Is Ren's hand in the making of this Fender???

[onewilyfool]

THANK GOD, they got rid of the electric guitar headstock they used to put on their acoustics.......Check out the MAP on this one....not your grand daddy's Fender acoustic.....

 

http://www.acousticguitar.com/Gear/Reviews/Fender-TPD-1-Review?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AG%20Weekly%208.05.13%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=5660458&spUserID=NTE3ODY0NzU4NTcS1&spJobID=161078665&spReportId=MTYxMDc4NjY1S0

[J-1854Me]

THANK GOD, they got rid of the electric guitar headstock they used to put on their acoustics.......Check out the MAP on this one....not your grand daddy's Fender acoustic.....

 

http://www.acousticguitar.com/Gear/Reviews/Fender-TPD-1-Review?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=AG%20Weekly%208.05.13%20(1)&utm_content=&spMailingID=5660458&spUserID=NTE3ODY0NzU4NTcS1&spJobID=161078665&spReportId=MTYxMDc4NjY1S0

 

Kind of looks that way, doesn't it?

 

Fred

[BigKahune]

.

Sure looks like it Wily.

 

I brought this up in the Best of luck, GM Dennis O'Brien thread (but no one bit). I'm not sure how much work Ren is doing, but it looks like he's in there somewhere, possibly only in an advisory capacity. Surely Gibson could have kept him on in such a position, but according to the comments in the other thread, apparently O'Brien and Ren didn't see eye to eye. To me it now reads like there was more to Ren's departure then getting out of manufacturing and "moving on".

 

 

.

[blindboygrunt]

Much b better without the electric headstock.... But not exactly gorgeous is it ?

[j45nick]

Much b better without the electric headstock.... But not exactly gorgeous is it ?

 

 

The only thing wrong with the headstock is that it says "Fender" on it.

[milod]

In a sense, I'd agree with J45nick's comment.

 

Actually two things about this description would lead me not even to looking seriously at the guitar. First is the long scale and second is the V neck profile. I'd be curious too about neck radius info that I didn't see in the piece.

 

m

[ritchie69]

Take a look at this Ren creation:

 

http://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/TradOCust2

 

 

[Joe M]

I have played Fender electric guitars for almost 50 years so I'm a real Fender advocate, but I can't see spending that kind of money on a Fender acoustic guitar when there are so many other guitars in that price range that have a much better, proven track record. It's probably as good a playing and sounding guitar as other makers guitars for around $3000 street price but the name on the headstock would be a deciding factor for me. Sorta like what happened with Fender/G&L and Gibson/Heritage. I'm sure that the quality of G&L's and Heritage guitars is as good as Fender/Gibson but most people would rather have a Fender/Gibson than G&L/Heritage just because of the name. Call me a name-brand snob but that's my story and I'm sticking to it......

[BigKahune]

.

Back to the topic: Former Gibson main man Ren Ferguson now working for Fender - is it his hand in the making of new high-end acoustics coming out of Fender?

 

@Ritchie - that's a beauty, and a great catch - I caught the label - no doubt there -

 

 

.

[milod]

Two things I noticed about both guitars mentioned...

 

First, a V sort of neck; second, the one at Sweetwater has a 10" fingerboard radius - so I'll assume it'd be similar radius on a similar style neck on the big boomer.

 

Frankly I prefer a relatively shallow C and a flatter fingerboard. I think more fingerpickers are likely to have similar preferences. Not all perhaps, but a predominance.

 

I think Joe's comment about brands also is quite valid. Fender's past acoustics have been priced to match Epi tags and frankly I wouldn't buy one at least partly due to past reputation. If nothing else, too, one might question aging of woods in a "Fender" as opposed even to a "Guild" regardless that they may share the same stock. That may not be right, but I think it's likely.

 

IMHO a better marketing strategy would have been to brand the things as a division of Guild, as in "Guild T," or something along those lines, as opposed to an upscale Fender marque. Like it or not, I think Fender has a certain rep for bolt on necks and a certain style of playing that would be more difficult to overcome than even a relatively poor rep for their acoustics built to date. OTOH, Gibson's solidbodies came after a long guitarbuilding tradition and continues today with set necks even on "board" guitars - a whole different concept.

 

m

[ritchie69]

It's true BK, a beauty for sure.

[JuanCarlosVejar]

I think he is more a designer than a luthier at Fender ... I asked Jeremy Fuller about what I thought was an awesome red kingman and he said they weren't that great ... let's hope they have started to get better . He also said Ren was designing them but others were building them but that could have changed since I asked him months ago .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

JC

[rar]

I'm not sure how much work Ren is doing, but it looks like he's in there somewhere, ...

