Why the hate for Fender acoustic guitars ?????

[cb1956]

Ok, I know I'll probably regret starting this thread but here goes.

I've read over and over how Fender would be the LAST brand anyone should look at when buying an acoustic.
Why is that?

Are you telling me Fender (*One of the largest musical instrument companies in the world) Can't find a person knowledgeable enough to design a decent acoustic guitar?
I find that hard to believe.

Is it that Fender* doesn't have the ability to buy quality woods and hardware, and do it in bulk at lower costs to them?
I doubt that too.

Is it the fact that Fender* builds outside of the US (as many makers do) and the CNC machine knows what ethnicity and language is spoken by the finger that presses the GO button?
I doubt that too.

Is it that the laborers in the shops and the managers are lazy and don't care about quality?
Jobs are valuable. I doubt that very much.

I don't see the same hate for Guild or Gretsch, who by the way are owned by (Guess who) FENDER*

Now before somebody gets all puffy on me and says "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" Or enjoy your Fender it doesn't compare to brand XYZ, I'm not saying they are the greatest in the world or that they are as good as XYZ. Just saying they are good quality instruments for the money and don't deserve all the hate....

[Shadowfox]

I think it's just that in the entry-level guitar area they are lacking in tone and quality compared to most of the others. The entry-level Taylor and Martin and Yamaha are just generally much better built and sounding instruments.

I think the hate is simply because it seems to be a money grab just because of the headstock. The reason their acoustic brands don't get hate is that historically they had good acoustics too.

[Jaden]

Sorry, outdated information - look at the Paramount Series - talk about value for the money -

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by cb1956

Ok, I know I'll probably regret starting this thread but here goes.

I've read over and over how Fender would be the LAST brand anyone should look at when buying an acoustic.
Why is that?

Hi cb1956

Not sure it's hate. It's more signaling that Fender builds beginner level acoustic guitars, not pro level.

Their electrics are awesome (I own both an American Strat and a Tele).

Their hybrids are…ho hum…

Their acoustics make great travel instruments, and pretty good leave-one-at-the-office-to-play-at-lunch guitars.

Some companies are better at certain things…

If memory serves me right, Martin took it's shot several times at building electric guitars (as did Taylor)…with similar results as the Fender acoustics.

[Brucebubs]

Originally Posted by cb1956

I don't see the same hate for Guild or Gretsch, who by the way are owned by (Guess who) FENDER*

Fender sold Guild to Cordoba Guitars in May 2014.

p.s. I was born in 1956 too.

[cb1956]

Originally Posted by Shadowfox

I think it's just that in the entry-level guitar area they are lacking in tone and quality compared to most of the others. The entry-level Taylor and Martin and Yamaha are just generally much better built and sounding instruments.

I think the hate is simply because it seems to be a money grab just because of the headstock. The reason their acoustic brands don't get hate is that historically they had good acoustics too.

So they are just throwing together crap without any regard to quality at all?
I find that hard to believe.

"Taylor and Martin and Yamaha are just generally much better built"
So the Fender is bad design? Being one of the largest musical instrument companies in the world you would think they would hire a better designer. They could afford to hire the best right? Doesn't make sense.

Now where did I put that popcorn maker...

[jim1960]

Originally Posted by cb1956

Why the hate for Fender acoustic guitars ?????

I have two questions:
1. Why does it concern you if others don't like Fender acoustics?
2. What's with the random insertions of asterisks in your post?

[RP]

Fender has a long-standing history of trying to make it in the acoustic world without getting anywhere near the World Series. By contrast they have arguably dominated the electric guitar world. I'm not saying that a company can't cast a long shadow in both the electric and acoustic realms, but it's been pretty unbalanced for Fender as far back as the 1960s. I think that the lack of respect for Fender's acoustic offerings is based on that considerable imbalance. What worked for Bo Jackson didn't work for Garth Brooks and Michael Jordan. What has worked for Gibson hasn't worked for Fender...

[cb1956]

Originally Posted by jim1960

I have two questions:
1. Why does it concern you if others don't like Fender acoustics?
2. What's with the random insertions of asterisks in your post?

Not concern, just curious.
I didn't feel like typing "One of the largest musical instrument companies in the world" every other question but I wanted to get that point across. Sorry if it bothered you.

[cb1956]

Here's another question then.
What if Fender hired Bob Taylor to design their acoustic guitars, Would Fender still suck?

[heavy_picker]

I have tried many guitars over the years and have never played a Fender Acoustic guitar that had any tone or that I thought as worth buying. I own a Fender Strat that is a good guitar and like many of their solid body guitars.

[1neeto]

I have a cheap Fender acoustic, it was my first acoustic because I fell for the name on the headstock and cheap price ($275 with HSC). The guitar is what it is, all laminate, cheap hardware and electronics, but it does have a fantastic neck that feels like a strat. It doesn’t sound too horrible, but after buying other better-sounding guitars, I rarely pick it up anymore. It is now the guitar I bring to the living room when friends come visit.

[cb1956]

Originally Posted by heavy_picker

I have tried many guitars over the years and have never played a Fender Acoustic guitar that had any tone or that I thought as worth buying. I own a Fender Strat that is a good guitar and like many of their solid body guitars.

So why do you think that is? Bad design, bad materials, bad craftmanship?

[cb1956]

Originally Posted by 1neeto

I have a cheap Fender acoustic, it was my first acoustic because I fell for the name on the headstock and cheap price ($275 with HSC). The guitar is what it is, all laminate, cheap hardware and electronics, but it does have a fantastic neck that feels like a strat. It doesn’t sound too horrible, but after buying other better-sounding guitars, I rarely pick it up anymore. It is now the guitar I bring to the living room when friends come visit.

I think that name on the headstock works both ways. Plus and minus. I guess that's what I'm getting at. Is it actually one of the things I listed above? Or bad logo mojo on an acoustic. Opposite of brand snobbery.