Spud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I a little intrigued by this discussion around the
> "hump"..presumably the heel shape of the neck is
> being referred to.

No, the router hump means two things: the bass side curve normally connects to the 19th fret of the neck, but as the router bits of Fender wore out, the curves' radius started to become less over the years, In the end of the 70's the curve was really shallow, and thebass side curve connected to the neck at the 18th fret. Cosmetically this is less pretty. A router hump is also the radius of the inside of the lower bout curve (the spot your hand hits when you play at the 20th fret). This curve used to be smoothly round, but started to become flatter over the years.

Mathijs

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> while a stand-in took its place in 79? or ... ...
> look at these shots. smile: i'm confused. :E
>
> [img.photobucket.com]
> guitars/fender_teles/1979blackcustomtriptych.jpg
> - all 1979: [1] CNIB apr 22nd, courtesy of S.
> Grigoryan; [2] Atlanta may 10th by Tom Hill; [3]
> Denver may 15th by Henry Diltz

Good pictures! This proves that on May 15 1979 Keith played the worn Custom with black switch tip, and on May 21, in the studio he played a new looking Custom with white switch tip. What guitar did he play on stage again after the 21st of May?

So now it's to decide which guitars are the same, and which are not. The only difference between the Custom used on the '75 tour and the '78 tour is the bridge. The '78 tour guitar looks fairly used and battered, it doesn't look new. It could be that he only changed the bridge (he didn't change the bridges of his Teles to Schaller bridges until 1981), but it can also be a new guitar. On the '79 tour he then plays two different guitars: a worn one with black tip, and a new one with a white tip. Is the black tipped one the same as the '75/76 guitar? Is the white tipped one the 81/82 guitar?

There's only one other thing that might differe between the guitars: the 81/82 guitar has a bridge pickup with raised D and G poles, and it could be possible that other Customs had pickups with flat pole pieces.

Mathijs

ohh thank you Mathijs - i'm glad if i'm contributing something despite my confusion. :E

>> What guitar did he play on stage again after the 21st of May? <<

the tour ended in San Diego on may 22nd (except for Knebworth Fair, of course);
here are the only shots i have with the black custom that are almost certainly from San Diego -
neither is too clear, but the white switch tip is pretty visible - at least i think it is!


- both most likely San Diego may 22nd, both by Chief Moon



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-23 18:01 by with sssoul.

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> smile: thanks HM - i second that. i guess i just
> don't understand which bit i should be looking at.
>
> if you feel like pointing at it for me, Open-G, i
> would be fascinated and grateful.


This pic should explain it - I hope.
all though they aren't customs.





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-23 14:33 by open-g.

Thanks! And with sssoul, please post more if you can! And thanks anyway for the nice pics. Pure magic.

...and here's the Fender add without scribbling

click

ohh thank you open-g honey - that does help. that's the bit i thought we were talking about;
i do see that the shape seems a bit different, but ... ack, i'll have to count again when i've gotten my eyes uncrossed. :E

meanwhile, trying to pin down what Keith had when in 79 (and since LA Forum is enjoying all this so much!)
here are some shots that i'm 99% sure are all from the Barbarians' may 19th 1979 LA Forum gig.
are we lookin at two different guitars in these, or just variously-unclear shots of the same one?


- all most likely LA, may 19th 1979; all by Neal Preston; b&w shots courtesy of Sugar Brown; colour shot courtesy of S. Grigoryan


- all most likely LA, may 19th 1979; top two by Neal Preston; bottom two by Henry Diltz



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-23 21:17 by with sssoul.

All the same, me thinks. Bridge saddles look in quite identical positions on all of these pics. If it were two diff guitars, chances are that saddles wouldn't be identically postioned....

The coloured one of the 3-set looks like it has a different bridge - but could also only be the light reflecting.
and he has his hand right there at the neck joint - arg.

I just can't tell

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Spud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I a little intrigued by this discussion around
> the
> > "hump"..presumably the heel shape of the neck
> is
> > being referred to.
>
> No, the router hump means two things:


Ah,
I don't think I read the posts properly did I ;^)

The way that the body curves into the neck with no "notch" is one of the least attractive features of 70s Teles. Horrible ! That and the "bowling ball" finishes.
One of the very worst guiatrs I ever owned was a 77 Tele. 11 bastard pounds and sounded horrible. Ice pick top end and nothing but mud at the bottom!
Bought it brand new as an exited 17 year old...had to be good didn't it ? it was a Fender !
That learnt me ;^)

>>The way that the body curves into the neck with no "notch" is one of the least attractive features of 70s Teles. Horrible ! That and the "bowling ball" finishes.<<

You said it, plain 'orrible - indeed.
The Fender company, losing that detail was really "going downhill" in my book.