As previously reported, Ren is both designing and also working with the guys in the New Hartford plant on building them. (Among other things, from training wood buyers to visiting and suggesting process improvements at other plants.) He's not going to be building customs for Fender/Guild or anything like that, but I'n not sure that means he will never build a prototype in his shop for them -- which makes this label interesting. Anyway, he tells me that the staff in New Hartford is excellent, quite capable of building anything he designs extremely well.

 

I don't see how the quality of anything Fender built in the past tells you anything useful about how good this guitar is. Generally, the way to figure out whether a guitar is any good is to examine and play it. In this particular case, Fender's history building acoustics seems utterly irrelevant: different designer, different builders, different processes. It's not like putting "Fender" on the headstock magically transforms the neck into a bolt-on or something.

 

If someone can find one of these to check out, I'd love to hear a report of how they compare to Gibson's designs -- which would get us back on topic, as a bonus.

 

-- Bob R

[bobouz]

IMHO a better marketing strategy would have been to brand the things as a division of Guild, as in "Guild T," or something along those lines, as opposed to an upscale Fender marque.

I would agree, but then probably the majority of today's buyers don't have the same soft spot in their hearts for Guilds as some of us old guys.

 

In the '70s I owned a D40, F40, F30, and F20. They were very nicely made guitars & quite responsive tonally. Also loved the way they looked - from the body shape, to the headstock (wider at the top), to the pickguard. In particular, the F30 with a flat braced back rather than arched, was a real sweetheart. Fairly similar to a J185 in body shape.

 

If they could reissue that baby, I'd sure be interested!

[j45nick]

Call me a name-brand snob but that's my story and I'm sticking to it......

 

 

Pretty much sums it up for me as well. It would have to prove to be superior to one of my Gibsons or Martins before I would consider it.

[j45nick]

 

IMHO a better marketing strategy would have been to brand the things as a division of Guild, as in "Guild T," or something along those lines, as opposed to an upscale Fender marque. Like it or not, I think Fender has a certain rep for bolt on necks and a certain style of playing that would be more difficult to overcome than even a relatively poor rep for their acoustics built to date. OTOH, Gibson's solidbodies came after a long guitarbuilding tradition and continues today with set necks even on "board" guitars - a whole different concept.

 

m

 

 

Gibson pretty much rules the roost when it comes to across-the-board excellence in both electrics and acoustics. It's a pretty remarkable track record, when you think about it. There are iconic instruments from other builders--the D-28, the Strat, the Rick 360/12--but Gibson has iconic instruments everywhere you turn, in virtually every category.

 

Can't say that about anybody else, IMHO.

[milod]

rar...

 

I guess I'm talking in terms of marketing as opposed to anything else.

 

And a lot of guys who have been playing even a few years have something of a negative perspective toward Fender acoustics even if they're absolutely religious about Strats or whatever.

 

And they're the ones who would have to dive into a new line of acoustics head first at some pretty high prices.

 

If the bit with coaching wood buyers, etc., is correct, and there's that much separation even from the Guild side, I'd be even a bit more concerned about early generations of these guitars.

 

Again, they may be the finest one might possibly make with given dimensions, but that's not what I'm talking about.

 

I've a hunch that there will be a certain niche for a high end "fender" branded guitar - but now that there's a rep of low-price Fender acoustics, as there's a rep for Squiers and low-end Epis etc., that a different branding for high end Fender corporate acoustics might be a good idea.

 

I dunno if there's been focus group sorts of work done, or if the slow trickle of high end acoustics with the Fender name on a headstock is mostly market research. The v neck and relatively sharp (for acoustics) neck radius ditto.

 

Bottom line is that I don't know where they're looking for market segment. It appears to me that what I've seen is a nice acoustic for somebody who's played Fender electrics and wants a pretty acoustic that would allow somewhat similar technique. That may be a good strategy, but I'm not sure whether that's a sufficient niche to replace other brands.

 

Mentioning Ren's name too may sell some guitars. Or... it may result in a lot of shop wear as folks try them and may or may not care for the neck and radius.

 

But again, figure I'm talking marketing, not manufacturing quality or design. If it's a long-term marketing strategy to keep the Fender name on a high-end acoustic, fine. But I can't picture many folks but collectors going for what I've seen so far at price points and design specs. OTOH, I've not done focus groups nor do I know exactly how one would figure focus groups for $3,500 guitars with a good company name, but not in that specific niche. Corvettes don't hang heavily on "Chevrolet" or "General Motors" either when it comes to name recognition. So... we'll see.

 

m

[ChrisA83]

You all sound like those bashers who played Gibsons in the 70s and 80s and won't touch them again

[milod]

Chris...

 

Perhaps in a sense, but again I'm talking marketing, not product quality.

