Discussion in 'Guitars in General' started by kidcheesyriffs, Aug 15, 2008.
... what's the verdict on seventies teles?
The opinion of '70s Fenders rises proportionally with the price of '60s Fenders.
I had a '73 that was junk. REALLY heavy.
I had a '77 Tele that had a fantastic neck. It was a bit heavy and that eventually led to me getting rid of it, but I had thoughts of keeping the neck and putting it on something else. If you find one that isn't too heavy (which is definitely possible) then you could be quite happy with it.
I had a '73 Tele Custom (Keith Richards model) and it was stupid heavy and wouldn't stay in tune for nothing. After years of wanting to slam it into the floor I sold it for some ridiculous low price. Now I see them selling for $$$ and I scratch my head and ask 'why?' I'm sure there are some good ones, but sadly that wasn't my experience.
Why are they so heavy?
The story that is often told is that during that time, dense wood was thought to be linked to better tone, sustain, etc. So Fender, as well as Gibson, purposefully selected dense wood for the bodies of their guitars.
The thick poly finishes of 70s Teles and Strats contributed to the weight as well.
I like heavy. If a Tele's under 8 pounds, send it on it's way. That's too light!
i have a 72 and a 78 that are as good as most teles I've played ( after swapping for 250K pots and great aftermarket pickups )
I just sold one - a '73 - in the emporium and when they buyer received it , he was VERY enthusiastic
they CAN be VERY good w/ a few tweaks
and.. they can be crap
I have a '72 that holds up well next to most Teles I've crossed paths with. Lots of players have offered to take it off my hands.
I have a 73 with the same condition--the "lots of players have offered to take it off my hands" thing. It's on the heavy side, but it do sound good, fun to play as well.
I'm gonna be the heretic in the group. IMHO, the new Teles are among the best that Fender's ever built. It seems that their quality and attention to detail has really improved in the last several years. I would definately buy a new Tele over a 70's just in terms of playability and consistency. There's something to be said for the collectibility of the 70's that's attractive.
I owned a 1973 Tele (same year as Roy Buchanan's),that was a perfect guitar.Ash body(2pc.),maple neck.It was stolen out of the high school band locker,the one weekend I couldn't find the band teacher to let me get it to take it home.A truly traumatic experience.If I had it,I might still have it.I ran into the idiot who stole it, many years later.He told me they got 100$ for it.
I had a 1974 Tele that I bought brand new around 1983. It sat in a Mom & Pop music store for all those years.
It was lightweight and played & sounded incredible. I played it thru a MusicMan HD130 amp.
One of the guitars that I REALLY miss.
I had a 1976 tele that I bought in the early 90s and I could never warm up to it. There was something about it that I didn't like. It lacked a good vibe I guess.
I've got a '74 standard that's a great guitar. it's the only guitar I don't think I could part with. It's heavy-ish, but that's what gives it it's tone. Also, these sound much better with an electronics upgrade. The originals pups were kind of shrill, but with an RS kit they mellowed right out. I've had other 70's telecasters that were horrible, three bolt neck models, I just couldn't get them to play right.
i don't own one--but from a $$$resale$$$ standpoint these days i wish i did.
i've played a lot of them over the years.....some have been great, some have been real dogs. but fender, gibson and martin all had quality control problems in the 70s.
it really depends on the guitar.