Fender's new answer to Suhr and Tom Anderson ...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gooseman
  • Start date Start date
Suhr":15cyzjke said:
Badronald":15cyzjke said:
Really? Fender has been making Custom Shop guitars for years. And don't kid yourself, the Fender Custom Shop IS production.
And, apparently you need to look at market shares. Fender doesn't compete with anybody. Suhr and Anderson aren't even a blip on the screen. :aww:

From what I understand this is still a factory instrument not custom shop.
We are just a blip on their radar but that doesn't mean they don't know who we and Anderson are.
Back when I was in meetings 15 years ago Andersons name came up many times at the Fender table as did amp companies like Victoria.

I have no idea what that movie was trying to say :lol: :LOL:
And correct... Tom and I are not worried in the slightest.

It isn't about the look, it is about functionality, warranty, customer service, tone and playability.
We choose to put our money in those areas instead of making our customers pay for advertising.

Excellent reply from the man himself :thumbsup:

Two things i hate about these fender guitars. No contoured or evolutionized neck pockets - one thing custom manufacturer's are doing (at least) is pushing the limits of design and functionality for better results. If you're going for select players - you're going to have to try harder to get even remotely close to Suhr's and Anderson's level.

Second thing is the production quality custom shop approach. Been there, done that with a JEM7VWH, and no longer own that guitar. total POS dead piece of wood. Proof that price does not reflect quality, the company that involves themselves in the above is what delivers the extra mile that you see in the instruments.
 
Suhr":2rqdm9td said:
Badronald":2rqdm9td said:
Really? Fender has been making Custom Shop guitars for years. And don't kid yourself, the Fender Custom Shop IS production.
And, apparently you need to look at market shares. Fender doesn't compete with anybody. Suhr and Anderson aren't even a blip on the screen. :aww:
From what I understand this is still a factory instrument not custom shop.
We are just a blip on their radar but that doesn't mean they don't know who we and Anderson are.
Back when I was in meetings 15 years ago Andersons name came up many times at the Fender table as did amp companies like Victoria.

I have no idea what that movie was trying to say :lol: :LOL:
Playing that guitar makes you not want to have sex? Maybe like a Cycle seat?
And correct... Tom and I are not worried in the slightest.

It isn't about the look, it is about functionality, warranty, customer service, tone and playability.
We choose to put our money in those areas instead of making our customers pay for advertising.

Awesome response!
 
70strathead":34271160 said:
.especially Suhr which is know to rip off designs and call it there's. Hence, the noiseless backplate..
.
:no:
Clearly you have no idea of the evolution or development of the backplate system which we ALWAYS licensed, credited the patent owner and paid a premium price for it's use as well as being solely responsible for putting it in to major artists hands.
That is a slanderous comment.
Oh and it is "theirs"
 
Moshaholic":6wwxpvog said:
rupe":6wwxpvog said:
I doubt Tom and John are loosing any sleep


But ya... Funny you should ssay that as I have never played s Suhr or an Anderson that holds a candle to any of my Fenders tone wise.
Tone is subjective...build quality is not. I own Fender Custom Shop and Anderson guitars...Anderson is clearly a cut above from a QC standpoint. Tonally they are different and each do certain things better than the other.
 
Suhr":3kv4qzbx said:
70strathead":3kv4qzbx said:
.especially Suhr which is know to rip off designs and call it there's. Hence, the noiseless backplate..
.
:no:
Clearly you have no idea of the evolution or development of the backplate system which we ALWAYS licensed, credited the patent owner and paid a premium price for it's use as well as being solely responsible for putting it in to major artists hands.
That is a slanderous comment.
Oh and it is "theirs"


I Apologize. I had heard it was an Italian who designed it and was I guess misinformed ..no harm no foul.
 
I'm an Anderson fan boy.


But on the for real, there isn't a guitar company around that could even give away a guitar that doesn't look like a Fender or Gibson, so there is that little fact! :rock:
 
Suhr":2t36kk5q said:
Badronald":2t36kk5q said:
Really? Fender has been making Custom Shop guitars for years. And don't kid yourself, the Fender Custom Shop IS production.
And, apparently you need to look at market shares. Fender doesn't compete with anybody. Suhr and Anderson aren't even a blip on the screen. :aww:
From what I understand this is still a factory instrument not custom shop.
We are just a blip on their radar but that doesn't mean they don't know who we and Anderson are.
Back when I was in meetings 15 years ago Andersons name came up many times at the Fender table as did amp companies like Victoria.

