Fender Custom Shop

[BoraBora]

I was thumbing through a British guitar magazine the other day that had an article on the Fender Custom Shop. It really cemented in my mind that Anderson Guitars are a step above the rest. The article went on to explain how the Blender, opps I'm sorry, Fender Custom Shop has 70 employees that produce 570 guitars a month. 570 guitars a month!!!! :eek: That doesn't seem custom to me. For comparision, it said that the main factory produces 425 guitars a day. Ouch, can you say quality control.

The article also made a big deal about the custom shop using alder and swamp ash bodies with 2 piece spreads, compared to the main factory's use of bodies with 3 to 5 piece alder and swamp ash spreads. Could you imagine owning an alder or swamp ash guitar made out of 5 pieces? :eek:

Call me biased, but I'll stick with an Anderson any day.

[sonsop]

Well, to be fair, lets not forget that Fender accommodates a lot more price ranges and practices the golden rule in life - pay more, get more.
Generally speaking, of course.

Anyway, TA makes stellar guitars but the Fender Custom Shop does too.

[Stan Malinowski]

I would agree that the "Time Machine" series of NOS, Closet Classic & Relic guitars from the Fender Custom Shop requires a lot of searching to find the "exceptional" one. I am lucky to own 2 "Cunetto Era" Custom Shop Relics. The early CS Relics were not built in the CS but sent to an artist/luthier named Vince Cunetto. Vince produced the Relics from 1995 to late 1998/early 1999. RElics from the Cunetto era tend to be of a generally high quality compared to the wide variation of CS RElics which ahve been produced since.

Overall, the quality of botique builders like Anderson & Suhr is "exceptional" on virtually every guitar they produce. With them their is not a need to worry about quality variation from guitar to guitar like their is with the Fender CS.

[sonsop]

I respectfully disagree. The majority of the Time Machine guitars that I have played {and I've played at least 200} are usually excellent and equal to Suhr, Grosh, Anderson. Most are very good and some have been exceptional, which, I feel, applies to all guitars {regardless of who's name is on the headstock}, all the time.

How they play are a matter of preference - if one prefers the modern appointments of a flatter radius, bigger frets and more contemporary bridge design - then they will generally gravitate towards the alternative boutique builders. All things being equal, if a Time Machine comes out of the box with a 9.5" radius and jumbo frets and is set up right, I think they sound and play awesome.

What's best and better is such a silly debate. Every guitar finds a home with someone who is determine to make it their Number One.

Anyway, why joke the joker when, ultimately, companies "like" Fender has influenced 90% of what the boutique builders are doing?

[Stan Malinowski]

All things being equal, if a Time Machine comes out of the box with a 9.5" radius and jumbo frets and is set up right, I think they sound and play awesome.

I would agree with this point 100%.....however 9.5" radius and jumbo frets on a Time Machine are NOT standard. They must be special ordered. A fairly large, respectable Fender Masterbuild Dealer has his ordered this way. FWIW, the Cunetto Era Relics came with the flatter 9.5" and larger frets. The delaer I was referring to claims the Cunetto Era Relics were the best to come from Fender. As far as time the newer Time Machine Relics he claims only about 1 of every 4 are really "keepers" (words right from his mouth).

I personally have owned 3 Time Machine Relics which were at best, average. Lack of resonance and poor fretwork were the major sore points on these. Needless to say I passed these on once I found the Cunettos.

[JoeB63]

I'm pretty sure that Cunetto only finished the parts for the Relics that he did. I remember reading him saying that somewhere. He did not make the necks or the bodies. They were shipped to him from Fender. Also, the one Cunetto Strat that I played had the 9.5" radius, but it had the same tiny frets that the current Time Machines have.

And BoraBora, check your math. Anderson has about what, 15 employees? Figure 10 of those are involved in building and they put out approximately 66 guitars/month (800/year). You say the Fender Custom Shop has 70 employees. Figure that 60 are involved in building (they probably share overhead (like sales, finance and IT) with the rest of Fender). And they do 570 guitars/month. That's 6x the number of employees of Anderson and 9x the number of guitars. Now figure that Fender probably has more automation than Anderson, and then the spread isn't so great anymore.

But I will agree with you that the Fender Custom shop quality and consistency is still not as good as TAs. (I have a Relic Strat and and have played many others, some really good, and some not that good at all).

