Monday 4/23 Lunch Report

It's lunchtime someplace….

It's been nearly 2 years since I've done this, so a re-intro might be in order. My handle is my name, or vice-versa. I've been around this joint for a few years, well before GbL V2 launched. I'm a geek-for-hire by trade, supporting small businesses locally. I also own & run the bass-specific site BassesByLeo as well as its forum. You're all welcome to join us over there. I can even add a guitar forum!

Lunch today will be…. Well, who the hell knows? My day job could find me pretty much anywhere in Orange County, CA or the LA County South Bay & Long Beach. I might have something from the home fridge. Or if I'm between site visits, maybe a sandwich while sitting and watching airplanes come and go at LGB.

As we stagger through the week, I'm going to try to touch on the following topics:

Monday - Physical design and materials.
Tuesday - Construction basics
Wednesday - Electronics and mods
Thursday - Basic instrument photography
Friday - Pics of your instruments

Today let's gab a bit about design. Last Friday Bassman wondered why technologies such as the Steinberger headless bass didn't take off. Lots of things about the instrument made sense; composite materials, tuning stability, modern electronics, etc. Yet because of its looks it remained, and remains, the odd man out. There are other examples of forward-looking guitars & basses that just kind of languished. Some have a kind of cult status. There could be any number of reasons. Whattaya think?

And what direction are things headed now? The basic Strat & Tele (and Precision & Jazz) have so many incarnations from so many manufacturers that one is pretty much indistinguishable from another - at least visually at first glance.

Finally…

What is it about the original designs of Leo Fender and George Fullerton that have stuck to our psyche so tenaciously for all these decades?

Discuss.

Last edited by Ken Baker on Mon Apr 23, 2012 10:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Hi man

No matter what you have for lunch - it will always be better with bacon......just had a nice BLT and the 'B' does not stand for bread!

I think the guitar shape of the strat and tele have stuck partly due to function (it simply works) but also its to do with association - we see our heroes playing them and that sticks in our mind whether we like it or not. I personally prefer to play a strat / tele because of the versitility and blues tones....the fact that with little effort i can imagine Hendrix, Clapton, SRV, playing the same style of guitar just adds to the vibe....

The original Fender and Gibson designed guitars have history on their side. Most players know how to get their preferred sounds out of traditional guitars. New stuff is unfamiliar and somewhat risky although I have found it to be worth the effort.
G&L guitars and basses are still traditional enough to hold the attention of most players and I think most are pleasantly surprised when they try them out.

Ken, I had some great cabbage/carrot soup with ham for lunch, home made of course.

Design and especially looks seem to be that what is best, is what we are used to. i think that Leo developed instruments that became the standard for everyone else. The same was true for everything he designed. There are a lot of quality guitars by custom builders out there but the numbers sold are very low. They do not have the mass appeal like the Leo instruments. We had a two nighter this weekend and I must say my L2500 is spectacular. The only thing I would like to change is if it could be made to weigh 3 pounds with no change in tone or sustain, how is that for wishful thinking? If it were all composite would people buy it?

Steve, our lead player, used both the G&L Legacy with Synth that I rigged up last fall and his 88 Strat Plus this weekend. He commented how the Legacy cooks compared to the Strat. He is a recent convert to the G&L fold and has commented on the build quality. He especially like the sensitivity of Legacy pickups. It is not hard to make converts if they can try the product. The G&L edge is traditional style with excellent build quality and outstanding wood grains. That is a formula for success. Marketing is what becomes especially important at this time. If you do not have quality and value, marketing is not of much value.-- Darwin

Why use wood for the body & neck? There are several man-made materials that can be used. You'd be able to dial in resonance, weight, strength, etc. You'd end up with a stable instrument that would deal with wide environmental swings and not need a setup tweak.

Ken...

You'd end up with a stable instrument that would deal with wide environmental swings and not need a setup tweak.

I think it is the research costs and "new" thinking that prevents this. Woods are still considered sustainable products and very small amounts are used for guitars relatively speaking. It is easily obtained and the cost of petroleum products are uncertain in the future. There is also the enviromental concerns with plastics, and fiber composites. Look what has happened to the cost of automotive paints in the last ten years. A lot of it is EPA related. I am a fan of composite acoustic guitars and would seriously look at one if I were in the market for one. Moses builds graphite necks and seem to have a reputation for being stable. I would consider one on a bass guitar if I needed a replacement. You do not see very many wooden boats nowadays. -- Darwin

i have played some composite guitars where they tried exactly that, the results were less than satisfying. also the tooling necessary is very different for the manufacture with some. aluminum has been also used for necks and bodies, didn't catch on. i don't really like the composite acoustics, tried many, own one, the sound is just not quite there.

