Acoustasonic Strats

ivandolz

Member
Messages
147
Yes, although I have to admit that I do enjoy playing mine unplugged while watching TV. Not as loud and bulky as a real acoustic.
That's a very good selling point. For a practice guitar is kind of cool and you don't annoy anyone at home.
 

ivandolz

Member
Messages
147
They did
Honest question: did the Tele do that well?

Personally, I will kindly say that I was turned off by the price without saying something more negative. I know there are buyers.
well for sure... Thaey made the exotic wood ones to sell them at a higher price and now the strat version... MIM will come in 1-2 years. They are selling really well.
 

MartinC

Member
Messages
3,040
And has greatly improved upon the T-5, IMO.
The concept of getting an authentic acoustic sound, but with electric guitar playability (string gauge, neck carve, body size, fret size and upper fret access) has always appealed to me. I'm not really too fussed on whether I could also get good electric tones out of the same guitar that could do this.

On that basis, having tried the Taylor T5z, and the Tele Acoustasonic, the latter is a hit and the Taylor T5z does not fit that particular bill in that its acoustic tones are limited and don't sound anywhere near as good.
 

Johnny_guitar

Member
Messages
145
This is so weird. They are beautiful to look at, and I'm sure sound great.

BUT THEY ARE THE WORST OF BOTH WORLDS.
They're harder to play like an acoustic with heavy strings, yet not full bodied without amplification like a true acoustic.

Seriously, I'd want the opposite. I'd want a guitar that sounds like a big acoustic, and yet has slinky strings that can bend. I realise why that's not likely to happen, but just saying, that's the fantasy model I'd want. This acoustasonic stuff is the opposite.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "they're harder to play like an acoustic with heavy strings." I have 12s on mine, and it's by far the easiest playing acoustic I've ever owned. That's the main selling point for me, actually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RGB

wire-n-wood

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
4,390
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "they're harder to play like an acoustic with heavy strings." I have 12s on mine, and it's by far the easiest playing acoustic I've ever owned. That's the main selling point for me, actually.
I'm being won over by these guitars... the more I look, the more I like. Do you use yours for live performance? Or home enjoyment?

But what I'm referring to is the fact that - when I play solos on an electric, I use lots of string bends. I like them to be easy, so I have 9s. When we play an acoustic duo gig, solos are done without bends. I use 11s on my acoustics, which I realise *some* players could bend fine, but I find it brings too much tension and struggle into the playing. My dream acoustic would have the big sound of heavy strings, but still allow bends like light strings.
 

ethomas1013

Silver Supporting Member
Messages
5,003
You can’t cheat physics. 11s are never going to feel and play like 9s, especially when bending, and 9s are never going to sound like 11s. So, yes, I find this easier and more comfortable to play than my Larrivée, but it’s still harder to bend than playing on my electrics. I use 10s on my electrics.

You could try stepping up to 10s on you electrics, and after you are comfortable with that the 11s on one of these may not be such a big change.
 
Last edited:

MartinC

Member
Messages
3,040
This is so weird. They are beautiful to look at, and I'm sure sound great.

BUT THEY ARE THE WORST OF BOTH WORLDS.
They're harder to play like an acoustic with heavy strings, yet not full bodied without amplification like a true acoustic.

Seriously, I'd want the opposite. I'd want a guitar that sounds like a big acoustic, and yet has slinky strings that can bend. I realise why that's not likely to happen, but just saying, that's the fantasy model I'd want. This acoustasonic stuff is the opposite.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "they're harder to play like an acoustic with heavy strings." I have 12s on mine, and it's by far the easiest playing acoustic I've ever owned. That's the main selling point for me, actually.
I would have to agree ... I have played a stock Tele Acoustasonic with 11s and it's chalk and cheese compared to my regular acoustic, which is also strung with 11s ... to characterise it, my acoustic plays like an acoustic, the Acoustasonic plays like an electric (granted ethomas1013's post above ... you cannot cheat the tension of the string gauge that you are using, unless you detune or you have a shorter scale ... but to me, the Acoustasonic feels much more like playing an electric than an acoustic)
 

monty

Member
Messages
21,987
I used to not want one because of the cost. Now I don't want one because of all the switching. Make it really well, charge $1200 and have a piezo and a strat middle sound. The review I just watched there was a short scale walnut/spruce acoustic, a rosewood/adi, etc. etc. etc.

I now appreciate why it costs so much. I get it and don't hate on the price. It's just not what I want. I want a Fender flavored version of my National Resolectric. One acoustic voice and one useful electric.

That being said, I am now a fan of the concept and product. I just don't want one.
I hear ya. Just for me, if it were something I used a lot it would be one thing but I love the idea of it but dont play acoustic all that much so that is why I'm balking at the price.
 

MartinC

Member
Messages
3,040
Just noticed ... in Australia at least, the Acoustasonic Strat is $400 more than the Tele.

Double-you-tee-eff?

I can't fathom why ... essentially the only difference that might make a difference to cost is the double cutaway ... isn't it?

I know the tone modelling is different, but surely not more expensive? If anything I would have thought the R&D costs of the Tele would have been greater ... with the Strat inheriting much of the learnings. And initial pricing would (could) have been based on much greater sales volume (given the Tele sold at a rate orders of magnitude greater than Fenders expectations, by all accounts)
 
Last edited:

LJOHNS

Member
Messages
783
I have zero interest in these. I see how it could be good for live performances in certain settings though.
 

noisebloom

Member
Messages
1,010
Here's a great review.

Paul Davids' review is very good and wide ranging. I like that he doesn't hold back his misgivings.

Judging from the reviews available, it seems like the Acoustasonic Strat has potential, but it's kind of caught in between electric and acoustic, as Davids points out. Some of the sounds are pretty interesting, like going from a dreadnought sound to like a parlor style.
 
Last edited:

Johnny_guitar

Member
Messages
145
I'm being won over by these guitars... the more I look, the more I like. Do you use yours for live performance? Or home enjoyment?

But what I'm referring to is the fact that - when I play solos on an electric, I use lots of string bends. I like them to be easy, so I have 9s. When we play an acoustic duo gig, solos are done without bends. I use 11s on my acoustics, which I realise *some* players could bend fine, but I find it brings too much tension and struggle into the playing. My dream acoustic would have the big sound of heavy strings, but still allow bends like light strings.
I use mine for live performance. The plugged in sound is great. I wouldn’t record with it, but that’s not really what it was designed for.
 
Last edited:

AprioriMark

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
1,421
I doubt there will be a budget model anytime soon. They're made in their own shop next to the Custom Shop, and they make all their own parts, except the necks, which I believe are CS necks. It's a separate division of Fender, not just something slapped together and mass produced.

-Mark
 




Trending Topics

Top