This page is intended to put some of my thoughts, ideas and answers on many of the subjects that seem to get discussed in the forums, chat rooms, review sites and the like.
I used to have extra time to go and look at some of the things people write about our guitars and even responded to some of those questions in those forums, however, time and other factors make this impossible. With that in mind, if you want to cut and paste any part of this to put into a forum to answer a question or further a discussion, I would encourage you to do that. Please just note where it came from.
Subjects:
Those who hate aged guitars, want to bash me or anyone else who makes these types of guitars.
My first feeling is always - why does anyone take the time to write comments on something they do not like? I hate eggplant, but I do not go onto cooking forums and spew my feelings about how bad eggplant and eggplant recipes are. That being said, luckily no one puts a gun to anyone's head to make them buy my guitars or anyone else's. And even more importantly, I do not have to eat eggplant. I will admit that only about 30% of my own collection of guitars are aged replicas. I do tend to use these for live work as the freedom of knowing that if they get bruised, lost or stolen it is no a big deal. They also tend to play better, sound better than real vintage guitars as the frets, electronics and neck radius are much more to my liking. This is a feeling shared by most people who use my replicas.
Since we live in a free county (for the time being), we all get a chance to post whatever opinions, feelings and the like to a myriad of sources. This is a wonderful thing that many people on the planet cannot do. So, when someone gets all hot and bothered because they hate the whole aged guitar thing and then goes out of their way to post these feelings, I just have to wonder why. There may be a better use of your right to free speech. After all we are talking about guitars, not curing cancer.
Those who dislike the particular cosmetics of my guitars in specific.
Aging guitars is a strange art. There are many considerations that go into how, why and what we do. One very common misconception is that when I take the lacquer off the back of the neck, I am trying to make it look like exactly like a vintage guitar would look. I actually do a much bigger and more of a wholesale removal of the lacquer with the FEEL as the main point. I try and get all lacquer off the back playing surface even though it may not look like some example of a vintage guitar we have seen or played. This is because if I did a more gradual and cosmetically correct aging, the necks just do not feel the way we want them. I agree with anyone who says the backs of the necks do not look like a real vintage guitar. So shoot me. I will go on record right now and say that the cosmetics are very important to me, however, the feel and the sound are my first concerns, so I will sacrifice "period correct" cosmetics to gain something in the feel or sound. Lacquer checking is sacrificed so we can keep the lacquer super thin. The thicker the lacquer the more dramatic lacquer checking is. Since we are going for resonance first and foremost, our paint is very thin and has little gloss. This is on purpose.
This whole concept can now be applied to many other things, such as pole pieces on pickups not looking right. I need to point out that the staggered pickup poles in the 50s were done on guitars with a wound G string and a 7.25 neck radius. If you were to stagger the pole pieces the same way and use with a plain G string and a 10 radius neck, the balance between the strings is WAY off. So those who do not like the look of a non-staggered pole on my guitars, please give it a rest.
Nash is not a luthier and these guitars are just assembled from parts.
By far my favorite subject that people get all upset about. The above statement is 100% true. I could no more cut down a tree and make a guitar out of it than I could dance ballet (though my wife likes when I try). I would not want to anyway as it does not interest me. I have a great respect and admiration for those who can, but it is not what I want to do.
In my opinion, unless you are making guitars with set necks, and actually making the bulk of the parts you use, then you are assembling guitars from parts. Now, the big difference between me and many of my colleagues, competitors and the like, is that I actually admit to not making my necks and bodies. Very few manufactures make their own wood parts unless they are in the top two tiers of guitar makers. It is not my goal to "out" anyone so I will not be specific, but you may be quite surprised at who makes what for who. Read on....
I'd rather buy a REAL Fender than some parts-o-caster made by Nash.
It may be a bit of a strange concept, but open your mind and try and forget everything you know and feel about guitars. Now, here is a concept - Leo Fender left his company in 1964. You know most of this history, but now look at it from a MFG standpoint and what you consider a real Fender guitar. Those factories are all gone. Fender is dead, most of the people that put those guitars together are long gone. Virtually every facet of making a Fender guitar is different, completely different, than it was back in Leo's days. So what we have is something called a Fender Stratocaster that other than the shape of the body and headstock and some layout shares almost nothing with the "real" Fender Stratocaster as it was designed and made in the early days. Think of it this way - Ford motor Company makes a new Mustang that is a killer little car that does have an overall vibe from its namesake from the 60s, but it is in no way a 64 Mustang.
This brings me to my point. No one has made a real Fender guitar since 1964. FMIC, may hold copyrights and trademarks to some names and designs, but they certainly do not make real Fender guitars as Ford does not make a real Mustang any more. Now start thinking about all those crappy cars that share names with some really great cars and it becomes a real funny thing to think about. A 2006 Chevy Impala has as much to do with a 1960 Chevy Impala as does a Moped. Now, when someone buys a Made in Mexico Fender Telecaster, is it really a Fender Telecaster or is it as much a Fender Telecaster as a 2007 Ford Mustang is a FORD MUSTANG? Could you consider that FMIC is actually making Fender copies, and sometimes not very well? Some of the Fender reissues made by the Custom Shop are much more on target, however they are still hobbled by many factors, such as paint, pickups, hardware and other parts that are still made from more modern designs or elements.
