giggsy
Thats doesn't like the Strat shape? I just find it very bland... by way of comparison I own an SG and Tele and love those shapes - next on the list a Jaguar and a Les Paul.
Explorerlover
There are probably others that share your sentiment, but then again it comes down to personal choice. I'd also rather have a Telecaster than a Strat, but not because I don't like the shape, the Tele is just more "chunky"...there again, it's all about personal choice. I like Explorers, but when they bring out one with holes in it.....sigh. ?
AlanRatcliffe
The reason you find the Strat shape bland is because you have seen it so often (on Fenders and other brands) that it has become commonplace - it's a cultural icon. There is a reason for that - and for the fact that nearly everyone who has tried to make a better guitar has used the Strat as a basis. The Strat body shape makes sense from an ergonomic viewpoint - in other words, it's comfortable. I actually think that if Fender had not come up with the Strat shape when he did, someone else would have.
The Tele was designed by Leo - an obvious engineer's design with sharp edges and everything functional from a manufacturing and cost viewpoint. It's a very utilitarian design, being little more than a plank of wood with a neck and pickups attached. The Strat Leo used input from Freddy Tavares and other players to design something that was more comfortable to play, with rounded edges and a body sculpted to fit the human form. It works sitting or standing, balances well, it allows easy access to the upper registers, the controls are easily reached, and it's still easy to make and to fix. For 1954, the Strat was very edgy and futuristic looking.
Gibson's overriding design criteria for the Les Paul was very different - the official directive was to make something that looked much more expensive (hence the gold tops, the binding, etc.) than the Telecaster, which had been taking a lot of electric business away from Gibson's electric line. The SG was an attempt to bring the weight and the production costs down (and is a nice design aside from being neck heavy). The Explorers, Firebirds and Flying V's tried to capitalise on the "futuristic" look popular at the time.
Explorerlover
There you have it Giggsy
giggsy
Haha! All I'm saying is that from a personal point of view, if someone offered me a 50's Strat for a grand, I would take it but only to sell it on for a profit. I don't ever see myself playing a strat or strat-style guitar.
deanBailey
+1 it's probably because I haven't played it much to but I have the same sentiments for Les Pauls. I never got into the LP craze (even though I know it can sound good)
Tele's on the other hand hehe I wouldn't mind owning one ?
Bob-Dubery
giggsy wrote
Thats doesn't like the Strat shape? I just find it very bland... by way of comparison I own an SG and Tele and love those shapes - next on the list a Jaguar and a Les Paul.
The Fender Stratocaster is one of the most beautiful things ever designed. It's right up there with the 1978 Lotus F1 car. If you sincerely revere those two objects then your soul will be purified and will escape the wheel of re-incarnation.
All IMO of course ?
Wizard
Wizard is forced to google "1978 Lotus F1"
Aha.
I now remember changing cigarette brands as a result of that car ?
And yes ... I was in Std 9 ?
MoJo-JoJoe
.
dee
To me a Strat is probably the single most beautiful guitar there is. It is something in it's simplicity and smooth shape that I can't explain.
Werner-Carstens
Agree with you Dee, but if I had Joe's Custom Shop Tele I probably would have battled to agree. And then he still has a beautifull Strat - heartless.
doc-phil
My first guitar was some indonesian strat shaped imitation, and despite it being made of chipboard and a neck made of oak it was a decent guitar ? the only reason i don't go for the strat shape is because it's become so generic, and of course it's just not metal!
Neps
a Strat will always have a soft spot in my heart!! Just like the LP shape!! All I need for my collection is a Tele then I'll be complete! :'( But the SG.. yuck! Ugliest thing ever designed by man!! (Now I'm expecting a lot of abuse for that)
O.K not the ugliest but close!! Ugliest should go to the Parker Fly!
Squonk
@ Neps
I agree with you, The Parker does not look lekker at all.
The SG also does nothing for me.
Guitars that turn me on these days, Taylor T5, Tele and for some very weird reason I would love to get one of those scarey BC Rich models. also some of the cheesy looking Danelectro's.
Gearhead
Like or dislike Flies, the detail, sound and build quality you have to agree is really cool. I know a guy owning a Fly that has white/abalone/white/black bindings amongst others, I did not even know that was possible.
For the record I would like to say that I also really dig Strats. Real Strats or really good clones. The thing is because they've been copied so often one would also associate the shape with its bad clones, that might be what's putting people off?
dee
Squonk wrote
also some of the cheesy looking Danelectro's.
Nothing cheesy about a Danelectro. Personally, I think the '59 is the most underrated guitar of all time.... I'm dying to get my hands on one...in black of course.
Explorerlover
@Dee, if you can find one on local shores, get me one too ? .... Then I can Kashmir like it is supposed to be played.
GoeieGenugtig
I agree that Parker fly doesn't look lekker, but it looks more uncomfortable than ugly.
If there was an ugly contest the winner by far for me would be the Zakk Wylde ZV customs series. I really hope that ridiculous tail takes away the top heavy problem of the SG. It looks like welding a a 911 turbo to a Ferrari F50.
http://www.epiphone.com/news.asp?NewsID=1445
Dirk
You're propably not the only one, but certainly in the minority!
Strat RoCkS !!!
