Announcement

**ginsambo** · 02-04-2012, 09:18 AM

This is my take on it:

Quartersawn, all I can say from experience is YES, it is more expensive to produce cuts for necks using this method and YES they are more stable and less prone to twist from extreme temperature and humidity changes and shrink expand more equally, especially when not laquered. However decently dryed flat sawn will almost be as good and as good if it never leaves your living room, but can you guarantee the wood was of sufficiently low moisture content in the first place. This has nothing to do with marketing or folklore, its woodworking fact. That said I've never really had a USA/Japan/Indian/Korean Jackson flat sawn neck twist, well one early '90's Japanese one a very little bit maybe, although many (Expensive) aftermarket neck producers ones have....alot! Perhaps it due to the giant slab of rosewood they use and the fact the neck itself is quite thin in profile?

I think neck through and even set neck sustain being superior is a bit of a myth from experience, I think that more the problem with most production bolt on's is that the body wood is often suspect, which you can't tell always tell under all the paint, especially the case with later fender ones I reckon and many neck through Jacksons. Many, by no means all, of them just don't seem to have much reasonance/sustain when unplugged.

Made in Japan pro mods are definitely much better finish quality and consistently better in quality and utilize better qulaity body wood than the first 2008+ USA run, of which the finish and fit quality, routing etc. and body woods can be...honestly...fairly shocking....but the USA necks are a nicer colour without the added/pre dye to the oil finish and if any luthier stuff, if required, is done to them they are superior....and they also have a Made in U.S.A. logo on them which has a heritage and certainly a psychosymatic effect.

Hell they all go shiny with a weeks use anyhow, but somehow I bond less with the Japan necks which seem mass produced somehow? and more with the USA necks which to me have a more barn door custom tailored feel, again this is probably psychosymatic, false notions of heritage or marketing, or the truth...

Regarding finding the best guitars, my opinion is to find a good Jackson/Charvel neck and mate it to a outsourced custom made body like KNE etc. with custom paint from someone you trust and then put in the pukka hardware and your desired pickups. Always beats factory models hands down, best of both worlds as decent necks are so expensive and really ain't all that to a decent manufacturer's neck and for me its ALL about the neck.

From experience, I would never buy a custom made neck over a good used Jackson/Charvel one which is their strongpoint but their bodies/tone resonance often suck (On factory guitars)I would also prefer bolt on, just so as you can replace the thing. just in case of accidents/incidents, which do happen in reality.Certainly the quality of the 2008+ USA production Charvels is no where near that of the earlier 2005 era reissues, but they are cheaper.

If I had the money I would opt for a custom Charvel or Jackson, made to my specs, but from your average Joe's point of view, for playability and sustain, the best option for a great guitar for the money is what I said....but of course, you ain't gonna get a neckplate or serial # with that. But if its a player and you get it wrong it isn't too expensive to remedy, but the downside is resale will suck.

I guess I am very Image/Brand loyal, I would never try any other brand/style now, simply for the fact that it could an expensive mistake and I know what I like. But the chinese series are putting me off and IMO damaging the 'Heritage' image. But I understand that there is no point of aspiring to have an expensive custom guitar, only to have the company go into receivership three years before you finally snag the money for a custom.

I would prefer my custom made stars over say something like a DST-3, even though it has a mahogany body. There is just something about it.That said for $400-$500 for a painted mahogany body, I am tempted to try a bound Dinky USA neck on there...but how do you rout without damaging the poly clearcoat?

In the world of the Fender Corporate and advertising drives, I think people forget that, originally Charvel were essentially more of a KNE/USACG's kind of company in essence in the first place....which in inself is both kind of funny and ironic I think. Collectors and nostalgia and the original quality has basically created the brand as we know it today.

I still think, even these days, guitar brands are very much like cigarette brands. You know, if you change there are not gonna be as smooth or you might get cancer or something..

..I wonder what other people think.

BTW, My angle is that I don't ever buy for resale value.

Edit: If admin can delete this long winded post after reading I'd be most appreciative.

**Beavis** · 02-04-2012, 10:15 AM

I have just searched 1000 thread titles today in the forum. I have found good 5-6 serious issues with usa made jacksons and really feel sorry for those people. My straight reaction was that wtf im gonna pay over 2k for a guitar that is claimed to be handmade usa stuff and still have serious truss rod, tuning and paint issues just over a year or so. No way, this is not acceptable. I dont pay that 2k for how that awesome neck feels to me. I pay for its overall quality including how much/good they dry my guitar`s wood.

I still wonder why ESP never uses quartersawn (except custom shops), why Ibby usually uses bolt on and why jackson produces their neck thru guitar in that style mentioned in my first post. Moreover, why the hell there are no proven facts for anything we know. Is it too hard to get/make the same guitar one with thru one with bolt-on, or one with 1/4 sawn one with plainsawn and test the rigidity and/or neck stability? No its not hard. It is just easy for companies to make profit out of ppl`s choice that are heavily shaped by the discussions, ads, brands and never proven gossips.