I think you have to go back to before the beginning of WWII to fully understand how revolutionary Leo's instrument. Electric guitars started coming into play in the 1930s during the Great Depression. By the start of the war in 1939, America was already coming out of its economic funk, but when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941, consumers were in for another five years of rationing. The Baby Boom begins in 1946, with all those GIs coming home, and it is the start of a new age of consumerism--the Jet Age, the Space Age--a new embrace of technology. Look back at the Fender ads of the late 1950's--early 1960s and you can see the influences. The Jetson's were a dream just around the corner. So it's not surprising to me that these instruments came into being during this period, or that their Space Age styling came to be iconic.

I think we are at the dawn of a new era--the era of alternative materials for guitar construction. Heard of bakelite, polyurethane, Tusq, Micarta, Corian, Lyrachord, Richlite, aluminum, carbon fiber and high-pressure laminate? All of these materials are being used in critical areas of guitar making--areas that would have been unthinkable 50 years ago. And as wood supplies dwindle, costs are going to go up--so look for more of these techno parts in years to come. I think someday your Steinberger bass might be highly collectible, "...because it was made back in the day when they used GOOD composites!"

Musicians have always been slow to adopt new technologies I don't see that changing anytime soon, but it's going to have to happen. The handwriting's on the wall.

But still, I think the Strat, Tele, Jazz and P-bass are going to be around for a long time. They are beautiful designs, with great functionality--and truly iconic.

Bill

But still, I think the Strat, Tele, Jazz and P-bass are going to be around for a long time. They are beautiful designs, with great functionality--and truly iconic.

+1

I'd like to see more guitars made with materials other than wood. I've played a couple of aluminium electrics and enjoyed then very much. Also played a couple of Trussarts, which I think are made from steel, and they were great. My Jerry Jones is made of masonite and sounds fantastic. I am not of the opinion that an electric guitar needs to be made out of old growth forest wood thats been drying out for the last 50 years.

Looking forward to Thursdays photgraphy lesson

The Steinberger bass was very expensive to make. They sold for $2000 in 1983 and that was a very high end bass at that time.
The real problem is that you have to have a composite material that structurally performs well and sounds good at the same time.
That is harder to do that you may think. The current owners of Steinberger (Gibson) have gone back to a headless wood bass with graphite rods reinforcing the neck. Kinda sounds like what Fender is doing too with the graphite neck reinforcement.
You can see a PBS series on Youtube shot in the early 80's about the Steinberger bass and its manufacture in the Steinberger factory of Brooklyn NY. The amount of hand work involved in making a Steinberger composite bass was far more than that of most wood basses of the time

The original Steinberger bass design would probably have to sell for $6k for them to make money on them today and Gibson doesn't see the market for that bass as being viable.

Wood instruments still sound the best and until a composite is found that is better than wood overall, I think we will have more wood electrics in our future. Instruments don't use that much of the world's wood supply. I think the price of wood would have to skyrocket for manufacturers to change to plastic compounds in a large scale.

Looking forward to Thursdays photgraphy lesson

Won't even be CLOSE to a lesson. More like some basic ideas borne of a rant.

Ken...

Hey Ken.

Good to see you up and around again.

I'm thinking maybe a "scar picture" Friday...??? ;+)

More on point, I have little experience with experimental designs or materials.

I have had the opportunity to enjoy (twice) watching BOC's Buck Dharma cutting through with his swiss-cheese-looking Steinberger six stringer. Quite a talent with a unique tone that is not at all shy.

Also, I have had the opportunity to strum a handful of Ovation acoustics over the years, and they really did impress me. If it weren't for Cat Stevens (whose songwriting really moved me as a kid), I don't think I would have been as receptive. But darn they all sounded bigger than the sum of their parts.

As to where we are heading, who knows? Maybe a world of virtual instruments and chip-set virtuosos.

As for why we like the classic designs, I guess more than anything because they (still) work, reliably and predictably - for the most part.

Lunch was two toaster waffles, a slice of scrapple, and a glass of OJ with Metamucil. And I raise you two. - ed

Hey Ken.

Good to see you up and around again.

I'm thinking maybe a "scar picture" Friday...??? ;+)

I'm thinking maybe not. I just reviewed a couple of the really juicy ones and it was not exactly a shiver of joy that I had. Kinda makes 'em suck up a bit, and that's my hand!

Besides, I really don't want be be responsible for loss of keyboards.

If someone really wants to see a pick or two they can contact me via email.

And I raise you two. - ed

Two what? Is this a fiber reference?

looking forward to the photograly part, just got my new camera. sony nex7

Hey Ken,

Thanks for the re-introduction, i have only been around here for almost a year.... Some of my favourite stuff from week to week is learning what everyone does!

I haven't played very many composite instruments, but if there was a material that could come close to reproducing the tonality of good old swamp ash i would certainly look into
Designs are probably going to continue along the same traditional path for the foreseeable future, especially in this economy.... i don't see many manufacturers taking any huge gambles.

Looking forward to the interesting list of items this week.

Scott