Vintage guitar of the week #17 - 1979 Music Man Sabre II
The Music Man Sabre II is, for all intents and purposes, a Fender guitar.
Music Man's Sabre is known as a bass guitar (and in fact, Music Man only uses the name Sabre on bass guitars now), but the model name was also used on a 6-string, the 1979 Sabre II model.
Why is this a Fender guitar? Because Leo Fender himself came up with the idea for it during his short tenure in the company. Fender was with the company until November 1979 (it started in 1974).
Is the Sabre II a Strat copy? No. It's distinctively different in several ways. The bridge is a big ol' chunk of metal, the pick guard is a bit of a hybrid between a Strat and Tele, and the bottom metal control plate borrows from the Jaguar. And, of course, dual humbucker pickups are found here.
Where things get a little nuts is with the active electronics.
There are three knobs, two toggle switches and a blade selector. Where does the 9-volt battery go? There is, thankfully, an easy-access control plate for that in the back.
How this guitar works is as follows as far I know (I've never played one personally, so if I'm wrong, feel free to email me and I'll post a correction):
The first toggle acts as a switch between humbucker and single-coil. The second toggle switches between active and passive (which should mean you can play the guitar even without a battery in it, if desired.) The volume control only controls volume. For the two tone controls, in passive they act as normal tone knobs for each pickup, and when switched to active, one acts as a treble boost while the other acts as a bass boost.
"I've never heard of this guitar before."
If before reading this you never heard of the Sabre II, that wouldn't surprise me at all as they did not sell well.
As for why they didn't sell well, I couldn't say because I'm not sure. Maybe it was poor marketing. Maybe Music Man didn't have enough presence in the guitar marketplace. Maybe the guitar was too complicated for most players. I'm just not sure.
What I do know is that it is a well-built instrument, and once educated how a Sabre II works, then oh yeah, it sounds all sorts of awesome when you know how to dial in the tone you want. Big, beefy humbucker tone along with snappy, twangy single-coil tone is all present in the Sabre II.
Worth it to buy?
It is if you appreciate "practical vintage" electrics.
The '79 Sabre II is a guitar you could in fact gig with. It's different-but-not-too-different, has the big humbucker sound along with great single-coil tone that's suitable for basically any amplifier setup and should have many years of life left in it.
Personally, I think the best part of the guitar is that it's different without being tacky. Nice design all around, lightweight (it's under 8lbs) and has that cool '70s era "woody" appearance going on.
Does Music Man still make the Sabre II?
Yes, but now it's just salled the Sabre.
Cheap guitar of the week #33 - Ibanez Talman TCM50
A different look for an electric-acoustic guitar that actually works.
Ordinarily, when a guitar company releases an acoustic with a non-traditional shape, it doesn't work. The Ibanez Talman TCM50, however, does work.
Even in a natural finish (same price as the dark finish), it looks pretty darned good.
Yes, there is a very-obvious pickup mounted in the front position. This is an acoustic-electric that leans more towards acting like an electric. The body style is thinner than a traditional dreadnought, but what really makes this act more electric-like is the way the electric sound is delivered.
When unplugged, the TCM50 has a traditional acoustic sound. When plugged in, you get more of a solid-body electric sound out of this guitar, which for many players is actually quite desirable because it's easier to record with.
The TCM50 might have "that acoustic-electric sound" you've been looking for, and if so, it doesn't cost a lot to get it.
Coil tap vs. Coil split pickups - which sounds better?
You probably don't even know the difference between the two. You will after reading this.
Take the 2015 Gibson Les Paul Studio in Desert Burst (definitely the best color for the 2015 model year). This guitar does have, in Gibson's own words, coil tapped pickups.
What's the difference between tapping and splitting?
Coil split: A coil isolation technique. In a dual-coil pickup, one coil is literally turned off when split.
