Starcaster Reissue, Coronado Reissue, and bass versions!

Chris Fleming · Post by **Chris Fleming** » Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:59 pm

Trying to withhold the gagging... Couldn't watch much of those happy clappy ass wipes. Was ready to smash something up after that blonde twat started with his hippy shit... Think I saw the headstock of the bass in question?

Awstin · Post by **Awstin** » Fri Aug 09, 2013 1:23 pm

Drummer looks tarded as fuck. That intro with the neck almost looks dangerous.

finboy · Post by **finboy** » Fri Aug 09, 2013 1:53 pm

Ugh, fedora folk

luciguci · Post by **luciguci** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:33 am

Chris Fleming wrote:Was ready to smash something up after that blonde twat started with his hippy shit

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 10:57 am

HEY TIME, GETTING OLD IS JUST LIKE YOUR OPINION MAN

Awstin · Post by **Awstin** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:03 pm

Ugh. It looks so shitty. It's like a shrunken version. Such a 335 copy...

DanHeron · Post by **DanHeron** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:09 pm

I think it looks nice. If you took the pickguard off it looks pretty much like the original one. Just the bridge which is a bit annoying.

EDIT
Just realised the originals came with pickguards anyway hah.... I have just been lookin at pics without them.

finboy · Post by **finboy** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:32 pm

Hmmm, definitely hope squier does a better job on the reissue. That said, if it is cheap enough, might be worth grabbing a warmoth body and just swap the parts over.

Awstin · Post by **Awstin** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 1:39 pm

DanHeron wrote:If you took the pickguard off it looks pretty much like the original one. Just the bridge

No way. They took and moved the neck back in to the body more, making the whole thing more scrunched up. Yuk

StevePirates · Post by **StevePirates** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 4:19 pm

I like the pictures of the starcaster, if they make it a shortscale (hell, even 24.75 would be fine) I'll buy one.

Addam · Post by **Addam** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 5:26 pm

I must be the only one that thinks a strat hardtail on stilts is a hideously ugly thing.
The T-O-M stoptail combo, while ugly, is slightly less so.
It also makes a little more sense in the context of a hollow/semi hollow electric guitar.

Chris Fleming · Post by **Chris Fleming** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 5:48 pm

Not really got a problem with the changes on the new version on the starcaster. Not being a direct copy is more than likely a good thing for the collectors market, they do a higher end verision I think it should be truer to the original? Looks fine to me, but then I'm likely never to own either new or old.

StevePirates · Post by **StevePirates** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 6:41 pm

AddamInsane wrote:I must be the only one that thinks a strat hardtail on stilts is a hideously ugly thing.
The T-O-M stoptail combo, while ugly, is slightly less so.
It also makes a little more sense in the context of a hollow/semi hollow electric guitar.

No... you're not the only one.

I actually like TOM/AOM bridges, they're comfortable to me.

SKC Willie · Post by **SKC Willie** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:11 pm

I really, really like it. The only thing I didn't like about the original is that is seems REALLY stretched out. The small, small change makes it look nicer, IMO. I'm also a big fan of the bridge/tail piece. Those weird strat type bridges always looked awkward on a semi-hollow.

Chris Fleming · Post by **Chris Fleming** » Sat Aug 10, 2013 8:47 pm

Think I prefer it with a scratchplate

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Sun Aug 11, 2013 8:37 pm

New Starcaster looks better, but the "modern spec" (1979-1992) neck probably sucks so fuck it.

Also I'm not sure it is more "squished" than this one, the body is probably just a slightly different shape.

Thomas · Post by **Thomas** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 10:54 am

The Starcaster always looked a bit squished and fucked up.

Awstin · Post by **Awstin** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 4:29 pm

For the millionth time look at the neck placement of the new one. It's farther in to the body.

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 5:36 pm

Punkacc9 wrote:For the millionth time look at the neck placement of the new one. It's farther in to the body.

For only the 2nd time (YOU SANK ME BATTLESHIP) the body is a different shape altogether so "farther into the body" doesn't quite summarize the difference. The lower horn is noticeably different in shape, it has much more scoop on the new one. They have actually ELONGATED the reissue, not "squished" it. The F-holes are placed/sized differently too, and some of the knobs deviate from the original pattern of those 4 (probably more evenly distributed now).

When we get dead-on pictures we'll be able to overlay and see exactly what's been moved.

To consider this "just a lame 335 copy" and the original version innovative/original/fresh is a MASSIVE stretch at very least. Starcasters were always a 335 copy that only lasted 3 years because they were too Fendery to sway Gibson fans, while not Fendery enough to interest Strat/Tele players. Apart from ultimately meaningless things like switch placement and a ubiquitous volume control it looks like pretty much the same vibe is going to come out of both guitars, within reason.
Remember that the Jazzmaster was also a 335 copy in spirit. A bolt-on Fender is never going to respond to playing the same way as a 335 nor sound identical so it's a moot point. This is a Starcaster. The biggest difference is the bridge, which will probably provide the greatest departure in sound and feel on these new ones, but that's going to be like the difference between a Mascis/CP Jazzy and an MIJ RI.

Awstin · Post by **Awstin** » Mon Aug 12, 2013 6:11 pm

Bleh. I doubt they changed the body shape much if they did. You can't compare em yet until the actual pictures come out. But regardless. The neck is still mounted farther in the body making it looked squished. And if they didn't wanna copy gibson they would of kept the 5 knobs and used a jaguar trem to keep it more of their own and make it better. I don't see how the TOM will make it better. You also loose the string through aspect.