Silvertone re-issues by Samick

jcyphe · Post by **jcyphe** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 7:47 pm

http://www.silvertoneguitar.com/

I don't believe this has anything to do with the current Danelectro company or Harmony company. This is a re-issue of the Silvertone moniker which is now owned by Samick

It doesn't look like they tried to do accurate recreations of either model. On the Danelectro styled instrument the skipped the typical style construction and bridge set-up in favor of a solid body and more "modern" bridge design.

metalhead384 · Post by **metalhead384** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:16 pm

MSR $899.00, way to much

timhulio · Post by **timhulio** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 8:56 pm

Solid bodied Danelectro? Epic lamefest.

Also "faultless intonation and better string attack" - what the fuck were they thinking?

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 9:15 pm

timhulio wrote:Solid bodied Danelectro? Epic lamefest.

Hexactly.

Leisureclub · Post by **Leisureclub** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 10:00 pm

I'd be relatively interested in a 1448 re-issue. When I come across originals, they're either way too expensive or have some sort of deal breaking flaw.

westtexasred · Post by **westtexasred** » Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:42 pm

Leisureclub wrote:I'd be relatively interested in a 1448 re-issue. When I come across originals, they're either way too expensive or have some sort of deal breaking flaw.

Do you mean the 1478? The 1448 is the amp-in-case.Did they reissue those?

[youtube][/youtube]

One thing I don't like about the originals 1478 is the pickups are riveted to the pickguard.

timhulio · Post by **timhulio** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:20 am

They've just done an Eastwood job on these. They look similar, but all the hardware is generic off-the-shelf stuff.

luciguci · Post by **luciguci** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 12:26 am

WOW A MAHOGANY BODIED DANO THATS GONNA SOUND SHITTY

Pens · Post by **Pens** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:08 am

I didn't know they changed hands again. My lefty bass is a Silvertone from a few years back, actually love that thing. Looks like they still sell that model too.

The 1478 looks nice, I don't get what y'all are bitching about with the "standard hardware". You'd rather they used that absolute shit old bridge that would never intonate just to make it accurate??

luciguci · Post by **luciguci** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:14 am

Pens wrote: The 1478 looks nice, I don't get what y'all are bitching about with the "standard hardware".

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:36 am

I'd quite like the 1478...I've always liked the looks of the old ones, but they never stay in tune and are too microphonic. The reissue looks quality in comparison. I just hope they didn't "modernize" the neck too much, which they probably did.

timhulio · Post by **timhulio** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 1:46 am

If youse guys can't see how attempting to recreate a quirky and unique sounding/playing guitar with a similar shaped one only with bland, generic GFS style pickups and hardware is bad then I despair. Companies do this all the time and I'm bored of it. Just tool-up and build something cool for once.

Here's a pic from my archives. The one on the left lasted about six months before I got rid of it.

xxhoixx · Post by **xxhoixx** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:49 am

Why don't they just build reissues? The new ones are stupid looking.

luciguci · Post by **luciguci** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:52 am

They look good to me. The originals had some shit qualities, and if they reproduced those shit qualities all the way through, they won't sell much on account of people bitching about how shit the guitars are. On the other hand, they are priced way too high.

HNB · Post by **HNB** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 2:55 am

daftsupernova wrote:They look good to me. The originals had some shit qualities, and if they reproduced those shit qualities all the way through, they won't sell much on account of people bitching about how shit the guitars are. On the other hand, they are priced way too high.

cur · Post by **cur** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:06 am

That U2 has the same bridge I put on one of my intermark builds. Bastards must be getting their cues from shortscale now.

Leisureclub · Post by **Leisureclub** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 5:11 am

westtexasred wrote: Do you mean the 1478? The 1448 is the amp-in-case.Did they reissue those?

No, correct, No.

I think the 1448 was technically the guitar and also the amp in case. It's the 3/4 scale that looks like an old Danelectro or something.

I've played maybe 3 of them. Usually they were asking ~600+ for guitars that weren't particularly that clean. IMHO, 4XX should fetch a pretty nice example. I think it's sort of funny that I've taken that stance, because I've over paid on some old Fenders but for some reason, I can't justify it w/ a 60 year old plywood guitar.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 4:49 pm

timhulio wrote:If youse guys can't see how attempting to recreate a quirky and unique sounding/playing guitar with a similar shaped one only with bland, generic GFS style pickups and hardware is bad then I despair. Companies do this all the time and I'm bored of it. Just tool-up and build something cool for once.

Here's a pic from my archives. The one on the left lasted about six months before I got rid of it.

I wouldn't really compare these to the Hagstroms just yet. The differences in the Hagstrom reissues are huge-they ignored just about all the cues other than body shape-different controls and pickups (lifted directly from a strat), strat style trem, even the opposite color pickguard to what was offered on the originals. And IIRC didn't you paint that one blue from a bland black or silver? At least the 1478 LOOKS like its supposed to-they didn't just stick a strat trem and squier pickups on it.

The original hardware on the old Hagstroms was pretty good and solid. In their day they might have been a cheaper alternative to Gibson or Fender, but they were still "high end" compared to these old Silvertone/Harmony guitars. On the Hagstroms they did obviously take the lazy way out because instead of recreating hardware that worked then and would still work now, they put generic hardware that works now but just isn't as cool or unique. With these you're comparing cheap generic hardware of yesteryear to cheap generic hardware of today which is admittedly more stable. I do appreciate quirky old guitars, but the good news is that there are still plenty of those available and judging by the MSRP of the reissues they'll still be cheaper than the new ones. As I said, I think the biggest issue for me will be the necks...I'm A-OK with the other changes, but a big part of the appeal of these guitars to me has always been the baseball bat necks.

robert(original) · Post by **robert(original)** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:13 pm

my old girlfriend had a 1478 or bobcat. or whichever name they chose for that year. under the guard there was a pink stamp indicating jan 1965(or maybe it was 66) and it had the famed gold foil pups. but only a 2 way toggly...
anywho. the thing sounded fucking AWESOME! i made a tune 0 matic that woud fit on the wood base for the bridge and besides some fretwork and a setup the thing was a great player. just a lil bit of dirt and the bridge pup would shine! i miss that guitar. not the girl so much, but the guitar yes.

James · Post by **James** » Sun Feb 10, 2013 7:53 pm

The thing that annoys me most about switching the unusual parts for off-the-shelf generics is the pickups. There might not be any big difference in the technology behind them but they often have a distinct sound that does a lot to capture the feel of the guitar. It's also great to see something that isn't typical visually, even if it means a replacement isn't so simple.