 

As for Gibson in that time period... yup, and look what happened to the value of the firm and how it was near "death" when a now somewhat controversial guy put together a concept and package to buy it and return it to respect. Which overall he certainly did, but by needing years to do so.

 

Note also how a pre CBS Fender may bring a much better price tag than one manufactured just a year later. Granted, that's largely forgotten today by younger players, but... it cost me a lot on a bass sale in the '90s on a reeeeally nice Precision.

 

That's why I talk marketing.

 

Also consider the nastiness written in various threads here about the FirebirdX and robot tuners. Sheesh. Partly it's because those writers are a market segment that don't find such things fitting their paradigm of guitar regardless that they may use 16 stomp boxes and an electronic tuner 'stedda a plain old amp and pitch pipe. Also I think Gibson did do a rather poor marketing job on it.

 

m

[MR GIBS]

Not impressed...

My J 35 sounds and looks way better.

[mountainpicker]

Whether Ren's hand is involved or not my first reaction to Fender acoustics is: Great, more Martin clones, just what the guitar world needs! And as for the story unfolding about the corporate guy and Ren, it looks like just another corporatethink story that Gibson can add to its history to go along with the Norlin one already in the books. How come the corporate thinking guys always squeeze out the artists and creative types and quality-over-quantity types instead of the reverse being the more common ending?

[chipss36]

Funny , long before ren went to fender, I was in a local music shop gassing for a new classical,

Played all the high end brands , then the cheep ones, Nothing was speaking to me.

I was just about to leave and saw a fender classical , it had been completely overlooked , I was floored how this guitar sounded , I had no idea what it was made of or anything but knew it sure sounded great, told the dude I would take it, pointed out some shopware, got a good discount and walked out with it.

No case just the guitar, threw my new cheep china fender guitar it the back of the truck and the light hit the top, I could see all the bearclaw in the top, and how tight the grain pattern was, so I busted out my phone to find out more, it was all solid wood , kind of a funky 70s vibe to it , that has grown on me,

Suppose my lesson here was never overlook something because what's on the headstock, if ya intend to play the dam thing.

[Hall]

I'm of the same mind as Bob, on this one.

And from the specs, it reads like a neapolitan dish. I see a little bit of the good stuff from at least three makers being incorporated in the build. I would really like to have the opportunity to play the instrument. And, if that doesn't happen, I hope someone who does get to do so, indeed, might post a full review here. The more fine guitars in this world, the merrier! I hope this one stacks up to be such.

 

Steve

[zombywoof]

Whether Ren's hand is involved or not my first reaction to Fender acoustics is: Great, more Martin clones, just what the guitar world needs! And as for the story unfolding about the corporate guy and Ren, it looks like just another corporatethink story that Gibson can add to its history to go along with the Norlin one already in the books. How come the corporate thinking guys always squeeze out the artists and creative types and quality-over-quantity types instead of the reverse being the more common ending?

 

 

Corporate bean counters calling the shots at Gibson goes back alot further than Norlin - back to 1965 when Arnie Berlin (the "in" in Norlin) took over CMI. First thing he did was to force Gibson's president Ted McCarty out.

 

And remember - the Hummingbird was pretty much a Martin clone.

[milod]

I've never been a headstock freak. Which... is likely why my latest buy was an Eastman archtop to "play out" in bad weather here which can get pretty nasty for a 40-year-old guitar and a 60++ picker.

 

But again, I think the bit with this batch is that it seems somewhat tentative also, as if they're looking for a market.

 

The neck radius and especially V neck shape tend to me to reinforce that estimate although I may be full of prune juice or the results thereof.

 

I'd still prefer from a marketing perspective that a shallow C neck and a flatter fingerboard be included - and not necessarily so much in the way of abalone as great solid wood properly aged and crafted with care for the type of guitar it's intended to be. A solid and properly fitted hard case if it's over X dollars.

 

Again, what market segment is being sought, besides "high end," and what marketing is specific to that segment.

 

I may be wrong, but even with different series designations for its pressed-wood guitars, it seems to me to cheapen the Martin name. Fender and Squier, Gibson and Epi, both I think have taken a good shift in different branding for different price tags and market segments. Squier and low-end Fender solidbodies have a little crossing point in prices and ditto some Epi and some Gibson pieces which, IMHO, is fine.

 

But now that Fender's up to now Epi equivalent hollows have a certain market image, it seems to me that something different, perhaps not unlike Epi's Masterbuilt line for their higher-end flattops, might not be something to consider.

 

As for the Hummingbird being basically a Martin clone, yup but... it wasn't marketed that way as such. It was marketed as a solo vocal accompaniment piece and honestly, the only people I knew who had one or really wanted one in the '60s were girl folksingers.

 

m