**VitaminG** · 02-04-2012, 10:54 AM

5-6 issues out of 1000 threads? That's a defect rate of 0.5% then? Not too bad.

If that isn't acceptable for you, maybe Jackson guitars just aren't for you.

Interesting premise that Big Guitar Manufacturers are suppressing scientific research into the differences between quartersawn vs. flatsawn maple, which neck construction method yields the most sustain, and the shocking truth that the maple neck of Jackson's neckthru guitars doesn't extend uninterrupted from headstock to bout (although it does prior to being routed for pickups & trem). Who had any idea that such a massive conspiracy was afoot?

for what it's worth - and I'm sure I'm not unique in this regard - my decision to buy a guitar isn't not shaped by any propaganda about dubious construction methods, how long the paint was left to ripen in the can before the guitar was sprayed, the improved sustain of 'loading' the body with metal rods, etc etc etc. It is informed by my gut reaction to how the guitar looks, the sound I get out of it, how it feels in my hands, how well made the guitar appears to be, how well it satisfies my requirements for what I have determined from years of experience is my preferred guitar.

Since you haven't been playing long, maybe you're more susceptible to the charms of the guitar manufacturers' marketing departments. More experienced players are probably less so.

**Nightbat** · 02-04-2012, 10:54 AM

Here's a fun fact: you'll always remember negatives better then positives

Have you searched Gibson, Fender, ESP, Ibanez, etc forums for bad reviews?

There are lemons everywhere, it happens with manufactured products, especially made from organic material

I believe among those threads you've must have come across one discussing the fact that a neck in State 'x' warped, and when it was sold, the new owner in state 'y' had no problems whatsoever

**Argos** · 02-04-2012, 10:58 AM

The thing is, sound involves so much subjective perception, combined with an almost limitless array of variables (down to humidity, your finger size, what sort of paint is on your wall, ad infinitum), that the whole argument is a waste of time. Talking about which construction method or combination of materials produces the best result in a sealed lab is one thing, in practice it's another.

Speaking about necks in particular, USA Jacksons are some of the best in the industry in my opinion. I've had a few Jacksons with puzzlingly shitty work on the rest of the guitar, but the necks are always very well constructed. 90% of the time, lack of tone/sustain/chatter is due to a shitty setup.

Are lots of guitars out there over priced and not built as well as they should be? Sure. Are Jackson's list prices absurd? Definitely. Do I see some amateur fuck ups on the USA made guitars occasionally? Yeah. But the bottom line is that we only have ourselves to blame--if nobody bought $3k+ guitars, prices would come down. It's just like what Grey Goose did with vodka.

But will I keep buying them? Probably. Because I need that blues rock chatter, baby.

**Beavis** · 02-04-2012, 11:21 AM

Originally posted by VitaminG View Post

5-6 issues out of 1000 threads? That's a defect rate of 0.5% then? Not too bad.

If that isn't acceptable for you, maybe Jackson guitars just aren't for you.

Interesting premise that Big Guitar Manufacturers are suppressing scientific research into the differences between quartersawn vs. flatsawn maple, which neck construction method yields the most sustain, and the shocking truth that the maple neck of Jackson's neckthru guitars doesn't extend uninterrupted from headstock to bout (although it does prior to being routed for pickups & trem). Who had any idea that such a massive conspiracy was afoot?

for what it's worth - and I'm sure I'm not unique in this regard - my decision to buy a guitar isn't not shaped by any propaganda about dubious construction methods, how long the paint was left to ripen in the can before the guitar was sprayed, the improved sustain of 'loading' the body with metal rods, etc etc etc. It is informed by my gut reaction to how the guitar looks, the sound I get out of it, how it feels in my hands, how well made the guitar appears to be, how well it satisfies my requirements for what I have determined from years of experience is my preferred guitar.

Since you haven't been playing long, maybe you're more susceptible to the charms of the guitar manufacturers' marketing departments. More experienced players are probably less so.

you dont get what im talking about. Do you know what R&D is ? Yes, research and development. Who wouldnt want companies do a proper research as well as testing various concepts in guitar making? However its not the main idea im stuck with. I dont talk about why they dont do such things which they should, rather im asking why there are no facts every1 agrees on?

I am not here to accept the authority as the truth, I only accept the truth as the only authority. 0.5% dud doesnt disprove the fact that ppl paid over 2k for these guitars . I am not here to shit on jacksons like i said whatever the truth is, i take it. Ive just asked a simple question, no harm intended and therefore no harm is expected so noone need to defend a particular company or their method of doing things. Having said that, I am criticizing jackson for is their poorly made high priced guitars that I have come across in this forum (doesnt mean there are no duds out of this forum. Also ppl would be reluctant to admit they got a lemon considering the money they paid for their guitar).

I am trying to have some empathy here for those who got duds. If you are happy to receive a lemon after paying 2k or more and try to believe shit happens, then what can i say?:think:

**VitaminG** · 02-04-2012, 11:43 AM

R&D? Is that like D&D?

