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
The further development of the electric guitar wasn't a "blue sky" invention from a blank canvas. We all know it was a desire to make the guitar louder in a big band situation so people could hear it over the brass section. It's still a guitar, though, isn't it?
I don't think the prevalence of Les Pauls, Teles and Strats is down to conservatism in the players or lack of imagination on the part of the builders. These instruments just work in a predictable way and they deliver predictable results. If your primary drive is to play and be heard when you do so, why not just go with one of those and just focus on the "having fun" part?
Back to the OP. That, for me, is probably why things are the way they are and why I'm quite OK about it.
As a result it's heavier than need be and not ergonomic. (tuneomatics are naff too).
By contrast a strat was way more modern in 1954. This is why PRS have found a market for improved dual humbucker guitars wheras there is no company out there making serious coin on 3 pickup double cutaway guitars.
Any failure by Fender to capitalise on Suhr's success is due to their lifeless sounding plus strats with nuclear thick finishes and weird necks rather than a problem with the template.
Leo just got it right.
That's been said by a LOT of high profile players.
The pickups are a bit weedy and not hum-cancelling too, but likewise easy enough to put right.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Yet if it had have got past 1st post would the market place have accepted it ?