Post by nickwellings on May 17, 2009 19:04:14 GMT -5
Really good pics, bokeh. How does the 2722 perform? I like the refin, too. I have a raspberry HM too, with rosewood neck, and at some point, someone sprayed it silver. Bright sparkly silver. Gues not many people liked the colour after the hair metal days faded. I'm still admiring your pics. Really nice work on the guitar too.
The 2722 works well. It has more mass than than the 2720 or a Floyd so it has a hell of a lot of sustain. It stays in tune and has been trouble free. I clean it and oil it with 3 in 1 about once a year. The pics make it look like it has more wear and tear than it really has.
The paint job is good overall. There are a couple of places where the pink is showing through, but nothing bad. I plan to eventually have it stripped and repainted with one of the available colors from 1988 - probably metallic red or black. Right now I am not too worried about it.
On the pickup - I really like the parallel humbucking mode. The traditional series mode has more distortion and kick, but its also pushes my solid state Ampeg SS-150 into a sort of compressed distortion. The parallel mode gives more definition to palm muted sounds. Overall the Dimarzio Super 3 is just awesome.
that is one sweet hm strat! nice photography too. love the wear on the fretboard. I notice the knobs are not stock. where did you find that 2722? I'd never seen them before but that looks great. nice paintjob too.
To be honest, I am not sure of where the 2722 came from. There is also the outside chance that the model number is a 2750, but I am 99% sure its a 2722. The 22 and 50 were the specific model numbers given to the two Spyder options. All I know is that they are really rare.
My Squier HM2 had a Floyd Rose clone tremolo on it. Knife edges on the mounting plate, lower mass, etc. The other guitarist playing in the band I was in had the Spyder and wanted to trade it for the Floyd on mine. Since I had moved on to playing an 87' Charvel Model 3a as my main and a 68' Les Paul Custom as a backup, I was happy to trade tremolos with him. The Spyder sat virtually unused on the Squier HM2 for years.
I think he got the 2722 from a Peavy Tracer, but he could have bought it new at the music store, or maybe even a pawn shop. This was 1990 or 91 and I really can't remember. I just know he was happy with the Floyd copy he got from me.
When I bought the Strat HM, the original Spyder 2720 needed work so I just swapped them out. I will probably leave them swapped out just to not have to worry about having an allen wrench. I don't plan to sell the Strat HM so I am not that worried about keeping everything completely stock, then again there is nothing else on the Strat that I would change now.
Seriously? Other than paint colors, what would you change? The HM plays every bit as well as my 1997 Fender American Stratocaster and is a lot more versatile. I could go further, the HM has the best parts of my Charvel 3a, American Stratocaster, and Gibson SG all rolled up into 1 guitar.
Cool details on the HM. I agree, such a versatile machine. I imagine the squire would be a bit lame in comparison. I saw a few on ebay but they didn't look all that good. Bokeh, did you buy your HM from Josh in NC?
The name Bokeh is a photography term - for the out of focus part of a picture. Its also the Japanese word for fuzzy, stumbling, and drunk. So take your pick of meanings - I have lived up to them all! Its pronounced Bow-Kuh.
The Squier HM has a slightly more aggressive shape to the body - longer horns and deeper cutaways. The neck and fretboard are actually nice. The frets are not jumbo on the Squier. I think the neck is thinner on the Strat. The Squier neck feel is closer to a larger Gibson neck like a Les Paul. The Squier has exactly the same all-access neck joint but no micro tilt. Now that I have raved about how great the necks on the Squier are, we get to the bad news.
The electronics and pickups on the Squier are a step down from the Strat HM - but not too bad - no microphonics and the humbucker was good. It stayed in tune pretty well. The Squier body is plywood. You can tell they cut a lot of corners. Tuners have no markings. Neck has 5 holes since the 4 are predrilled and the 5th comes from the odd spacing of the 1 screw in the all access neck. Clean tones and body resonance suffer the most - did I mention the Squier was made of plywood? Nice paint though. Overall the Squier is not in the same league as the Strat - but it was a good first guitar.
I am planning to take some pics of how the body of the Strat HM compares to a regular American Stratocaster and the Squier HM.
Yes - picked it up from Josh. Great guy, He was not able to tell me that much about it. He said the paint was on there when he bought it. Outside of some setup fixes and the issues with the trem it was in great shape. I don't know if he was the second owner or if it had been passed around more. I will be holding on to it for a long time.
Ha! I might have guessed because of the pictures you took of your wiring cavity. One had a clear shot of the top of the cavity while the bottom was necessarily out of focus. The next had the bottom half in focus but the top half out of focus. Having said that, I prefer the fuzzy, stumbling and drunk version. haha.
Very interesting info about the Squier HM's. I played a Squier HM3 one time but it had the AANJ that Ibanez "adopted" from Fender on it.
Felony, how did you know this Josh guy he bought the guitar from?!?!!
"Jimi would be playing an HM Strat if he were still alive." Bob @ Genesis Recording Studios.
Felonius knows all! naw, i was trying to buy it too but the bugger wouldnt' return my emails! then when i saw it here, i realised the chances of there being two repainted gunmetal grey/maple hm guitars were pretty slim.