Page 3 of 4

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 7:01 am
by JJLipton
I played an original 65 strat the other day. It was quite awesome.

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:03 am
by BillClay
iCEByTes wrote:my dream is this
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guitars/ ... ric-guitar
Olympic pearl Rosewood
Image

+

FiberCarbon Pickguard , true fibercarbon
Image

+

Curtis Novak lipticks 3x
Image

+

CTS 250k Pots and Metal knobs barrel i think
Image

+

Schaller strapslock


will looks bestial :D
Your dream looks p tight.

Posted: Sun Mar 03, 2013 8:54 am
by westtexasred
JJLipton wrote:I played an original 65 strat the other day. It was quite awesome.
Was it like this one?

Image

What did they look like in 1954?

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:49 am
by 61fury
I used to think they were boring, especially the black/ white PG variety. But in the right colors they look great. Then I think about how it must have looked in 1954, like Back to the Future, what else looked like that? That view from the forearm cut , belly cut side makes it look like it's melting, the whole body shape is really special. Sure they and their knock offs are common as dirt but get one in the right combination and they still look like they're from the future. I've really come around to them.

Re: What did they look like in 1954?

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 4:56 am
by paul_
61fury wrote: I think about how it must have looked in 1954, like Back to the Future, what else looked like that? That view from the forearm cut , belly cut side makes it look like it's melting, the whole body shape is really special.
This. It looked like a spaceship, and the body and trem design are two of the most historically noteworthy innovations in electric guitar design ever, they've just become so ubiquitous that we're used to them now. Forget about the Jazzmaster or Mustang having turned out like they did if not for the Strat. Page, Beck, Harrison, Knopfler etc all talked about seeing them in shops as kids and getting goosebumps like they were looking at a Ferrari or something. A TV press guy writing a review of Buddy Holly on Ed Sullivan didn't even realize it was a guitar, he was writing about the weird sound of Holly's futuristic electronic banjo driving his band.

Remember that when the Strat came out the only solidbody electrics similarly fancy to them in the shops were butterscotch/blackguard Teles and Goldtop P90 Les Pauls. The Strat had way more going on, it changed the whole game.

Re: What did they look like in 1954?

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:21 am
by dots
paul_ wrote:
61fury wrote: I think about how it must have looked in 1954, like Back to the Future, what else looked like that? That view from the forearm cut , belly cut side makes it look like it's melting, the whole body shape is really special.
This. It looked like a spaceship, and the body and trem design are two of the most historically noteworthy innovations in electric guitar design ever, they've just become so ubiquitous that we're used to them now. Forget about the Jazzmaster or Mustang having turned out like they did if not for the Strat. Page, Beck, Harrison, Knopfler etc all talked about seeing them in shops as kids and getting goosebumps like they were looking at a Ferrari or something. A TV press guy writing a review of Buddy Holly on Ed Sullivan didn't even realize it was a guitar, he was writing about the weird sound of Holly's futuristic electronic banjo driving his band.

Remember that when the Strat came out the only solidbody electrics similarly fancy to them in the shops were butterscotch/blackguard Teles and Goldtop P90 Les Pauls. The Strat had way more going on, it changed the whole game.
love this. strats get some hate around here, and i have always felt it undeserved. this post says it all.

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:00 am
by ultratwin
Aye, great stuff to think about there, paul_.


izodiak wrote:Ultratwin You know how to post nice stratocasters ! Really good looking both of them !
Aren't they charming? I wish that two-pickuper was mine!

The collage of my ST68-TX was done using good ol' Comic Life, which I usually use just to make Shortscale banners.

Posted: Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:33 am
by JJLipton
westtexasred wrote:
JJLipton wrote:I played an original 65 strat the other day. It was quite awesome.
Was it like this one?

Image
Indeed it was sir. The small frets made bending very difficult but the sound was AWESOME through the fender amp.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:12 pm
by ultratwin
When I was first asked to play in Lee Seunghwan's band, my two friends on guitar had a 3TS '63 and a '64 respectively. One of them, originally purchased for $16000, just got sold for $25000.


