New Fender 'Flame' Tops...
have guitar, will travel...
Strats, Teles and J-basses (I think). It looks like they have about a
3/8" flamed maple top on the guitar, and the price is around $600.
Cool, I think in my best Butthead voice, and go check it out. The flaming
looks good, and it's all over the back of the neck, but wait. It's a bit
fuzzy in some spots, and it doesn't look bookmatched.
So, I eye the back of the headstock and there this 'Foto-Flame' logo back
there.
(Mind you, the tag on the guitar says "Natural Flame Maple Top!!").
I spoke with a Fender rep at another store, who filled me in. It's ALL a
photo-finish. There's just a fake top on there to look like it's got a
cool piece of wood on there.
I had never been more disappointed in all my life; with Fender for putting
out such a shameless instrument and for the music store guys for either
being clueless or on the take.
Wankers.
=== Scott Naylor - Ball State University, University Computing Services
(whose opinion is that my opinion is not necessarily their opinion)
I often want to ask why God allows suffering, starvation, oppression,
and injustice. I don't, though, because I'm afraid God might ask me.
Larry Huntley
>So I'm at the music store the other day, and they have a new series of
>Strats, Teles and J-basses (I think). It looks like they have about a
>3/8" flamed maple top on the guitar, and the price is around $600.
I saw one of these just this past Tuesday. A Strat. I thought it
looked pretty cool.
[Hard-on produced at thought of flame maple tele.]
>So, I eye the back of the headstock and there this 'Foto-Flame' logo back
>there.
(Butthead voice on. "Wait a minute...this sucks...")
[Hard-on recedes to half-mast.]
>(Mind you, the tag on the guitar says "Natural Flame Maple Top!!").
Was this a factory tag or one applied by some salescritter?
>I spoke with a Fender rep at another store, who filled me in. It's ALL a
>photo-finish. There's just a fake top on there to look like it's got a
>cool piece of wood on there.
[Loss of hard-on.]
>I had never been more disappointed in all my life; with Fender for putting
>out such a shameless instrument and for the music store guys for either
>being clueless or on the take.
>Wankers.
Indeed. The whole lot of them. I hadn't checked out the axe I saw that
closely. I was in one of the "Please Don't Take The Guitars Down; Ask
For Assistance" kind of places, so I never really *touched* it. Stone
disappointment. The question of what a Fender guitar with a REAL maple
top on it would sound like remains open, of course. Anybody else actually
played one of these Deceptocasters yet?
- L
>
>=== Scott Naylor - Ball State University, University Computing Services
> (whose opinion is that my opinion is not necessarily their opinion)
> I often want to ask why God allows suffering, starvation, oppression,
> and injustice. I don't, though, because I'm afraid God might ask me.
--
Larry Huntley Portland, Oregon Guitars/Organs/Electronics/Computers
"Radio Shack and Peavey are on the same karmic levels in Usenet musicdomness."
-- Robert "Ray" Fukumoto (rob...@uhunix3.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu)
Tom Morley
An unnamed salesman at an un-named Fender dealerdown the
street from me refers to this finish as
Fake-O-Flame.
Tom Morley
Jack A. Zucker
the body like the PRS guitars !
---
| Jack A Zucker Internet: jack....@ab.com |
| Allen-Bradley Company, Inc. |
| 747 Alpha Drive Voice: 216-646-4668 |
| Highland Hts., OH 44143 Fax: 216-646-4484 |
David L. Campbell
>I spoke with a Fender rep at another store, who filled me in. It's ALL a
>photo-finish. There's just a fake top on there to look like it's got a
>cool piece of wood on there.
Yup. I recognized the psuedo flame as soon as I closely examined one,
before actually knowing what it was. When you hold a real flame
maple top up to the light, and randomly turn the guitar so that the
angle of light on the surface of the guitar changes, the grain on the
genuine article will bend and distort and generally act sorta
chrystaline. Its a fascinating visual effect. Try it with a PRS or
Hamer and you'll see what I mean. A photo-flame finish, on the other
hand, will look the same no matter what the light angle. Also
consider this: a real flame top will be unique in that no two are
exactly the same; a sort of fingerprint. The photo-flame top, since
its a photographic reproduction, will look the same on any two
guitars that were finished using the same "photo".
Of course, all this says nothing about how the guitar *sounds*, which
is the bottom line. But it gets me very angry that many stores will
try to pass one off as the real thing.
David.
--
+-----==== opinions expressed do not represent those of my employer ====-----+
| David L. Campbell, IBM Austin, TX | "... and you eat your own soul |
| Internet: dcam...@austin.ibm.com | until the only thing |
| VNET: dcampbel at austin | left is appetite..." |
Mike Conway
>played one of these Deceptocasters yet?
Yeah, I've got one...I wanted a 60's reissue with the plain black finish,
cause I REALLY liked the neck. The music store gave me a very good deal on
one they had in stock that had the flame on it.
I guess it is kind of hokey, but, hey....who cares, as long as it doesn't have
a skull and crossbones, or some other stupid shit on it......
It needs better pickups, but it is still a decent guitar....I do wish that i
had saved a few hundred more and gotten an srv, but then I'd have to spend
more $$$ to get that crummy pick -guard replaced!
This guitar is a decent value, i could take or leave the flame top stuff
gary watts
I think what most of us dislike about the photoflame thing is the idea
rather than the actual look. It's like cheating somehow. Let's face
it...the reason people buy flame tops is for the appearance not the sound.
