In reply to bOb's question as to did Fender
make some walnut non pedal steels. I would like to give my take on this question.

bob,Fender did in fact manufacture Dual Pro &Customs in walnut. The reasons they were discontinued were from Leo Fender's words to me,God Rest his soul.

Back in i953,the last of the walnut guitars were manufactured. The 1954 price list reflected the fact that the walnut guitars were discontinued. Since this was a quick decision on Leo's and Don Randall's behalf,rather than have a new price list printed,they simply blacked out the walnut guitars as an item in the Fender catalogue.
I have a copy of that price list from 1954.

The walnut guitars were a bit higher in price
and these are the reasons told to me by Leo and Don.

The ash,swamp ash and (oak when used) were much less costly than walnut. The walnut wood was a beautiful piece of wood and the procedure to manufacture these into a finished product took much time as the walnut had to be perfect as far as the grain,etc and they
were carefully chosen.

If in fact the walnut was not as perfect as Leo would accept,he would have these painted
in what is now called the "butterscotch" finish which covered any and all imperfections in the walnut guitars.

This proved to be costly and time consuming and since the demand for Fender non pedal guitars was increasing,Leo thought it best to
stop buying walnut wood. This was a waste of money to choose to paint a beautiful piece
of walnut with Sherwin Williams or DuPonte paints.

The small and slight imperfections in the walnut would be unacceptable to many players
back then as the price of the walnut guitars was higher in price. Not only from the manufacturing process but the increase in cost was passed along to the dealer and in turn that was passed on to the consumer.

The Telecaster and Esquire were selling well & people were starting associating that familiar blonde finish to a Fender.

The ash and swamp ash was easier to work with
there were few descrepencies regarding "knots" or irregular pattern wood
grain problems. If there were in fact,it was easier and less expensive to finish an ash and or swamp ash to the blonde finish.

This was the case and the reason the walnut wood was not used again.

People starting asking for the familiar Fender blonde and since Noel Boggs was playing a Triple neck Custom in Blonde back then,it made the blonde all the more popular.

When Noel played with Spade Cooley over the KTLA TV network, he was more times than not playing a blonde Custom triple neck guitar and that guitar is what put Fender on the road to sucess.

People would refer to Noel's guitar as being
the guitar with the "diamonds" on the front
making reference to the chrome diamond plates.

I asked Noel if there was in fact a difference in tone quality and he said with a
definite answer YES. He preffered the walnut
but Leo and Don explained the situation to Noel and Noel was obliging and went along with Leo and Don's decision. But since the blonde was much more popular and the effort
of doing the walnut guitars,the walnut guitars were then discontinued.My buddy Greg
Sullivan has an original Dual Pro and to my
ears there is a difference,,maybe not much but there is a definite difference. There is a sustain difference,at least to my ears.

Recently as of last week I e mailed Ricky Davis with the same question regarding the walnut wood as opposed to ash etc etc. Ricky
is much more qualified than I to answer that.

I beleive Ricky explained that the ash is more dense than the walnut and that since Leo
was planning on going into R&D with the Stringmasters,he thought that Leo's idea of letting the walnut go was a good idea.

Ricky felt that the Direct Strings Through Pickups were better sounding with the walnut
wood.but since the Stringmasters were coming
it would be better to use ash rather than the walnut.

I dont want to put words in Rickys mouth,but
it was my understanding that the walnut wood
accecentuated the sweeter tone of the "now called" "trapeziod pickups" and that the ash was better sounding with ash or swamp ash which was then manufactured on all Stringmasters.

I think it would be best for Ricky to explain
his reasons for choosing ash for the stringmasters rather than the walnut,,and take into consideration the fact that walnut was more expensive to buy and more time put in trying to choose that "perfect" piece of walnut where the beauty of the grain would stand out.

All Fender guitars which were made of ash were gone over with a fine tooth comb and if
there were any with a natural imperfection or a knot of any kind were then painted in a custom color such as Candy Apple Red,Sonic Blue,Fiesta Red, Foam Green Inca Silver etc etc. This process covered a less than perfect piece of ash and moreso no pun intended was a "cover up" and I dont mean that in a deragatory manner.

A couple of years ago I was in touch with one
of our Forum members Chris Bauer who is on this thread "Hi Chris" .

Chris had a beauty of a Custom triple for sale and we both exchanged e mail re my purchasing his beautiful Custom. That guitar Chris had was indeed walnut stained or possibly a true walnut guitar I dont really know.

During the time Chris and myself were putting the deal together I found my original
Custom guitar which I used way back and explained to Chris that I was unable to buy
his beauty.

To this day I dont know whether or not Chris's guitar was indeed a true walnut.Maybe Chris can answer that. Perhaps if Ricky the master of wood see's this he can
join in and help out.

As I said before,,I would in no way put words into Rickys mouth,he knows more about wood than I'll ever know.

The facts I explained were the facts that were told to me by Leo Fender and Don Randall. To my ears there is NO SOUND like a Fender guitar ..walnut,ash or whatever.I like em all

Whew I never thought I could talk so much.

Sorry about that. Who was it that said I talk
too much?

Thank You

edited for spelling and remember I was only a salesman and not a guitar luthier

I'll discuss this with Mr.Fender when I see him again..

[This message was edited by Jody Carver on 12 March 2003 at 06:57 PM.]

I know who Chris Bauer is,,is that a "hip" expression?.(lucker)????

Chas,,good choice.

[This message was edited by Jody Carver on 13 March 2003 at 01:44 PM.]

Though this should be on the "Custom vs. Stringmaster" thread, I favor the playability of the SM over the earlier guitars. It's practically impossible to play above the 17th fret with the trapezoid pickup in the way.

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

I can always tell a refinish job no matter how good from an original. The value goes down on a refinish to a collector.

Rick

This means, everthing else being equal, a P/P Emmon's would NOT have as much brilliance as that same instrument made out of walnut. (NOTE: Emmons' use mostly hardrock maple for their bodies).

While this may be desirable for some players, I do believe most would opt' for the maple bodies given a "sound" choice.

carl

[This message was edited by C Dixon on 21 March 2003 at 01:34 PM.]

While this may be desirable for some players, I do believe most would opt' for the maple bodies given a "sound" choice.

Mr.Dixon
This may be true with Emmons and others as such. Fender has an extreme amount of treble as it is. I find the walnut as you say "not as dense of wood" as maple and perhaps ash as well,but given that fact,the Fender sound is
treble personified and I find the walnut to off set the treble that Fender is known for and the choice of Walnut on early Fender guitars was discontinued for reasons other that what is stated here.

I have three Custom guitars and each has its own distinctive tone,however the walnut has a tone all by itself.

And if a player does not like the billiance of an Emmons, a walnut body would probably be a very good choice. Certainly a prettier choice IMO