[Stan Malinowski]

I'm pretty sure that Cunetto only finished the parts for the Relics that he did. I remember reading him saying that somewhere. He did not make the necks or the bodies. They were shipped to him from Fender.

It is true that the the "raw" bodies and necks were made by Fender and shipped to Vince. Vince however did have the right to not use any body or neck which he felt was not up to his standards (he claims he rejected about 1/3 of the parts sent from Fender). Finishing, relicing and setup (including fretwork) was done by Vince.


the one Cunetto Strat that I played had the 9.5" radius, but it had the same tiny frets that the current Time Machines have.

Most, but not all, Cunettos came with the 9.5" radius. There were a few Teles (and even fewer Strats) that came with the Vintage 7.25" radius (mostly maple fretboard models). I've found about an even split between Cunettos (I've played about 12) with the smaller Vintage frets and the bigger :modern frets.

[tom]

just for the record we have 13 employees, 3 do not build, and we do make our own pickups as well. we did 752 in 2004.

[sonsop]

My ’95 Cunetto Nocaster had a 9.5” radius and vintage frets. Small frets don't bother me if the board is flatter. However, I don't love them on the 7.25 neck. I can deal with them, though.

When I took it in for a refret Phil Petillo planed the board to 12” before his frets were installed. My Relic is a sweetheart guitar that has tons of mods but I like it and I think it sounds great. I’ve played new Nocasters that sound great, too. I don’t think Cunetto was blessing the guitars with magic dust. They’ve caused a stir and became sought after because they’re no longer available; such is the fickle obsession of collectables.

[Stan Malinowski]

I don’t think Cunetto was blessing the guitars with magic dust. They’ve caused a stir and became sought after because they’re no longer available; such is the fickle obsession of collectables.

I also don't believe in "magic dust", but one thing that can't be disputed is the sheer production numbers. From 1995 to early 1999 I believe maybe 3000 or so Cunettos were built. If you look at the Fender CS Time Machine numbers this 3000 was surpassed pretty fast. I really have to believe that lower numbers equal better choice of materials (at least in most cases :) ). IMO The Fender CS produces as many Time Machine Relics (Team Build version) as they can get material for which causes comprimises in material selection. I would also have to believe that if one was to spend the $$$ to get a Master Build Relic instead of the common Team Build Relic that the material selection would be top notch as well as construction quality.

[JoeB63]

I also don't believe in "magic dust", but one thing that can't be disputed is the sheer production numbers. From 1995 to early 1999 I believe maybe 3000 or so Cunettos were built. If you look at the Fender CS Time Machine numbers this 3000 was surpassed pretty fast. I really have to believe that lower numbers equal better choice of materials (at least in most cases :) ). IMO The Fender CS produces as many Time Machine Relics (Team Build version) as they can get material for which causes comprimises in material selection. I would also have to believe that if one was to spend the $$$ to get a Master Build Relic instead of the common Team Build Relic that the material selection would be top notch as well as construction quality.

Stan,
I think you logic is flawed here. Fender sent Vince parts from the standard Fender production line. We can probably agree that they ranged from "pretty lousy" to "very good" at best (rather than "great"), and he discarded the worst 1/3 or them, that still leaves a whole range of bodies and necks that were "OK" to "very good" or maybe "good" to "very good." Note the the Cunetto Relics have the same contours as the old USA Reissue '62's and '57's -- in other words, the incorrect contours and headstock shapes -- so that was production-line stuff.

Since the Time Machine bodies and necks are cut differently than the standard USA production line guitars, we might also assume that the current Fender Custom Shop selects the best wood in the shop (or perhaps the 2nd best wood, behind the wood chosen for the Masterbuilts) for the Time Machine models.

Even if you don't make that assumption, I don't think the current Custom Shops selects the worst wood (wood that's equivalent to that which Vince rejected), right??

I think the magic in the Cunetto-era Relics, is that like real '63 Strats or '59 LPs, you just can't get them new anymore. Collector and Internet-driven hype. But I'm glad that you love yours. After all, that's what it's all about. Well, that and the Hokey-Pokey.

[Stan Malinowski]

Even if you don't make that assumption, I don't think the current Custom Shops selects the worst wood (wood that's equivalent to that which Vince rejected), right??