So, for many people who buy our guitars, we put something in their hands something that is better to their liking - and may just do Leo a bit more justice. I hope so. Look at a thing for only what it is. Right here right now.
FYI, I own several post 64 Fenders myself so do not think I am trashing them. I do buy them with different expectations than I did years ago. I know they are copies and or replicas. My favorites are the MIJ reissues. Should I think just because FMIC holds the control of the name, that a guitar made in Japan, Mexico or China is actually a REAL Fender?
Now, so you do not think I am trashing Fender specifically, I feel that there are many makers that have put out guitars with their company name, model name and logos that share little with the "original" guitars. Gretsch comes to mind easily as they make a fantastic line of reissues, however except for the USA custom shop stuff, all of them are made in the orient. I think of these as copies commissioned for the holder of the trade name and though they may look and sound much like their vintage brothers, they are certainly a whole different instrument. Is a current Hamer Sunburst anywhere near the guitar that was the 1981 Hamer Sunburst? I think Rickenbacker is the only guitar maker from the old days that could actually claim that they are much the same as they once were, as they have not been bought, sold, moved, re-tooled, commissioned Asian factories and all the other things most makers have done. Gibson falls in a mid point as they certainly have been bought and sold many times and moved factories etc, but the end product in most cases has come full circle and in my opinion they make guitars as good if not better than they did in the 50s. This of course depends on model as there are certainly examples of questionable guitars in their line. My only complaint is that the guitars generally need a complete fret dressing and some other mods when they come out of the factory.
Bottom line is that there are many Fender inspired guitar builders who make guitars that are better than the ones either made or commissioned by FMIC. I may or not be one of them, but I can say that Callaham, Anderson, Suhr, Grosch and several others would certainly be in this category.
Another thing to consider - what percentage of the parts used on a "real" Fender are made by them? I think you would be surprised at the answer.
The big legal discussion - who gets sued, who owns what etc.
This is the area that I am so often amazed about when I read some of the postings. Why anyone has taken the time to speculate and or debate an area that they have absolutely no information about is a mystery to me. This is a complex subject that would take many pages to go into. FMIC owns trademarks including the word "Relic", which is why I never use it. Other than that, anything I say has the possibility of more negative than positive impact - and really who cares about this.
Where do the bodies and necks come from?
I use several OEM suppliers that do not do much business with the public. They are in the USA, however I will not name them. This I do for a couple reasons. I once had a supplier stop selling to me once they were named. Their biggest customer for raw parts is FMIC and they felt some pressure to make a decision about selling me or FMIC. Though I was doing some respectable numbers with them, certainly I will never come close to spending what FMIC does, so I totally understood. But I learned a valuable lesson there and it has nothing to do with not wanting the public to know. The other reason is that they generally do not want to deal with retail sales (like selling one neck at a time to a private individual) so in most cases, these companies would prefer to not be mentioned.
I will certainly use some of the obvious retail neck and body makers to fill in a piece here and there, but not more than a couple bodies or necks a year - it does not fit our business model. We build about 100 guitars a month so these OEM suppliers ship standing orders to us every 4-8 weeks, depending on the product - certainly not a service that any of the retail parts companies is set up to do. This allows both the supplier and the builder to anticipate and control work loads, product flow and man hours. In the past as we were building the business and the numbers were not so steady, we did use more obvious retail makers often, so there will be Nashguitars out there with necks and bodies with those markings.
Is it true that (....insert name of famous guitar player here.....) uses a Nash, and why is this information not publicized - especially by Nash who is obviously a money grubbing opportunist - as it would benefit his sales.
The answer is that every famous guitarist dead or alive, even ones who died before I was born, are Nash owners except Stevie Ray Vaughn as he overplayed and thus I did not let him have one.
Actually the answer is complex. There are countless big name,, medium name and otherwise famous people using Nashes. It is up to them to decide who to make that information known to. I rarely speak with them directly as this type of business is usually run through a dealer or the guitar tech that takes care of them. Some of them use my guitars as it is just stupid to bring a 50-100K guitar out on the road every night so if they can get something that does the job, keeps the vibe, but is replaceable for a small price, it makes sense. Many are endorsees of bigger companies and those arrangements may be jeopardized by publicity. Keep in mind that most of these guys have so many guitars that in some ways, it really is not that impressive if they have a couple of mine. I am sure they have guitars both better and worse than mine in the stable. That being said, I am honored that many of my heroes have become clients. I will only say that if I tune into my local classic rock station, no more than a few minutes will go by before I hear a band that includes a client.
In summation
I love guitars and am grateful that I am able to earn a living making guitars. I urge anyone to follow their passion even if it means that there will be more folks to compete with. I am happy there are places in for all of us to share our passion for guitars on the internet in all the forums, chat rooms, blog sites etc. I would like people to always keep in mind that there is much mis-information out there mixed in with the straight dope. I try and keep in mind that I am damn lucky that anyone cares enough to post anything about me.
All my best - BN
++..Love Animals, Stop Eating Them..Please..++
(This post was last modified: 15-04-2010, 20:26 by Jazzy Metal.)
Search
Member List
Calendar
Help
Nash guitar 
![[-]](http://www.NimitGuitar.com/mybb/images/collapse.gif)
