Fender F63S?

[multidon]

Yes, I know. It's a Fender. We have a tendency to dismiss them out of hand. But I am intrigued because they have been recently redesigned. The specs now say carved solid spruce top and solid flame maple back and sides. Nut is bone. MOP inlays on rosewood fret board. Never saw one, so never played one. But an F style with all the right stuff? For 699 street? What am I missing. Yeah, I know it's probably polyurethane finish or something like it. And some may find the head stock ugly, but then again no ear to break off! Just wondered if anyone has seen and played, one with the upgrades, and what they thought.

[multidon]

I am surprised by the lack of response. I guess the serious mandolin community just doesn't even bother with anything that says "Fender" on the headstock? I suppose that's understandable given that there have been some truly miserable plywood examples from them. But if they are trying to make a better instrument with carved solid tops and backs, bone nuts, etc, don't they deserve at least a glance?

My octave mandolin is a Fender. Made in Korea, it is all solid maple and spruce, and quite eerily similar to Trinity College models. My guess, made in the same factory to the same specs as the Korean TC. The quality is certainly as good as the TC models that get rave reviews here. Is it any less so because it says Fender on it? I think not. In the same vein, if the new F style were to the same build quality as, as a "the Loar" or a Kentucky, shouldn't we at least consider it?

[Drew Streip]

I am surprised by the lack of response. I guess the serious mandolin community just doesn't even bother with anything that says "Fender" on the headstock?......In the same vein, if the new F style were to the same build quality as, as a "the Loar" or a Kentucky, shouldn't we at least consider it?

As a guitar player first, it took me some time on this site to understand that Fender and Epiphone, while great for guitarists, were not also so revered by mandolinists.

While I personally appreciate the effort to offer a playable F-style mando, I can see a few problems by looking at the F63S pictures (which presumably they spent some time and money to produce):

• F-holes are rough carved and not sanded -- I can still see splinters
• The A-strings are both strung through the same nut slot
• They advertise it as "THE ORNATE LOOK AND CLASSIC SOUND OF
  CONCERT TONE "A"-STYLE 63S MANDOLIN"

It's a little disheartening to notice those oversights on the website. You can't tell me that sanding the soundholes would have added significantly to the price. Or that whoever strung it up was doing so for the first time ever. Or that fixing the name of the instrument on the site is too much work. (Hey Fender, I'll proofread your website. We can negotiate payment later.)

It's this lack of attention to basic details that says "We don't really care about the instrument, we care about the sale."

In the same price range, we collectively know that The Loar, Michael Kelly, Eastman, Saga, et. al. are more mando-focused. Why gamble?

The distinguishing feature of the Fender is the built-in pickup. I'm sure it's adequate if you need the plug-ability more than the pure acoustic tone. I see this mando as an acquaintance, not family, to the aforementioned brands.

[catmandu2]

I once played a 'Fender' OM equipped with internal p/u: terrible electronics - I wasn't able to get an acceptable sound from it with standard preamp and EQ.

WRT the OP, imo another entry-level model intended to appeal to the increasing numbers of those who want an "F'-style at the lowest cost. I presume Fender wants its share of this market too.

[CWRoyds]

Judging by this video, I think you can do much better elsewhere.
It just doesn't sound that great.
The bass is most lacking, and it is a bit weak and tubby.
Plus that is Sean Watkins playing it, and if he can't make it sound good, then there is a problem.
It actually sounds like he is finding it hard to play.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBpLIA9OW5A

I think you would do much better with a J Bovier, Eastman, Kentucky or a The Loar.
For similar prices, they would almost certainly sound much better.

Personally, I would find a J Bovier F5T.
I have a JB F5 Special, and it is awesome.

I am a Fender guy for Electric guitars, but I would be wary of a Fender mandolin.
Most of the mandolins I have played from companies like Fender, Washburn, etc., have been severely lacking in tone.
I think they just expect to appeal to the guitar crossover guys who just want to strum "Losing My Religion".

[multidon]

Catmandu2- regarding the electronics, in the Fender OM, I have the the sound quality to be acceptable when played through my Fishman Loudbox Artist. However, I only tried them to see if they worked when I bought it. I literally never use them, playing only acoustically. In sound, fit, and finish, I find it to be equivalent to a Trinity College, which I believe it to be with minor changes. I only brought up my OM to make the point that Fender can make a decent imported acoustic instrument if they choose the right factory and use the right design.

CWRoyds- I find it odd they picked Sean Watkins to demonstrate it. Isn't he a guitarist? He does look like he is struggling though. One has to wonder if it's because the instrument is poor quality, or because he has been asked to demonstrate an instrument of hat is not his forte?

Still haven't heard from anyone that actually saw or played one. Interesting how folks are willing to dismiss it based on the brand alone. I guess, once you've made a poor product, there is no such thing as redemption.

[CWRoyds]

CWRoyds- I find it odd they picked Sean Watkins to demonstrate it. Isn't he a guitarist? He does look like he is struggling though. One has to wonder if it's because the instrument is poor quality, or because he has been asked to demonstrate an instrument of hat is not his forte?

