# Fender Telecaster



## Paul Running

I would like to ask the opinion of any Fender experts on the forum, if anything in the images of this particular guitar seem questionable. I have not inquired about the price...got to wait for my stomach to be in a strong state first. Anyway, I would appreciate any comments that you may add.









Kijiji - Buy, Sell & Save with Canada's #1 Local Classifieds


Visit Kijiji Classifieds to buy, sell, or trade almost anything! New and used items, cars, real estate, jobs, services, vacation rentals and more virtually anywhere.




www.kijiji.ca


----------



## fogdart

That is an absolute beauty of a Tele. 54 was a GREAT year and that one would retain much of the blackguard vibe with the March neck date and flat pole pickup. Very cool axe that appears completely straight. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s in the $35-40k USD price range.


----------



## chickenpicken84

I'm no expert, I'm just here to hasten the stomach pain for you. He has it listed on Reverb for $48,500 CAD. So let that be your starting reference.


----------



## GeorgeMich

Yah he had a price up yesterday at $48,000 CND on Kijiji.


----------



## Milkman

As always with such guitars, to a collector it may be worth that. Supply and demand, et cetera.

To a guitarist, it's probably not significantly better than a MIM or maybe even a Squire Tele.

It's worth what someone is willing to pay. I'm not that someone.


----------



## GeorgeMich

Milkman said:


> As always with such guitars, to a collector it may be worth that. Supply and demand, et cetera.
> 
> To a guitarist, it's probably not significantly better than a MIM or maybe even a Squire Tele.
> 
> It's worth what someone is willing to pay. I'm not that someone.


Gonna go out on a limb here and say a 54 tele is gonna be significantly better than a squire or MIM tele…


----------



## Milkman

GeorgeMich said:


> Gonna go out on a limb here and say a 54 tele is gonna be significantly better than a squire or MIM tele…



Really?

Are you sure?

How confident are you that in a blind test, you would be able to pick which was which, assuming that the Squire or MIM was relic'd?

I've been playing for 46 years and I don't have that much confidence.

Better, why?

More impressive (to some)?


----------



## greco

GeorgeMich said:


> Gonna go out on a limb here and say a 54 tele is gonna be significantly better than a squire or MIM tele…


Not in my hands.


----------



## GeorgeMich

greco said:


> Not in my hands.


haha. Me either.
And to @Milkman that’s just my opinion.


----------



## Milkman

GeorgeMich said:


> haha. Me either.
> And to @Milkman that’s just my opinion.


I understand, and I don't have a chip on my shoulder for those who collect rare and expensive instruments. That's collecting, speculating, flipping, and not so much playing or listening.

I just don't swallow that there was anything magic or inherently superior either in construction or materials in the 50s. Sure some materials have become more difficult to obtain and some cost reduction measures have been applied but I'm of the opinion that technically the average guitar now is vastly superior to those made 70 years ago.

It's like paying $50k for an old bottle of scotch. It costs that much because there's so little of it left, not because it's going to taste better than an 8 year old bottle.


----------



## Paul Running

Yeah, for myself in most cases logic is overwhelmed by emotion and sometimes it is very difficult to pin-point a cause; sometimes it can become a very strong emotion and that's when I usually act and in some cases, the emotion subsides and then there's a sense of guilt or some how a sense of justifying a purchase that would appear totally illogical...maybe a characteristic of Acquisition Syndrome.


----------



## Powdered Toast Man

Milkman said:


> I understand, and I don't have a chip on my shoulder for those who collect rare and expensive instruments. That's collecting, speculating, flipping, and not so much playing or listening.
> 
> I just don't swallow that there was anything magic or inherently superior either in construction or materials in the 50s. Sure some materials have become more difficult to obtain and some cost reduction measures have been applied but I'm of the opinion that technically the average guitar now is vastly superior than those made 70 years ago.
> 
> It's like paying $50k for an old bottle of scotch. It costs that much because there's so little of it left, not because it's going to taste better than an 8 year old bottle.


Totally. There absolutely were dogs out there back in the day. And the fact that guitars from the early 70's are now commanding over $10K speaks exactly to your point. You couldn't GIVE those guitars away back in the 80's and 90's because they were significantly worse than newly available production guitars.

Collectors have ruined the market for older guitars. And up until about 2 years ago they hadn't touched the offset guitars (Jazzmasters, Jaguars, Mustangs) but now the secret is out and those have gone from affordable vintage players to nearly unobtainable by players in a short span because collectors have started vacuuming them up off the market.

