What's coming next then?

[Rich#6]

You know you were a kid once upon a time and i bet you anything you knew about Fenders and Gibsons and you wanted one too. If you saw a Charvel next to it, you'd just assume it's a knock off. Kids are customers, and you might not care, but the guys at fmic know how to sell their stuff.

No my first guitar I bought from a store that I thought was a fender knock off was a 86 squier. I bought the squier because it looked like a charvel(ala allan holdsworth). The first guitar I thought was a real guitar was an 86 charvel model 6 that I bought in 88. I was dying to have a charvel!

[Fender]

No my first guitar I bought from a store that I thought was a fender knock off was a 86 squier. I bought the squier because it looked like a charvel(ala allan holdsworth). The first guitar I thought was a real guitar was an 86 charvel model 6 that I bought in 88. I was dying to have a charvel!

It looked like a Charvel, which looked like a Fender strat. Therefore, you bought and will always fender strat, but you will go out of your way to make sure it says ''charvel'' on the headstock. The irony in that is that they are now made in the same place lol. You guys crack me up. That 86 charvel was essentially a cheaper soloist or in today's standard an SL3. Except for early models, can any clue me in as to what charvel has actually contributed except a sort of bitch brand name to Jackson during the mid 80's. Again, no bad rep, i think they are great guitars, but they could be wiped out from existance and we could still replace them. SD 1? Fender Strat deluxe with a floyd. Model 2? Dinky pro. Model 6? SL3. and so on. I know i am going to get flammed for this , but i like pushing buttons. I am not trying to insult you guys btw, i respect most of you and value your opinions, thus the purpose of my rebuttle.

[fullmetalguitar]

Dude, you really think a Charvel is the same as a Fender strat except that it says "charvel" on the headstock? Obviously you're a Fender fanboy, but come on man. There are distinct differences. You're just trying to stir things up.

And I'll second what Charvel750 said. I wanted nothing to do with anything Gibson or Fender when I was first learning to play. I bought my first Jackson in the 80s while I was still in high school. It was not cheap and I worked my butt off to save for it.

[pro-fusion]

Cause as far as it goes for anyone else, put it next to a Fender Strat with a floyd on and you have a customer who doesn't give two shits about neck profile, to him they look the same. To those that are trying to buy something new, it's kind of hard to pick when they all look the same. You dig?

I think the strathead Charvels are well-known enough on their own for that not to be a problem. Anyone familiar with '80s metal guitar knows about Charvels. The recent production batches have sold quite well, so obviously *somebody* is out there buying them.

I think you're also missing a key point about what Fender is doing with Charvel. Since the demise of the HM Strat many years ago, Fender has occasionally made a half-assed attempt at putting a metal-oriented Strat in their lineup. Now that they own Charvel, they don't have to do that anymore. I'm pretty sure that the return of Charvels means that you won't see production Fender Strats with Floyds and metal styling anymore. In fact, go and check out the Fender web site right now. Six pages of currently available Stratocaster variants at all price levels--and only a single one with a Floyd. Fenders are now being aimed solely at the traditionalist market. Charvels are for the metal guys. You dig?

[Fender]

I think the strathead Charvels are well-known enough on their own for that not to be a problem. Anyone familiar with '80s metal guitar knows about Charvels. The recent production batches have sold quite well, so obviously *somebody* is out there buying them.

I think you're also missing a key point about what Fender is doing with Charvel. Since the demise of the HM Strat many years ago, Fender has occasionally made a half-assed attempt at putting a metal-oriented Strat in their lineup. Now that they own Charvel, they don't have to do that anymore. I'm pretty sure that the return of Charvels means that you won't see production Fender Strats with Floyds and metal styling anymore. In fact, go and check out the Fender web site right now. Six pages of currently available Stratocaster variants at all price levels--and only a single one with a Floyd. Fenders are now being aimed solely at the traditionalist market. Charvels are for the metal guys. You dig?