I wasn't saying the CS selects the worst wood. What I was trying to say is with the relatively large number of Time Machine guitars now being produced the wood which would normally be considered "grade A" needs to be mixed with woods of less quality to meet the production runs.

I think that this is an issue with virtually all high quantity guitar manufacturers. The stock of really superb wood is getting smaller and smaller. And we all know that the major manufacturers will not limit the number of guitars they make based on a lack of quality wood.

[JoeB63]

I wasn't saying the CS selects the worst wood. What I was trying to say is with the relatively large number of Time Machine guitars now being produced the wood which would normally be considered "grade A" needs to be mixed with woods of less quality to meet the production runs. .

What evidence do you have of this? This sounds like "faith-based" reasoning. :-)


I think that this is an issue with virtually all high quantity guitar manufacturers. The stock of really superb wood is getting smaller and smaller. And we all know that the major manufacturers will not limit the number of guitars they make based on a lack of quality wood.

But doesn't that imply that we're going to run out of good wood altogther soon (at least until the trees grow back for a while) -- and all manufacturers will be affected, regardless of their volumes. In other words, let's say there's only enough good wood left in the world to make another 10,000 guitars. If PRS and Fender and Gibson grab it all, then there won't be *any* left for TA -- even if they only plan to make 2 guitars/year.

If anything, if there really was a "good wood" shortage, it would have already affected the small, high-quality builders, since they can't settle for anything less and they are competing with the big guys for that scarce good wood. But I've noticed more high-end builders start-up over the past 5 years, not less.

I think the current good wood shortage is not much different the than the gas shortage in the 1970s. Per 1972 thinking, aren't we supposed to be out of gas already?!?

[Stan Malinowski]

What evidence do you have of this? This sounds like "faith-based" reasoning. :-)

No, not "faith-based" reasoning but "common-sense" reasoning. How can a company like Fender be as "picky" as someone like TAG or John Suhr about each piece of wood which comes thru their shop? While the goal of all businesses are to make money some companies (like Fender) are BIG into optimizing their resources. This usually means things like:
- who will sell them the wood they need at the lowest price (sacrifice quality)
- how can we maximize the use of each piece of wood.
and
- how many guitars can we build & ship out the door.


But doesn't that imply that we're going to run out of good wood altogther soon (at least until the trees grow back for a while) -- and all manufacturers will be affected,


If anything, if there really was a "good wood" shortage, it would have already affected the small, high-quality builders, since they can't settle for anything less and they are competing with the big guys for that scarce good wood. But I've noticed more high-end builders start-up over the past 5 years, not less.

I'm not saying there is no "Grade A" wood available. It is (and probably always will be) there for the people who want to pay for it. I would suspect the botique builders pay a bit more per unit for the wood they use. I'm sure the smaller, better builders also evaluate a piece of wood before it is used.

[BoraBora]

Hey JoeB63 & sonsop I realize that comparing Fender's Custom Shop with 70 employees to Anderson's 13 is a little unfair in terms of guitars produce each year. I will certainly agree that the Fender Custom Shop produces some fine guitars. :cool:

My point ultimately is this, I personally believe that with Tom and his company you are going to get a level of passion, commitment, and quality that you simply can not get from one of those "big" guitar companies. I know this because I've been lucky enough to visit the Anderson shop and see the guitars we know and love being built. Aside from Tom's day to day operation of running his business, he is also involved in selecting the pieces of wood that make up the killer quilted tops we love, he goes into the spray paint booth to paint the guitars, and he personally play tests and signs off on each and every Anderson guitar before it leaves the shop. I'm sure he does a lot more, but those are just a few of the things that come to mind.

As I said in my original post, I'm very biased. I just love Anderson guitars, and that I believe is something we can all agree on. Peace & happy playing. :)

[sonsop]

I know you folks dig and love Anderson guitars and I agree that the level of intimacy and compassion that the Anderson Company extends to their customers is very special. No argument from me on all the great people at TA, but let’s not overlook all the great people who work at Fender, too. We’re all good people, brothers and sisters…

I think the digs that people take at F.M.I.C. are often warranted and hold certain merit, however, I think Fender’s original designs and commitment to making instruments accessible to all players, at all levels, is unequaled in the marketplace.

Go guitar shopping for a Stratocaster or Telecaster and for under $600 you can have a professional instrument that will provide many years of service. No joke either - because I work right next to a Guitar Center – I play lots of Fender guitars. And I’m really blown away at some of their models; specifically the Jimmy Vaughan Strat, Muddy Waters Telecaster and Robert Cray Strat. All very fine instruments!