Guys, these were bolt-on mass produced guitars. There's no special sauce or magic dust in them. Due to the production methods and technology available at the time yes, there was more hand work on them. But it was still assembly line methods.


----------



## jimmythegeek

Back in 2007 I had my heart set on a Jazzmaster. Loads of my favourite players used them. They looked gorgeous. I actually liked the rhythm circuit. An early prototype came up. Anodized guard, the whole deal. All original in good condition. It was under 4K and I just thought “there’s no way I can spend that”. I look back now and laugh. It was expensive but they’re stupidly so now; especially when you take into account how crazy noisy the early Jazzmaster pickups were. Still, rarity can add a lot of value in the eyes of prospective buyers:


Powdered Toast Man said:


> Totally. There absolutely were dogs out there back in the day. And the fact that guitars from the early 70's are now commanding over $10K speaks exactly to your point. You couldn't GIVE those guitars away back in the 80's and 90's because they were significantly worse than newly available production guitars.
> 
> Collectors have ruined the market for older guitars. And up until about 2 years ago they hadn't touched the offset guitars (Jazzmasters, Jaguars, Mustangs) but now the secret is out and those have gone from affordable vintage players to nearly unobtainable by players in a short span because collectors have started vacuuming them up off the market.
> 
> Guys, these were bolt-on mass produced guitars. There's no special sauce or magic dust in them. Due to the production methods and technology available at the time yes, there was more hand work on them. But it was still assembly line methods.


----------



## Powdered Toast Man

jimmythegeek said:


> Back in 2007 I had my heart set on a Jazzmaster. Loads of my favourite players used them. They looked gorgeous. I actually liked the rhythm circuit. An early prototype came up. Anodized guard, the whole deal. All original in good condition. It was under 4K and I just thought “there’s no way I can spend that”. I look back now and laugh. It was expensive but they’re stupidly so now; especially when you take into account how crazy noisy the early Jazzmaster pickups were. Still, rarity can add a lot of value in the eyes of prospective buyers:


Even up to about 2 or 3 years ago you could still snag a mid-60's Jag or JM for under 5 grand. Not anymore. The collectors caught on and they've ruined those too. It's to the point where guys like Mike Adams (puisheen) have stated that vintage offsets are now out of reach and they aren't worth the money they're commanding. (And Mike Adams is basically THE internet guy for offsets and has long championed the vintage models). 

And I think it's a smaller number of "super collectors" that's done this to the market too. I heard about some guy down in California who had something like 200 vintage guitars locked away in a friggin storage locker which got broken into and a bunch were stolen. Why does he have over 200 vintage Jaguars and Jazzmasters locked in what a amounts to a shed? Because he's got more money than brains apparently. I don't have much respect for these rich guitar hoarders.


----------



## Jalexander

He told me he wants $45k and had had offers at $40k (CDN). He also posted it here back in May, but in a weird place where nobody noticed it:








Strat


100 percent




www.guitarscanada.com


----------



## MS41R8

I have no idea how I did not see this here or on kijiji….not that I really look at kijiji much …but still !


----------



## colchar

fogdart said:


> 54 was a GREAT year



There is no such thing as a good year or a bad year. That is a myth. There were crappy guitars made then too, just like today.


----------



## fogdart

colchar said:


> There is no such thing as a good year or a bad year. That is a myth. There were crappy guitars made then too, just like today.


Mid ‘54 saw the change from flat pole pieces to staggered pole pieces in that beautiful bridge pickup. ‘54 necks tend to be more shapely than the large U-shapes of ‘53 but still maintain much of the blackguard heft that subsided a bit in ‘55. The swamp ash also tends to be lightweight (but not quit as light as ‘55/‘56). Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but if you want an early Tele ‘54 is a special year that saw unique features - many of them coveted. So yes, it was a great year.


----------



## colchar

fogdart said:


> Mid ‘54 saw the change from flat pole pieces to staggered pole pieces in that beautiful bridge pickup. ‘54 necks tend to be more shapely than the large U-shapes of ‘53. The swamp ash also tends to be lightweight (but not quit as light as ‘55/‘56). Yes, there are exceptions to the rule but if you want an early Tele ‘54 is a special year that saw unique features - many of them coveted. So yes, I was a great year.



No, it wasn't. Great denotes a level of quality, and the year has no impact on that. What you are talking about are desirable (to some) specs, which is a completely different thing.