2005 Backstage ULTRALOLZ.

I believe this one was the '64, it was kinda unnerving just holding the thing.

► Show Spoiler

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:44 pm
by Fran
Good post paul.
It is truly iconic and the design still looks fresh and futuristic today.

I remember reading somewhere that Strat sales were floundering in the 60's until Hendrix arrived. The rest is history.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:56 pm
by brainfur
Fran wrote:Good post paul.
It is truly iconic and the design still looks fresh and futuristic today.

I remember reading somewhere that Strat sales were floundering in the 60's until Hendrix arrived. The rest is history.
i watched the woodstock documentary this last weekend and it ended w jimmy hendrix playing and the cameraman focused in on his face and cropped out his hands and guitar! what the hell man???

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:04 pm
by paul_
ultratwin wrote:the '64
[pics]
That's lovely. I never tire of seeing a properly old-school Strat re-shaped/coloured by years of use and exposure to the elements... I know what you mean by "unnerving" though, it always strikes me how pre-CBS Fenders are almost invariably all beat-up and we know they're rugged, yet I handle them more carefully than I would an antique vase or something.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 5:34 pm
by Mo Law-ka
Paul_, I'd venture to guess that stems from them costing more than an antique vase.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 7:02 pm
by robert(original)
it fetched that much?!?!?! the one your holding? it looks like it had a refret. that is craziness. i rmember the first time going to hollywood guitar center an playing a 99,000.00 59 lp goldtop and there was an early 60s strat for around 25,000.00 or so but i didn't touch it.

Re: What did they look like in 1954?

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 7:45 pm
by benecol
paul_ wrote:
61fury wrote: I think about how it must have looked in 1954, like Back to the Future, what else looked like that? That view from the forearm cut , belly cut side makes it look like it's melting, the whole body shape is really special.
This. It looked like a spaceship, and the body and trem design are two of the most historically noteworthy innovations in electric guitar design ever, they've just become so ubiquitous that we're used to them now. Forget about the Jazzmaster or Mustang having turned out like they did if not for the Strat. Page, Beck, Harrison, Knopfler etc all talked about seeing them in shops as kids and getting goosebumps like they were looking at a Ferrari or something. A TV press guy writing a review of Buddy Holly on Ed Sullivan didn't even realize it was a guitar, he was writing about the weird sound of Holly's futuristic electronic banjo driving his band.

Remember that when the Strat came out the only solidbody electrics similarly fancy to them in the shops were butterscotch/blackguard Teles and Goldtop P90 Les Pauls. The Strat had way more going on, it changed the whole game.
Aye, very good points both. Can't think what else could be done to make a strat any more visually appealing - it's about perfect. It's only its ubiquity that makes some guitarists love them less.

Paul - do yoy have a link to that Buddy Holly factlet? I love that...

Re: What did they look like in 1954?

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:44 pm
by Pens
benecol wrote: Aye, very good points both. Can't think what else could be done to make a strat any more visually appealing - it's about perfect. It's only its ubiquity that makes some guitarists love them less.
Eh, no. I don't like them, hate the contours, hate the bridge entirely in both looks and function and the amount of routing it requires, hate the placement of the controls, hate the sound, hate the three pickups, hate the switching, hate the scale, hate the tuners. There's almost nothing I like about strats at all and it's not how common they are.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:49 pm
by benecol
You hate everything, you fucking curmudgeon.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:52 pm
by brainfur
Pens hate strat so much that it sounds like he *envies* them...

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:55 pm
by Pens
I like my Musicmaster. It has none of the problems the strat has.

My point is only to say that it's not envy or ubiquity of the Strat that makes some people dislike them. Some just actually hate the stupid things. Y'all can go back to your circlejerk on the strat, it's fine.









Okay, I admit I do fucking hate everything.

Posted: Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:23 pm
by Ankhanu
I like the 2&4 positions on a Strat... ya don't really get those sounds anywhere else.

I really quite like the way my G&L Legacy plays, and the sounds it gives. It's 2 point trem works far better than any 6-point I've used. I find it, and other Strats, looks kinda uninteresting, but it is definitely a player.