If the Performer and Professional Jazzmasters...

[Great Yawn]

...had specs closer to the AVRI JM models, but without the jazz circuit, I think more JM lovers would be drawn to these models.

I'm talking about:

Performer with actual JM bridge instead of Strat bridge.
Professional with rosewood neck, and pickup switch in the right place.

Are other people influenced by the above mentioned feautures as well, or am I being a purist?

[601210]

It's the age-old argument of "What makes a Jazzmaster a Jazzmaster?"

With strats and teles it's the body shape, pickups, and bridge.

The thing with Jazzies (and Jags, but I don't want to type "and Jags" every other sentence) is that literally every single person disagrees on what makes a Jazzmaster a Jazzmaster.

For example, I actually really really want a maple fretboard on a JM. I don't care too much about the pickup switch being in the wrong place, but what puts me off on the am-pros is the non-traditional pickups and pots. Many people argue that the TOM is an abomination, while some prefer them. Some people cannot tolerate the repositioned tailpiece. Go back far enough on this forum and you'll find people who think that the newer 9.5" radius is complete heresy. Otherwise I'm all for a stripped down "standard" JM if we can all actually agree on one.

As far as Fender is concerned, it seems like body shape == Jazzmaster. Obviously I'm pulling this out of my ass, but the way I see it, Fender's philosophy with Jazzmasters is that people want Jazzmasters because they look cool, but what they really want are strats and teles.

And IMO the reason why OSG gets really mad whenever Fender pulls another Jazzmaster-shaped-object out of their ass is that while there are mountains of HH, HSH, HSS, HMS, etc Teles and Strats, you could spit into the air and it'll land on a standard Tele or Strat. There's countless "traditional" options.

Much less so for a JM. If you want a traditional JM, you're either paying for the top-of-the-line model or a 60s lacquer, and that's it. Fender's "standard" lines are filled with JMs that in most people's opinion miss the point of an actual JM, and with that there's a tinge of worry that Fender are basically trying to stamp out the identity of JMs.

Personally I don't care how many wonky JSOs Fender releases, I'm sure they've done the market research and I'm sure people outside of OSG love them, but if traditional Jazzmasters become harder to acquire then I'll be pretty salty.

[Tafarel]

I am somewhat in the same boat as 601210. If it is the Jazzmaster shape, then it's a Jazzmaster to me. I have a CS '63, an AVRI '62 and an American Professional. They all sound different from one another and I find the sound of the AP a great changeup to the other two, which sound more similar to one another. It also scratches my strat itch and I have gotten rid of all my strats since acquiring the AP. I don't obsess over pickup selector switches, either, but for me it's an easier triangulation since I rarely play in anything other than the middle position. I know there are great sounds in the other positions, but I love the middle position sound so much that I tailor all my pedals and amp tones around that.

[Ceylon]

^^^
In relation to what's said above I thought it was very revealing that when Fender released the Offset Telecaster that's what it was called, the Offset Telecaster, not the Telemaster or whatever. That tells you right away that the Telecaster is a concept, that can be exported to another platform, i.e. the Jazzmaster body shape, without losing what makes it inherently a Telecaster. There may have been Customs and Deluxes and Thinlines, large-Strat headstocks, neck humbuckers, Bigsby's and B-Benders, the floating vibrato MIJ Contemporary and the Nashville Deluxes, so that you could argue that the only thing that's really inherently Telecaster between all of these is the body shape, but apparently what with the Offset Telecaster and all, what a Telecaster does is iconic enough that body shape is not what it relies on. People just know a Tele.

I think a lot of the people with who the Jazzmaster rose to prominence were fond of or forced to modify their guitars in such a way that the rhythm circuit or the standard rocking bridge or to some extent even the pickups were never fundamental in how the Jazzmaster was projected into public consciousness. But then by that logic at least the vibrato itself would be a constant and you need only to look at Fender to see that it isn't. Maybe in this case the body shape just made more of an impact and got to be more recognisable than the sound and functionality?

EDIT: Weirdly enough there's no such thing as a Telecaster with no neck pickup, it's immediately an Esquire to everybody. You can exchange the neck pickup for any other kind of pickup and still have a Tele but the second you remove it, you've got an Esquire.

[tune_link]

I like that the American Pro series is a little more affordable for an American made model, you can generally find them used for around or right under $1,000. I also love that Mystic Seafoam color on the Jazzmaster. But as much as I'm a sort of "do what you want" type person it does feel really weird to me to see it with a maple fretboard and the switch in that awkward place on the upper horn. I haven't played one so I can't say anything about the pickups one way or another. Maybe some people like em but they don't sound like Jazzmaster pickups from all the videos I've watched demoing them. The Pro Jaguar on the other hand still mostly seems to sound like a Jaguar just with hotter pickups. I have a CIJ Jazzmaster that has Lollars in it and they already sound kind of Strat like. Always wondered how the Michael Frank V-Mods compared to something like that.

[Arthon]

I dont mind the switch placement and i really really like the maple fretbord on the pro.
I dont like the strat trem of the performer. I think it dont balance well the big Jm body. I do like the strat trem on a strat.

[higgsblossom]

I dont like the strat trem of the performer. I think it dont balance well the big Jm body.

Definitely my thought, too. All that extra wood for no practical use?

