Satriani discusses vintage guitars and his ‘54 Fender Strat that got away!
- Thread starter PLX
- Start date
- Messages
- 9,645
It’s fuckin’ history, bro! History you can make music with!
AutomationBias
Roadie
- Messages
- 693
What's worse is that it's such a distinctive finish that there would be no question it was his - but there's like a 99% chance that someone has refinished that guitar in the last 40 years.
iaresee
Roadie
- Messages
- 499
His signature model is surprisingly vintage! The Prestige neck is fuller, rounder on the back than a Wizard. A comfortable C shape, I'd put it at. The radius a very vintage 250 mm (compared to a JEM or PIA at 400 and 430 mm). And fairly small frets.
- Messages
- 6,644
Well maybe in certain specs, yes, except for the Floyd and locking nut. But in presentation, his design approach was unique and more futuristic in appearance. Obviously his playing was ahead of its time.
- Messages
- 2,178
That's a Vox CO2 Deluxe Echo "Long Tom" Echo Unit atop the Rickenbacker cab.PAGE RECORDED ZEP II WITH A LES PAUL THAT HAD JUST TURNED TEN.
Today that'd be a 2014 model....
Eagle
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,670
The original JS is close to a 61 strat neck but with 10” radius and 6105 .
Most early Fenders and Gibsons sound good even if they don’t play well. The wood that was commonly available was a lot different to what you routinely find today. Slow growth naturally seasoned from large trees, that is very premium these days mostly replaced by fast growing species and kiln dried. This is nowhere near as stable or predictable from a sound perspective. Now add the hard lacquer that had to be painted thinner and you have by default reasons that are likely to produce good sounding results. The playability however was usually poor by today’s standards and fit and finish was also not as good as it is today. If you source premium woods ( that were standard) and use today’s building methods but use a hard thin finish you have the best of both worlds but this is expensive now. Gibson Murphy and Fender Custom Shop are almost always better than the vast majority of vintage instruments.
Most early Fenders and Gibsons sound good even if they don’t play well. The wood that was commonly available was a lot different to what you routinely find today. Slow growth naturally seasoned from large trees, that is very premium these days mostly replaced by fast growing species and kiln dried. This is nowhere near as stable or predictable from a sound perspective. Now add the hard lacquer that had to be painted thinner and you have by default reasons that are likely to produce good sounding results. The playability however was usually poor by today’s standards and fit and finish was also not as good as it is today. If you source premium woods ( that were standard) and use today’s building methods but use a hard thin finish you have the best of both worlds but this is expensive now. Gibson Murphy and Fender Custom Shop are almost always better than the vast majority of vintage instruments.
AutomationBias
Roadie
- Messages
- 693
I've been wondering - are the Murphy guitars built differently (more selective wood, etc) than the regular Gibson Custom Shop guitars, or are they just finished differently?
Eagle
Rock Star
- Messages
- 3,670
Both , the pick of the wood shop and authentic paint products and process as far as possible. The relics are painted thinner to replicate the thickness of the paint on an original after sinking and thinning over time. A relic needs to be painted with this in mind to replicate an actual worn vintage piece. You can’t just relic an NOS and it look good.
came the rain
Groupie
- Messages
- 86
Meanwhile…
