Starfires: Differences between 60s, modern & DeArmond issues

[chrisb]

OK, here's my situation:
For a few years I've had a 90s DeArmond Starfire Special with single-coils which I love for many reasons, but find to be slightly "dead-solid" sounding, which I assume to be a product of the less-than-stellar wood, heavy build & thick varnish. Tuners and pots have been upgraded to great effect.

I just got a 64 SFII with DeArmond humbuckers, which is great, but sounds like a totally different guitar: much more acoustic and thinner overall, with less top & bottom end. I'm not really sure it's what I was looking for, though I definitely like it.

What I'm wondering is: What are the differences between the vintage, Westerly & DeArmond versions of this guitar?
Maybe what I want is actually a Westerly version?
Maybe I should spend a little time & money to fix up the DeArmond? It does seem to be about 90% of the tone I want and it plays great!
Any opinions/advice are greatly welcome!!!
Thanks,
Chris

 

[Walter Broes]

Hey Chris - surely you mean DeArmond single coils or Guild humbuckers?

I don't have much experience with the DeArmond branded Starfires, for the sort of guitars I'm into I was dissappointed to see they had a center-block when they came out.

My '61 Starfire

is a bright guitar, especially on the lead pickup, but I wouldn't describe it as thin sounding or lacking in bass content, but it is twangy and fairly aggressive in the high mids.
Is your "new" Starfire really all that different from the T-100?

the chronology on these is roughly DeArmond single-coils on the first few years, small Guild humbuckers after, larger Guild humbuckers around the time of the move to Westerly in the late 60's, up until the last ones made in Corona.

The one thing I don't like, but that's cosmetic, about the Westerly ones is that the body silhouette changed pretty drastically - the Westerly SF's are not nearly as goodlooking to me.
(funny, the DeArmond guitars did have the "hoboken" earlier SF II and III body shape!)

 

[matsickma]

I owned a T100D with Franz PUPs a while back but had difficulty with feedback control. I came to the conclusion that a semihollow guitar with Franz PUPs would be the ticket. Unfortunatly there were no Guild models I could think of with this configuration or that could be modified.

So, with good fortune I picked up a set of Franz PUPs, wax potted them and swapped them with the the DeA 2K's out of the first DeArmond guitar I ever purchased.

I am very pleased (although I still need to uprade the Pots and caps). The Frans pups barely snug up under the strings when surface mounted on the body. Billydelight once advise that the bridge PUP can really growl when it is very close to the strings. Well indeed this baby can growl and low frequency howling feedback is non existant. :twisted:

M

p.s.

Walter, it sounds like the DeA T400 would be a better DeA choice for you. It is a thin 17 inch lower bout body guitar that is all hollow. Also, you are very correct about the DeA Starfire body matching the older Guild Starfire body shape. I compared this DeA to the Starfire III Deluxe I picked up from Billy and they are very close in shape and size.

 

[matsickma]

Oh, One other thing. The Digsbys on the DeA puts excessive tension on the strings over the bridge. To lessen this I run the string over the roller bar instead of under it. There is sufficient angle over the bridge this way that still keeps the strings in the bridge saddle. It was a subtle but very useful improvement.

M

 

[Guildmark]

Thanks for pointing that out, matsickma. I was just looking at one HERE on eBay that is strung in the usual manner. I wouldn't have realized there was an option.

 

[matsickma]

Hey Guildnark,

I don't know if I would call this an option but I didn't like the constant string "pinging" on the nut so I tried this and it worked. I also changed the bridge from a stock kniefedge tuneamatic to a roller tunematic off of a M77T I had years back.

The combination work well. If you are hard on picking your strings you may need to carve the saddles on the kniefedge tunematic a little deeper to hold the strings in the groove. You will have to tweek your guitar for your own style.

M

 

[billydlight]

Wow that DA Starfire with Franz's looks really cool!!

I bet it sounds great!

 

[chrisb]

In the futile hope that someone will find this helpful, I'll now answer my own questions, since I have all 3 Starfires on hand.

1) The 64 sounds the most acoustic and a little thinner (not thin). It also has the most "issues." And it does sound quite different (less acoustic & more meaty) than the T-100.

2) The DA is semi-hollow (unlike the other 2) with a tune-o-matic bridge and is much more electric sounding. The craftsmanship is very good, though not up to either of the US made ones. It's got much more wood and much more varnish. It does play the best & has the lowest action, and the pickups are fantastic. I'll miss it a lot.

3) The Westerly is the best for me, even though the body shape is slightly different (more curvy). It's equal to or better than the 64 in terms of craftsmanship (only Rickenbackers are better made) and has some design features that make it easier to adjust. It's not overbuilt or over-varnished and is very resonant & lively. The tone is warm but crisp (the aluminum bridge has been replaced with an ebony one of good quality) and it's got a lot of output. Someday I hope to hear it with DA 2K pups, but the buckers are great too (wanna let yours go, matsickma?). Easily my 2nd favorite guitar at the moment!

So there we go, in a nutshell. All 3 are great guitars, and now I know which one's best for me. Thanks to all who pitched in!

 

[x-180]

You guys are making me miss the ghost(s) of 'Starfires past'... II, III, IV(i), IV(ii) & DeA IV...

my current IV(iii) is a late 90's Westerly that I really like but (sadly) rarely play - of the ones I've owned, the '99 DeA Starfire was the most fun merely because a) I was less afraid of ding-ing it, b) it never met a Beatle song it didn't like, and c) it had the harp tailpiece that my newer Guild doesn't(*). I've read mixed comments concerning the Goldtones, but I was favorably impressed with them.

IMHO those late 90's DeArmonds were a heck of a value... both the Starfire variants and the jazz boxes they put out...

Matsickma - that DeArmond is ultra-sweet. Hats off.
X-180

(*) when I was a kid in my early 20's, I thought the harp tailpiece was cheesy, but for some reason 30+ years later, I'm bummed that my newer Starfire doesn't have one - despite the more stable intonation and tuning. Also, I really wish they'd never discontinued the block inlays and master volume control of the 70's era SF's. For that matter, I wish they'd never discontinued the Starfire IV!