Bookmarks

Yahoo Gmail Google Facebook Delicious Twitter Reddit Stumpleupon Myspace Digg

Search queries

howard roberts fusion 3, john lodge wig?, ttompeten noten mit xallen , pica fierce faust cd, roland jc 77 vs 120, barney kessel guitar copy, ibanez fa 700, JA4SHAR@AOL.COM, gibson byrdland alternative, kasuga barney kessel copy

Links

XODOX
Impressum

#1: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 17:11:09 by phil

Hi y'all:

I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
older (80's) ones are "better" but I don't know in what way.

Thanks

Report this message

#2: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 17:35:48 by LarryV

I have a newer HR with the fingers tailpiece, but I've never had the
opportunity to play one of the older models. I do know that I love mine
though. The fingers tailpiece allows you to adjust the downwards
tension on the strings by adjusting the break point over the bridge. I
keep mine screwed all the way down so that the fingers actually make
contact with the surface of the guitar.

Whether or not it's a figment of my imagination, I think it provides
more sustain this way. Raising them up gives the guitar more of an
airy sound to my ears. Either way, the guitar sounds great and doesn't
feedback in high volume situations. For jazz gigs, it sounds great, and
for blues/rock gigs it sounds great as well. It's like a swiss army
knife of guitars and it does all things very well imho. I always get
comments about what a great sounding guitar it is. The guitar
motivates me to play as it never gets in the way of whatever I want to
do.

Phil wrote:
> Hi y'all:
>
> I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
> the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
> with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
> older (80's) ones are "better" but I don't know in what way.
>
> Thanks

Report this message

#3: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 19:32:29 by fpirrone

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Phil wrote:

> Hi y'all:
>
> I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
> the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
> with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
> older (80's) ones are "better" but I don't know in what way.
>
> Thanks

Phil,

Don't take this as flippant or in any way a criticism of you for asking
the question but rather an effort to provoke further comment and
discussion:

The answer is older ones are always better.
Vintage instruments always sound better than their modern counterparts.
Guitars made in 1980 are better than those made today.
Guitars made in 2004 are better than those made today.
Advancing technology never improves anything.
Advancing knowledge never improves anything.
If you have a chance to buy something old, ignore something new.
My recent manufacture Ibanez AS-120 can't possibly sound as good as my
classic Gibson ES-335 did.

I'm not challenging anyone who objectively evaluates and older instrument
and finds it sounds or plays superior to a current one. I wouldn't
challenge anyone who discovered one guitar off the rack sounds and plays
better than others of the same model and vintage. I understand companies
operate in different eras of their existence as ownership, management, and
employees change. I understand competition, pressure for profits, and
inflation. I am aware of issues regarding availability of important wood
products and other materials and components. I have heard there is a
different approach to skills acquisition and craftsmanship. Ahh, etc.

What I don't understand, even from my late-middle-age perspective is how
this assumption can be taken by so many as a maxim and applied so broadly.

Does anyone have a compelling analytical explanation. Is there any
empirical evidence of its accuracy? Does anyone have a compelling
refutation? Examples in support? Examples to the contrary?

Frank

Report this message

#4: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 20:35:53 by Michael Evans

Well in the case of this particular question I think it is quite a sensible
one. The "fingers" tailpiece
was not part of HR's original specification for the guitar but was replaced
by Gibson, I think
shortly after his death. There is some debate about it but many think that
the reason was primarily cosmetic and that
the fingers add nothing. I have seen comments about this tailpiece by Robert
Benedetto
who scoffs at the rationale behind it as supplied by Gibson. Personally I
own one of these guitars and keep the
fingers firmly tamped down (as Larry V does) but my reason for doing so is
that I find that otherwise
the fingers can rattle and buzz. From that point-of-view the stop tailpiece
on the older model
might be a bit better but with the fingers tamped firmly down it is not a
problem. The fingers
tailpiece might be better at getting the top moving (just a normal archtop
tailpiece would work as
well perhaps) and so impart a woodier sound but maybe the
stop tailpiece produces greater sustain. I've never had access to one with a
stop tailpiece
so this is just speculation. Overall though a very nice guitar.