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The coloured one of the 3-set looks like it has a
> different bridge - but could also only be the
> light reflecting.
> and he has his hand right there at the neck joint
> - arg.


It's light... Every guitar on every pic have Vintage 6 saddle bridge...

[www.grguitars.com]
[www.mattlawsonphoto.com]

>> and he has his hand right there at the neck joint - arg. <<

come on Keith - give us a glimmer! :E
in case it helps any, here are a couple more from LA, where i guess we're looking at the one with the black switch tip:


- both most likely LA may 19th 1979; both by Neal Preston

and a few more from Oakland, where it looks like the white switch tip to me - or am i hallucinating again??


- all Oakland may 20th, all by Greg Myrha

thanks everybody for helping me see better and reassuring me that i'm not the only puzzled one.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-23 21:46 by with sssoul.

It looks like white. I can't see bridge unfortunately.... Anyway, thank you for all those great pics!

>> It looks like white. I can't see bridge unfortunately <<

it's pretty visible in the Oakland shot i posted on the previous page -
to me it looks like the saddles are in the same positions as in the shots of the guitar with the black switch tip,
but as we all know, i am easily confused, as well as cross-eyed from counting frets. :E
glad the photos are grooving you. :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-23 17:48 by with sssoul.

with ssoul, thank you again. feelin a bit hot here...all those pics of that damn fine guitar and it's rightful and only player. Damn with that thing around his neck he is the definition of rock n roll. Rock music. So heavy.

Mathijs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Spud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I a little intrigued by this discussion around
> the
> > "hump"..presumably the heel shape of the neck
> is
> > being referred to.
>
> No, the router hump means two things: the bass
> side curve normally connects to the 19th fret of
> the neck, but as the router bits of Fender wore
> out, the curves' radius started to become less
> over the years, In the end of the 70's the curve
> was really shallow, and thebass side curve
> connected to the neck at the 18th fret.
> Cosmetically this is less pretty. A router hump is
> also the radius of the inside of the lower bout
> curve (the spot your hand hits when you play at
> the 20th fret). This curve used to be smoothly
> round, but started to become flatter over the
> years.
>
> Mathijs

That's not quite correct - about the router bits wearing out.
I asked the question on the TDPRI forum and got this reply:

From what I've read, it was basically sloppiness/neglect of/to detail on CBS' part after the takeover. Duchossoir's definitive work on the Telecaster claims that it began in the early '70s, when new NCs were acquired* which, because of their routers' early design and manufacture, had a "...cutter whose diameter prevented the forming of the original curve of the upper shoulder, hence a slightly wrong body shape....in the early '50s and '60s the upper edge of the body blends into the neck at the 17th fret after a fairly steep curve, whilst it joins the neck at the 16th fret after a much flatter curve on most '70s and '80s models..." an "...alteration (that) was not deemed important at the time and for some nine years after ....new senior management brought in by CBS in mid-'81 saw the mistake and had the NC router's program and cutter modified."



*Initially, CBS management would not allow Fender to invest in several NC routers at once, so some bodies' shaping was done by hand while others were done by NCs; the error multiplied as more NCs were brought onto the line and the exact original shape was "forgotten" as handwork ceased and the NCs erroneous profiling proliferated.

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> That's not quite correct - about the router bits
> wearing out.
> I asked the question on the TDPRI forum and got
> this reply:
>
> From what I've read, it was basically
> sloppiness/neglect of/to detail on CBS' part after
> the takeover. Duchossoir's definitive work on the
> Telecaster claims that it began in the early '70s,
> when new NCs were acquired* which, because of
> their routers' early design and manufacture, had a
> "...cutter whose diameter prevented the forming of
> the original curve of the upper shoulder, hence a
> slightly wrong body shape....in the early '50s and
> '60s the upper edge of the body blends into the
> neck at the 17th fret after a fairly steep curve,
> whilst it joins the neck at the 16th fret after a
> much flatter curve on most '70s and '80s
> models..." an "...alteration (that) was not deemed
> important at the time and for some nine years
> after ....new senior management brought in by CBS
> in mid-'81 saw the mistake and had the NC router's
> program and cutter modified."

There seems to be some confusion about this as far as I know. Duchossoir states that the router bits wore out, and that this is the reason why the curve slowly got less and less pronounced over the years in the 70's. By only looking at the curve you can almost certainly eshtablish the date the guitar was manufactured.

If the router was just plain wrong from the beginning, than the curve would have been the same over the years. The wearing out of the bits sound plausible to me, but I am not totally certain.

