Stratocaster Comparison

[HFFritz]

I have three questions:

I am trying to decide between two guitars - The Fender 50th Anniversary American Stratocaster and the Fender American Vintage '57 Stratocaster. The 50th Anniversary is about $200 less. I have played them both, and I think they're both really nice. That's the problem. I began scrutinizing the specs, hoping I'd find something that would tip the scales either way.

1. The 50th has a polyurethane finish and the 57 has a nitro-cellulose lacquer finish. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each finish?

2. The bridge and tuners on the reissue are more like an original, but the more modern hardware on the 50th wouldn't bother me if they are considered better. Are they, or is it just personal preference?

3. Are there any other significant differences that I'm not considering, such as the Ash vs. Alder body?

Thanks in advance for any responses.

[Aaron Cheney]

I think most vintage purists are going to tell you that nitro lacquer and the vintage hardware are both key components to a vintage sound. Others might tell you that ash is better or alder is better or whatever.

Here's what I think: I've played botique, custom built axes that have vintage style hardware, nitro finishes, etc etc etc that sounded like crap. I've also played many Amercian Standard Strats with polyester finish and modern hardware that sound frikkin' awesome.

I guess what I'm saying is, I would never buy a guitar based simply on its specs. What a different world it would be if we all were forced to buy our guitars blindfolded.

[HFFritz]

Thats good advice. Thank you. I tried to convey that I really like both guitars, and the decision was never based on the specs alone. Your blindfold analogy is good, I agree that too much information can sometimes distract people from the whats really important. I also think that it can be fun, and sometimes very interesting, to consider the specs. This is whether it is an instrument, car, watch, camera, bottle of wine ...whatever.

'Consider' is the key word. I was hoping that others might have some insights and opinions through their own experiences. Like most people, I can talk specs forever on lots of topics (cars are a popular one) but I ultimately go with what I like - for reasons that are sometimes intangible. I believe that there are a lot of people that are the same way.

[c7sus]

You can cook some pretty mean salmon on an alder plank.

But I don't know of anybody that uses ash.

[bongolation]

Originally Posted by Aaron Cheney

I think most vintage purists are going to tell you that nitro lacquer and the vintage hardware are both key components to a vintage sound.

The hardware, possibly, but the "nitro" finish is pure snake oil.

People are still falling for this nitro business. The "nitrocellulose lacquer" used in modern finishes is totally different from the old nitro finish paint, which is absolutely illegal to use commercially in the US (and I believe all NAFTA signatories), and the "breatheability" issue is a canard because the bodies are sealed anyway before the nitro is applied, and have been since the "Fullerplast" days in Leo's time.

If there is any sonic advantage at all, it would be due to the relative thinness of some lacquer finishes and this would be irrespective of the chemical base - nitrocellulose, acrylic or whatever.

[Aaron Cheney]

QUOTE=bongolation "The hardware, possibly, but the "nitro" finish is pure snake oil."

Agreed.

[jimistone]

I agree with bongolation

I think the modern finishes are superior to nitro, and do not affect the tone. I refinished my '66 strat in lake placid blue nitro laquar not too long ago. The only reason I used nitro laquar was to be the "correct" finish for the period. Before that it was finished in dupont emoron poly...thick finish too. It sounded just as good with the poly finish as it does with the thin nitro finish.

nitro =better tone=snakeoil

I prefer the vintage style pickups to the modern pickups. I prefer the vintage bridge assembly to the modern bridge.
I prefer the vintage cold rolled steel tremelo block to the modern blocks. Its all personal preference. Alot of players that are not used to playing a vintage style strat will roll the little E string off the edge of the neck...the modern bridges have a narrower string spacing. I like the wider spacing of the vintage guitars.

But...I have been playing that same '66 strat for 20= years. It is what I am used to.

[slinger6]

When deciding between guitars to buy I use the following criteria, in the following order.

1. Which sounds the best?
2. Which feels (plays) the best?
3. Which looks best?
4. Which costs least?

Only move to the next sequencial question if there is a tie. Usually the first question will answer your guitar buying dilema. Sometimes you may need to go the the second. I've never gotten as far as #3 or 4.

[slinger6]

jimistone said:

Alot of players that are not used to playing a vintage style strat will roll the little E string off the edge of the neck...

Huh? My 63' strat has plenty of room off the high E side of the fretboard. At least as much or more than modern strats or reissues.