Had a choice between this and the Arctic Metal 7. Ended up going with the latter because of the feature set, but Tele’s are my jam and I sometimes kick myself for not going with the former lol. Wish more companies did 7 string baritone Tele’s (or offsets too). Also great vid and great playing, man.
@@richardclarkmoore No problem! And yup totally agree. All the gear acquisitions sorta teaches you what you like or don’t like so you can make more informed decisions later. Already learned a lot about what I want from living with the Arctic Metal 7 for some months now, stuff like ergonomics and stainless steel frets etc.
I have the purple single humbucker version. Decent guitar but I just can’t jive with the pickups. I’ve now tried several different variants of the fluence moderns and am not into them at all. I have the open core classics in my ec-1000 though and love them.
@@richardclarkmooreI wish they did a purple sparkle version of the tele but I think he’s talking about his lavender M series with the Reverse Headstock
So this is Telecaster body shape owned by Fender, so i wonder how are they allowed to make it. You need to alter some aspects of it in order not to get copytight infringement. So how did they change the body in comparison to the original?
Fender never really protected the body copyrights - hence why so many companies have almost 1/1 body copies. The only copyright they ever really protected was the headstock. Theree likely some alterations, like the belly cut and so on - but in general fender are fairly chill on the bodies
Thanks for letting me know! I always thought the tele headstock was super ugly and its the only thing protected! Also i think they sued Gibson when non reverse Firebird was to close to their jazzmaster or sth, thats why we have a reversed firebird nowadays.
I wanted the purple ST model but they are overpriced. No bone or graphite nuts, no stainless steel frets, but the same price as models that come with such features. And the pu positions are probably an acquired taste
Signature guitars are using the artist’s chops to sell instruments. In that way they are nice, but also more expensive.
Facts. Some are cheap though, like that Tim Henson nylon string acoustic thingo! It was surprisingly affordable
Had a choice between this and the Arctic Metal 7. Ended up going with the latter because of the feature set, but Tele’s are my jam and I sometimes kick myself for not going with the former lol. Wish more companies did 7 string baritone Tele’s (or offsets too). Also great vid and great playing, man.
Cheers mate! Choices are hard man, I regret a lot of expensive gear I’ve bought over the years honestly, but it’s all part of the journey
@@richardclarkmoore No problem! And yup totally agree. All the gear acquisitions sorta teaches you what you like or don’t like so you can make more informed decisions later. Already learned a lot about what I want from living with the Arctic Metal 7 for some months now, stuff like ergonomics and stainless steel frets etc.
I have the purple single humbucker version. Decent guitar but I just can’t jive with the pickups. I’ve now tried several different variants of the fluence moderns and am not into them at all. I have the open core classics in my ec-1000 though and love them.
My favourite colour! I didn't realise they made a purple one, I had to make this video FAST hahaha
@@richardclarkmooreI wish they did a purple sparkle version of the tele but I think he’s talking about his lavender M series with the Reverse Headstock
Lambchopper’s son confirmed.
Close! But from the sound of his accent he’s across the ditch from me in Oz
Observing the knob 👏
It be how it be
great videoooo lets goooo hello from california
LETS GOOOOO
Is that middle pickup splittable?
It can go voice one or voice two, not sure about coil split
I'd say it's for everything other than looks
Hahaha fair, it’s not to everyone’s taste
@richardclarkmoore yeah😭 I've just never been a Tele guy, that and green guitars just aren't usually my jam either. Still a sick guitar specs wise tho
So this is Telecaster body shape owned by Fender, so i wonder how are they allowed to make it. You need to alter some aspects of it in order not to get copytight infringement. So how did they change the body in comparison to the original?
Fender never really protected the body copyrights - hence why so many companies have almost 1/1 body copies. The only copyright they ever really protected was the headstock.
Theree likely some alterations, like the belly cut and so on - but in general fender are fairly chill on the bodies
It's sliiiiiightly different
Fender doesn't really care, as long as you're not copying the headstock
Thanks for letting me know! I always thought the tele headstock was super ugly and its the only thing protected! Also i think they sued Gibson when non reverse Firebird was to close to their jazzmaster or sth, thats why we have a reversed firebird nowadays.
I can't keep up with the lawsuits from these old school companies eh, it's so out of hand haha
Is that a Wiegedood shirt?
Damn right, fantastic band 👌
"Cleans"
Maybe I should say “less distortion” haha
@@richardclarkmoore ya lol
damn brother, you should have more subs
I''m working on it brother! 409 is a lot more than the 27 I started with in September last year :)
I wanted the purple ST model but they are overpriced. No bone or graphite nuts, no stainless steel frets, but the same price as models that come with such features. And the pu positions are probably an acquired taste
Yeah it’s hard to justify an expensive guitar if you still need to upgrade it