Coil tap: A coil winding technique. During the wire winding process of pickup construction, another wire is routed in, usually at the midpoint (e.g. if there were 1,250 winds on a pickup, this wire would be introduced at around the 625-wind mark,) then the rest of the original wire winding process is completed. That midpoint wire introduced is the tapped part, and when engaged will have the pickup produce a distinctively different lower-output sound compared to the regular wire at the end of the pickup windings.
Which sounds better?
Surprise answer! Neither, because they're totally different from each other.
I'll explain.
What is a coil tapped humbucker supposed to sound like?
Many players think "coil tap" means "single-coil sound". That is not universally true. You can set yourself up for some big disappointment if you think all coil tapped humbuckers are supposed to sound like single-coil pickups when tapped.
The fact is that some coil tapped humbuckers sound single-coil-like when tapped, while others don't and instead just sound like vintage low-output humbuckers; it depends on how the pickup manufacturer voiced them during construction.
For example, certain coil tapped humbuckers only do one thing. Lower the output when tapped. That's it. It's almost like switching on or off a boost, with tapped being "boost off".
Then there are other coil tapped humbuckers where it's tapped in such a way to have a very single-coil-like character to it (usually depending where the midpoint wire was introduced during pickup construction.) But rest assured, that humbucker is absolutely not acting like a single-coil pickup when the tap is engaged.
What is a split coil humbucker supposed to sound like?
Like a single-coil pickup, because you are in fact physically turning off one coil when you split.
If you want a humbucker that physically switches to a single-coil pickup via a push/pull knob or other switch, you absolutely want split and not tap.
But in the end...
If you want single-coil tone, which is probably what you were after in the first place, use a guitar with single-coil pickups in it and just skip the split altogether.
On a Gibson, that means to use a Les Paul that has P90s in it. Or if you want to save money, Epiphone makes them too (the "1956" Epiphone Les Paul in particular is quite nice).
Will the P90 Paul have single-coil hum? Of course it will. But it will also have that awesome "growly" P90 tone you're chasing after. And the pickups will also be mated to potentiometers with proper resistance for P90s (which should be a linear taper 300K for the volume pot.)
By the way, I'm not saying not to buy the Gibson Les Paul Studio. If you want one, get one. Just don't expect those tapped humbuckers to sound like real P90s or emulate real Telecaster tone, because that's just not happening.
Also, just as a final side note, Gibson does have this thing called "Tuned Coil Tap" with certain pickups they make, which they directly describe in their words as:
...a gentle, but distinctive, midrange scoop - without thinning the sound or dropping the output [and] also [retaining] most of a humbucker’s hum-rejecting properties.
That is Gibson's words on what that type of tap does to the tone in their guitars with pickups that have Tuned Coil Tap. It's not-exactly-single-coil, not-exactly-humbucker in tone representation. It is, more or less, a "filtered" tone (via capacitor) when the tap is engaged. Is it any good? Heck if I know, because I wouldn't bother and just use guitars with real single-coil pickups in them anyway, which, in fact, I do.
Anyway...
Now you know that split and tap are absolutely not the same. Just remember the following: For single-coil-like sound out of a humbucker that you can toggle on/off, split. For a lower-output voicing option out of a humbucker that you can toggle on/off, tap.
Vintage guitar of the week #16 - 1959 Fender Jazzmaster
Time to talk about an old Jazzmaster.
Concerning a real-deal 1959 Fender Jazzmaster, you're probably thinking, "there is no way a Fender made in '59 can look good today". With a Jazzmaster, it's actually routine that yes, most do in fact still look (and perform) very nicely, and I'll tell you exactly why.
The Jazzmaster way back in the day was Fender's flagship guitar. It was the guitar built to compete with other jazz electrics of the time, and probably had a price tag to match. Not too many people cared for it, but was picked up a few years later in the early '60s by the kids who were making this newfangled noise called surf music.
Really, really old Jazzmasters are usually in really, really good condition. Something you have to remember is that with the exception of surf music players and a very small selection of grunge players in the '90s, nobody wanted this guitar. People saw the crazy switchgear all over it, "weird" vibrato system, "odd" shape and wanting nothing to do with it.
