'72 Telecaster Thinline
Moderators: pompeiisneaks, Colossal
'72 Telecaster Thinline
I'm contemplating another parts-o-caster build and this is high on the list. Any thoughts or comments.
-
Gibsonman63
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: Wed May 27, 2009 1:59 pm
- Location: Texas
Re: '72 Telecaster Thinline
I built one with StewMac parts about 10 years ago. Mine is a little neck-heavy for my tastes. I went with the maple top and Rio Grande pickups. I was going for a Johnny Lang type sound, but mine ended up being very clean and acoustic-ey sounding. I should probably try some different pickups, but I suspect that the top has something to do with it.
If I were to to it again, I would probably go with Warmoth, do without the maple top and get a compound radiused fretboard.
If I were to to it again, I would probably go with Warmoth, do without the maple top and get a compound radiused fretboard.
-
telentubes
- Posts: 897
- Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 11:29 pm
- Location: Bellingham, WA.
- Contact:
Re: '72 Telecaster Thinline
I built a Thinline with a Swamp Ash body from Allparts. I started with an Allparts neck but replaced it with a Birdseye Maple neck ('59 roundback), with an Indian Rosewood fingerboard (10" to 16" radius), from Warmoth . I've tried a number of different pickups and settled on a pair of "Vintage Plus" PUs from Harmonic Design. They are a little hotter and richer than the standards. I had a bunch of old tele stuff lying around that I used for the rest of the guitar.
It's a great ax. Not my main tele anymore (I use a solid body mostly), but it sounds fab and it still gets played a fair amount. I used it mostly in a semi acoustic setting (meaning the rest of the band was playing acoustic instruments, although plugged in) and it added some soulful tones to the mix. A very rich and clear guitar with plenty of sustain, especially nice above the 10th fret, which is unusual. One of its best features, and the reason I originally built it, is its light weight. I ended up leaving it unfinished as it sounded so good when I first put strings on it. I got spooked about wrecking it (I am in the process of finishing it now though, 3 or 4 years later).
You better add one to the quiver. It's a nice variation to the tele sound. Really great with humbuckers (probably what you have in mind ala '72).
It's a great ax. Not my main tele anymore (I use a solid body mostly), but it sounds fab and it still gets played a fair amount. I used it mostly in a semi acoustic setting (meaning the rest of the band was playing acoustic instruments, although plugged in) and it added some soulful tones to the mix. A very rich and clear guitar with plenty of sustain, especially nice above the 10th fret, which is unusual. One of its best features, and the reason I originally built it, is its light weight. I ended up leaving it unfinished as it sounded so good when I first put strings on it. I got spooked about wrecking it (I am in the process of finishing it now though, 3 or 4 years later).
You better add one to the quiver. It's a nice variation to the tele sound. Really great with humbuckers (probably what you have in mind ala '72).