Mike

&quot;frank&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:fpirrone&#64;localnet.com" target="_blank">fpirrone&#64;localnet.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:pan.2005.08.29.17.32.27.954482&#64;localnet.com..." target="_blank">pan.2005.08.29.17.32.27.954482&#64;localnet.com...</a>
&gt; On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Phil wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&gt; Hi y'all:
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
&gt;&gt; the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
&gt;&gt; with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
&gt;&gt; older (80's) ones are &quot;better&quot; but I don't know in what way.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; Thanks
&gt;
&gt; Phil,
&gt;
&gt; Don't take this as flippant or in any way a criticism of you for asking
&gt; the question but rather an effort to provoke further comment and
&gt; discussion:
&gt;
&gt; The answer is older ones are always better.
&gt; Vintage instruments always sound better than their modern counterparts.
&gt; Guitars made in 1980 are better than those made today.
&gt; Guitars made in 2004 are better than those made today.
&gt; Advancing technology never improves anything.
&gt; Advancing knowledge never improves anything.
&gt; If you have a chance to buy something old, ignore something new.
&gt; My recent manufacture Ibanez AS-120 can't possibly sound as good as my
&gt; classic Gibson ES-335 did.
&gt;
&gt; I'm not challenging anyone who objectively evaluates and older instrument
&gt; and finds it sounds or plays superior to a current one. I wouldn't
&gt; challenge anyone who discovered one guitar off the rack sounds and plays
&gt; better than others of the same model and vintage. I understand companies
&gt; operate in different eras of their existence as ownership, management, and
&gt; employees change. I understand competition, pressure for profits, and
&gt; inflation. I am aware of issues regarding availability of important wood
&gt; products and other materials and components. I have heard there is a
&gt; different approach to skills acquisition and craftsmanship. Ahh, etc.
&gt;
&gt; What I don't understand, even from my late-middle-age perspective is how
&gt; this assumption can be taken by so many as a maxim and applied so broadly.
&gt;
&gt; Does anyone have a compelling analytical explanation. Is there any
&gt; empirical evidence of its accuracy? Does anyone have a compelling
&gt; refutation? Examples in support? Examples to the contrary?
&gt;
&gt; Frank

Report this message

#5: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 20:51:36 by phil

frank wrote:
&gt; On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Phil wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Hi y'all:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
&gt; &gt; the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
&gt; &gt; with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
&gt; &gt; older (80's) ones are &quot;better&quot; but I don't know in what way.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Thanks
&gt;
&gt; Phil,
&gt;
&gt; Don't take this as flippant or in any way a criticism of you for asking
&gt; the question but rather an effort to provoke further comment and
&gt; discussion:
&gt;
&gt; The answer is older ones are always better.
&gt; Vintage instruments always sound better than their modern counterparts.
&gt; Guitars made in 1980 are better than those made today.
&gt; Guitars made in 2004 are better than those made today.
&gt; Advancing technology never improves anything.
&gt; Advancing knowledge never improves anything.
&gt; If you have a chance to buy something old, ignore something new.
&gt; My recent manufacture Ibanez AS-120 can't possibly sound as good as my
&gt; classic Gibson ES-335 did.
&gt;
&gt; I'm not challenging anyone who objectively evaluates and older instrument
&gt; and finds it sounds or plays superior to a current one. I wouldn't
&gt; challenge anyone who discovered one guitar off the rack sounds and plays
&gt; better than others of the same model and vintage. I understand companies
&gt; operate in different eras of their existence as ownership, management, and
&gt; employees change. I understand competition, pressure for profits, and
&gt; inflation. I am aware of issues regarding availability of important wood
&gt; products and other materials and components. I have heard there is a
&gt; different approach to skills acquisition and craftsmanship. Ahh, etc.
&gt;
&gt; What I don't understand, even from my late-middle-age perspective is how
&gt; this assumption can be taken by so many as a maxim and applied so broadly.
&gt;
&gt; Does anyone have a compelling analytical explanation. Is there any
&gt; empirical evidence of its accuracy? Does anyone have a compelling
&gt; refutation? Examples in support? Examples to the contrary?
&gt;
&gt; Frank


An intersting philosophical question Frank. But in my case the Howard
Roberts Fusion models of old and the newer ones have definite design
differences and features. I was hoping someone could comment on how
those differences impact the feel and sound of the different era
models.

I do however like the &quot;played in&quot; feel of older guitars. Wood
definitely dries out over time, finishes wear thinner allowing greater
resonance, etc. and those effects are pleasing to me.