There were several guys who actually bought a Jazzmaster in the '50s and early '60s, only to pluck around on them only a few times, then put in a case and not touch the guitar for decades.
Prior to 2012 when Squier put out the Vintage Modified Jazzmaster (I'm on my second one currently,) I never even touched one of these guitars. The only time I ever saw one was in a guitar store waaaaay in the back where nobody could see. This was back in my teens in the '90s. I barely knew anything about guitars back then, but I do remember seeing that "weird" guitar.
Is it worth it to buy a 57-year-old electric guitar?
I can't say for sure. But what I can say is that out of all vintage Fender electrics, a Jazzmaster is the one I would trust to actually still work like it should today.
While 1959 isn't the oldest Jazzmaster (that would be 1958,) the thing to know about '50s and '60s Jazzmaster guitars is that Fender put a lot of effort into building them. Again, remember that this was Fender's flagship guitar at the time. This was supposed to be a premium jazz instrument and the best electric guitar they could possibly make. Combine that with the fact that many '50s Jazzmasters even to this day were barely played, and that's why I'd trust one over other Fender electrics of the time.
I'll put it another way. The Jazzmaster is the only '50s Fender electric I'd even consider touching from that era. 1958 Strat electronics only had 3-way switching, and I've explained before why I can't stand vintage Tele wiring. The Jazzmaster however pretty much has the exact same electronics today as it did way back in '58.
There are a lot of players who dream about owning a '50s era Fender. I'm not one of them, but if I were, functionality of the instrument counts a lot with me. I know vintage Jazzmaster wiring would agree with me, but vintage Strat and Tele wiring absolutely would not.
If I ever do have the disposable cash to pick up a real-deal vintage Jazzmaster, I'd have to weigh that decision carefully, because in all honesty, I could get a new one built by Fender Custom Shop for the same price (probably for a few thousand less, actually.) This ticks off collectors when I say this, but I don't care because I'm a player and not a collector. Guitars aren't "investments" to me. I buy them to play and not to sit in a case in the closet for 20 years.
Anyway, in the end, yes the '59 Jazzmaster would be a solid purchase for a collector.
Rich's continuing Casio watch adventures
Finding "that perfect Casio watch" is a bit of a tall order. But it can be done if you do some research.
I like Casio wristwatches. I've bought a few over the years, and it's a fun hobby because they're cheap and plentiful.
Who wears a watch anymore?
I do, because pulling out a phone just to get the time is stupid when you can get that information from your wrist faster and easier. That, and smart watches at this point are still stupid because at best, they can only hold a charge for about 5 days before needing a recharge. Oh, and another thing. You have to be really, really careful with a smart watch because they are so easy to ding up. It's just a stupid idea to own one presently. I'm sure they will improve, but that's in the future and not now. Presently, the old style Casio digital wristwatch is still the way to go - if you get the right one. And that's where my Casio watch collecting adventures come into play.
What I want out of a watch...
...is something that shows weekday/day/month on the face, has an alarm, a countdown timer and a nylon or Casio-specific metal watch band.
Now as far as the nylon band version of something like this, I already own it:
This watch is loaded with goodies. 10-year CR2025 battery, 5 alarms, over 30 time zone configurations, countdown timer, weekday/month/day on the face, water resistant, amber backlight, rugged construction. The only thing more rugged than this is a Casio G-SHOCK.
My complaint about this watch however is the way the face is configured. The time can be read just fine, but the smaller weekday/month/day above the time (which can alternate between showing that or auto-scrolling between 4 time zones) has one fatal flaw. The small black separator right above it casts a shadow just enough to where it interrupts the display.
My solution to this was to get another watch, this time with Casio-specific metal band (which means one where length can be adjusted by sliding connector and not adding/removing links,) this one:
While this watch does not have as many features as the AE1200 series, it's very, very close to being perfect. So close it's not funny.