I have no idea what that movie was trying to say :lol: :LOL:
Playing that guitar makes you not want to have sex? Maybe like a Cycle seat?
And correct... Tom and I are not worried in the slightest.

It isn't about the look, it is about functionality, warranty, customer service, tone and playability.
We choose to put our money in those areas instead of making our customers pay for advertising.

I don't want you to misunderstand me. I'm supremely sure that Suhr and Anderson guitars are absolutely fantastic instruments. I would never get into a conversation about who is "better". It's a silly argument as far as I'm concerned. Means nothing.

I just meant to comment that I'm sure Fender is chasing no one and responding to whomever said Fender is "late to the party". Silly stuff.

By the way, the only guitar I'm gassing for right now is a Guthrie Govan Antique Modern. :thumbsup:
 
70strathead":3r5495k6 said:
Suhr":3r5495k6 said:
70strathead":3r5495k6 said:
.especially Suhr which is know to rip off designs and call it there's. Hence, the noiseless backplate..
.
:no:
Clearly you have no idea of the evolution or development of the backplate system which we ALWAYS licensed, credited the patent owner and paid a premium price for it's use as well as being solely responsible for putting it in to major artists hands.
That is a slanderous comment.
Oh and it is "theirs"


I Apologize. I had heard it was an Italian who designed it and was I guess misinformed ..no harm no foul.
Misinformed absolutely. You need to do some research before making accusations that could damage a manufacturer for your own sake.
The Backplate system PATENT is owned by Ilitch Electronics who resides in California.
If Anyone could be given real credit to the use of a large low impedance coil used for this purpose it would be Bill Lawrence who did it back in the 70's and then Alembic who combined it with Low impedance pickups. We do have a new system though which is very much original that we are switching over to.
 
Badronald":1vyx5nxv said:
I
I just meant to comment that I'm sure Fender is chasing no one and responding to whomever said Fender is "late to the party". Silly stuff.

By the way, the only guitar I'm gassing for right now is a Guthrie Govan Antique Modern. :thumbsup:


Well I understand but still disagree having sat in on many of the meetings when I was there. They most certainly see and care what the small builders are doing and selling.
They were not the first to start mixing compound radius, maple tops, Floyds , contoured heels, carved tops, rear routed guitars etc with classic shapes or downsized shapes.
Lets not forget who designed those instruments and how long they haven't been with the company. Also consider how many innovative successful shapes have left that factory in the last 50 years. The reason being is there is no need and the new shapes failed. What they are left with as well as everyone else is variations on the theme on instruments that have been around since the beginning, if you want to sell instruments that is. If all the customers started asking for guitars shaped like Kola bottles then that is what we would make. As long as it was legal to do so. Yes I do think they are late to the party of making the superS and certainly are noticing what other builders are doing. They are missing the point though IMO. We are backordered over 2,000 guitars and I'm sure they wouldn't mind talking those orders, it would be silly to think otherwise. Then you add up all the small builders and you are talking about a good chunk of market share :yes:
 
Suhr":1jjgp2ph said:
70strathead":1jjgp2ph said:
Suhr":1jjgp2ph said:
70strathead":1jjgp2ph said:
.especially Suhr which is know to rip off designs and call it there's. Hence, the noiseless backplate..
.
:no:
Clearly you have no idea of the evolution or development of the backplate system which we ALWAYS licensed, credited the patent owner and paid a premium price for it's use as well as being solely responsible for putting it in to major artists hands.
That is a slanderous comment.
Oh and it is "theirs"


I Apologize. I had heard it was an Italian who designed it and was I guess misinformed ..no harm no foul.
Misinformed absolutely. You need to do some research before making accusations that could damage a manufacturer for your own sake.
The Backplate system PATENT is owned by Ilitch Electronics who resides in California.
If Anyone could be given real credit to the use of a large low impedance coil used for this purpose it would be Bill Lawrence who did it back in the 70's and then Alembic who combined it with Low impedance pickups. We do have a new system though which is very much original that we are switching over to.