Every guitar manufacturer does R&D. But their goal isn't to find out the one best way of making a guitar. A lot of guitar manufacturers offer bolt-on, setneck & neckthru models. Not just as good, better & best options either, but at all price points. The reason there is no consensus across the guitar community - manufacturers & players alike - is because there is no best way. Advertising often reflects a manufacturers beliefs about what they consider best, which is why their advertising will differ from another builder who believes their way is best. Of course, a lot of advertising is emotive, or will promote something unique about a product in order to create interest.

If you read 5-6 threads where people received dud guitars, I'm sure you saw PLENTY of empathy for their situations. I'm sure there were also plenty of suggestions on ways to address whatever issues they were having, or recommendations to return the guitar to be fixed under warranty. No one here would for a second suggest that it is okay to accept major faults in an instrument that cost $2k.

So for the 5-6 dud guitar threads, how many threads did you count where new Jackson owners were ecstatic with their new guitar? Also what sort of time period did these 5-6 threads occur? Were they all in a week, a month, over several years?

**Ward** · 02-04-2012, 11:51 AM

I'm not sure that any amount of R&D would come up with concrete 'this is better' information.

There are many different options at many different price points. Each method will have pros & cons, different costs, and different opinions about them. Not just with guitars, but with anything. It is all very subjective, and different people like different things. That is why there is such a varied supply, because there is such a varied demand. I don't care what scientific research says about bolt on vs neck through, I will always prefer neck through. Many would say the same about bolt-ons. Neither side is right or wrong, and both sides want to be able to buy the one they want.

There will also always be companies that use a cheaper production method to produce lower priced products as long as there is a market for them. I don't really blame these companies for not saying, 'this method sucks.' Of course they are going to market it as being as good or better. That's how businesses operate and make money, by promoting and standing behind their product. Behringer pedals doesn't have the slogan 'our pedals suck, but you can't afford a quality one', they promote their pedals as being just as good, for half the price. May not be true, but I don't fault them for it. And they sell a lot of pedals, so there is obviously some wisdom behind their method.

**Hellbat** · 02-04-2012, 12:04 PM

If I buy a USA Jackson new and it has a serious issue, I would have it fixed under the lifetime warranty. Luckily neither of my USA Jacksons have any production issues. Well technically my RR1T has one near microscopic piece of black 'fluff' in the clear over the binding. Should I be outraged about poor QC? The thing plays like butter and sounds amazing, I couldn't give a crap about something you can't see from more than 2 feet away. But if god forbid the neck suddenly developed a twist, I know it will be dealt with.

**Beavis** · 02-04-2012, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by VitaminG View Post

Advertising often reflects a manufacturers beliefs about what they consider best, which is why their advertising will differ from another builder who believes their way is best. Of course, a lot of advertising is emotive, or will promote something unique about a product in order to create interest.

Yes, agreed. Look at Dean guitars' slogan: the finest guitars in the world

to them, they`re the best. HOWEVER we know they`re not. It may be for some ppl, but generally speaking they are not.

Originally posted by Ward View Post

I don't care what scientific research says about bolt on vs neck through, I will always prefer neck through. Many would say the same about bolt-ons. Neither side is right or wrong, and both sides want to be able to buy the one they want.

That`s what im talking about. The companies do not want to reveal the fact on sustain, rigidty e.t.c because they supply both models to the market. So there are various demand. But this doesnt mean there is no right or wrong. On a given situation where there are ceteris paribus, there MUST be a fact on sustain, rigidity e.t.c because there still some academic papers pointing out the "truth" (i dont know how reliable their conclusion is).

**Beavis** · 02-04-2012, 12:16 PM

So it seems like it all boils down to a point where the final decision will be made by consumers no matter how many sci-proven facts there are. People will continue to believe what they want to believe. Like some people argued that jacksons are not neck-thru. I believe it is. Semantics all over the place.

**Hellbat** · 02-04-2012, 12:18 PM

I think when it comes to sustain on a guitar the piece(s) of wood used have more to do with it than the inherent design differences between bolt on and neckthrough. Some wood just stucks up the resonant frequencies of the strings at various pitches and you get tone dead zones. It's why some beautiful looking guitars are tone dogs.

If rigidity was the ultimate arbiter of tone and sustain we'd all be playing carbon fiber composite guitars.

**Beavis** · 02-04-2012, 12:21 PM

true that. have you seen parker`s (or steinberger cant recall) carbon fiber composite neck?

**ginsambo** · 02-04-2012, 01:14 PM

And plexiglass bodies...

I wouldn't say Quartersawn is stiffer BTW, just that in all conditions, rain, shine, snow etc. it will bounce back better and be less risk than flatsawn in the woods reaction to temperature and humidity extremes.

Although tru oil is more like a varnish then an oil, I've never seen a manufacturer release a mass produced model with an oiled flatsawn neck.

Announcement

What's fact, what's not and manipulating the public opinion

What's fact, what's not and manipulating the public opinion

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment