ShortScale.org

honeyiscool wrote:You want to know what's got silly wiring? Just look at the Jaguar.

Not really. Each setting IS different to the next and it is dual circuit which opens up a lot of possibilities; stereo wiring, onboard effects.... without spoiling the aesthetic or need for extra routing. The 'strangle switch' can be exchanged for any number of things including a 3-way. Not to mention the tremolo is also flawless.

To me the Mustang is a halfway house between the simplicity of a Duo/MM and the complexity of a Jaguar. ALL great guitars, i love every one of them.

I think the rhythm circuit is frivolous. It goes from mud to more mud. In a double humbucker Jag it makes sense, but for me, it's basically a kill switch.

I feel like the Jag tremolo can do some things very well, especially tasteful shimmers and of course the MBV, but for light shimmers, I don't find Mustang lacking at all, and I can use the trem without an arm, which is super.

For me, Jag is all about looks and just the overall bling factor and the cool thing. I think Mustang has the feel, the sound, and the sensibility. Only if it was cheap like it's supposed to be.

That said, I could never choose one over the other, I always choose both. But if you put a gun to my head and can only have one for the rest of your life, I pick the Stang.

honeyiscool wrote:I think Mustang has the feel, the sound, and the sensibility. Only if it was cheap like it's supposed to be.

Why bang on about how it's the perfect guitar then complain that it costs too much? They're still very cheap compared to other vintage Fenders. The only ones that aren't are comp orange and even then its a world of difference from pretty much any other vintage fender.

Your arguments make about as much sense as the Mustang switches.

James wrote:Your arguments make about as much sense as the Mustang switches.

[/thread]

Poissonally, I don't see the attraction of the racing-stripe Mustangs. I'm an older player, remember when they were new, and we thought they were tacky-looking back then. Now they're hip for some reason...

Here's one of my fave Mustangs, a Japan-only SB with MOP guard. The other is Oly White/Tort like my first one was back in '67...



BTW, this is a 2004, and was $875.00 landed from Japan. Not bad for a NEW Fender built to rock.

James wrote:Why bang on about how it's the perfect guitar then complain that it costs too much? They're still very cheap compared to other vintage Fenders. The only ones that aren't are comp orange and even then its a world of difference from pretty much any other vintage fender.

Your arguments make about as much sense as the Mustang switches.

1. I feel that the current model is fairly priced, given it's Japanese made, but given that Fender seems hell bent on making Jazzmasters and Jaguars more accessible, the lack of a lower priced Mustang is a sore point for the model. Make sense?

2. That's a compliment. Thanks.

honeyiscool wrote:I think the rhythm circuit is frivolous. It goes from mud to more mud. In a double humbucker Jag it makes sense, but for me, it's basically a kill switch.

How would it be beneficial in a humbucker Jag? Humbuckers are already mud, that makes no sense. Rhythm circuit is very versatile, if not widely used. Rhythm circuit leads + breaking up tube amp is dreamy.

cobascis wrote:Fender Humbuckers are already mud

Lets get it right

I have a Baja tele and I love how it has both pickups in series and parallel, both in and out of phase. I know it's possible to do that on a Mustang, but it usually requires the MORSE code as stated above.

I wish you could wire it so you would replace the redundant settings with other settings

For example,

Both switches forward (towards neck) would be both pickups in parallel.
Both switches backward (towards bridge) would be both pickups in series.
Both switches to the outside would be out of phase in parallel
Both switches to the inside would be out of phase in series

Both switches in the center would be off and then using them separately.

I love Mustangs and I hope to build one very soon.

honeyiscool wrote:

James wrote:Why bang on about how it's the perfect guitar then complain that it costs too much? They're still very cheap compared to other vintage Fenders. The only ones that aren't are comp orange and even then its a world of difference from pretty much any other vintage fender.

Your arguments make about as much sense as the Mustang switches.

1. I feel that the current model is fairly priced, given it's Japanese made, but given that Fender seems hell bent on making Jazzmasters and Jaguars more accessible, the lack of a lower priced Mustang is a sore point for the model. Make sense?

2. That's a compliment. Thanks.

the classic vibe duo-sonic is about as good as it is going to get. We don't really need a classic vibe mustang, duo, bronco, and music master. I think they did a damn good job making the duo. It is very middle of the road for those guitars. It also doesn't have the whack trem. It has simple switching - I don't see what else you want.

classic vibe version - relatively cheap japanese versions - and cheap vintage versions.

portugalwillie wrote:I think they did a damn good job making the duo. It is very middle of the road for those guitars. It also doesn't have the whack trem. It has simple switching - I don't see what else you want.

duo II style offset body would be nice.

and you can find vintage guitars for less than the new MIJ guitars easily. especially if you count musicmasters and all the rest. so really the price ladder is more like:

classic vibe / vintage / mij

there's something a bit off about that. but I think it perfectly explains why there's no MIA or MIM version. the vintage guitars are just too readily available for little money in the US.

