Nash = best playing/sounding "new" Strats closest to my '63

[electricskychurch]

if only we could try 50 or 60 custom shop strats in Paris ! LOL
i'm quiet sure i'd have hard time find them here just in the city's shops !
on top of that , most of teh guitar shops here have "shitty" amps like the Fender hot rod serie or maybe some jcm 800's at best for most of them ( might not be my first choice to try a guitar although i have a 2210 and had a 2203 i sold as it was too loud when pushed with some gain , compared to a superlead that's already loud) but not even sure they would have decent speakers .
if by chance they have some decent / good actual boutique ones (like in one shop ) you can't push them anyway !

i don't know if there's a direct link (especialy knowing the influence of the neck on the tone ) but i noticed the lightest guitars i have are the brightest ones whatever type of guitar they are the lightest les paul's, SG's and strats i have are brighter than the heaviest ones except the vintage 63/64 strat i have but the frets were dead (i brought it to a luthier to install new frets) and the neck is quiet thinner / not as deep than the other strats i have .
i would tend to think the heavier the wood, the less the high frequencies will resonate but i'm not sure it's definately a known fact.
i wonder if the older wood with possible higher density might be part of the reason why it is less bright (although i would tend to think the thin neck is the first reason ) ?

[electricskychurch]

by the way , about string tension, i'm not totaly sure if string tension is that much the key to the good strat tone, cause on top of what i wrote before , i totaly forgot to add (as we all know) that Hendrix was mostly playing tuned down half step , so the string tension is not as strong as a regular tuning and it let him go faster through bends in his solos (and kept him from finger pain combined with lighter strings he used for some of his strings ;010 .013 .015 .026 .032 .038 although it seems his favorite black strat was kept as he used it before he died , by Monika Dannemann and the light E was a .009).
on top of that the string tension is not teh same when the trem is resting on the guitar's body , with 5 springs than when the trem block is setup as it was designed and with 3 ptrings.
cause when you play , using the same tuning,there is slightly less tension on the strings with teh regular setup vs 5 springs and trem resting on the body as the trem block moves sligtly and has less tension from teh springs .

that said, if you don't have the right string tension to start with and play tuned down half step, that might not work as well ! lol

[leleduke]

I just compared my 56 CS relic to my friends original 57 and it was scary close.

[planetjimi]

HOw consistent are Nash guitars? I'd like to get a strat but there is no dealer in ohio. I'd have to order one through the mail (scary).

[leleduke]

I bought a nash last year and sent it back. The finish was orange peel and the relic job was horrible. I would buy a used one on ebay for $700 but not $1500 new.

MD

[worldoftone]

There's always one.

- WOT

[bluze81]

OK. The Nash had Fralin "Vintage Hots" in it.

So I was wrong all around LOL! That does make sense since the output was noticebley hotter/fatter than my '63. So, take that for what it's worth. Tonally that model was still the closest.

- WOT

Ross I bought a set of Fralin vintage hots a few months back,installed them and the were almost to much gain wise, they had nearly a p90 sound, I love old p90s But not in a Strat, did the set you played give you that impression? I really like the Nash guitars, Steve

[worldoftone]

They definitely had more punch than my stock '63 P/Us, but I liked that. They had the same kinda vibe as the pickups in my '58 Strat but a bit fatter tone-wise. The Lollar's had more of a hi-fi vibe to them, which definitely was not right when comparing to vintage instruments.

- WOT

[electricskychurch]

all these comments about Lollar or Fralin make me think they still don't totaly hit the nail !
i like the Fralin 7,5K /8K PAF clones i bought although they lack a bit of attitude in the mids, compared to my original pairs of 68' (2) and 69' T-Tops (2 as well) .
so i'm not sure his strat pu's are closer to the original ones than his humbuckers are although i just tried the humbuckers.
i haven't tried teh Lollar but from what a friend of mine told me ( he has had several original 60's and 50's strats after he tried custom shop / time machine and master built ones) , they don't seem to sound as good as the original ones but some may prefer the actual repros over teh original (it also depends on the original ones ! LOL)

i compared my 66' NOS strat rosewood fingerboard to an original 66' a friend of mine has, his neck profile seemed more comfortable than mine !
i have medium hands and i'm used to play with my mid/ late 90's les paul 59' ri's and les paul custom 54 ri but the strat 66' NOS neck isn't comfortable enough for me; too big for a strat neck to my taste (and for my hands !) !
it's deeper ( maybe with more shoulders as well but i'm not sure as i i have the feeling teh original 66 was sort of oval, the CS66' seems more like a D to me or at least a big c ) than the original 66 i tried that was easier to play from what i remember.
so much that i will cetainly have my strat 66 NOS neck profile modified to get closer to the original 66 i tried (at least i will make it a bit thinner).
but i have to say this CS66' with rosewood fingerboard doesn't sound bad.
i like it even more with teh original 65' enamel pu i put in teh bridge but it doesn't have the same ring to the tone than teh 2 x 63' i tried ,partly as it has different type of pu's i suppose and also it seems less prone to microphony (maybe the wire has become a bit loose on the coils of some of the formvar ones ).
i got my original 63/64 strat back from the luthier today after he installed new frets and this neck is more comfortable finally as the new frets add to the neck size compared to when the frets were dead low.
now it feels much easier to play when i stand tall (even when i sit down and play) than the 66' NOS time machine (and than before it was refretted !) .
the back of the neck feels also much nicer than the closet classic or relic i had in my hands, it's kind of smooth as the satin neck they make now, so much it was naturaly sanded by hands playing it (and is not sticky at all obviously unlike the recent closet classic i had !.
before i tried some original 63 and 64 strats, i though guitars had to have big necks to have a nice high end response but it doesn't seem to be the case !
i asked my luthier ( a good one in Paris, i was told he was working with James Trussart before ) what would be the consequence if i get my CS 66 strat neck profile a bit thinner and he said there are no rules for that !
you can put a guitar through a scope and then make the neck thinner , put it through a scope again and get less treble and repeat the experience several times ( i suppose on different necks ! ) and have different results from what he said.

the custom shop 60' closet classic i had ,had a more comfortable neck than the CS 66' ( i don't feel like i'm getting used to it ) to my taste.
i really can't get used to the relic ones (from the start ! LOL) and i think some are not really well done compared to some original ones i saw and played (i agree some are done better than others but i feel horrified when i see destroyed maple fingerboard to simulate years of use, or rusty screws that break in teh wood !).
why don't you relic them yourself guys and save teh money they make you pay to destroy the guitars they sell you after, to buy some other guitars ! LOL ) .
just kidding but it might not be a so bad idea ! LOL