----------



## fogdart

@colchar

I would call those specs pretty great. So... ‘54 was a great year for me and many other Tele players. Not to mention 1954 saw the introduction of the Strat. Another reason was it was a great year for Fender and the future of the electric guitar.


----------



## teleboli




----------



## fogdart

Oh I’m done brother Brent. I’ve said my piece.


----------



## jimmythegeek

Powdered Toast Man said:


> Even up to about 2 or 3 years ago you could still snag a mid-60's Jag or JM for under 5 grand. Not anymore. The collectors caught on and they've ruined those too. It's to the point where guys like Mike Adams (puisheen) have stated that vintage offsets are now out of reach and they aren't worth the money they're commanding. (And Mike Adams is basically THE internet guy for offsets and has long championed the vintage models).
> 
> And I think it's a smaller number of "super collectors" that's done this to the market too. I heard about some guy down in California who had something like 200 vintage guitars locked away in a friggin storage locker which got broken into and a bunch were stolen. Why does he have over 200 vintage Jaguars and Jazzmasters locked in what a amounts to a shed? Because he's got more money than brains apparently. I don't have much respect for these rich guitar hoarders.


That’s obscene! One day I’ll scratch the itch with a Squier (the FSR 50s Jazzmaster has most of what I want beyond the black pickup covers). That being said, if George Fullerton’s personal Jag hits the market again in my lifetime I’ll have to have a serious talk with the Mrs.


----------



## Jalexander

So which one of you bought it?


----------



## loudtubeamps

One would be paying for the nostalgia and a time capsule, genuine patina and the smell that only a vintage instrument can produce.
The build quality and tonality of one of these survivors can be equaled or surpassed at a fraction of the price.
But most of us already know that....don't we?

A nice piece any way you look at it.......


----------



## Always12AM

Milkman said:


> Really?
> 
> Are you sure?
> 
> How confident are you that in a blind test, you would be able to pick which was which, assuming that the Squire or MIM was relic'd?
> 
> I've been playing for 46 years and I don't have that much confidence.
> 
> Better, why?
> 
> More impressive (to some)?


I’m not saying that it’s worth 40k.
But you could tell the difference.
Smell, sight, sound, touch etc.

You develop these skills around 14 months of age.


----------



## Milkman

Always12AM said:


> I’m not saying that it’s worth 40k.
> But you could tell the difference.
> Smell, sight, sound, touch etc.
> 
> You develop these skills around 14 months of age.


I doubt you could in a blind test if the non vintage instrument was skillfully relic’d.

Even less likely if you were just listening to someone else playing them.


----------



## Mikev7305

My buddies 63 jag SMELLS old. Playing it against a number of guitars priced between $500 and $2000, it wasn't as good as any of them. That doesn't mean it's not worth the $4500 he paid for it, they aren't making any more 63 jaguars. Function doesn't mean squat for the value of old stuff. Scarcity trumps it all


----------



## Mikev7305

And it's funny that people think it is vintage guitar collectors that are ruining the access us peasants have at getting our hands on some of this gear. It's happening across the board on any asset class. Why has real estate grown 22% in the last year? It's not because investors are snatching up houses. It's probably closer to the idea that governments have added 20% more fiat money to the system. Any asset like vintage guitars, rare art, real estate, etc, will always account for its percentage of the total asset value of all things worth money. Just another sign that the inflation they say is at 4%, is far from truth. Many people peg it closer to like 15% - 20%. But I digress.... The tele in question will absolutely fetch the asking price, and don't be surprised that in 5 years it's worth $100,000


----------



## Paul Running

It's no longer available...back to dreamscape mode


----------



## Milkman

There are some elements to vintage guitars and associated gear that you can't quantify or measure and comparing them to modern guitars is sort of an apples to oranges comparison (says the guy who just did that very thing).

Love what you love and buy what you want with the money you've earned (or received).

Just don't waste anyone's time trying to convince them that a well made modern instrument can't meet or exceed the qualities of a 1954 Tele or similar.

That's much like trying to convince someone that a vintage Corvette is superior to a new one. It may be cooler looking ( a matter of taste), but in terms of handling, accelleration et cetera.....well you get it.


----------



## MS41R8

And if anyone is closely involved in the higher end vintage market, this guitar has most blackguard specs/qualities with the desired flatpole pickup , round style string tree and the fact that it’s a Tadeo Gomez neck. Like @fogdart said in an earlier post , this guitar will infact command $35-40K _USD_ in the collector circles .