Report this message

#6: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 20:54:44 by phil

frank wrote:
&gt; On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 08:11:09 -0700, Phil wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &gt; Hi y'all:
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
&gt; &gt; the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
&gt; &gt; with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
&gt; &gt; older (80's) ones are &quot;better&quot; but I don't know in what way.
&gt; &gt;
&gt; &gt; Thanks
&gt;
&gt; Phil,
&gt;
&gt; Don't take this as flippant or in any way a criticism of you for asking
&gt; the question but rather an effort to provoke further comment and
&gt; discussion:
&gt;
&gt; The answer is older ones are always better.
&gt; Vintage instruments always sound better than their modern counterparts.
&gt; Guitars made in 1980 are better than those made today.
&gt; Guitars made in 2004 are better than those made today.
&gt; Advancing technology never improves anything.
&gt; Advancing knowledge never improves anything.
&gt; If you have a chance to buy something old, ignore something new.
&gt; My recent manufacture Ibanez AS-120 can't possibly sound as good as my
&gt; classic Gibson ES-335 did.
&gt;
&gt; I'm not challenging anyone who objectively evaluates and older instrument
&gt; and finds it sounds or plays superior to a current one. I wouldn't
&gt; challenge anyone who discovered one guitar off the rack sounds and plays
&gt; better than others of the same model and vintage. I understand companies
&gt; operate in different eras of their existence as ownership, management, and
&gt; employees change. I understand competition, pressure for profits, and
&gt; inflation. I am aware of issues regarding availability of important wood
&gt; products and other materials and components. I have heard there is a
&gt; different approach to skills acquisition and craftsmanship. Ahh, etc.
&gt;
&gt; What I don't understand, even from my late-middle-age perspective is how
&gt; this assumption can be taken by so many as a maxim and applied so broadly.
&gt;
&gt; Does anyone have a compelling analytical explanation. Is there any
&gt; empirical evidence of its accuracy? Does anyone have a compelling
&gt; refutation? Examples in support? Examples to the contrary?
&gt;
&gt; Frank

An interesting philosophical question Frank. But in my case the Howard

Roberts Fusion models of old and the newer ones have definite design
differences and features. I was hoping someone could comment on how
those differences impact the feel and sound of the different era
models.

I do however like the &quot;played in&quot; feel of older guitars. Wood
definitely dries out over time, finishes wear thinner allowing greater
resonance, etc. and those effects are pleasing to me.

Report this message

#7: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 20:56:30 by Jack Zucker

I've owned them both. The original model had more sustain and was a bit
more of a 335 type of sound due to the stop tailpiece. The newer model
has less sustain and more of an archtop attack. The finger tailpieces
are prone to some sympathetic vibration however...

The original model had a mid-range control which IMO was not very
useful.

Report this message

#8: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 22:05:13 by fpirrone

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:54:44 -0700, Phil wrote:

&lt;snip&gt;
&gt;
&gt; An interesting philosophical question Frank. But in my case the Howard
&gt;
&gt; Roberts Fusion models of old and the newer ones have definite design
&gt; differences and features. I was hoping someone could comment on how
&gt; those differences impact the feel and sound of the different era
&gt; models.
&gt;
&gt; I do however like the &quot;played in&quot; feel of older guitars. Wood
&gt; definitely dries out over time, finishes wear thinner allowing greater
&gt; resonance, etc. and those effects are pleasing to me.

Thanks for your reaction Phil. Well, there's no substitute for time and
usage in a musical instrument that represents a complex resonant system
like a guitar, so if that makes them sound better and you're not willing
to age one say 30 years yourself(!) then the only solution is to buy old.

I guess the general charge is that automated manufacturing processes and
maximizing profits by minimizing costs have taken their toll on the
quality of musical instruments in opposition to the point of view
that greater precision, improved materials, and the refinement and further
acquisition of knowledge should have led to better ones.

Frank

Report this message

#9: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 22:16:03 by LarryV

As Mike and Jaz mentioned, the fingers may vibrate, but I've never had
that problem with my guitar, even without having them screwed all the
way down. The tension of the strings seems to prevent that happening.
Anyways, it's never been an issue for me. My guitar was made in 1997
and I'm the original owner. I can tell you that the tone has really
mellowed out over the years. It's really got a sweet tone and I love
the way it responds to nuances. The stoptail is likely a better
design, but I'm really quite happy with mine &lt;otherwise it would have
been gone by now :) I would have sold it to Greg ;) &gt;

Report this message

#10: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 22:20:39 by Jack Zucker

By the way, if you go to my dan wilson tribute page off of
<a href="http://www.sheetsofsound.net/tributes.htm" target="_blank">http://www.sheetsofsound.net/tributes.htm</a> you can hear clips of him
playing an HR Fusion III. It sounds beautiful.