That's actually a pretty good response. I remember seeing a local sale for a Heartfield Talon. I guess another one of those failed attempts, that has a surprisingly tight cult-fan based too. I've seen a few HM's too, they were nice aswell, i don't know why they never caught on. When i was starting to play in 2000-2001 , i remember seeing the Fender showmasters. Neckthrough, floyd rose and 24 frets i believe. All the right ingredients. Played one a couple of years later and it was a sweet deal for the price. Again, i still think Charvel's reputation is a lot more overdone than it should be. Maybe Wayne started something of real good repute, but when he backed off a bit it just became a b side to a really good tape, and for a couple of years after that a big mess. I can honestly say i really like the Charvels, but where are they going with it ? dunno, but if theres a chase, how do we cut to it because i bet this hype they are building is going to dissapoint like the 8th batch, unless we get another round of Strats with floyds and slightly different colors than before

[pro-fusion]

Again, i still think Charvel's reputation is a lot more overdone than it should be. Maybe Wayne started something of real good repute, but when he backed off a bit it just became a b side to a really good tape, and for a couple of years after that a big mess. I can honestly say i really like the Charvels, but where are they going with it ? dunno, but if theres a chase, how do we cut to it because i bet this hype they are building is going to dissapoint like the 8th batch, unless we get another round of Strats with floyds and slightly different colors than before

Wayne Charvel had almost nothing to do with it. He sold the company to Grover Jackson before it started turning out finished guitars.

Have you ever actually played an '80s USA Charvel? The necks really are that good. If you started playing 10 years ago, you're probably not old enough to remember the effect that Charvel had on the guitar industry. You have to remember that Fenders were total crap in the late '70s and early '80s, and Charvel came along with better guitars and features that Fender wouldn't touch, such as bigger frets, friendlier neck carves, humbuckers, locking trems, etc. etc. etc. Also, Charvels were custom-made. You could get just about any combination of woods, hardware, and electronics on them. Fender just pumped out the same old guitars year after year, but with decreasing quality. Essentially, Fender's arrogance and conservatism under the CBS ownership *created* the market for Charvels.

I'm really not sure what you're arguing in this thread. Someone who walks into a store looking for a Fender Strat probably isn't going to walk out with a Charvel. But, by the same token, someone who walks into a store looking for a metal-oriented guitar isn't going to walk out with a Fender Strat. But they might walk out with a Charvel. The market timing is right, too. Shred guitars from the '80s are really popular right now with guys who weren't even born then. Maple fretboards are all the rage among metal players, along with wild colors. The all-black thing and the goofy goth shapes are pretty much yesterday's news.

It's not any coincidence that BC Rich has introduced reissue Gunslingers and ST-IIIs, or that Kramer had good success with reissue Pacers and Barettas. That style of hotrod Strat is back in fashion, and FMIC seems to be doing pretty well with the Charvels.

[Rich#6]

Again, i still think Charvel's reputation is a lot more overdone than it should be.

Really???
the most valuable guitar in the world(frankie worth about 1 million) and which many a kramer (5150) and other brands that eddie has bounced to have used its neck shape.
The original Jem guitars from Ibanez were modeled after the green meanie charvel neck profile-since that's ibanez's baby how many do you think they've sold?. How many guitars does ESP sell off of the George lynch Bengals that were originally charvel? I'l stop at just three.
Charvel may have missed the mark years ago by now keeping these artists but its influence runs deep in the guitar word.

[AndyK]

I'm just glad I have my "limited run" Candy Blue SD-1! If Charvel / FMIC decides to make the current San Dimas models in different colors and neck woods, that's cool! As long as the Charvel guitars are still made and made well, I am happy.

I wonder if sometime soon, we can say we own "Pre-Mass Production Production models"??