[daysleeperjeff]

I am somewhat in the same boat as 601210. If it is the Jazzmaster shape, then it's a Jazzmaster to me. I have a CS '63, an AVRI '62 and an American Professional. They all sound different from one another and I find the sound of the AP a great changeup to the other two, which sound more similar to one another. It also scratches my strat itch and I have gotten rid of all my strats since acquiring the AP. I don't obsess over pickup selector switches, either, but for me it's an easier triangulation since I rarely play in anything other than the middle position. I know there are great sounds in the other positions, but I love the middle position sound so much that I tailor all my pedals and amp tones around that.

Agree 100% with this! I got the AMPRO Jazzmaster to get different tones than my other Traditional Jazzmaster and I absolutely love it and the range I get between the two! Maple neck looks fantastic to IMO and the switch placement is never an issue for me.

Nothing on the Performer series Jazzmasters interest me but I’m glad there’s options like this. You can always find a traditional Jazzmaster if you want.

And sorry purists, It’s a Jazzmaster if Fender makes it and calls it one. You don’t have to like it but they determine what a Jazzmaster is.

[Kadenray]

I would like Fender to offer a Jazzmaster with the traditional trem placement, pickup selector in the traditional spot, no rhythm circuit, and actual hot jazzmaster pickups (not strat)

[jesterpunk68]

Nick Reinhart made the American Pro Jazzmaster with a maple neck sound pretty good.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSGlGh9IYFU

I know the pickups are more like strat pickups rather then typical jazzmaster pickups but a pickup swap isnt too hard and the stock pickups sound pretty good the way they are.

Also Chelsea Wolfe made the rosewood American Pro sound good.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRCea043IeY


I want one of them, they seem pretty like pretty good stripped down guitars with some good mods like the mustang style bridge.

[jesterpunk68]

I would like Fender to offer a Jazzmaster with the traditional trem placement, pickup selector in the traditional spot, no rhythm circuit, and actual hot jazzmaster pickups (not strat)

They did that already

[tune_link]

Will vouch for that American Pro bridge. I got one and put it on my partscaster which at this point is basically the American Original 60s Jazzmaster with a Squier neck. It’s got the 9.5 radius and was way cheaper than a Mastery and solved all my bridge issues.

Kinda GASing for the Oly White American Pro Jag at this point. Trying to decide whether to sell off my Q series Jag and get one of those instead.

[zeero9]

As far as Fender is concerned, it seems like body shape == Jazzmaster.

Much less so for a JM. If you want a traditional JM, you're either paying for the top-of-the-line model or a 60s lacquer, and that's it.

Yes, according to Fender, the name Jazzmaster only refers to body shape.

Squier VM, now CV, are cheap traditional options.

[Kadenray]

I would like Fender to offer a Jazzmaster with the traditional trem placement, pickup selector in the traditional spot, no rhythm circuit, and actual hot jazzmaster pickups (not strat)

They did that already

are the pickups hot though?

[kwbarnes]

Hello all,
Interesting subject. I'm not a raving purist but I do have to say that I very much appreciate these different guitar forms for what they are and how they were designed. I like a Tele to sound like a Tele, a Strat to sound like a Strat and a JZM to sound like a JZM. To me there's just something enjoyable about taking what Leo designed and blending its voice with my own.
PICKUPS AND POTS
So in that vein I'm partial to the pickups that were originally intended for the guitar and while some might like a humbucker in a strat or JZM it's not really for me. I'd rather play a guitar that was intended to have humbuckers. A JZM with humbuckers might still look like a JZM - kind of - but it no longer really sounds like one.
JZM WIRING
I use the rhythm circuit very seldom on my JZM but I don't mind it's being there. It's quirky and a bit unusable but that's how it was designed. I do however have a treble bleed on my JZM and appreciate that I don't loose the "chime" when rolling back the tone. I also appreciate that it doesn't change the guitars natural voice.
NECKS
I like rosewood and maple necks. My JZM has rosewood but I played a Mystic Seafoam JZM with a maple neck recently and really liked it. It felt a little different and also sounded a little different but it was still definitely a JZM voice.
BRIDGE & TREM
I like the originals here. The trem is subtle and if the bridge is set up correctly it doesn't jangle. I will admit that I had some bushings made for the bridge posts so the bridge doesn't "float" but I like the threaded saddles. They let me adjust the string spacing a little which I like. I've tried a Mustang bridge and it was ok - but the string spacing thing landed me back at the standard JZM bridge.
MY FIRST GUITAR EVER WAS A JAZZMASTER.
I started playing the guitar in 1965 when I was eight years old. My dad was in the record biz and told me he'd find me the right guitar and amp to learn on. What he brought home was a 1964 Fender Pro Reverb amp and a 1964 custom short scale Jazzmaster. He purchased these at Joos Music In Lynnwood WA. The guitar he was told was a custom order that the customer never picked up - basically a Jaguar scaled Jazzmaster. It was a gem - Daphne blue and I was clueless as to how lucky I was to get such a treasure as my first ever guitar. Of course it eventually went the way of all guitars and was traded away for something unremarkable in the late 1970's. But ever after I've sorely missed having it around. A few years ago my dad passed away and as a tribute I re-made my first ever guitar - my Daphne Blue Jaguar scaled Jazzmaster. It is still my favorite guitar to play. Below is a photo of it - I inscribed it as a tribute and added a sentimental remembrance and our birthdays. Cheers to you Dad!