Quality Control / Design Improvements / Cost

Back in the 90s and early 00s when I was young(er) and had much more time to gig a lot and hang out with other musicians,
talking with them about the strenghts of my SG I used to say that I loved my Gibson because was a guitar you need to tame like a horse.
I said it mainly because my guitar was more prone to feedback than others and feedback made the instrument alive to me.

I really meant that and I still do, by the way.

Just like weight. I love les pauls also because they are heavy and I can really feel them on me.

bottom line. there are things I love that are seen as defects to other players. as a consequence improving somenthing might look like making it worse to a different pair of eyes
 
Eagle said:
He numbers the cases and when he brings me stuff we joke at how the numbers just keep getting higheršŸ¤£
Click to expand...
It reminds me of an old bandmate (rip), he was a collector too. He had a spreadsheet of what it was, what case, where it was stacked etc. That crazy SOB!
 
HotRats said:
Back in the 90s and early 00s when I was young(er) and had much more time to gig a lot and hang out with other musicians,
talking with them about the strenghts of my SG I used to say that I loved my Gibson because was a guitar you need to tame like a horse.
I said mainly because my guitar was more prone to feedback than others and feedback made the instrument alive to me.

I really meant that and I still do, by the way.

Just like weight. I love les pauls also because they are heavy and I can really feel them on me.

bottom line. there are things I love that are seen like defects to other players.
Click to expand...
SGs are quite different in many important aspects, particularly the position of the neck is further over to the left than practically anything else.
 
FuzzyAce said:
It reminds me of an old bandmate (rip), he was a collector too. He had a spreadsheet of what it was, what case, where it was stacked etc. That crazy SOB!
Click to expand...
It used to be a lot easier to collect, now everyone thinks they are an expert and everything is too expensive.Not to mention the good stuff has disappeared off the market almost altogether.
 
My preferences have changed over the years as my tastes and playing style changes.

For a long time I hated Gibsons because they were too thick and round, especially on the low strings. I was all about snap and attack and I thought Fenders sounded so much better. I hated humbuckers in general because they sounded too compressed and focused and had no character. (I was playing a lot of country at the time)

Today Iā€™ve found tonal qualities in Gibsons that make them work much better for me and I now love them. My LP had been my primary working guitar ever since I got it 4 years ago. Iā€™ve even learned to like humbuckers
 
FuzzyAce said:
Fender really perfected the bolt-on design. Heck, it was almost perfect out of the gate. What makes that build style so great is the ease in which you can modify, replace parts and maintain for not a ton of cost. If the neck goes kaput, you replace it. If the body breaks, you replace it. That's not simple or cheap to do on a set neck or neck-through design. So from a practicality standpoint, the S and T style guitars are wonderful designs. As Eagle mentioned, what separates the good from great are the details in wood selection and expertise with finishing. Hardware choice and electronics are obviously important too.
Click to expand...
I think the main flaw with Fender is their refusal to take those guitar designs to the modern age. Even their Ultra series are kinda half-assed with the way they do e.g neck heels. It's basically the same as Gibson where they sell the "old thing" even for players who are not looking for vintage accurate specs.

Hell, even Kiesel style slimmer, slightly slanted design on the block shape heel would be a big improvement. I don't notice the heel on my Kiesel AM7 at all even though it is not as contoured as say the Ibanez All-Access Neck Joint.
 
laxu said:
I think the main flaw with Fender is their refusal to take those guitar designs to the modern age. Even their Ultra series are kinda half-assed with the way they do e.g neck heels. It's basically the same as Gibson where they sell the "old thing" even for players who are not looking for vintage accurate specs.

Hell, even Kiesel style slimmer, slightly slanted design on the block shape heel would be a big improvement. I don't notice the heel on my Kiesel AM7 at all even though it is not as contoured as say the Ibanez All-Access Neck Joint.
Click to expand...
Those are fair points for sure. I'd have to go through Fender's Artist guitars to get closer specs to what I like. Ultimately that is a big reason why I choose to go the partscaster route. Other than my time involved, it's cheaper and I get what I want.
As a fan of both Fender and Gibson (I don't want any of them to fail), I'm always open to new designs that make sense... so not a hardcore traditionalist here. Fender's other brands cover a lot more 'modern' territory so good for them for diversifying. Gibson is doing that, just not at the level of Fender yet. But it would still be cool to see their main brand continue making new designs.
 
laxu said:
Even their Ultra series are kinda half-assed with the way they do e.g neck heels.
Click to expand...
Sorry, just curious as to what you dislike about the tapered neck heel on the Ultra Strat. I find it more comfortable than previous Strat(s).

But I am no expert at all, and haven't played (let alone owned) as many guitars as most people here.

I just found it to be a better price than Suhr - but I got mine on special as the local music store was off-loading all their Fenders and haven't restocked. So I may just be defending my purchase!
 
Aelred said:
Sorry, just curious as to what you dislike about the tapered neck heel on the Ultra Strat. I find it more comfortable than previous Strat(s).
Click to expand...
I think it could be done a lot sleeker.

Fender UItra:

Fender-American-Ultra-Tele-Body-15@1400x1050.jpg


Suhr Modern:

productImage


Ibanez AANJ:
latest


While the Fender version does its job - it's better than the block heel they usually use - it could be slimmed down more for even more comfort.
 
