause that's the only time I enjoyed seeing those guitar world former porn star models skanking up the guitars in the magazine.
tone it down a notch, yeah?

they're good looking chicks, and you can see their nipples. and they're not porn stars, they're playboy models (except one). i don't see how this is even a problem unless you prefer dudes.

OH YES, TITS AND A BLACKTOP JAZZMASTER. HOW DISGUSTING.

It's a problem because A) the girls in those magazines aren't hot, they're trashy, and yes, playboy models are trashy and they all look the same, I can't tell you the last time I found a playboy girl actually attractive. and B) for the same reason that Jcyphe posted above: You can't look at these mags anywhere except for the privacy of your own home, unless you want people to think you're a perv. If I want to look at half naked girls, I'll do so on my computer, or in another magazine. If I want to look at guitars, or read about guitars, I prefer it to be separate from my half naked chicks.

Also, the year I stopped buying the Guitar World buyer's guide, there WERE actual porn stars in the magazine. I'm pretty sure Jesse Jane was on the cover.

Billy3000 · Post by **Billy3000** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:36 am

Also, last year's GW buyers guide models were from Rock of Love. If you try convincing me that any of the girls in that mag or on that show are anything but trashy whores, I'm seriously calling your taste in women in to question.

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 2:39 am

edit: This was an unfunny and needless post.

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:03 am

Does this thread really need to turn into a lesson in how to objectify and then justify the objectification of women and the commodification of sex?

My point was about how irrelevant naked women are to guitars and how simple-minded you have to be to be drawn in by the simple equasion of "TITS + SOMETHING YOU LIKE = YOU LIKE IT MORE LOL". There's something terribly wrong when a magazine that reviews electronics parts for instance feel the need to slap a cut-up plastic lady on the front of their magazine in order to prey on the weak-minded. And it actually works.

DO YOU LIKE WOMEN? YEAH? YOU BETTER BUY THIS MAGAZINE THEN!

Grant · Post by **Grant** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:09 am

edit: Needless post.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:42 pm

im going to turn this thread around right now.

quit wacking off to girls and wack off to this.

SGJarrod · Post by **SGJarrod** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:02 pm

hotrodperlmutter wrote:
Billy3000 wrote:
SGJarrod wrote: is this really a problem? I tend to like it
Are you 12? Cause that's the only time I enjoyed seeing those guitar world former porn star models skanking up the guitars in the magazine.
tone it down a notch, yeah?

they're good looking chicks, and you can see their nipples. and they're not porn stars, they're playboy models (except one). i don't see how this is even a problem unless you prefer dudes.

OH YES, TITS AND A BLACKTOP JAZZMASTER. HOW DISGUSTING.

Yep this is how I feel..... who cares if their trashy, ur looking at them next to guitars not marrying them

Is it objectifying women....yes.... but they chose to be there.....

there is alot worse things in the world to worry about than 1/2 naked women holding a guitar

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:44 pm

hotrodperlmutter wrote:found this pic on a private forum. the gent who posted it says he got this pic direct from a source at fender, who says that this is official:

i know, i wish it was some sort of over the top jokey troll thing instead of this supposed legit hunkapoopee.

If that's really it, that's a bit disappointing. I'd rather just get a Squier '51 and mod it...that was the whole allure of those guitars anyhow.

I was hoping it'd be closer to this "Squier '71" a guy I know built: