Charvel for the right reasons?

[Millbrook]

Hi!

I've been hanging around here for a few days now, very cool site! Lots of good info, thanks a lot!

I have been playing a my japanese Les Paul-type copy for almost three years now and would like to have something different for a change. My first idea was to get a Parker Nitefly, but then I stumbled upon the new Charvels and was immediately drawn back to my childhood memories of Steve Vai and Van Halen. I play all kinds of music, rock, soul, jazz, folk and blues. Been heavily into Mogwai and Mastodon lately, but also Joni Mitchell, Pat Metheny and Derek Trucks.

These two guitars are completely different from one another, and they both attract me for totally different reasons. The jazzier side of me wants the Parker and the rocker in me screams for the Charvel. The hard part is that neither one is available in shops here in Helsinki, so I need to make up my mind based on the information I manage to gather from the net. I made a deal with the finnish distributor (the shop is 600 km north from Helsinki), that when they get a San Dimas Style 1 HSS Trans Gold Kandy, I'm the first in the line to get one. The Parker I would probably order from Thomann.

What I doubt about the Charvel is is it versatile enough, the lack of tone knob and the quite hot pickups (I'm used to vintage output stuff), and the neck shape; I know it's thinner and flatter than a 50's style LP neck and I'm ok with that, I just hope it's nowhere near Ibanez wizard or Jackson dinky profile. I know that the Parker neck shape is also quite slim, but there's no question about the versatility with Parker even thought it also has quite hot pickups.

What I dig about the Charvel is the superstrat rock n' roll attitude, Floyd bridge (I've never owned one) and easy playability. Parker has the piezos that I would probably use, but it's very difficult to mod whereas Charvel just begs to be customized. It's also a lot easier to sell for a good price than the Parker if I decide not to keep it.

Ok, sorry about the long post, it turned out to be quite a monologue. If someone wants to share some thought about this I would be more than glad to hear it. It's just very difficult to make up one's mind when you can't just go and play both and then decide.

[wanthairspray]

If you want versatility, maybe the Fly would be best.

To me, my Charvel is an all out, balls to the wall rock machine, made to rock hard. That's what it does, and that's it. It does it very very well indeed. It is a no nonense, tone-beast begging for rock.

Of course it can do more than rock. Last night at a jam nite I used it in a semi-ballad, a cover of "Sunshine of Yer Love" by Cream and a cover of Dio's Holy Diver.

It can do blues too, for sure. But then, most guitars can. However, when you play it it really whispers for you to shred like hell and throw down some Dokken-esque, 80s type riffage. Or it does to me. I use mine in an 80s cover band, so I may be biased towards that.

The neck is pleasingly thin but not aggressively thin like a Wizard. I feels slim, rather than thin. It's a tiny bit like a shaved down Fender neck. I think there's some pictures on here with the neck profile shown.

Can't speak for the Fly of course, as I have never tried one either.

Obviously though, pickups in your HSS Kandy could be changed easily if you find them too hot. I put a 59 Neck and Pearly Gates bridge in mine for a while, for more vintage tones, but it now has the stock pickups back in it.

You are right, in that it begs to be customised. Some people have painted theirs or modded pickguards and pickups or tonal options.

IMO just about any guitar can be made to be versatile, question is, how easily? IMO the Charvel might not like being versatile. However, it has HSS, which to me is a great all round pickup config.

But if your main concern is versatility, you may have to make the hard decision and go with the Parker.

Perhaps other guys on here use their Charvels for slide, blues and country though?

[charvel750]

Well, plenty of cool dudes used Charvels and they weren't metal shredders. Holdsworth, Beck, etc. Any guitar that can do that kind of style though can sound great for less aggressive music. In my San Dimas, I installed a push/pull coil tap. So it can do the nice jangly cleans and single coil tones plus the hard rock stuff.

What is the price range of the Fly? The one with an acoustic/piezo bridge is probably more expensive than the Charvel, and doesn't it feature neck through construction compared to the Charvel's bolt on neck? Just things to compare.

[vondran]

In the Charvel line the SoCal may be more versatile, as you can change pickup configurations and add a tone knob without routing the body. I don't have a parker, but compared to my PRS and other guitars, I get a lot of versitale sounds out of the stock SoCal - I actually had to play a jazz tune and nailed it with the neck pickup with the volume rolled back a bit. That said, the Parker and Charvel are very different guitars, and it would be best to play before you buy if possible.

[fatstrat]

charvel dude! you can easily add a tone knob. the pickups are in the middle class for hot. you can always back them off until they match your current guitars output. the neck is nowhere as thin as an ibanez. it is thick and flat. much more to a les paul than ibanez. the stock so cal pups are the best in my opinion. the tone zone is the most versatile pickup period (my opinion, and many others). I have a pagan gold, white and soon to be red so cal. and I play them more than my other 28 guitars!

[fatstrat]

AND you can always add a piez0 to your charvel! all you need are the new piezo floyd rose saddles, and a little mod. way cheaper and cooler than a parker!

[alanhindle]

You will obviously get biased answers if you go on a board covering either guitar. I have a Charvel San Dimas 2 among several other styles (LP, SG, semi hollow) and would love a Parker Fly too for its contemporary look (not a good reason really).

My advice is to go for the Charvel. If you want vintage tones for bluesy stuff what more could you want than the Seymour Duncan '59 PAF neck pickup. And....it cleans up beautifully, sounding almost Strat like. That JB pickup in the bridge will handle all the rock and metal you can throw at it. If you want to mod to the point of adding extra controls or doing HSS/HSH then the Socal may be a better choice but I don't know what the dimarzios are like for vintage tones.

The Charvel doesn't do that fat creamy tone of a Les Paul or that semi hollow sound but neither will the Parker. Indeed, no one guitar will do everything so just get the Charvel - far cooler IMO.

BTW if you like Gibson '50s necks I'm sure you'll love the promod neck. They both feel more substantial in the hand to me.

[Millbrook]

Thanks for the opinions guys! (Bias was to be expected!)

I'm keeping my Tokai LP so my new thing doesn't need to compete with that, just work in areas where LP is not at it's best. The price is not an issue, Parker Nitefly is around 1250 € and the Charvel maybe 1100 €. Actually there's one used Parker available for maybe 800 €, put it's an older model with passive piezo which isn't very practical. Niteflys are bolt-on guitars with carbon composite necks.

The Parker thing is a whole another story, very cool design and versatile, but you don't get the same kind of rush of childish excitement with them (which is actually very important, I'm not looking for a tool to make saltwater sweet, I just want to be excited about playing again). Actually I think the Parker would be a braver choice, more like a jump to the unknown. But it's also a more mature and nerdy choice, so... (I'm slowly starting to lose my will to live... saltwater... sweetwater...)

The Charvels. Yeah right Beck and Holdsworth played them. I also see the point of the versatility issue, and maybe the SoCal would be a better choice. I just fell in love with the look of the San Dimas Style 1 HSS Trans Gold Kandy, the colour and the pickguard-less top are just beautiful. And yes, the pickups are not overly aggressive, I might actually enjoy the warmer and more fluid sound of hotter pickups for a while. And I would really like to have a Floyd Rose for the first time in my life (been playing +20 years). The neck would probably suit me. And it's cooler to play a Charvel in the Anthrax-tribute band I'm hoping to get together... The tone knob seems to be the only real issue. Need to think. Need to think.

I get to play a Parker this weekend, but the only way to play a Charvel is to take a trip to the north. We'll see. Thanks guys, I'll let you know whatever happens.

[Hellbat]

If you have a drill and can solder, you are 10 minutes away from having a tone knob in a Charvel.

[Kisonen]

Charvels are also available from Thomann and are little cheaper there.

The decision to give only Charvel dealership n Finland to a shop in Oulu could be the worst business choice Fender Scandinavia have made this century. There should be Charvel dealer in Helsinki area where most of the potential customers actually are.

[Millbrook]

Played the Parker yesterday. The neck is good, it's easy to play but not overly thin or flat (compund radius 10-13). The electric sounds are good, the pickups are warm and hot but there's still nice edge to them. It sounds, looks and feels like a super quality instrument.

The not so great things were the body shape, the upper horn was pushing painfully against my ribcage, the piezo system felt more like novelty thing, or at least you need to invest in a more complex system with separate amp (which I'm not sure I'm willing to do) and the extremly thin overal design left me a bit unattracted. The strings are really close to the body which takes some time to get accustomed to. And it had the most horrendous mother-of-toiletseat pickguard which looked like it had escaped from the Bold & the Beautiful set.

So I guess the verdict is kind of 50-50 which is not enough to make the deal. The ultimate price for it would be 1215 €. I still might consider the used option but I guess the new one is out. I also played a few LTD's and one Framus but did not like them. Wish I could play the Charvel somewhere... :think:

[Millbrook]

Kisonen,

you're right about the dealership. The guys in Oulu are nice and all, but it's quite unpractical to have only one shop selling them in a country this big.

[Predator1]

I would think that if you went ahead with the Charvel and it was not to your liking, it would be an easy flip in a country that sounds Charvel starved.

[tonemonster]

how bout buying one of each, but used. that would bring the price down. is that a possibility?

[Millbrook]

Yes, you're right Predator1, no problem selling it if it turns out not to be what I was looking for. And unfortunately no, I can't really justify buying two guitars just because I can't make up my mind. They both are also a bit hard to find here, the second hand market is also non-excistent for both brands.