Okay. This one has weekday/month/day on the face, amber backlight, a single alarm instead of 5, no time zones, stopwatch and countdown timer - but - it has a few things the AE1200 doesn't have. The alarm can be set to sound on a specific date. Nice touch. The display is far easier to read than the AE1200, yet is slimmer. The watch can be configured to flash the backlight whenever the countdown timer expires or the alarm sounds. Another nice touch.
So what's the flaw? While the band is stainless steel, the case is frost-painted. While the watch looks really nice, it can get dinged up almost too easily. That's the flaw. If this watch had a stainless steel case, it would be perfect.
An example of two watches that supposedly do have the stainless steel case, but almost no features is the Casio A168W-1 and the A158W-1. Both have identical feature sets. The difference is that the 168 is slightly larger and has the "ElectroLuminescence" blue backlight (similar to Timex's "Indiglo") while the 158 has a standard and fairly useless single bulb backlight. However, I'd still buy the 158 over the 168 just because it has more retro flavor to it.
Both these watches only show time and weekday and day on the face, but not the month. They also both have stopwatches, single alarm and that's pretty much it.
If either of these watches had weekday, month and day on the face all at once, I'd buy one in a heartbeat even though neither has a countdown timer.
For some (for many, actually,) the 158 and 168 are perfect because it's metal everywhere but the face, meaning this watch can have the crap beat out of it for years and still look relatively decent with just a little polishing. You can't clean resin cases like that, but you can with metal cases.
However, I wanted something more that had it all, which leads to this:
This, hopefully, will be the watch. I say hopefully because I have it on order right now.
To note, there are two versions of this. The all-silver-face version is the A500WA-7. Same exact watch, except all silver and the top right map is gray instead of blue.
The A500WA series is basically exactly the same as the AE1200, feature-wise. Same 5 alarms, same multiple time zones, same amber backlight, same countdown timer and so on. The difference is the case, the battery (CR1616 instead of CR2025, which lasts 3-5 years instead of 8-10,) the band and the face.
This watch has no plastic dividers on the face, and the little mini round clock seen on the AE1200 (which by the way is useless) is deleted. This means no cast shadows from plastic dividers since it doesn't have any.
Is the case metal? No. It's what Casio called "chrome plated." I don't know if that means chrome-like plastic or real chrome. But what it does mean is that it can take a beating more than paint can, so I decided to have a go, buy the watch and see what I get.
While the band is significantly wider than the B640WD-1A's is, I already know this watch and have a good idea of what it will feel like when on the wrist.
Am I totally done buying Casio watches after I get this one?
Easy answer. Yes.
I didn't buy all my Casio watches all at once. My watch buying adventures has been something that's been going on for years. When I do buy one, I make sure it's as close to what I want as possible.
I really meant it when I said the B640WD is very close to Casio watch perfection, which is why I kept it. Same with the AE1200 I have. That one is also close to perfection.
This time around, it's the A500WA, and it's my last try at trying to score that watch that I'm totally satisfied with. I'm sure Casio will introduce some new models later that I'll check out in the future, but for now, my hopes are riding on the A500WA. I hope it's a good one.
Why bother going through all this crap?
It's like I said at top, collecting Casio watches is a hobby of mine. It's easy, fun, and most importantly, cheap. :)
On a final note, you'd be surprised how good a metal band watch can look. A classy timepiece with a metal band never goes out of style.
And if you think the metal look is good, Casio of course also has gold with band color to match.
The gold version of the A158 is the A159WGEA-1EF and A159WGEA-5EF.
The gold version of the A168 is the A168WG9.
And, of course, the gold version of the watch I just bought is the A500WGA-1 (black border) and A500WGA-9 (gold border).
Yes, the gold versions always cost more, as they are produced in limited numbers. But Casio arguably does make the best gold-look digital watches that exist. Depending on your taste, that means you may spend over $40 for one. For some, it's totally worth it just for the look.