New Fender Brent Mason Tele

Oh and Mojo is certainly another name for BS.
If there is something about a player or instrument it is quantifiable, logical and not just some mystical BS.
 
I kind of think that Brent Mason KNOWS what he wants. When you guys can play like him (or Danny Gatton) then maybe you can question it.
I checked a few videos real quick and he has the trees right where they are in the pict in this thread. But hey, what the hell does Brent Mason know, right?
 
We are asking WHY not saying it is wrong without the full information . And how do you know I can't play as well as him or anyone.
 
We are asking WHY not saying it is wrong without the full information . And how do you know I can't play as well as him or anyone.
First, the post was NOT directed at YOU personally. Perhaps I should have said "have accomplished what they have"
 
Last edited:
There are certain guitars I play that just feel right and provide a level of creativity that's different than other guitars. Not that I don't enjoy playing the others, there is just a feeling I get with a couple of them that's just inspirational. That to me is mojo.

While mojo may not be measurable or quantifiable, it's difficult to deny it exists. I do agree that an instrument in its own cannot contain mojo. It's an inanimate object. It's a comfort level the player has that makes it 'easier' to play for them. Terms used like 'gel' or 'bond' when it comes to describing a 'relationship' with a guitar and other gear can be considered by others as mojo.

Provenance and marketing can lead a person to believe there is something special about a piece of gear that can cause them to tap into a more inspirational or creative state. The power of suggestion can be overwhelming. Since they don't think they could have done it on their own and it didn't happen until playing that particular instrument, the instrument has to have mojo.
 
What you are saying is basically if the feature set particularly appeals to you it has "Mojo". I get it but all those things are quantifiable. Mojo is BS by it's very term.
 
We still have NOT been able to quantify why Stradivarius violins sound so good...call it mojo, minor imperfections, etc.

'Imperfections'
One study has claimed that Stradivarius violins are far from perfect. In fact, physicist Dr Franco Zanini argued that what makes a Strad a Strad is its tiny imperfections. Dr Zanini put a number of instruments into a particle accelerator to look beneath the layers of varnish. Speaking to The Telegraph he said: "We noticed there were a lot of asymmetries in the instruments. In principle they have no reason to be there, but it is possible these imperfections were made to remove the unpleasant harmonics that you get in symmetrical instruments.”
 
Yes we do, and not all of them do sound amazing. Many are altered and the ones that are not regularly played do not sound good.
Wood is a random variable but it IS quantifiable even if you can't readily replicate it . I always tell my customers not to try and have an "identical" guitar as a back up to there main stage instrument because it won't be exactly the same and they will consequently have a favourite and not use the other. Better to but something different and celebrate the difference. This is also a song reason for never having a custom built guitar built for you. The last 5% is not in the builders gift. It's not mojo it's a large number of tiny differences that add up to one big one.
 
What you are saying is basically if the feature set particularly appeals to you it has "Mojo". I get it but all those things are quantifiable. Mojo is BS by it's very term.
For me, it's not a particular feature set, the guitar that gives me the greatest inspiration isn't really suited for the type of music I prefer to play. It doesn't make sense to me why this guitar causes such a different level of creativity. I do know it's nothing in and of the guitar itself, it's just me; but I have not been able to have the same results with other guitars.

You don't like the term and that's totally cool and I'm not here to try to change your mind. Just maybe be a bit more open to other's experiences and what they call Mojo. I guess it's difficult to explain to and unrealistic to expect one to understand if they have never experienced it for themself. Because you've not experienced it does not mean it doesn't exist or is BS. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that anyone who has experienced 'mojo' is any more enlightened, better or more in tune with their instrument.
 
Well guys, I'm just very pragmatic about things in general. I don't believe in magic, religion, aliens, destiny etc. I believe everything is quantifiable in the end ;) And I'm also one of those horrible persons who think vintage guitars are generally overrated at best.
 
I kind of think that Brent Mason KNOWS what he wants. When you guys can play like him (or Danny Gatton) then maybe you can question it.
I checked a few videos real quick and he has the trees right where they are in the pict in this thread. But hey, what the hell does Brent Mason know, right?

Brent Mason is also a human being and human beings are pattern recognition animals. Red berries kill member of group, red berries must be bad. Caves bad cause sabertooth tigers may be in them. Pattern recognition was what kept us alive. It also causes us to think that there are patterns when there aren't. That is why we have conspiracy theories. And some would argue religions. And the same applies to guitars and guitar players. Hmm, strings of brand X break less, therefore they must be better. Picks of brand Y play better, therefore they must be better. And sometimes our system sees patterns where there aren't. Like tonewood. Brent Mason is human like the rest of us so he too may think something works for him that the rest of us might think are bonkers. It might work, it might be his pattern recognition causing him to think it is.

And even if it weren't the case, what works for Brent Mason doesn't have to work for you. Some people love fat necks, others hate them.

Yes we do, and not all of them do sound amazing. Many are altered and the ones that are not regularly played do not sound good.
Wood is a random variable but it IS quantifiable even if you can't readily replicate it . I always tell my customers not to try and have an "identical" guitar as a back up to there main stage instrument because it won't be exactly the same and they will consequently have a favourite and not use the other. Better to but something different and celebrate the difference. This is also a song reason for never having a custom built guitar built for you. The last 5% is not in the builders gift. It's not mojo it's a large number of tiny differences that add up to one big one.

I had two identical Strats, exact same model and series. One played good, the other played great. So I agree, just like electronic components have tolerances so two identical pedals of the same production run can sound different, the same applies to guitars. Which is why you shouldn't order guitars online but try them out in person.
 
Back
Top Bottom