Fender finally got it right on the professional 2 (for a Strat) Just the right balance between comfort and function. I have a Suhr Modern and yes it feels comfortable but what is the scallop in the lower cut away for???
Itā€™s completely useless. If you want innovation in a bolt on looks at the Anderson A wedge. It has major advantages. Two machine bolts, a greater area of contact under tension. Self alignment that cannot slip.

Donā€™t forget that the heel plays a vital role in the stability of the neck and overall rigidity. Necks that have no reinforcement other than the truss rod often have problems with the relief bottoming out too high and buzzing in the upper register.
PRS lengthened the heel for this reason and it greatly improved this issue. In fact it eliminated it.
 
Last edited:
Eagle said:
Fender finally got it right on the professional 2 (for a Strat) Just the right balance between comfort and function. I have a Suhr Modern and yes it feels comfortable but what is the scallop in the lower cut away for???
Itā€™s completely useless. If you want innovation in a bolt on looks at the Anderson A wedge. It has major advantages. Two machine bolts, a greater area of contact under tension. Self alignment that cannot slip.
Click to expand...
I agree the scallop is useless. You'd never put your hand over there when playing so I guess it's just for visual flair or weight reduction?

The Anderson neck joint looks very nice.
 
Even in neck through design there is a point where all you do by removing material is undermine the structural integrity required at this most critical point.
Look at the Soloist, three versions;
IMG_3307.jpeg

The original and my favourite for stability and feel.
At the point the neck was a full depth quarter sawn maple centre section running the full length of the body with a scarf joined head.
IMG_3322.jpeg

Version 2 (1990) still full depth maple centre section with scarf head. This adds nothing to playable or comfort.
IMG_3955.jpeg

This is how it is now BUT the centre section is only half depth with an alder piece sandwiched on the back ( and a scarf head) this is no longer quarter sawn and nowhere near as rigid as the original. This version has now added carbon fibre rods to compensate but this is recently and there are a large number without.
Also the truss rods were changed to a hex key when Akai bought the company and no account was taken for the interaction with the truss rod access and the Floyd nut fixing screws. This left one screw less than a mm away from the truss rod access rout. Avoid these guitars. Fender only just recently fixed this issue by replacing the hex key rod with a spoke wheel.
All this to finally get back to the stability of the original and superior design. The original however was dependent on a much more expensive construction.
I am a huge fan of the soloist but I avoid the hex key at the head version because the lock nut just comes loose unless you glue it on.
This is why it took me so many years to find an 80s custom shop original in mint condition with a Floyd at a reasonable price.
IMG_3302.jpeg
 
Big heels that work fantastically well;
The Strat,
Does it really get it the way it???
IMG_2180.jpeg

Ok letā€™s round off that corner . They got that right.
IMG_3512.jpeg

The original Ibanez joint;
Here on the S the body is thinner so it doesnā€™t get in the way at all.
Vigier do this too.

IMG_3621.jpeg

There is no issue with comfort or accessibility on either.
Even the extended version with a tilt is in practice excellent too;
IMG_2879.jpeg

Your hand never gets to the big side even playing ALL the frets.
Now two that are only possible because of a totally different concept of construction;
IMG_3414.jpeg

Even on this nylon strung classical Spanish Fly no heel at all really.
IMG_3850.jpeg

And no wood at all on the Aristides
IMG_2008.jpeg
 
Special mention goes to the guitar that prides itself with ergonomic design and the worst heel shape on anything I own
IMG_3051.jpeg

Can I easily play all the frets? Yes but no thanks to the now slightly improved heel shape.
Now where is that 339 šŸ¤£
 
Eagle said:
Even in neck through design there is a point where all you do by removing material is undermine the structural integrity required at this most critical point.
Look at the Soloist, three versions;
View attachment 30880
The original and my favourite for stability and feel.
At the point the neck was a full depth quarter sawn maple centre section running the full length of the body with a scarf joined head.
View attachment 30881
Version 2 (1990) still full depth maple centre section with scarf head. This adds nothing to playable or comfort.
View attachment 30882
This is how it is now BUT the centre section is only half depth with an alder piece sandwiched on the back ( and a scarf head) this is no longer quarter sawn and nowhere near as rigid as the original. This version has now added carbon fibre rods to compensate but this is recently and there are a large number without.
Also the truss rods were changed to a hex key when Akai bought the company and no account was taken for the interaction with the truss rod access and the Floyd nut fixing screws. This left one screw less than a mm away from the truss rod access rout. Avoid these guitars. Fender only just recently fixed this issue by replacing the hex key rod with a spoke wheel.
All this to finally get back to the stability of the original and superior design. The original however was dependent on a much more expensive construction.
I am a huge fan of the soloist but I avoid the hex key at the head version because the lock nut just comes loose unless you glue it on.
This is why it took me so many years to find an 80s custom shop original in mint condition with a Floyd at a reasonable price.
View attachment 30883
Click to expand...
Does this apply to other Jackson neckthru models from the same eras?

I'm thinking of getting a Jackson RR or King V at some point and am wondering if I need to think about this sort of nonsense.
 
laxu said:
Does this apply to other Jackson neckthru models from the same eras?

I'm thinking of getting a Jackson RR or King V at some point and am wondering if I need to think about this sort of nonsense.
Click to expand...
yes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top