Actually, when Nickel Creek started, he was the mandolin player, and Thile played guitar.
They switched at some point when Thile decided he wanted to focus on Mandolin.
So he has been playing Mandolin for a very long time, as well as guitar.
A lot of guys who grew up in Bluegrass can play multiple instruments.
He is a pretty great musician, so I would think he could still bust out some solid mandolin when he wants.

It just looks like the mandolin is not a breeze to play.
Could be the setup.

I just don't think it sounds all that great.
It is lacking in tone.
There are much better options, if you are looking for a mandolin with great tone.

[multidon]

Thanks for the info. Not a bluegrasser so only know about Nickel Creek's lineup from the way it was when they hit big. Thile the guitarist? Difficult to imagine.

As far as tone, I don't think anything really sounds good through a iPad speaker. All of those ubiquitous demo videos are a waste of time IMHO. A Loar wouldn't sound good. As far as the Fender mandolin, I would like to at least look at it and try it. But I have never seen one at a music store. They seem to only be available online AFAIK. Weird. Now, the specs on the "new" A style shows they are still using plywood, those are probably on the level of a Rogue. But the one big thing that piqued my curiosity is that for the F style they specify solid carved maple and spruce. In the pictures the maple is nicely flamed too. Not in the market for one, just curious.

[Drew Streip]

Still haven't heard from anyone that actually saw or played one. Interesting how folks are willing to dismiss it based on the brand alone. I guess, once you've made a poor product, there is no such thing as redemption.

In the world of consumer goods, that's pretty much correct. Look at how Gibson is still treated for some of their duds and "dark years." They had to prove that they could compete in the high-end market. And they made the BEST MANDOLINS EVER. Yet people routinely pick boutique brands that have rarely, if ever, produced a dud.

Like I said, if I can see visual flaws in highly staged photos from one of the world's preeminent instrument manufacturers, that doesn't give me confidence. And it doesn't sound appreciably better (or equal) to this Eastman, with a player of equal skill: https://youtu.be/LhaYvD6yXzo

I write marketing materials for a living. When you combine a bad reputation with current evidence and find fault with both, whose burden is that to resolve?

Another point...if people haven't played them, it's because they aren't in music stores or widely available. Because I will play every mandolin on a wall, even if I know it's a $50 Rogue. That probably means shop owners are acting as gatekeepers, and maybe they don't want inventory that's going to sit on the shelf.

[Drew Streip]

I should add, I don't really have a dog in this fight. I like Fender; a Mexican Strat was my first electric and I still love it. I'm not personally offended by their offering. I just have too many other proven good choices in that price range.

Lots of people took a chance on the $200 MK, and ended up very happy. Same with the $50 Rogue. I bet if somebody offered the Fender for, say, $300, you'd see people risk it to have a backup/festival instrument with built-in electronics. Especially people who like to tinker. And with some tweaking, I'm sure it'd be good enough. At $700, it's a tough blind sell.

I have played the equivalent Epiphone at a local shop and it was a brick. Twice as heavy as anything else on the room, twice the price, and half as resonant.

[catmandu2]

I assume these will be prominent in the 'musician's gear' catalogs - which are essentially electric fodder. As others previously mentioned, I presume the Fender corporation has a market they are targeting and would expect to succeed there. I would expect (based on many additional factors, albeit not first-hand experience with a sample) this unit not to be a remarkable and surprising quality-sounding instrument of its price cohort, but instead another comparable unit among its cohort.

Fwiw, I've played a number of 'Fender' solid wood acoustic instruments - all of which 'looked' perfectly acceptable, but sounded generally typical (for the cohort). We're not talking electrics - that's another subject, and involves plenty of other factors including the same processes that other manufacturers underwent (Conn for example originating in the US rust belt and migrating to Mexico via stops along the way in southern US). Electrics, Leo banjos, i even owned a beautiful nylon-strung in the 80s that Fender was dabbling in that had good sound (though it had structural issues). Currently Fender corp is a giant in especially entry-grade instruments. Most if not all of these look good, but you may be underwhelmed by tonal quality. Playability/set-up capability? Sure. The import market has many such examples.

[catmandu2]

Btw, I have no investment either way. If someone buys one and enjoys it - that's great. And of course maybe I'm wrong in my estimations, and it turns out to be exceptionally good among its cohort - so that would be great too.

[allenhopkins]

Don, don't be surprised at the "lack of response." It's closely related to the fact that "you haven't heard from anyone that actually saw or played one." If this is a new model, there aren't going to be a lot of Cafe-ers who have picked one up at a dealer's and actually tried it out.

I agree that the specs look at least decent. We have a long history of Fender mandolins being fairly ordinary, but this may well be a sign of a new emphasis. However, we are all well aware that Fender mostly focuses on electric instruments. They've usually had a subsidiary line of acoustic guitars and mandolins, and for a brief period, after Fender bought the Salstrom Banjo Co., they featured some decent banjos as well.

My suggestion, impertinent as it may be, is to find a dealer carrying the new Fender mandolin, and see for yourself. I would certainly pick one up and try it, if I happened to be in a store that had one hanging on the wall, but that hasn't happened as of yet.

[multidon]

Not an impertinent suggestion, Allen, but an obvious one. I would try it in person if I could. But I've not seen one in all the places I've gone. And that includes Guitar Centers. You'd think they'd have one, since to them quality is secondary to branding and marketing. I have a local music store that is an authorized Fender dealer, and they carry a good stock of both electric and acoustics in all the various price ranges. But for mandolins, they choose to carry Gold Tone and Savannah. I'm sure they could do carry the Fenders if they wanted to, being an authorized dealer all they would have to do is ask their regional rep. I suppose the fact that they choose not to should tell me something. Maybe there is something to the "gatekeeper" theory. But in the case of Guitar Center, I believe each store manager is basically told what he is going to stock and display by corporate.

[allenhopkins]

...I have a local music store that is an authorized Fender dealer, and they carry a good stock of both electric and acoustics in all the various price ranges. But for mandolins, they choose to carry Gold Tone and Savannah. I'm sure they could do carry the Fenders if they wanted to, being an authorized dealer all they would have to do is ask their regional rep. I suppose the fact that they choose not to should tell me something...

Good points all around. If you have a local Fender dealer, they could, as you state, order one. Perhaps you might ask them, making it clear that you're not committing to buy it without a thorough hands-on test.

I should add to my fairly dismissive discussion of Fender's acoustic history above, that for several years Fender did commission manufacture of the well-respected Fullerton mandolins in Asia. These, during the time they were available, got a lot of "props" here on the Cafe and elsewhere, and the used ones that turn up command respectable prices. So if the new Fender is in the same league, it could well be a decent low-to-mid-price instrument.

There's some tough competition in this price range, from Eastman's 300 series, Loar and Kentucky. Fender would have to step up to the plate to get a share of the market, although they're helped, primarily among buyers newer to the mandolin, by their well-known brand name.

[CES]

I had a Fender FM62SE, blue burst awesomeness, that I bought from Ted Eschliman about 8-9 years ago. It was made before the Rigel legal deal led them to change to the lumpier form. It was set up well, and was perfectly fine as a "plug and play" A/E mandolin. My brother still uses it periodically in a church praise band, and has had no issues with it. Unplugged its tone wasn't the best, but wasn't terrible. I gave it to him when I bought my Silverangel, but if he gave it back I'd probably keep it and use it some at church as well.

That said, my Eastman 315 is a much better sounding instrument, and I got it for significantly less (than the price listed for the 63) on clearance at a big box subsidiary. I've played several of their older F style models (probably been 10-11 years ago) and was unimpressed, but I'd try one of the 63s you mention if I were shopping in that range, and would buy if it was better than the competition. Without being able to try before buying, however, I'd go with an Eastman, Kentucky, Bovier, or Loar from a café sponsor based on my experience.

[Ausdoerrt]

I tried one briefly in a store - at least I'm assuming it's the one, since I didn't bother to look at the model number. A Fender F-style with a big "made in China" sticker on the back.

Wasn't impressed with the sound or the workmanship. As noted above, the f-holes are very rough, and ditto for the scroll (the one I tried didn't even have it fully painted/varnished on the inside of the curve!). And the sound... well, it did make some, but nothing close to my much more reasonably-priced A-style The Loar.

[Ted Eschliman]

Fender dealer weighing in here. According to a Feb/2017 dealery price list update, the F 63S is discontinued. As far as mandolinists disrespecting Fender, quite the contrary. It's more Fender disrespecting the mandolin. I've never been impressed with any of the mandolins we've sold. The aforementioned "lawsuit" FM62SE (Pete Langdell almost got in a fist fight in the Fender NAMM booth over this blatant copy of his Rigel design a decade & 1/2 ago) might be the only exception, in my opinion. Even the "Mandocaster" in it's day failed to get its fully deserved reprisal.

[artguy]

Fender dealer weighing in here. According to a Feb/2017 dealery price list update, the F 63S is discontinued. As far as mandolinists disrespecting Fender, quite the contrary. It's more Fender disrespecting the mandolin. I've never been impressed with any of the mandolins we've sold. The aforementioned "lawsuit" FM62SE (Pete Langdell almost got in a fist fight in the Fender NAMM booth over this blatant copy of his Rigel design a decade & 1/2 ago) might be the only exception, in my opinion. Even the "Mandocaster" in it's day failed to get its fully deserved reprisal.

Hey Ted,

Since you mentioned the FM62SE in your reply, I'm wondering if you have any idea what one of the pre-lawsuit versions would go for these days? I picked up a sunburst model in near mint condition recently, but have no idea of the true value. As you said, it seems to be head and shoulders above just about anything Fender has produced recently, and if I ever decide to sell it, I'd like to have some idea of what it might be worth.

Thanks!

Kurt

[Ted Eschliman]

Kurt, despite these being rare, I don't think there's a significant bump in the value of these instruments. It's more aesthetics than function, although these were fairly decent for their price point in the day. I doubt you'd get more than $900, and as low as half that. I know that's a wide range but for someone who appreciates what these are, perhaps on the high side of that range. I do think they were better than anything they've introduced since.