My twelve-year-old nephew is on the prowl for a red Stratocaster – it has to be red – and it has to be lefty. We’ve been checking out some great Fender MIM’s for under $500 with a gig bag. $500! For a lefty guitar? Amazing!

I’m not here to lecture but it strikes me odd that so many players feel compelled to thrash the guitar society created by Fender. I like Fender guitars and I can still recall that sense of arrival I felt the first time I opened the case of my 1964 Stratocaster. And weekly, I witness young kids flying off the wall when their parents bring them into Guitar Center to pick out their first guitar. And it’s usually a Fender. Sweet...

We’re all adults on this page and shootouts are fun but generalizing that the Fender Custom Shop produces inferior guitars without providing any actual facts to establish these truisms is unwarranted.

Best,
Joe

[Son of Anderson]

^ good post.

[Stan Malinowski]

I think Fender’s original designs and commitment to making instruments accessible to all players, at all levels, is unequaled in the marketplace.

There is NO disputing this point, we owe a thanks to Leo for his original Tele and Strat designs, certainly the cornerstone of most guitars produced today.


I play lots of Fender guitars. And I’m really blown away at some of their models; specifically the Jimmy Vaughan Strat, Muddy Waters Telecaster and Robert Cray Strat.

And don't forget the Highway 1 Series of Strats/Teles. I also agree with your point here, in fact, a co-worker asked me the other day what guitar to buy for his kid - I recommended the Highway 1 or a JV Strat.


We’re all adults on this page and shootouts are fun but generalizing that the Fender Custom Shop produces inferior guitars without providing any actual facts to establish these truisms is unwarranted.

Since a person's opinion of a guitar is very subjective, I would find it hard to believe that anyone could present a factual argument to prove that all Time Machine guitars Fender produces are great. I also work near a Fender Custom Shop/Masterbuild dealer and have played more than a few Time Machine guiatrs at lunch over the years. I really have found quite a variation in TM guitars - some were GREAT, others were at best average, but my subjective opinion of each varied. In fact if I didn't already own 2 CS Relics that I love, I would have probably purchased one or two. The BIGGEST varaiation I found was in the resonance of the guitar when played acoustically. Some boomed and I could feel the body vibrations, others produced little in the way of resonance. The second biggest variation was in fretwork. These feelings of quality variation were backed both by my local dealer and a very large CS/MB dealer that is quite well respected.

So basically, I am NOT in a any way against Fender, remember I own 2 that I think are great guitars. I will still stand by my claim that their TM qiuality does vary from guitar to guitar, and that you really need to play a few before the right one pops up. I hope you can see the reasons why I have the opinion I do. My purpose was not to tick anyone off, but merely to offer my observations. My apologies to anyone who feels that are offended by any opinion I have offered.

[sonsop]

Stan!

First, I’d like to say I think you’re a bangin’ guy! When it comes to guitars and amplifiers I suspect we would agree on a whole lot of the same things. I know you have no axe to grind. You’re a good engine, Stan!

I think certain guitars win me over unplugged and certain guitars win me over amplified. I have played acoustically resonant electric guitars that I thought would kill plugged in and didn’t. Lots of guitars are going to sound beefier just by having big frets and higher action. However, I am so guilty of looking for strong vibrations and hearing resonant tones from unplugged electric guitars. It’s just that I don’t let it guide my purchases like I used too.

Peace and Clear Skies,
Joe

[dannopelli]

My first "REAL" guitar was a 1974 Black Strat. I got it in Union City NJ for $335. I still have the receipt, and the warranty card. I was 14 at the time. I bought it with my own money.

I rememeber how cool I felt having a Strat. Just like Clapton.

Then I remember a year or two later reading in some guitar mags, and hearing from musicians, about what crap Fenders were, that the last good year was 1969.

This went on through the 80's and 90's. And to this day folks are still saying the same thing.

So if they suck so bad why do SO MANY big time players use off the rack Fenders. Why is there a 1974 Strat on Ebay right now for over $2200!

My point is, for the money it gets the job done. No it is not a TAG. Thank goodness. And yes you do have to pick through the CS stuff. So what. I just got a 2001 57 Vintage reissue that smokes some of the CS stuff. So what if my MIJ Strat is an excellent workhorse for bang up club gigs. It gets the job done!