[dg]

+1 to everything pro-fusion & Rich said, but one good point I think he raised was "where are they going with it?" This comes up often in discussions here & elsewhere. Is Charvel going to stick to the nostalgia market only, or are they going to produce some updated guitars? There are good arguments both ways, and people have strong opinions. Somebody asks for a recessed trem on a few of the pro-mods & somebody else acts like that would be the end of the world. They try a new truss-rod adjustment on a few NAMM guitars & the WD Snakeskin. Some like it, but some say it's hideous and ruins the guitar. Mike puts flaming skulls on a few NAMM pieces and people say those are "Jackson graphics".

It's a tough spot for JCMI. Nobody expects every Jackson fan to love every Jackson model, but the Charvel crowd seems to act like every feature on every guitar has to meet some unwritten standard, or it's not really a Charvel. That's a virtually impossible task, and you run the risk of catering to the lowest common denominator when you try. I personally think it's possible to satisfy the old-school guys with some models and still press ahead & compete head-to-head for new fans in the growing shredder market. I also believe they can do this without too much overlap with the Jackson line. The key is to make sure they're all great guitars at a good value.

[Fender]

Wayne Charvel had almost nothing to do with it. He sold the company to Grover Jackson before it started turning out finished guitars.

Have you ever actually played an '80s USA Charvel? The necks really are that good. If you started playing 10 years ago, you're probably not old enough to remember the effect that Charvel had on the guitar industry. You have to remember that Fenders were total crap in the late '70s and early '80s, and Charvel came along with better guitars and features that Fender wouldn't touch, such as bigger frets, friendlier neck carves, humbuckers, locking trems, etc. etc. etc. Also, Charvels were custom-made. You could get just about any combination of woods, hardware, and electronics on them. Fender just pumped out the same old guitars year after year, but with decreasing quality. Essentially, Fender's arrogance and conservatism under the CBS ownership *created* the market for Charvels.

I'm really not sure what you're arguing in this thread. Someone who walks into a store looking for a Fender Strat probably isn't going to walk out with a Charvel. But, by the same token, someone who walks into a store looking for a metal-oriented guitar isn't going to walk out with a Fender Strat. But they might walk out with a Charvel. The market timing is right, too. Shred guitars from the '80s are really popular right now with guys who weren't even born then. Maple fretboards are all the rage among metal players, along with wild colors. The all-black thing and the goofy goth shapes are pretty much yesterday's news.

It's not any coincidence that BC Rich has introduced reissue Gunslingers and ST-IIIs, or that Kramer had good success with reissue Pacers and Barettas. That style of hotrod Strat is back in fashion, and FMIC seems to be doing pretty well with the Charvels.

That's pretty fair. I had a 76' Fender strat and i had a love hate relationship. The body, in comparison to my 05' USA standard, looked like was done fast and was lumpy looking. The three bolt neck moved around a lot would untune the guitar every 15 minutes. The tuners were pure crap. The bridge was a weird string through/hard tail and had no trem on mine, but then again the Neck had a beautiful feel to it, the pick ups had a crisp bell like tone and it was quite a sexy looking guitar. Black, black pickguard and pups with maple board. I guess you'd want to compare early Charvels to Suhrs from about 3 or 4 years ago or maybe Moser custom shops. People play them and the word is definitely out there, but they are very expensive and not every store will carry them. (nevermind that moser does have an import series that's reasonably affordable :P) I've only put my hands on a non strat head san dimas and a 475. Was close to getting a Model 6 too, but i don't think that these guitars had much with the originals.

[MakeAJazzNoiseHere]

I think anyone who confuses the Strat-head Charvels with a "Strat with a different logo" hasn't actually tried both guitars, or is so inexperienced with guitars that they don't have any basis to judge a guitar.

I've owned a few Strats. I've never really cared for how those necks felt or the high action since I tried a Kramer, that was very similar, except with a flatter-radius neck and a double-locking tremolo that actually stayed in tune, and it already had a bridge humbucker. But, I never really cared much for the Kramers since I tried a Charvel, that had a compound-radius neck, big frets, and still had the humbucker and the double-locking tremolo.