And for the discussion going on about “Do vintage guitars sound or play better than a good reissue or modern day guitar to make it worth the price ?” … to me (so my opinion only) …all that doesen’t seem to matter too much in the upper echelon “Collector” circles. Many guys pay ALOT of money for a guitar sight unseen or even played/heard just to have in that model or year in their collection.

From my experiences YES, there are amazing vintage guitars and there are duds …. Same as for modern guitars … there are some absolutely stunning heavenly playing/sounding examples out there and there is some high priced garbage too. But the vintage ones I have played that are the good ones are pretty spectacular and I think with not only being a good guitar, more mentally/emotionally inspire me knowing the history of the guitar, the stages or venues it played in its life and all the stories it has to tell. This adds up (for me anyhow) to justify spending much more on a GOOD Vintage guitar than a good Modern guitar ….. I would also NEVER buy a poor quality/playing vintage guitar just for the sake of having it. In these type of deals ..a real collector who “actually plays”their instrument will travel from afar to physically go put a guitar in their hands and make sure it’s magic .

My take on it all …..and again….just my opinion and I respect all others views on this stuff as well.


----------



## Milkman

MS41R8 said:


> And if anyone is closely involved in the higher end vintage market, this guitar has most blackguard specs/qualities with the desired flatpole pickup , round style string tree and the fact that it’s a Tadeo Gomez neck. Like @fogdart said in an earlier post , this guitar will infact command $35-40K _USD_ in the collector circles .
> 
> And for the discussion going on about “Do vintage guitars sound or play better than a good reissue or modern day guitar to make it worth the price ?” … to me (so my opinion only) …all that doesen’t seem to matter too much in the upper echelon “Collector” circles. Many guys pay ALOT of money for a guitar sight unseen or even played/heard just to have in that model or year in their collection.
> 
> From my experiences YES, there are amazing vintage guitars and there are duds …. Same as for modern guitars … there are some absolutely stunning heavenly playing/sounding examples out there and there is some high priced garbage too. But the vintage ones I have played that are the good ones are pretty spectacular and I think with not only being a good guitar, more mentally/emotionally inspire me knowing the history of the guitar, the stages or venues it played in its life and all the stories it has to tell. This adds up (for me anyhow) to justify spending much more on a GOOD Vintage guitar than a good Modern guitar ….. I would also NEVER buy a poor quality/playing vintage guitar just for the sake of having it. In these type of deals ..a real collector who “actually plays”their instrument will travel from afar to physically go put a guitar in their hands and make sure it’s magic .
> 
> My take on it all …..and again….just my opinion and I respect all others views on this stuff as well.



An important distinction / clarification I should have made, is that I am by no means saying or implying that one can't be both a cellector AND a player.

My apologies if that was inferred.


----------



## MS41R8

Milkman said:


> An important distinction / clarification I should have made, is that I am by no means saying or implying that one can't be both a cellector AND a player.
> 
> My apologies if that was inferred.


You for sure, and I didn’t take your comments that way either … there are plenty of both kinds . There are some that can’t even play the guitar but love the thought of it all 🤣🤣…there are some who play a bit and plink away….. and there are collectors who obnoxiously (but with extreme talent) wank away while gloating about their millions of dollars of gear …. All types in this industry 🤷‍♂️


----------



## SWLABR

Milkman said:


> I doubt you could in a blind test if the non vintage instrument was skillfully relic’d.


Ya, I probably couldn’t tell between a legit 54, and a really good relic, but that wasn’t your original argument. You said the 54 vs a MIM or Squier… 

I am literally walking out of a L&M. (Helping a buddy buy something for his aspiring daughter.) I think a novice could tell the difference between a Bullet and a Classic Vibe. A 54 would be kind of a no brainer.


----------



## colchar

Always12AM said:


> I’m not saying that it’s worth 40k.
> But you could tell the difference.
> Smell, sight, sound, touch etc.
> 
> You develop these skills around 14 months of age.


World class violinists could't tell a Stradivarius from a modern instrument but you think a bunch a basement players and bar band warriors could identify a vintage Tele?


----------



## colchar

fogdart said:


> @colchar
> 
> I would call those specs pretty great. So... ‘54 was a great year* for me* and many other Tele players. Not to mention 1954 saw the introduction of the Strat. Another reason was it was a great year for Fender and the future of the electric guitar.



