Pr3Va1L Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 Ok, yesterday i was thinking about this: I always found the front of a strat to be really ugly. BUT looking at one from the back it did look not so bad. I mean, it looked even a little shred-ish... So what do you think about that... Can carving a body make or break a design, or not? I understand a Tele with a carved top would (probably) be ugly, but still... I found a great example of what i'm saying here. This compagny's designs are pretty much the standard stuff you'll find everywhere (the LP clone and the PRS type thingie...) BUT looking at it my first impression was that it was sexy and ORIGINAL! The outline is the same as those guitars, but it really looks great. Warrior Instruments Example: http://www.warriorinstruments.com/gallery_...07_files/3d.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 It's original, but I don't like it, I have to say. On the other hand, I have seen carved-top teles before, and they can look awesome. Ultimately, I don't think that a carve is as important as the rest of the design; however, the execution of a carve CAN really make a difference and can create a unique look, like that "Isabella" guitar by Warrior. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 Uck. These guitars remind me of those anorexically skinny super models...you know you're supposed to think they're beautiful, but they end up looking, well, hungry... To each is own though (I personally think that no one has ever topped the tele design...my next favorite being the guitarlin) Their 'Les Paul' looks suspiciously close to that latest guitar from Myka, you know, the one where the guy patented his 'unique' design... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pr3Va1L Posted June 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 the point wasen't only to speak about THOSE guitars... But you probable have alredy seen an uncarved double cut (les paul DC junior...)? Ugliness is assured lol. one thing is for sure, any figured wood should be ALWAYS carved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 the point wasen't only to speak about THOSE guitars... But you probable have alredy seen an uncarved double cut (les paul DC junior...)? Ugliness is assured lol. ← See, we're really from the opposite side of the fence...because I'm looking at exactly that --a flat top LP Jr DC...to me, that's one hot guitar... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 I agree. Fewer better-looking guitars than a flat-top double-cut LP Jr. If you think that's ugly, we clearly have different tastes. <grin> I also disagree about the figured wood. Look at the MusicMan Axis with the flat quilted maple top. Awesome! Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 I am with idch but the old concept of a belly contour or contoured front applies to guitars, OTHER THAN TELEs. The thin, wasplike waif of a Strat from a custom shop does something for me, but not enough to make it a design requirement. I really want to know if a belly contour on the back of a Tele is sacrelidge (spelling?) or just something to make it different. If I had a belly to speak of, I might realize it's practical applications but I always wonder about doing stuff to the side of the guitar nobody sees. I agree that it is almost a given to carve the back of a modern Strat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank falbo Posted June 23, 2005 Report Share Posted June 23, 2005 I designed a Cort way back that was great with my carve on it. Then they stopped carving it immediately after I left to cut costs. (fools!) I thought it just looked like crap without a carve. Then they started doing a more PRS-style scooped out carve on it later as they made higher end models of it again. That looked really good, too. But totally different than my carve. So you had two great guitars and one crap looking guitar all with the same silouhette. To me, the carve is everything. Not on the classics, necessarily. Strats, Teles, LP juniors, etc. have sort of made their mark as they are. But on more modern designs, the carve is very important to me. And on some guitars it's just as important that they remain flat. I vastly prefer the flat top MM Axis/EVH over the carved top Peavey. I don't like the new arched top Ibanez RG either. I like it flat. A carved top is won or lost in the details. +/- 1/8" here or there can ruin it or me. I guess it's because, like the shape itself, the carve directs your eye. So if it sweeps your eye in an abrupt pattern, or two areas of the carve come together awkwardly, my brain shuts off. Have a look at Switch guitars. The shapes are kind of lame anyway, but the goofy carves totally kill it for me. I don't think the John Pattitucci Yamaha bass is carved well, either. Then there's the often overlooked bevel. The SG needs those bevels. And although flat topped Warlocks with binding are okay, those bevels sort of make it. When guys like Metal Matt come up with new goofy shapes, the bevels really add the finishing touch. Nothing says "I want to kill something because I have rage issues" quite like a bevel against a sharp point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanKirk Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Have a look at Switch guitars. The shapes are kind of lame anyway, but the goofy carves totally kill it for me. I agree. The outer sillouettes start out looking goofy but add that carve and they go from goofy to butt ugly @mach 10, hehe. So I think a carve top really can make or break a design. The carve can change the flow to the point that even the outer body shape can look different to my eyes, for better or worse. I look at the Schecter 006 and the outer shape is OK but with the slightly scooped horn sections it adds character to the guitar. My on-going carve top tele-ish project I think is made by the carve. I like the outer shape but with the added carve it gives it a little more character (I'll change it slightly on my next one though, still learning to implement it correctly). It also has a belly cut & contoured heel for playing comfort not for looks. As an added bonus the carve on it makes it more comfortable for my pinky to rest against when I finger-pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 I really want to know if a belly contour on the back of a Tele is sacrelidge (spelling?) or just something to make it different. ← I'm looking at doing this to my tele --I'm used to playing gibsons, and other angled neck guitars and the telecaster is just too straight, puts my arm way out there... My strat's pretty comfortable to hold though. So I'm thinking that with a bit of a carve in the back, I can bring the neck just a little closer in ... I'm considering a forearm carve, but that's not so important to me, since I like flat top guitars --my Melody Maker especially... In fact, you want sacrilege? Here's what I'm thinking....wouldn't it be nice to have a thinner telecaster? Like just because it was easier for Leo Fender to find wood that thick, doesn't mean I have to live with...I'm willing to shave off about half an inch (leaving the area around the neck pocket, I suppose). Hmmm.