Now I pick up a Strat off the hanger at about any store, and it feels like some kind of guitarist torture device from the 50's. :dunno:

[tonemonster]

Really???
the most valuable guitar in the world(frankie worth about 1 million) and which many a kramer (5150) and other brands that eddie has bounced to have used its neck shape.
The original Jem guitars from Ibanez were modeled after the green meanie charvel neck profile-since that's ibanez's baby how many do you think they've sold?. How many guitars does ESP sell off of the George lynch Bengals that were originally charvel? I'l stop at just three.
Charvel may have missed the mark years ago by now keeping these artists but its influence runs deep in the guitar word.

what Frankie? I thought Eddies Frankie was a strat?

or are you referring to his black/yellow charvel that is buried with dimebag Darrel??

who said that it was worth 1 million dollars?? (and yes, I did do the dr. evil pinky thing there when I said it. well, I said it, then typed it, but really did that dr. evil thing for effect in real life. )

[fordsho90]

+1 to everything pro-fusion & Rich said, but one good point I think he raised was "where are they going with it?" This comes up often in discussions here & elsewhere. Is Charvel going to stick to the nostalgia market only, or are they going to produce some updated guitars? There are good arguments both ways, and people have strong opinions. Somebody asks for a recessed trem on a few of the pro-mods & somebody else acts like that would be the end of the world. They try a new truss-rod adjustment on a few NAMM guitars & the WD Snakeskin. Some like it, but some say it's hideous and ruins the guitar. Mike puts flaming skulls on a few NAMM pieces and people say those are "Jackson graphics".

It's a tough spot for JCMI. Nobody expects every Jackson fan to love every Jackson model, but the Charvel crowd seems to act like every feature on every guitar has to meet some unwritten standard, or it's not really a Charvel. That's a virtually impossible task, and you run the risk of catering to the lowest common denominator when you try. I personally think it's possible to satisfy the old-school guys with some models and still press ahead & compete head-to-head for new fans in the growing shredder market. I also believe they can do this without too much overlap with the Jackson line. The key is to make sure they're all great guitars at a good value.

Well put!!

[Rich#6]

what Frankie? I thought Eddies Frankie was a strat?

I believe it was made from parts from a bin at wayne's shop, and it's value has been estimated that if sold would go for that(not out of line look at how much eric clapton's guitar went for)
and yes we have the black and yellow charvel and the charvel in the unchained video.
Are you trying to argue with me that Eddie didn't play charvels or what neck shape was used for his later guitars? The neck was changed at some point anyway no frankie.

[Fender]

Most expensive guitar was, yet again, another stratocaster. This time signed by the gods of rock and the art of having daily orgies up into their 60's .

“Blackie”, Eric Clapton’s favorite mid-career modified Strat has been surpassed in value and is no longer the most expensive guitar ever, despite that it was bought for $950,000 USD in 2004 by a guitar archaeologist.

The latest most expensive electric guitar in the world dethroned its predecessor at an auction in Doha, Qatar on November 16th, 2005. The Strat was signed by several rock musicians to benefit a tsunami charity, ‘Reach out to Asia’. It was bought one year ago by Qatar’s royal family for a million dollars and donated back to the Asia Program, bringing in $2.7 million USD at the more recent auction, whose attendees included Former President Bill Clinton. Technically, the guitar has generated a total of $3.7 million USD, making it the most expensive guitar yet.
Signees of this expensive electric guitar included Mick Jagger, Keith Richards, Eric Clapton, Brian May, Jimmy Page, David Gilmour, Jeff Beck, Pete Townsend, Mark Knopfler, Ray Davis, Liam Gallagher, Ronnie Wood, Tony Iommi, Angus & Malcolm Young, Paul McCartney, Sting, Ritchie Blackmore, Def Leppard, and Bryan Adams, the coordinator of the project.