Thank you and appreciate the info... and Once again, I apologize for the comment.
 
One look at the video will tell you how out of touch Fender is. They don't offer anything that interests me. If I wanted a strat tomorrow, I would buy a Suhr Classic.

But the ass on "the operative" was talking to me. :-)
 
kaeli0430":167mfzyx said:
Gooseman":167mfzyx said:
bigdaddyd":167mfzyx said:
Suhr and Anderson are the answer to Fender. You have that backwards. Fender has to answer to no one. Leo invented this shit and even though he sold his shares long ago, everyone has learned their craft from him and just added their touches to it. Fender is just adding one more flavor to their menu here...nothing more. The guitars look nice, but that video was so bad. WTF were they thinking. It was completely inane and moronic and I want that part of my life back...lol.

If Fender has "to answer to no one," as you put it, then why release versions of their guitars that mimic what Suhr puts out? And, to top it off, why call them Fender Selects.
there are only so many red, black, blue, yellow, gold, white.. guitars you can paint.. times change.. why not do something like suhr.. suhr sure did copy from fender.. fender doesnt mimic suhr... suhr mimics fender.. fender and gibson are immortals.. and the other wannabe's are mortals.. and thats a fact...

You think this is the first time they made flamed and quilted guitars? No. They have made metal guitars and such too. Btw, you just said what I said...
 
Suhr":33wgpz0t said:
Badronald":33wgpz0t said:
I
I just meant to comment that I'm sure Fender is chasing no one and responding to whomever said Fender is "late to the party". Silly stuff.

By the way, the only guitar I'm gassing for right now is a Guthrie Govan Antique Modern. :thumbsup:


Well I understand but still disagree having sat in on many of the meetings when I was there. They most certainly see and care what the small builders are doing and selling.
They were not the first to start mixing compound radius, maple tops, Floyds , contoured heels, carved tops, rear routed guitars etc with classic shapes or downsized shapes.
Lets not forget who designed those instruments and how long they haven't been with the company. Also consider how many innovative successful shapes have left that factory in the last 50 years. The reason being is there is no need and the new shapes failed. What they are left with as well as everyone else is variations on the theme on instruments that have been around since the beginning, if you want to sell instruments that is. If all the customers started asking for guitars shaped like Kola bottles then that is what we would make. As long as it was legal to do so. Yes I do think they are late to the party of making the superS and certainly are noticing what other builders are doing. They are missing the point though IMO. We are backordered over 2,000 guitars and I'm sure they wouldn't mind talking those orders, it would be silly to think otherwise. Then you add up all the small builders and you are talking about a good chunk of market share :yes:

I'm a Fender guy, but there is nothing written here that is invalid. With that said, the video was pure cheese; I wish they took the money they used to make the video and take it off the price tag, and said price tag is incredibly expensive for a production line guitar. Just my two cents.
 
Badronald":16nnsuz5 said:
I'd take one of these any day. The headstocks are cooler. :yes: :thumbsup:


So you would take appearance of headstock over quality of build

:facepalm
 
Moshaholic":1g5cb7so said:
rupe":1g5cb7so said:
I doubt Tom and John are loosing any sleep


But ya... Funny you should ssay that as I have never played s Suhr or an Anderson that holds a candle to any of my Fenders tone wise.

Wow, get your ears checked or learn a new instrument! Can you hear the difference between a Cort and a Fender? its pretty much the same step from Cort to fender to anderson/suhr/melancon
 
Wow, I just watched the video....WTF? :confused: That was beyond lame.
 
I'm the one that said late to the party. I wasn't talking about Fender as a whole, just this style of guitar. To me it does seem to be a response to the maple top flame quilt guitars that are being built by smaller builders. No reason to get butthurt over it (referred to three times in the thread). Im sure I also mentioned they looked good and that I hope this effort works out for them. Easy to pick one thing you don't like and bypass all of my thoughts. I thought my original reply was a pretty fair thought.
 
Back
Top