Leaving aside the fact that you are, once again, confusing specs with quality the bolded part of your post above is important. They might be great to you, but that doesn't mean they are for others. For someone who likes thin necks, for example, a '64 would suck. You are stating your opinion as if it is fact - it is not. It is personal preference, not something universal.


----------



## Always12AM

colchar said:


> World class violinists could't tell a Stradivarius from a modern instrument but you think a bunch a basement players and bar band warriors could identify a vintage Tele?


I don’t think that a world class violinist would confuse a violin made by hand 200 years ago with a violin made in Vietnam last night.


----------



## Always12AM

Milkman said:


> There are some elements to vintage guitars and associated gear that you can't quantify or measure and comparing them to modern guitars is sort of an apples to oranges comparison (says the guy who just did that very thing).
> 
> Love what you love and buy what you want with the money you've earned (or received).
> 
> Just don't waste anyone's time trying to convince them that a well made modern instrument can't meet or exceed the qualities of a 1954 Tele or similar.
> 
> That's much like trying to convince someone that a vintage Corvette is superior to a new one. It may be cooler looking ( a matter of taste), but in terms of handling, accelleration et cetera.....well you get it.


If you are suggesting that someone may like their guitar more than another guitar, I would agree.

I would even agree that a master builder of any brand that makes T style guitars has the ability to use 70 years of hindsight and inherited technology and skill in a way that could make an exact replica of any era of Telecaster.

The exact idea that I am skeptical about is that someone could not tel the difference between an 4lbs Affinity Squier or a 10lbs MIM standard vs a Telecaster made with the same hardware and wood as the original models.

To accept that would suggest that people are not observant enough to use critical thinking and sensory abilities that are present in toddlers to distinguish the difference between very obviously different things.

I have seen a lot of dead nuts replicas of vintage guitars. Any mass produced modern “telecaster” has very different measurements and in many cases universally accepted improvements. These are what I’m referring too.

Again, I’d rather see my sister in a whore house than pay 40 grand for a guitar. But I also don’t own a stable of 1.7 million dollar show horses or a wife who’s face looks like a fuckin plastic saw doll mask from plastic surgery lol. I also don’t have a butler who I can force to eat spider webs when they fail to acquire fresh avocados.


----------



## Milkman

Take a MIM Tele, spend a few hundred getting someone to relic it.
Blindfold.

If you’re just looking at them, yes there should be a clear difference, but feel and sound can be replicated.


----------



## tomee2

Always12AM said:


> I don’t think that a world class violinist would confuse a violin made by hand 200 years ago with a violin made in Vietnam last night.


I believe the actual comparison being alluded to (in a research paper or something.. ) was a Stradivarius against a top tier modern hand made equivalent. Not sure what those go for but last time I got interested in this sort of thing it was $10kUS and up for a concert quality violin.

BUT... an audience might not tell. Famous story of Fritz Kreisler or Heifetz playing at Carnegie Hall and smashing his violin comes to mind.


----------



## colchar

Always12AM said:


> I don’t think that a world class violinist would confuse a violin made by hand 200 years ago with a violin made in Vietnam last night.


There have been two studies done - one in 2010 and a second more recent one (that one aimed to correct criticisms of the first study). The results were the same both times.









Double-Blind Violin Test: Can You Pick The Strad?


Researchers presented a group of professional violinists with a set of violins and asked them to play and then determine — based on sound alone — which were made by the famed Italian violin-maker Stradivari and Guarneri. The results surprised everyone, including the pros themselves.




www.npr.org













Blind-tested soloists unable to tell Stradivarius violins from modern instruments


Following the controversial 2010 study in Indianapolis, researchers in Paris invite ten professional musicians to compare twelve instruments




www.thestrad.com













Million-dollar Strads fall to modern violins in blind ‘sound check'


Living violinmakers score a win over Stradivari in double-blind test




www.science.org









__





Science | AAAS







www.science.org






Edited to add:
Apparently it has been done a third time, and the Strads lost then too.









Players and Listeners Both Prefer a New Violin to a Stradivarius


The old masterpieces lose for a third time in a new study.




www.theatlantic.com


----------



## Always12AM

tomee2 said:


> I believe the actual comparison being alluded to (in a research paper or something.. ) was a Stradivarius against a top tier modern hand made equivalent. Not sure what those go for but last time I got interested in this sort of thing it was $10kUS and up for a concert quality violin.
> 
> BUT... an audience might not tell. Famous story of Fritz Kreisler or Heifetz playing at Carnegie Hall and smashing his violin comes to mind.


this is more what I was getting at ^.
It’s not to say that someone couldn’t build a telecaster today that is as good or better than a vintage, you just can’t do it in Indonesia out of basswood and then hit it with 30 layers of poly and make it indistinguishable lol.