ANd those of use that have flame tops paid plenty extra for that one
special piece of wood. It's a bit like buying a black box for $100.00
that replaces your vintage amp collection!
Obviously, a maple top adds more brightness to Gibsons and such but most
people don't even care about that, expecially on the lower end guitars.
I do take objection to salespeople trying to pass them off as "real"
figured tops as this is dishonest but typical in music store land.
Gary Watts
(Proud owner of a Tom Anderson Drop "Authentic Flame Maple" Top Classic)
14035-L.KRAUTH(MT5712)XXXX
I have mixed feelings about this stuff (you know what mixed feelings are?
When you drive your mother-in-law off a cliff in your new car :-))
On the one hand, the idea of something fake is unattractive to me, and
to a lot of others it seems. Also it may look reasonable now, but what
about when it gets chipped after normal wear and tear?
But on the other hand, I tried one of these "beauties" last night. At least,
I tried the DeceptoJazz version. It plays and sounds great. I don't mean
just good, I mean: compares-with-MusicMan-Stingray/Vintage-Jazz-Bass-great.
Maybe I'm overstating it, but string balance is even, the pickups seem really
powerful and it has that full range that comes out when you thumb-slap.
Looks like good value at $560. The flame effect does have a kind of
translucent "depth" to it a little like the real thing. I've seen much
worse (remember the Dan Armstrong plexiglass guitars/basses with Formica
pickguards?).
I hate to say it, but I think Fender may sell a lot of these things. They
are heavy brutes, but that may have improved sustain, which was good. I
would imagine similar characteristics would apply to the DeceptoStrats
and DeceptoTeles too. Question: would be encouraging Fender and others to
perpetrate this kind of travesty by buying them?
Personally, I'd rather have a fakey guitar that plays well,
than a wonderful but dead piece of furniture.
Any opinions? (Probably Flame Bait)
Tony Stillwell
Bjorn Lindstrom
(14035-L.KRAUTH(MT5712)XXXX) wrote:
> I have mixed feelings about this stuff (you know what mixed feelings are?
> When you drive your mother-in-law off a cliff in your new car :-))
Gee, I thought that was called "I don't care because I'm dead now ..."
(8=
Seriously though, I have a 50's Reissue Tele with a Sunburst Fake-o-Flame
that I just love ... especially since I replaced the pickups and
electronics.
Sure, I would rather have a *real* flame-top, and I will probably buy a
real one someday, but for now, I am extremely pleased with this guitar.
Yes, if you look close, you can see that the "flame" lacks detail, but
being a sunburst, it's harder to tell.
Bjorn
Proud owner of:
'72 Ovation Deacon - Black
'92 Breedlove C1 - Rosewood/American Walnut
'93 Fender Strat Delux Plus - Natural
'94 Fender Tele 50's Reissue - Sunburst (Fake-o) Flame (But don't tell ...
=8)
'94 Fender Custom Shop Strat Set Neck Ultra - Black Beauty
'94 Custom Built B.C. Rich Mockingbird - Zebrawood/Graphite
Larry Huntley
>I have mixed feelings about this stuff (you know what mixed feelings are?
>When you drive your mother-in-law off a cliff in your new car :-))
>On the one hand, the idea of something fake is unattractive to me, and
>to a lot of others it seems. Also it may look reasonable now, but what
>about when it gets chipped after normal wear and tear?
Not so much the fakeness, but the idea that they aren't being real up
front about it. "Genuine Imitation Masonite" is okay if they say
that. BTW, where is all the _real_ maple? Gibson and PRS got it all
bought up for the next few years?
>But on the other hand, I tried one of these "beauties" last night. At least,
>I tried the DeceptoJazz version. It plays and sounds great. I don't mean
>just good, I mean: compares-with-MusicMan-Stingray/Vintage-Jazz-Bass-great.
>Maybe I'm overstating it, but string balance is even, the pickups seem really
>powerful and it has that full range that comes out when you thumb-slap.
>Looks like good value at $560.
This is the useful piece of information. Tone and playability are the
main criteria.
>I hate to say it, but I think Fender may sell a lot of these things. They
>are heavy brutes, but that may have improved sustain, which was good.
So, the applied top is maple, just not flamed? This would explain the
additional mass. Or is it (horrors!) some synthetic substance that lends
itself to the FotoFakeFlame process? (Based on the neck, I'm assuming
it is real maple.)
>I
>would imagine similar characteristics would apply to the DeceptoStrats
>and DeceptoTeles too. Question: would be encouraging Fender and others to
>perpetrate this kind of travesty by buying them?
Probably; but, if as you say, they are good guitars, so what? If it
fits the purpose, someone will buy it, no matter what it looks like,
right? If its appearance lures someone into buying it who cares more
for looks than tone, it doesn't take any money out of my pocket. So
long as they don't quit making sunbursts and midnite wine and the
others we know and love, it's just one more variation on the theme.
>Personally, I'd rather have a fakey guitar that plays well,
>than a wonderful but dead piece of furniture.
Exactly. We've heard a lot of great music come out of what looked
like real junkers. Has a lot to do with the fingers (and who they're
attached to), or so I'm told.
>Any opinions?
Oh, sure.
>(Probably Flame Bait)
Not this time.
- L
--
Larry Huntley Intel SSD - Beaverton, Oregon USA
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.
- Super Chicken