Gotta add my tupence here. My old Mustang...the original slab made in 1965 with all original parts...is a great guitar. I have many good guitars, some of them high-end, and I keep coming back to my Mustang. It fits & feels great, plays great...a fine neck with excellent action... and has all the tone I could want.

Truly, amps are such a big percentage of a guitar's performance, so I've never felt the old pups are weak at all. Add peripherals to the mix like my Boss Distortion/Overdrive pedal, and why would I want new pickups? As for the switches, they work for me and get some tones I can't get from my BluesHawk or my vintage Casino.

Honey, thanks for that info about John McLaughlin and for the link. My favorite track! I'm a bit of a music trivia nerd and especially like Mustang trivia so I'm eager to know the source of your information about the guitar on this album (which I happen to own).

cobascis wrote:How would it be beneficial in a humbucker Jag? Humbuckers are already mud, that makes no sense. Rhythm circuit is very versatile, if not widely used. Rhythm circuit leads + breaking up tube amp is dreamy.

In the HH versions, they're used as coil blenders, which makes perfect sense!

portugalwillie wrote:the classic vibe duo-sonic is about as good as it is going to get. We don't really need a classic vibe mustang, duo, bronco, and music master. I think they did a damn good job making the duo. It is very middle of the road for those guitars. It also doesn't have the whack trem. It has simple switching - I don't see what else you want.

classic vibe version - relatively cheap japanese versions - and cheap vintage versions.

Says you. It's just that the Duo is ugly and non-offset. I want any a cheap version of the Duo II or a Mustang. Is that too much to ask?

the only difference between that guitar and the one you want is an offset body?


they've tried to release cheap versions of duos several times and they never seem to work because there are enough used and vintage piece for cheap. there's just no demand for them, dude. get over it.

An offset body is enough of a difference to have a whole website dedicated to it...

Also,

http://www.shortscale.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=39932

So maybe other people felt the same way too!

Your animosity is tiring.

Why is everyone ganging up on some Mustang love?

Are we all forgetting that the guitar is fun as hell?! Minus all its issues it is still so much fun.
It has quirks actually, not issues, and I love it for that.

your ideas don't make sense. You love the Mustang switching but think the Jaguar is too much. The Mustang looks great but the duo sonic is ugly because it is slighty more symmetrical? Duo is ugly but you think a Mustang with a strat hard tail and two giant humbuckers is going to be good?

It's good that you like the Mustang but the guitar has it obvious flaws and by just pretending like their not there does make it a better guitar. Glad you like it but you just don't seem to understand that you're in the minority of guitar players.

We're all in the minority here. The market has decided against short scales. What's your point?

My personal tastes don't have to be coherent. Regardless, what's hard to understand? I think this is beyond ugly:



Meanwhile, I think this is beautiful:



How are the two particularly similar looking? Unless you knew of the common heritage, you wouldn't think these were related guitars.

I'm more interested in a double humbucker Mustang as a cheap modding platform (if it indeed turns out to be one) than something I would enjoy stock. I thought I made that clear.

In any case, Mustangs don't have any major flaws IMO because the switching is something that works very well and because you can actually set one up with 9s, whereas you can't really do that with Jags with the stock bridge. It has quirks, and therefore you can have legitimate gripes with it, but they're not flaws. I have said many times before that I find Strats to be crappy, but I don't think that the Strat has flaws, it's just not something I like. I know the difference.

honeyiscool wrote: In any case, Mustangs don't have any major flaws IMO because the switching is something that works very well and because you can actually set one up with 9s, whereas you can't really do that with Jags with the stock bridge. It has quirks, and therefore you can have legitimate gripes with it, but they're not flaws. I have said many times before that I find Strats to be crappy, but I don't think that the Strat has flaws, it's just not something I like. I know the difference.

I kind of agree.

They are quirks, there is nothing inherently wrong with the guitar... the Trem is odd to some people, but heaven to you and mean (without a bar). The pickups have some good sounds in my opinion, and the access of pickup options for me, allow for easy changes when in the middle of a song, maybe not for others though.

I don't see why this has turned into an arguement. IT is opinion to consider the Mustang better than a Strat. One I hold, and I feel, just like most opinions, it is pretty hard to ground in fact, and claim it is a universal truth. Yes trends suggest other guitars are 'better' than mustangs because they sell more, but more people are christian than buddhist... uno? Fuck it. Mustangs are better ALL GUITARS EVAH

Yeah, the trem rules! Show me another floating bridge whammy that you can manipulate meaningfully without an arm. OK, you can push in that little knob thingy on a Jaguar without the arm being present, but that just feels really weird.

For certain styles of music, where you want to strum frantically yet still have the option of getting that little warble on a long chord without pushing on the neck and possibly damaging it, there's nothing better than a Mustang.