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 I built, or to be more correct, completed a thineline Tele about two years ago for a music store and I was never so glad to see a job leave as that one. It played well, sat agin the bod well and such but, with the slight carving on the top, it was NOT a Tele, in my old, humble opinion. An overall thinning would not offend me near what the top carve does. But, the belly carve. Hmmm...... Can't see it from the front... don't know, yet. Plus, I am JUST able to do a decent binding job. On a flat Tele. Carve the top and I am so outa there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 I built, or to be more correct, completed a thineline Tele about two years ago for a music store and I was never so glad to see a job leave as that one. It played well, sat agin the bod well and such but, with the slight carving on the top, it was NOT a Tele, in my old, humble opinion. An overall thinning would not offend me near what the top carve does. But, the belly carve. Hmmm...... Can't see it from the front... don't know, yet. Plus, I am JUST able to do a decent binding job. On a flat Tele. Carve the top and I am so outa there. ← Yeah, I'm really leaning toward a carve on just the back--also for the weightloss thing, the guitar's heavier than what I like. I really like the way thinlines look though, it has me really tempted....actually, I'm especially tempted to do that to the Bocaster, and slap a bigsby on there to boot.... I'm leaning toward your view on the top carve -- wouldn't need that anyway, if I can thin down the back of the guitar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 My Yamaha Pacifica 302 is a Tele-style guitar, and it has a ribcage contour. It looks perfectly fine and makes the guitar more comfortable. Unless I do a bound back or take up a "purist" project, any Teles I decide to do in the future will also have a contour. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Okay, idtch, you got this coming. You worry about the weight and you are gonna put a BIXXXXX on it? To quote the late Gilda Radner, "You talk like man with paper butthole!" I have given that belly contour some thought and I can't see where it would hurt a thing. I guess I am going to do that to the Tele I am building right now to see if it makes that forearm square part a little easier to live with. Where can you send me to see a really good example of a carved-top Tele that looks pretty good? I probly haven't looked at enough of them to even have a valid opinion. I am always up for a learning thang! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 There was one fairly well-known boutique luthier that makes them, but I'll be danged if I can remember who it was.... Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Greg, please don't give me the link to Carvin. Those are not Telecasters. A while ago, before the acoustic-kinda Teles, some really cheap (Rogue?) company made a kinda carved Tele and it was just AWFUL looking. You are right. I would like to see a couple that have been done tastefully. With some class and style. That don't totally suck, as they say in the far west. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickguard Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Okay, idtch, you got this coming. You worry about the weight and you are gonna put a BIXXXXX on it? To quote the late Gilda Radner, "You talk like man with paper butthole!" ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Setch Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 I've always liked this one: http://www.musicforums.ru/sh_int/browse_th...57140835&cpag=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Greg, please don't give me the link to Carvin. Those are not Telecasters. A while ago, before the acoustic-kinda Teles, some really cheap (Rogue?) company made a kinda carved Tele and it was just AWFUL looking. You are right. I would like to see a couple that have been done tastefully. With some class and style. That don't totally suck, as they say in the far west. ← Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tirapop Posted June 24, 2005 Report Share Posted June 24, 2005 Someone who does relics made a Tele with Strat style contours. Normally, once the front of a Tele ceases to be planar, it's lost me. The relic I saw had a very subtle forearm contour, with a big gentle radius. The worn off finish of the contour helped camouflage it. It also helped on the belly cut, but, since you don't see those from the front, I think they're fine camouflaged or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanKirk Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Oh man, I know my on going project would just kill the tele purists. Top carve and belly carve as well as an altered tele-ish shaped body and humbuckers...oh! almost forgot the contoured heel, hehe. To each his own I guess. I should get some good feedback from you guys on how to improve for my next build whenever I finally get it done though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedoctor Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 "To each his own I guess. wink.gif" Exactly, VK! I am only expressing MY opinion and the opinion of everyone from the planet Zephron. Greg, I know you know what a Telecaster is and I was just taking an oportunity to slam Carvin designs. Also, I am the pround holder of a doctorate in Knowlege Vaporous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannoG Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Perhaps you are thinking of Grosh guitars. He has some tasty carved versions of Fender designs: http://www.groshguitars.com/images/ccT-hnybrst_5.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanKirk Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Perhaps you are thinking of Grosh guitars. He has some tasty carved versions of Fender designs: http://www.groshguitars.com/images/ccT-hnybrst_5.jpg ← Grosh is exactly what my project is modelled after except I wanted a deeper carve and a contoured heel as well as a different wiring scheme. I played a couple Grosh guitars and they are about the nicest sounding and playing guitars I've picked up. (better be for $3000+) GREAT fretwork and finishes but in person the carve is so subtle it makes me think why bother, dish that sucker out! Again though, that's only what goes through my warped mind, hehe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GregP Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 It very well may have been Grosh! The website's not exactly as I remember, but that doesn't mean it wasn't Grosh. Sites change. Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.