Also, be careful what you wish for!

Can you imagine what would happen, with the economy of scale that a large company has, if they produced a product of the same quality as TAG, etc, with the same Customer Service and committment to satisfaction.

Do you think this is not possible? Can any of you say "Lexus?" I used to have one. Best friggin car I EVER had. Best service. I mean once, when I had it in for an oil change, they ran out of loaners. So they drove me to work, 30 miles away. Then they delieved the car to my office before lunch! (Oh yeah and if you recall when Toyota first came too the US in the 70's they were crap too. Be careful what you wish for!)

Unfortunatley the ex got it. My little German sports car, (you know, the ones that used to be considered "quality") that I use only on weekends, has more little nagging problems than I care to mention. Oh yeah and when it is in the shop for service, I drive away in a Buick or Mitsubishi. I get better service at the Nissan dealer for my Maxima. A MUCH better car!

Ok enough ranting! :cool:

[funalij]

Hi guys:

I would like to share my experience in this post, it is no Fender comment, but is similar company.

I personally know the Gibson luthier that plays and tests any Gibson that come to Spain, and he said me (celvira was there) that the quality of new guitars (Gibson in this case) are worse than built too many years ago.

Nobody doubt, there are Fenders, Gibson, etc, that sound great, but if I pay 2.400 euros (about 3K $ now), it is supposed it will be a very good one, and it mustn't be adjusted before dealer sell the guitar, but now it don't happens, the luthier must review every guitar to finish the optimal adjust.

The data is there, more production, a little less quality (I think in every way of life even).

Javier

[michaelomiya]

You’re a good engine, Stan!

Yes, Sir Topham Hatt said you're really quite useful. And don't forget, Responsible and Reliable! But please try not to be so cheeky when you return to the roundhouse!:p :D

[Guitarded]

I still have my first 'lectric - Fender strat - that has been slightly modded cosmetically - and I am attached to that thing! I recently had a custom shop Fender strat that I got for a song that was a beautiful instrument to play!! - maple body... ebony fretboard... awesome guitar that I sold to a friend in order to help finance my first TAG...
That custom strat is his go-to guitar now... he has some awesome instruments collecting dust! But I anticipate wiping his slobber off when he sees my TAG!
Learned a lot from this thread... thanks guys!

[dkaplowitz]

How could it be that a higher end guitar from Fender or Gibson made in '04-'05 could be so much worse than all the models from the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s that are going for so much money on ebay?

I don't really know the history of these companies that well, but I'm sure people were complaining about the late 60s/early 70s strats, teles and LPs just like they are complaining about them now. I understand that these instruments are mass-produced now, but you can't tell me that any Fender or Gibson later than '68 or '69 wasn't also mass-produced. I would think that newer guitars would be a lot better b/c of better tools/technologies in the factories, etc. Also, people have more knowledge of and choice in and access to different types of woods. I am not arguing that they are better, but my logic tells me that it would make sense that the quality of instruments improves with time and knowledge.

Can anyone tell me how wrong I am in assuming one of the higher priced Fenders today is as good as, if not better than some of its predecessors, and why?

Thanks for any info.

Dave

[Stan Malinowski]

Can anyone tell me how wrong I am in assuming one of the higher priced Fenders today is as good as, if not better than some of its predecessors, and why?

One interesting point is that you are comparing todays Custom Shop Fenders with the Production Line Fenders of the past. I would tend to agree that many of the guitars from the CS rival their early production counterparts in quality, tone and playability. To me the only potential advantage the original vintage Fenders would have is the quality of the wood. I have talked to a few luthiers and all seem to agree that the wood supply in the 50's/60s was subsatntailly better than today's supply. Here's a good example: I went to pick up my new Andy last week at Magdons, Jack Gretz showed me a production line Gibson that had a mahoghany body comprised of 5 different pieces of mahghany spliced together. This is very common with the current production line guitar where production technologies and pressures dicatate using every possible piece or scrap of wood.


I would think that newer guitars would be a lot better b/c of better tools/technologies in the factories, etc. Also, people have more knowledge of and choice in and access to different types of woods.

