Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

[MikeRocker]

So, I've started to get the strong urge for a Tele with a Bigsby, and if I go for it I'm gonna build it. If it happens, it will be swamp ash (after all, it ain't really a Tele unless it's swamp ash...or maybe pine...) with a rosewood fingerboard, kind of like the photo below :cool3: So I've been scoping USA Custom and Warmoth, and the description of the chambered (Warmoth)/thinline (both) sounds great (from Warmoth - "These bodies are very resonant, they even feel alive when plucked. Sustain is improved over their solid body counterparts and feedback isn't even an issue. Tone wise: Alder, Ash, and Mahogany each maintain their traditional tone but it's more open, full, fat, and chunky."), and they both can make them solid behind the bridge to accommodate the Bigsby. So all was well until I looked at the price for chambered + binding on the front and back and went:
:eek2:

So, the question: does anyone have any experience with a Telecaster that is chambered or thinline BUT with NO F-HOLES? If so, how does it compare to a standard solid-bodied Tele? The reason I ask is that chambered/thinline is about $100+ more expensive than solid...if it really makes a big difference and is worth it, I might just bite the bullet, but if not I'd like to hang onto my $100+. Thank you for any input/wisdom/experience!!

 

[ParameterMan]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Foistly, Warmoth's chambering is very much different from a thinline. Take a gander at the images on their body builder page. I owned a warmoth chambered strat and my take is that it's unlike any guitar you've heard. It didn't sound like a strat at all. Basically you've got a guitar made of large closed-cell foam that also happens to be wood. The result: very light, with a rich smooth midrangy tone. No high-end snap, no low-end punch(but a good amount of it), no pingy resonant peak. No mud, either. Sustain was reduced but you couldn't tell if you had an amp going because it fed off the amp smoothly at all frequencies at any level above inaudible. The effect was that of unnatural sustain. I enjoyed it a lot but it might be a bit unusual at first.

A thinline with no f-hole should sound very nearly identical to one with... maybe a little tighter and and focused in whatever frequency the guitar leans to, probably slightly nasal.

Side notes: I love thinline teles like nothing else. They open up and add sweetness to that wonderful tele tone in just the right way. Also, mahogany teles do sound like teles, at least if the mahogany is reasonably lightweight or it's a thinline. Shoot, I even played a "Fender Special Edition Custom Telecaster Spalted Maple HH" (mahogany body and set mahogany neck, carved maple top, PG+ and '59) and it still managed to feel remarkably tele-like.

 

[MikeRocker]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Thank you very much for your reply! But I'm a little confused...you said "No high-end snap, no low-end punch(but a good amount of it)" and I'm not sure what you mean by "but a good amount of it" after you said "No high-end snap, no low-end punch"...a good amount of what? Also, when you said "Sustain was reduced but you couldn't tell if you had an amp going because it fed off the amp smoothly at all frequencies at any level above inaudible. The effect was that of unnatural sustain." by unnatural sustain, did you mean reduced sustain? 'Cause Warmoth claims that chambered/thinline bodies increase sustain...was that not your experience?

Thank you again, not trying to be contentious at all, just want to make sure I know exactly where you're coming from

 

[ParameterMan]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

But I'm a little confused...you said "No high-end snap, no low-end punch(but a good amount of it)" and I'm not sure what you mean by "but a good amount of it" after you said "No high-end snap, no low-end punch"...a good amount of what?

A good amount of low end, and warmth in general. Just not tight and direct(and by that I mean the character of low end demonstrated by a les paul or tele, strats don't have a lot of that anyway).

Also, when you said "Sustain was reduced but you couldn't tell if you had an amp going because it fed off the amp smoothly at all frequencies at any level above inaudible. The effect was that of unnatural sustain." by unnatural sustain, did you mean reduced sustain? 'Cause Warmoth claims that chambered/thinline bodies increase sustain...was that not your experience?

Enhanced. Like every note slowly faded into this threshold below which they never really died out. It didn't sound like feedback, the notes just hung around. My point was that the guitar itself didn't have the sustain, it was so light and sensitive to vibrations it worked like an acoustic-mechanical sustainer. The attack of notes still sounded and "felt" like you were playing a light, low-sustain guitar. And then they'd just refuse to die out. If you were playing it unplugged it didn't do that.

 

[MikeRocker]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Thank you very much for your thoughts! Hmm, so it sounds like it differs pretty significantly from traditional Tele tone...I definitely want the Tele twang and growl, so maybe solid body is the best option. Anyone else have any thoughts?

 

[AlexR]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

The chambering/thinline will make the guitar less present. It is like having a subtle compressor pedal on. You've got to be a little careful with your choice of necks. On my warmoth thinline I initially had a pretty thin/light neck with vintage tuners and ebony board. The guitar just lacked something. I then got a boatneck profile 1 piece maple neck with grovers and the guitar improved.

 

[ParameterMan]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Thank you very much for your thoughts! Hmm, so it sounds like it differs pretty significantly from traditional Tele tone...I definitely want the Tele twang and growl, so maybe solid body is the best option. Anyone else have any thoughts?

A thinline will definitely have that twang and growl, just a bit airier and smoother. My comments above only apply to the warmoth multi-hole chambering.

 

[MikeRocker]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Thank you for the input...it sounds like if I want a guitar for rockabilly/rock/country stuff, maybe chambered/thinline is not the best option...

 

[jtougas]

Re: Chambered/thinline (no f-hole) Telecaster experience?

Well... I would say thinline/hollow sure, but maybe not chambered.