Mathijs

Well thats what got me wondering in the first place.
What happens when router bits gets worn?
They get blunt after some mileage and need to be sharpend.
In that process material of the bit gets taken away, reduceing the diameter of the bit.
A smaller radius can cut much more detailed curves, which would be the opposite of the discussed matter.
If anything got worn, then maybe the templates....

but somehow I suspect the "sloppiness/neglect of/to detail on CBS' part after the takeover"

Maybe someone wrote it but didnt Fender challenge Gibson in the 70s (with the 72 custom)?

i'm sorry to be so slow, but ... i see that shape of the "hump" is a bit different in some shots,
but i don't see it meeting the neck at the 19th fret in *any* of these photos.
in the huge 81 close-up and the 79 photos of the one with the white switch tip
it looks like it meets the neck between the 16th and 17th frets,
and on most of the others either i can't see it or it looks like it's right around the 17th fret.
(unless we're talking about the edge of the pickguard - but why would we be??)
so further instructions from you kind patient learned & good-lookin experts
would be very gratefully received.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-25 11:26 by with sssoul.

Keith has been playing the black custom since the beginning of the U.S. Bigger Bang if I am not mistaken.

I have a similar model and have always wondered where it went since the *1 sound was so good.

I'm glad to hear it back.

J

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> i'm sorry to be so slow, but ... i see that shape
> of the "hump" is a bit different in some shots,
> but i don't see it meeting the neck at the 19th
> fret in *any* of these photos.
> in the huge 81 close-up and the 79 photos of the
> one with the white switch tip
> it looks like it meets the neck between the 16th
> and 17th frets,
> and on most of the others either i can't see it or
> it looks like it's right around the 17th fret.
> (unless we're talking about the edge of the
> pickguard - but why would we be??)
> so further instructions from you kind patient
> learned & good-lookin experts
> would be very gratefully received.

Sorry, let's forget about the 19th fret.
it should be the 16th and 17th fret were talking about.

I wouldn't recommend lending my eyes...o0

I must be slower than With Sssoul - but I can't see what you & Mathijs are talking about.

Even between the 16th and 17th fret - I need better eyes.

My '74 Telecaster Custom has a hump that joins the neck at the 17th fret. Should I worry ?

No... you shouldn't worry ;^).

>> it should be the 16th and 17th fret were talking about. <<

ohhh f ... LoFL! thank you open-g honey - just checking to see if anyone was paying attention? :E
thank you for clarifying that, and excuse me while i try to get my eyes uncrossed.
if i succeed in that, maybe i'll try to add some photoshop arrows and so on with the clearer photos of Keith's Customs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-23 21:48 by with sssoul.

After staring at the pictures forever, I must conclude that I don't know if we're looking at one, two or three guitars. The only realy difference I can spot between every guitar is the switch tip...All else seems to be the same.

All guitars seem to have the same flat jack plate, the same yellowed lacquer on the head stock, the same corroded (dull) front pickup cover -everything seems to be the same. The black switch tip indicats a mid-70's guitar, but the discoloring of the headstock and the wear on he guitar do not fit that mid- to late 70's period.

It might very well just be the very same guitar, and Keith lost the black switch top on the 19th of May 1979 and replaced it with a white one immediatly. For the studio session on the 20th the guitar looks new, but Keith's tech might as well just have given it an extra rub. We just don't know.

It's just too hard to judge from these pictures!

Sssoul, please post as many pics of Keith with Custom as possible, you've got many I've never seen!

Mathijs

open-g Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well thats what got me wondering in the first
> place.
> What happens when router bits gets worn?
> They get blunt after some mileage and need to be
> sharpend.
> In that process material of the bit gets taken
> away, reduceing the diameter of the bit.
> A smaller radius can cut much more detailed
> curves, which would be the opposite of the
> discussed matter.
> If anything got worn, then maybe the
> templates....
>
> but somehow I suspect the "sloppiness/neglect
> of/to detail on CBS' part after the takeover"

I really don't know actually. I have read many times over the years that the router and the templates got worn, and Fender CBS did not want to invest in new equipment. I do not know the real truth behind it.

Mathijs

is the humbucker in the Tele Custom a true humbucker (which ordinarily I do not like the sound of)? what is correct name for the "lipstick" pickup in the standard Tele neck position? thanks.

>> please post as many pics of Keith with Custom as possible <<

well all right - here's what i have from 75/76. sorry about the quality of some of them!
most of them seem to be from the new Genesis book of Christopher Simon Sykes's TOTA photos -
i'm hoping some of our cohorts who own that book might be coaxed into posting better scans of them,
please please and thank you very kindly, if you can!


- 1975 by Christopher Simon Sykes


- 1975 by Christopher Simon Sykes


- 1975 by Christopher Simon Sykes, courtesy of ThousandLips


- 1975, courtesy of Chippy (not sure who took it, sorry!)


- 1975, courtesy of Chippy (not sure who took it, sorry!)


- 1976 (don't know who took it, sorry!)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2008-10-23 21:49 by with sssoul.