A great point, however this applies to luthiers/comapnies that wish to use technology to improve or maintain quality as production numbers increase. Example: PRS guitars are very consistent in their high quality even as their production numbers increase. Paul uses technology to mantain the quality of the products which is to the the cutomers advantage. However many companies use technology to increase production (in the name of profits) at the expense of quality. Example here: Fender changes trem blocks from steel to zinc, much cheaper to produce, tone suffers. Fender goes to a swimming pool route under the pickguard, cheaper to produce one body for a wide variety of pickup configurations, lowers production cost, and to some, effects tone. The there is the "Thickskin" Fender finish adopted in the late 60s. Very easy to paint (lowers cost), Very durable, but is a true tone sucker. Don't get me wrong, I'm not picking on Fender alone, but many of the large scale manufactures do the same.

But let's not lose sight of the fact that without the early advances and developments that Leo gave us where would the electric guitar be?

[Suriel Zayas]

My first "REAL" guitar was a 1974 Black Strat. I got it in Union City NJ for $335. I still have the receipt, and the warranty card. I was 14 at the time. I bought it with my own money.

was it pastore's or dennis' shop?

[sonsop]

However many companies use technology to increase production (in the name of profits) at the expense of quality. Example here: Fender changes trem blocks from steel to zinc, much cheaper to produce, tone suffers. Fender goes to a swimming pool route under the pickguard, cheaper to produce one body for a wide variety of pickup configurations, lowers production cost, and to some, effects tone.

Although, Don Grosh uses a *swimming pool route* and a zinc block on his Strat-ish guitars, which I think sound phenomenal and {dare I say} warmer and more vintage than many other Strat-ish knock offs.

For whatever it's worth, I think the zinc block softens the tone. Steel doesn't necessarily sound better but it definitely sounds subjectively different. Steel is heavier, also.

[dkaplowitz]

One interesting point is that you are comparing todays Custom Shop Fenders with the Production Line Fenders of the past. I would tend to agree that many of the guitars from the CS rival their early production counterparts in quality, tone and playability. To me the only potential advantage the original vintage Fenders would have is the quality of the wood. I have talked to a few luthiers and all seem to agree that the wood supply in the 50's/60s was subsatntailly better than today's supply. Here's a good example: I went to pick up my new Andy last week at Magdons, Jack Gretz showed me a production line Gibson that had a mahoghany body comprised of 5 different pieces of mahghany spliced together. This is very common with the current production line guitar where production technologies and pressures dicatate using every possible piece or scrap of wood.

Thanks for the reply, Stan. Although it makes sense that quality wood supply is diminishing due to huge consumer demand (and not only for guitars), I didn't realize that they were splicing woods together like that. I'll have to take a closer look at the mahogany back of the SG I bought in December to see if I can tell if it was spliced thus. Do they even splice the Fender CS blocks? Or is it a case of consider it spliced unless otherwise noted.

Anyway, I'm glad I'm investing in Anderson guitars. It seems for the cost to be about the best deal going. Though maybe it's the consumer in me, there's something psychologically comforting about owning an authentic Fender or Gibson. But maybe I should look into vintage units for that psychological comfort.

Cheers,

Dave

[Stan Malinowski]

I didn't realize that they were splicing woods together like that.


Do they even splice the Fender CS blocks? Or is it a case of consider it spliced unless otherwise noted.

Actually the "splicing" of pieces of wood together to make a body is not new. A body made out of a single piece of wood is the exception, rather than the rule, and is typically noted somewhere in the description of the guitar.

Most vintage guitars (Fender and Gibson) typically were 2 piece bodies. Even most high-end guitars today (Anderson, Suhr, PRS, etc) have bodies made of 2 pieces of tonewood spliced together. Unfortunately the use of 3/4 piece bodies is becoming more and more prevelant in production line guitars. Personally (IMO) I don't think there is a problem with 2 piece bodies, but I question the effect on tone when 3/4/5+ pieces of wood are jointed together. The number of levels of discontinuity between all the spliced pices must somehow deteriorate the resonance of the body.

[andersonguy]

just for the record we have 13 employees, 3 do not build, and we do make our own pickups as well. we did 752 in 2004.

Well, Tom..
Im hoping you can step it up this year to 753. More coffee and less breaks! LOL :D

[dannopelli]

was it pastore's or dennis' shop?
Pastore! And Dennis is gone now. But I used to take my Amps to NYC cause I had pretty bad luck with Dennis repairs.