It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Rift Amplification
Brackley, Northamptonshire
www.riftamps.co.uk
Feedback
As for "when am I ready?" You'll never be ready. It works in reverse, you become ready by doing it. - pmbomb
Feedback
Is knocking some parts parts together and sticking a trademarked logo on it immoral and illegal? Yes
obviously as it sits now now it’s just the body that is not original, everything else on the guitar is as fender intended.
now if I manage to get another ‘89 USA body in the original colour and swop with the current body... is that guitar 100% original?... it would be 100% fender... but could I sell it as 100% original?
Fender don’t keep records earlier than the late ‘90’s (tried to find out what shade of white mine was by the serial number)... so there would be no way of telling if “body A” belonged with “neck B”...
so, if I source the right body, is my strat a “fake”? (FYI, it’s never getting sold, it was my first decent guitar)
The *risk* of that happening might be pretty remote, but it's a risk that we don't need to take, hence the position, and the wording of our statement.
Read the wording carefully - because it was written carefully - understand what it forbids and what it allows, and then stick to the rules, and then there's no problem with advertising and selling partsas here.
It doesn't matter if you say that it's a fake in the description. In fact, by admitting that it's a fake and that you know it's a fake, you've probably just put yourself in a completely indefensible position if (again, pretty remote chance) anyone decided to take action against you for selling fakes.
Not quite - read the rules carefully.
What's not allowable in any circumstance is selling items to which decals have been added which make the item appear to be something that it's not - typically that's putting a F decal on a non-F neck. I've seen ads where people have done that to a neck that I'd think was more valuable without the F decal on it - ie the neck was made by a respected luthier.
[*edit - when I say "this" is his job, I don't mean running this specific site!]
Is as in my case, buying a "genuine" Charvel USA neck from a reputable parts dealer at a guitar show and sticking it on a parts bin S type body with a genuine wilkinson trem from a Carvin strat and some Brandoni pickups in a wd scratch plate with genuine sperzel machines immoral and illegal?
On the subject of 'Blackie', Clapton's famous bitsa... each time it was advertised/sold it was represented as a 195x Fender Stratocaster. Each time Fender have used it in their literature to sell signature models they have described it as his well worn 1950s Fender Stratocaster.
Even Fender seem to turn a blind eye (when it suits them).
;-)
i should probably add to my original comment that any wrongdoing would only be in relation to how the guitar was advertised at POS. Apolgies for any confusion
I know this is kind of awkward, but I can’t help thinking that the way ‘F’ guitars are constructed along with a thriving third party market in components, and a fair amount of enthusiasm for swapping bits around to try to build the “perfect” whatevercaster makes this a long way from being an academic question. Short of taking the whole thing to pieces and submitting the major components to scrutiny by an expert I suspect that most buyers and sellers would be hard pushed to tell the difference between an upgraded/modified/repaired original and a well executed Frankencaster with a genuine neck...
Just because you have fitted the neck to a non-Charvel body does not change the fact it is a Charvel neck and as such, you are quite entitled to leave the logo in place even at POS. You must declare that the body is x, the trem is y etc and call it a partcaster.
However, fwiw, you will get far more for it if you sell it as parts and it will probably be easier to sell. Experience has taught me this, and yet it feels wrong - especially if you end up selling most of the parts to the same individual!!!
Ultimately, it comes down to what are considered intrinsic parts of a guitar and what are considered owner-upgrades. For a guitar, being as permissible as it's possible to be, the former includes the neck and the body and the latter comprises everything else.
So...yeah, Blackie falls foul of that. However, given that Blackie is a special case (ie of historical value) and unlikely to ever be sold on this site, I'm sure you'll understand why we're going to totally ignore that one (as well as any argument that our enforcement of these rules is wrong based on Blackie's existence)