>> Keith with a sunburst custom with a butterfly sticker on top, that is from a later date <<

~*YEAH!*~
october 28th, 2002, to be exact, when he joined Waddy & Co at The Joint.
ahh it feels good to solve a good Keith Mystery - thanks, Mathijs! :E

Keith using a ampeg dan armstrong in 1972 is a rarity. I never expected to see that.

Mathijs Wrote:


everything i wanted to know about customs.

Thanks Mathijs, now I know I wont buy a Mexican! Great post.

I very much enjoy reading these discussions about the guitars/guitar sounds, particlarly the scholarly posts of Mathis. Very informative and helpful.

Question:

What are the specs on Keith's Black ES-355? and has he played the orangeburst Es-355 on stage at some point this tour?

Thanks, Tomcat

ChrisM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Monsieur Maillot and Ms Sssoul, I was surprised as
> anyone to learn that the last time that Keith used
> the Dan Armstrong was actually 1972, a year after
> the Nellcote robbery. Evidence of the ol'
> glazzies:
>
>
>
> Thanks to Harold Colson for the photo by the way.
> I think this photo was taken in San Francisco
> either June 6th or 8th.


Ahh Chris - yes - isn't this Frisco '72 ??

Oh hang on, yes - you mention this above. Believe Hazza anyday when it comes to US 1972 Tour !

Esky



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-04 15:46 by Esky.

Check it out:



I noticed that this guitar looks brand new.. the pickguard.. the neck, like he just bought it. The pick-up quite rusty, though, so I guess that's a replacement job.

>>The pick-up quite rusty, though, so I guess that's a replacement job.<<

can you really spot the rust on a pic like that?
stage lights can have strange effects too
I'm not sure if its brand new or just got a good polish
but nice you remembered the ole` thread, instead of a new one.

Esky Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChrisM Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Monsieur Maillot and Ms Sssoul, I was surprised
> as
> > anyone to learn that the last time that Keith
> used
> > the Dan Armstrong was actually 1972, a year
> after
> > the Nellcote robbery. Evidence of the ol'
> > glazzies:
> >
> > Thanks to Harold Colson for the photo by the
> way.
> > I think this photo was taken in San Francisco
> > either June 6th or 8th.
>
>
> Ahh Chris - yes - isn't this Frisco '72 ??
>
> Oh hang on, yes - you mention this above. Believe
> Hazza anyday when it comes to US 1972 Tour !
>
> Esky

Thanks for the acknowledgements, guys.

The 1972 pic of Keith with the Lucite comes
from SF, June 8, 1st show. I think I have a pic of KR
with that same style guitar in Seattle, too.
Obviously, it was just an early STP guitar.

Harold

P.S. What's a Hazza? Aussie nickname for ______ ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-08-02 05:11 by stoneslib.

LA FORUM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks Mathijs, now I know I wont buy a Mexican!

I have a Mexican '72 and it's a good guitar, wouldn't call it exceptional, but
still a good guitar.

I also have a Mexican and it's a good guitar. I replaced the PUPS because the stock ones weren't too good and, hey presto, a superb sound.


What I would say is that the quality of these guitars varies quite wildly. I tried out several before picking up the one I bought. I then set it up myself. Now, everyone comments on what a great guitar it is when they play it. It is just as good as my mate's USA custom, if not better with the new PUPS.

Sometimes I think Mathijs doesn't like any guitar costing less than $1500! I appreciate that of course a $1500 guitar will have better quality materials and workmanship than a $500 guitar, but you have to make the personal decsion whether you can offord the extra money and, indeed, whether the difference in quality justifies that additional outlay.

After all, Keith could pick up a $100 guitar and it would still sound great! Of course he can afford to have any guitar he wants, and who wouldn't?

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What I would say is that the quality of these
> guitars varies quite wildly.

I was very lucky myself. I had a friend of mine try it and buy it from me at Manny's in NYC and took it back to Italy for me.
The lead guitarist in my band has a Mexican 50' Tele replica and it can't comepte with my Mexican '72 Custom.

I was lucky.

Still, I have a real '75 Les Paul Deluxe and it has lots of neck problems.
I know that wasn't a good year for Gibson, still, my Mexican Fender is a more reliable guitar than my Nashville made Gibson.
Now I want the ES-355 Custom Gibson just pulled out ... mmm ... I want it, I want it, I want it.

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>The pick-up quite rusty, though, so I guess
> that's a replacement job.<<
>
> can you really spot the rust on a pic like that?
> stage lights can have strange effects too
> I'm not sure if its brand new or just got a good
> polish
> but nice you remembered the ole` thread, instead
> of a new one.

No, but there's more pictures that show that it's quite obviously an old pick-up.

sjs12 -

I'm thinking about buying a Mexi '72 - what pu's did you replace the stock ones with? And with the humbucker . . . were you able to keep the plate to maintain the look of the guitar?

Lame as it may sound, I'll want mine to look just like Keith's. You know, so I can play dress-up and all that! But if the sound will be vastly improved, I'd gladly upgrade. Also - how are the tuning pegs that come with it? I had an early Mexican standard Tele for a while and they were pretty solid, but I've heard conflicting reports of the newer ones.