Report this message

#11: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 22:26:30 by mleggett

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:05:13 -0400, frank &lt;<a href="mailto:fpirrone&#64;localnet.com" target="_blank">fpirrone&#64;localnet.com</a>&gt;
wrote:

&gt;On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:54:44 -0700, Phil wrote:
&gt;
&gt;&lt;snip&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; An interesting philosophical question Frank. But in my case the Howard
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; Roberts Fusion models of old and the newer ones have definite design
&gt;&gt; differences and features. I was hoping someone could comment on how
&gt;&gt; those differences impact the feel and sound of the different era
&gt;&gt; models.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; I do however like the &quot;played in&quot; feel of older guitars. Wood
&gt;&gt; definitely dries out over time, finishes wear thinner allowing greater
&gt;&gt; resonance, etc. and those effects are pleasing to me.
&gt;
&gt;Thanks for your reaction Phil. Well, there's no substitute for time and
&gt;usage in a musical instrument that represents a complex resonant system
&gt;like a guitar, so if that makes them sound better and you're not willing
&gt;to age one say 30 years yourself(!) then the only solution is to buy old.
&gt;
&gt;I guess the general charge is that automated manufacturing processes and
&gt;maximizing profits by minimizing costs have taken their toll on the
&gt;quality of musical instruments in opposition to the point of view
&gt;that greater precision, improved materials, and the refinement and further
&gt;acquisition of knowledge should have led to better ones.

I think that dollar for dollar the new guitars are unbeatable for
playability and 'new-guitar' tone. Metheney says the Ibanez guitars
are the equal of 60s Gibsons if you compare them new-new. I have an
Ibanez AS193 and it's simply a superb instrument, and for under a
grand. Plus there are lots of other top notch new guitars - I also
have a D'Angelico NYL2 which is wunnerful. But like you say, if you
want that warm tone that comes from wood being aged and played in for
30 years, then you have to go old. People have been raving about 80s
175s with mahogany backs, and you can't buy a new 175 with a mahogany
back. As my guitars age, the D'A especially, they'll really come into
their own. There's also the Collector's Mentality, although I haven't
seen it much on this NG, which looks at guitars as investments rather
than instruments; in that world view anything &quot;vintage&quot; becomes more
valuable simply by virtue of age and, to a large extent, brand. But as
to the HR guitars, I think Jack has pointed out a couple of design
changes that make the older guitar a better deal for a player. Ditto
Gibsons and Fenders - both got bought out at various times by
conglomerates who put MBAs in charge instead of luthiers. Quality went
by the board as costs were cut; both companies have escaped their bean
counters and are again producing good instruments, but not all Gibsons
are created equal. And [I'll shut up soon] there's also the mojo of a
guitar made in 1954, although some models, like 175s and Strats, from
that era are way overpriced. But Gibson 125s from then are great
guitars at reasonable prices.



















-------------------------------------------------------
Is it not strange that sheep's guts should hale
souls out of men's bodies?
Willie 'The Lion' Shakespeare
-------------------------------------------------------

Report this message

#12: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 23:16:18 by steinbergerstyler

Jack,

Just curious - do you know if there is a specific reason he went with
the HR model instead of a GB10? They are slightly similar guitars
size-wise. To avoid GB comparisons, perhaps? :)

Report this message

#13: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 23:40:33 by Jack Zucker

His uncle gave it to him as a gift. I don't know if he picked it out first
or not. He's not particularly into gear. He just plays!

--
Experience a revolutionary way to approach the instrument.
Introducing Sheets of Sound for Guitar
&quot;Let the music govern the way you play guitar instead of the guitar
governing the way you play music!&quot;

Check it out at:
<a href="http://www.sheetsofsound.net" target="_blank">http://www.sheetsofsound.net</a>
&quot;steinbergerstyler&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:davidrud&#64;gmail.com" target="_blank">davidrud&#64;gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:1125350178.753340.239350&#64;f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com..." target="_blank">1125350178.753340.239350&#64;f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...</a>
&gt; Jack,
&gt;
&gt; Just curious - do you know if there is a specific reason he went with
&gt; the HR model instead of a GB10? They are slightly similar guitars
&gt; size-wise. To avoid GB comparisons, perhaps? :)
&gt;

Report this message

#14: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 23:43:21 by Jack Zucker

Another thing...The HR Fusion does not feedback.

From: &quot;steinbergerstyler&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:davidrud&#64;gmail.com" target="_blank">davidrud&#64;gmail.com</a>&gt;
Subject: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design
Date: Monday, August 29, 2005 5:16 PM

Jack,

Just curious - do you know if there is a specific reason he went with
the HR model instead of a GB10? They are slightly similar guitars
size-wise. To avoid GB comparisons, perhaps? :)

Report this message

#15: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-29 23:57:33 by Jack Zucker

I'm not convinced that the old instruments are better. There are certain
instruments in which there is a quantifiable difference between old and new
such as the 175. In this case, it's attributable to differences in the
manufacturing of plywood, glues, etc.