----------



## colchar

Always12AM said:


> this is more what I was getting at ^.
> It’s not to say that someone couldn’t build a telecaster today that is as good or better than a vintage, you just can’t do it in Indonesia out of basswood and then hit it with 30 layers of poly and make it indistinguishable lol.



I never said anything about a cheap Indonesian made instrument. I said that a bunch a basement players and bar band warriors couldn't identify a vintage Tele.


----------



## Always12AM

colchar said:


> I never said anything about a cheap Indonesian made instrument. I said that a bunch a basement players and bar band warriors couldn't identify a vintage Tele.


I don’t like to use the word “cheap” I like to use the word different which is the reason I am opposed to the ideas that you and @Milkman are saying.

I was clarifying that no, you cannot take something that is constructed so much differently and “relic / scratch” it to feel or sound like a 1950’s telecaster.

You can build one, but how convincing it is depends entirely on how much more than $2,000 someone is willing to spend on getting a body and neck constructed and then finished in the same way that guitars were built back when wood was cheap and health and safety didn’t exist in the work place lol. In fact the biggest giveaway would be that if you were to buy a AAAA flamed maple neck and a top tier one piece ash body and then some very well made pickups today, it would feel and play and sound a lot better than an original and have an actual computer design the neck pocket instead of a guy named Randy in 1953 with a chissel and a piece of sand paper 😂

The hardware and pickup construction has not changed dramatically since then other than they are probably cheaper to make and higher quality.

Also, I would argue that basement players know more than band warriors and band warriors probably know more than extremely successful musicians given that average people actually have to handle and repair and make financial decisions around knowing the products they are buying as opposed to having an in house technician, roadies and a management team to insert brands for show etc.

I think guitar gods probably have had the time and money to get nerdy about their instruments, but I don’t think Beyonce gives a fuck if her bass player has healthcare let alone a 1950’s P bass lol. Where as people like myself who will break a pickup and then spend a year learning how to build a pickup probably know more about pickups than someone who makes one hundred thousand dollars to appear at an event with a wig and makeup lol.


----------



## Alan Small

Alright kids...time for dinner now and a good nights sleep because you all have to catch the bus to school in the morning


----------



## Always12AM

Alan Small said:


> Alright kids...time for dinner now and a good nights sleep because you all have to catch the bus to school in the morning


My bus picks me up right at my driveway and it only holds 6


----------



## colchar

Always12AM said:


> I don’t like to use the word “cheap” I like to use the word different which is the reason I am opposed to the ideas that you and @Milkman are saying.
> 
> I was clarifying that no, you cannot take something that is constructed so much differently and “relic / scratch” it to feel or sound like a 1950’s telecaster.



Sure you can, the vilin experiments proved it - repeatedly. And relicing isn't even necessary for sound.




> Also, I would argue that basement players know more than band warriors and band warriors probably know more than extremely successful musicians given that average people actually have to handle and repair and make financial decisions around knowing the products they are buying as opposed to having an in house technician, roadies and a management team to insert brands for show etc.


Extremely successful musicians went through those phases too. They weren't always successful.




> I think guitar gods probably have had the time and money to get nerdy about their instruments



You're wrong. Many have no clue. Randy Rhoads was convinced his Custom was from a certain year until he learned that they didn't even make Customs then. Dickey Betts can't even name pickups properly (and I mean neck and bridge, not brand or model). To those guys, and others like them, guitars are merely tools and not items to be fetishized over.


----------



## Always12AM

colchar said:


> Sure you can, the vilin experiments proved it - repeatedly. And relicing isn't even necessary for sound.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Extremely successful musicians went through those phases too. They weren't always successful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're wrong. Many have no clue. Randy Rhoads was convinced his Custom was from a certain year until he learned that they didn't even make Customs then. Dickey Betts can't even name pickups properly (and I mean neck and bridge, not brand or model). To those guys, and others like them, guitars are merely tools and not items to be fetishized over.


I am confident about my point of view none the less and I appreciate you sharing yours. But I’ve got no more fucks to give about museum artifacts.


----------