Thanks -

Juan

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sometimes I think Mathijs doesn't like any guitar
> costing less than $1500! I appreciate that of
> course a $1500 guitar will have better quality
> materials and workmanship than a $500 guitar, but
> you have to make the personal decsion whether you
> can offord the extra money and, indeed, whether
> the difference in quality justifies that
> additional outlay.
>

I think you didn't understand fully what I said: I said that the Japanese line of Fender guitars is far better than the Mexican line of guitars. As the Japanese line costs about the same amount of money, I personaly feel they are a much better buy. I even feel the Japanes guitars are better than the U.S. build Fenders. I feel Mexican guitars lack distinct wood, and all hardware is mediocre at best. I don't like poly finishes and I feel the radius of the necks is too modern (12" compared with 7.75" for vintage guitars). Yes, I do have some very expensive guitars, and yes I do feel that quality costs money, but one of my main guitars is a Japanese Telecaster '72 Custom. I replaced the bridge pickup with a Seymour Duncan '54 Antiquity and the neck pickup with an original '70s Wide Range Humbucker and changed to bridge to a new 6-saddle bridge. The tuners were already the better Schaller tuners. All in all the guitar's value now is about $1000, and it is together with my '59 LP Reissue my main guitar.

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-08-03 11:43 by Mathijs.

Let's not argue and stick to Keith's Telecaster.

I guess this is a bit off topic, but many people want to get a guitar similar to Keiths. However, we don't all earn the same salary as Keith and, therefore, have to make one or two compromises. If you're not interested, I apologise in advance and ask politely that you skip the following...

Anyway, JuanTCB Wrote:

>
> I'm thinking about buying a Mexi '72 - what pu's
> did you replace the stock ones with? And with the
> humbucker . . . were you able to keep the plate to
> maintain the look of the guitar?
>

I got a Kent Armstrong single coil (can't remember the exact model) for the bridge pickup. These PUPS are very good value. For the wide range, they are a funny size. I thought about getting an original 70s one but couldn't find one. I therefore got it re-wound. If you ring WD music (at least the UK one) they are very helpful about these things. They will re-wind the pickups exactly according to your requirements. All this costs less than buying a new PUP!

The tuners were adequate on the tele. However, I will replace them soon since the 1st string tuner got bent when I droped the guitar on its head (owch!).

And I apologise to Mathijs because the Jap fenders were much better than the Mexican ones - I had misconstrued your post. Only problem is that in the UK you can't get the the Jap Fenders easily and you can pay as much for a Jap guitar as for a USA one, making them an expensive proposition. Therefore, I think that the Mexican ones can represent the best value for money - especially if you are willing to do a bit of work to them.

By the way, the bottom of the range Mex fenders are very poor quality and you really need to be careful when buyng one of these. I'm talking about the basic strat and tele models here. If you are short of cash look for a second hand japanese squire instead!

Squier has a similair model too, for just 199 bucks.

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> misconstrued your post. Only problem is that in
> the UK you can't get the the Jap Fenders easily
> and you can pay as much for a Jap guitar as for a
> USA one, making them an expensive proposition.

In Holland it is the same, Jap Fenders are hard to find. But you can order them directly here:

[www.ishibashi-music.com]

They offer excellent service, and delivery after order only takes about three days. I ordered my '72 Custom here, and the total cost was about 650 euro (compared to 1100 euro if you buy this one in a Dutch shop). When it arrived the set-up was immaculate (actually better than my $6000 '59 LP...). The pickups were bad, as were the pots, I have to say that. If you buy a Jap Fender, you will need to replace the pots and pup's.

Mathijs

Wow - thanks Mathijs. That is brilliant!

Is Keith playing THE original black '72 custom... or a different one.
[Notice that he's recently been using a blonde '70s custom too.]

I remember Keith once commenting that the '72 weighed a ton. Is he back into weight lifting...or has he found a lighter one he likes ?

BTW. I can vouch for the quality of Fender's MIM 72 Customs. The MIM Classic series had suffered from a little inconsistancy of fit and finsh...but it's gotten much better over the last couple of years. The woodwork now rivals that of the Fuji Gen built Japanese models and the electronics have always been better.

>> Is Keith playing THE original black '72 custom or a different one? <<

i'd love to know that too

>> I remember Keith once commenting that the '72 weighed a ton <<

wasn't it the rosewood Tele that Keith said was absurdly heavy?
there's a bunch about that one in this thread: [iorr.org]

As far as I can tell from the scratches and dings, as well as the replaced jack cup and tuners: this is the guitar he used from the 1981 tour on.

Mathijs

Maybe it's been on a diet then.

The Rosewood Teles were heavy [some had hollowed out sandwich construction to counter this] but Keith has also remarked that the black Custom is a bit of a boat anchor too...as many '70s Fenders are.
Black ones are usually less prone to this is they weren't made from the same haevy "northern ash" as the trans blonde examples, but some still test the shoulder ;^)

For the shows in Europe it seems Keith has gone back to the blonde 52´tele,I´ve seen some photos were it´s capoed in the 4th fret early in the show?

Kind Regards
Thomas

Indeed, it seems as if Malcolm is back:

Wee..for me it´s the only guitar JJF can be played on!

great photo - thanks Lizard! is that from Stuttgart?
dig the guitar strap ... :E

Also very interessting, is that the toggle switch seems to have been removed or something, which wasn't the case in '81/'82.

Yes, the toggle switch moved to the bridge pup volume control knob postion.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2006-08-08 01:23 by open-g.

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, the toggle switch moved to the bridge pup
> volume control knob postion.

Oh yes, I missed that.

For obvious strumming reasons, I presume.