--
Experience a revolutionary way to approach the instrument.
Introducing Sheets of Sound for Guitar
&quot;Let the music govern the way you play guitar instead of the guitar
governing the way you play music!&quot;

Check it out at:
<a href="http://www.sheetsofsound.net" target="_blank">http://www.sheetsofsound.net</a>
&quot;frank&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:fpirrone&#64;localnet.com" target="_blank">fpirrone&#64;localnet.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:pan.2005.08.29.20.05.11.722307&#64;localnet.com..." target="_blank">pan.2005.08.29.20.05.11.722307&#64;localnet.com...</a>
&gt; On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 11:54:44 -0700, Phil wrote:
&gt;
&gt; &lt;snip&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; An interesting philosophical question Frank. But in my case the Howard
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; Roberts Fusion models of old and the newer ones have definite design
&gt;&gt; differences and features. I was hoping someone could comment on how
&gt;&gt; those differences impact the feel and sound of the different era
&gt;&gt; models.
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; I do however like the &quot;played in&quot; feel of older guitars. Wood
&gt;&gt; definitely dries out over time, finishes wear thinner allowing greater
&gt;&gt; resonance, etc. and those effects are pleasing to me.
&gt;
&gt; Thanks for your reaction Phil. Well, there's no substitute for time and
&gt; usage in a musical instrument that represents a complex resonant system
&gt; like a guitar, so if that makes them sound better and you're not willing
&gt; to age one say 30 years yourself(!) then the only solution is to buy old.
&gt;
&gt; I guess the general charge is that automated manufacturing processes and
&gt; maximizing profits by minimizing costs have taken their toll on the
&gt; quality of musical instruments in opposition to the point of view
&gt; that greater precision, improved materials, and the refinement and further
&gt; acquisition of knowledge should have led to better ones.
&gt;
&gt; Frank

Report this message

#16: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-30 02:13:10 by fpirrone

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 20:26:30 +0000, Max Leggett wrote:

&gt;
&gt; I think that dollar for dollar the new guitars are unbeatable for
&gt; playability and 'new-guitar' tone. Metheney says the Ibanez guitars
&gt; are the equal of 60s Gibsons if you compare them new-new. I have an
&gt; Ibanez AS193 and it's simply a superb instrument, and for under a
&gt; grand.
&gt; &lt;snip&gt;

Max,

That sentiment was buried in my ramblings. I own a 1963 ES-175 that I've
had since 1975 and had a late 1960s ES-335 prior to that, but am
absolutely knocked out by this Ibanez AS120, so I can only imagine how
nice your AS193 is.

I've got a couple of what I consider to be reference amplifiers including
a 1963 blackface Super Reverb (through which I had played that 335 with an
organ trio) and can assure you this guitar holds its own against all I've
encountered - fit, finish, action, sound, and even vibe whatever that is.

$600 new...

Frank

Report this message

#17: Re: Howard Roberts Fusion model -- newer vs. older design

Posted on 2005-08-30 15:04:27 by Exotic-scales

I had a Fusion III (<a href="http://www.exotic-scales.com/fusion_iii.htm" target="_blank">http://www.exotic-scales.com/fusion_iii.htm</a>), and it was
without a doubt the nicest Gibson I've ever owned (and I've owned quite a
few). It was also nice to play something that was a little different from
what every other guitarist on the block had.)

I never had a whole lot of use for the finger tailpiece. It looked kind of
neat, though. I particularly liked the fact that it featured an ebony
fretboard, but simple dot inlays (I don't generally care for big block
inlays). All in all, it exuded a real understated elegance. The tone was
fabulous -- darker than, say, an ES335 or my Les Paul Standard. I regret
having parted with it.

Joe
<a href="http://www.exotic-scales.com" target="_blank">http://www.exotic-scales.com</a>


&quot;Phil&quot; &lt;<a href="mailto:pdemario&#64;yahoo.com" target="_blank">pdemario&#64;yahoo.com</a>&gt; wrote in message
news:<a href="mailto:1125328269.946693.156660&#64;g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com..." target="_blank">1125328269.946693.156660&#64;g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...</a>
&gt; Hi y'all:
&gt;
&gt; I'm interested in hearing from folks who have had a chance to compared
&gt; the older, 1980's Howard Roberts Fusion models (TP6 tailpiece, etc.)
&gt; with the newer Fusion II and III models (Fingers tail) I've heard the
&gt; older (80's) ones are &quot;better&quot; but I don't know in what way.
&gt;
&gt; Thanks
&gt;

Report this message