Defining Strathead "Mojo" Project (Please Help!)

[shreddermon]

There's a thread in the E-fraid section where Greg Crowe, Jim Shine and others were cool enough to share the dimensions of their older Jackson Kelly bodies, thereby defining the measurements of which version they had. ("King", "Medium", and current "Dinky"-sized bodies.) Cool info. shared with all here.

This got me thinking about asking folks to do the same for their Charvel strathead necks. Old and new. We engage in endless debates about what constitutes the strathead "mojo", why the new Charvel strathead necks do-or-don't feel like the old SD ones, and so on. ...But wouldn't it be cool for all of us to have some baseline measurements by which to define the "mojo"? Admittedly, some of what we call "mojo" is subjective - years of being broken in and worn, grungy fretboards, etc. But at least this will help define the measurements of the objective parts of mojo. Like:

- Neck dimensions at 3rd and 12th frets
- Neck backshape
- Fretboard radius ("radii", if compound? [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img])
- Commonality of the various nut widths, and when during production they were most prevelent.
- etc.

I'm sure this kind of info. won't end our many debates on the releated subjects. But at least it might help narrow their focus to personal preferences and other intangibles, rather than inanely debating things that are actual facts.

Unfortunately, I have no old stratheads of my own with which to contribute. ...Or new ones, for that matter [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] But if you are interested and have the time to take some measurements and post, please do so.

This might make a very nice resource for our community. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[shreddermon]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

(...hears crickets chirping...)

I guess the mojo has nothing to do with the design, specs and execution of the necks, then? It's totally subjective BS? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Chuckracer]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

Yup, there ya go!

I think you can measure necks till your blue in the face (?) but that tells you nothing about how a neck feels, how it plays, how it resonates, what 20 years of oil in the wood feels like. Not to mention I've never played two stratheads that felt the same.
You cannot quantify that neck feel into measurements and "C" or "D" descriptives.

[shreddermon]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

Come on! Do you really believe that, Chuck? I'm not saying the "intangibles" you mention don't mean squat. Yes, the age of the wood, it's broken-in feel, etc. do contribute. They are part of the "mojo" equation. Subjective parts.

But, IMHO, MOST of a neck's desirability comes from its manufacturing design and specs. To say these "tell you nothing about how a neck feels" and to say you can't quantify it into measurements is [img]/images/graemlins/bs.gif[/img] , IMHO.

If that were the case, then FMIC should just start slapping Fender necks on the guitars with Charvel logos. Because - if that were the case - the difference in specs between a Fender neck and a Charvel neck mean nothing, right? [img]/images/graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/nono.gif[/img]

[Chuckracer]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

I agree, the specs are most of it, but measureing the thickness at the third and twelth frets and calling the shape a "C" or whatever isn't telling you anything about what it FEELS like.

[shreddermon]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

Sure it does. It "feels" like a thick C shape, with a flat fretboard radius. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Seriously, I think you and I are just disagreeing about what defines "mojo". To you and perhaps others, mojo is mostly - or only? - the intangibles. To me, that is a smaller part of the equation. The specs and execution are the "meat and potatoes". I guess I just define "mojo" more broadly to mean what I love about Charvel necks vs. others. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Chuckracer]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] Smart ass!

What I'm saying is, how many stratheads have you played?

That's a loaded question, I know, but my point is, unless you had a way to divide the backshape into thousands of points and measure each one of those points down to the ten thousandths, all the way around the circumference of the neck and all the way up and down the neck, only then would hard numbers tell the story of the neck shapes. These neck shapes varied, some quite a bit. There was very little standardization going on. So to measure the thickness of ten different necks at the third and twelth frets, measure the nut width and fret size, and assign a letter description to the backshape...tells not a thing about each neck. You could at best clump groups of necks together, but each neck in those groups would still feel different.

I'm not talking about Mojo, cause we're not talking neckplates here, and everybody KNOWS that's where the Mojo lives...!

[shreddermon]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

Yep. Point taken, and agreed. No way we're going to laserscan each and every SD strathead neck. I was just hoping to get us "in the ballpark".

And mojo is in the neckplates? What does that say about prepros? Are they "pre-jos" [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

We now return you to our regularly scheduled program: a wonderful instrumental provided by crickets. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Chuckracer]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

Laserscan. I typed two sentences of gibberish cause I couldn't think of that word.
[img]/images/graemlins/idea2.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

[RR05xx]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help!)

[img]/images/graemlins/popcorn.gif[/img]

I think the "mojo" has a lot to do age, condition and authenticy for most of the people out there (read: collectors) who care enough about the pedegre of a guitar. If it did not come out of the right place during the right period of time and retain the right parts then it is just another guitar. There are a few guys out there making guitars to the "correct" specs and while the guitars may be "cool", most will say the "mojo" is not there. Should be interesting to see where things stand in 20 years for some of these guitars (I am purposely not naming names because I do not think that would be in the spirit of this thread, even if the converation is kinda limited at the moment).

[MHGOLDTOP]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help

there is also some mental mojo involved....my stratheads put me in the right frame of mind...and the mojo of my main charvel...a pointy...i did it all myself for the past 21 years...nothing like your own mojo!!

[Jim Shine]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help

There is also something great about old wood from trees way older than these United States.

[kmanick]

Re: Defining Strathead \"Mojo\" Project (Please Help

I agree with the age having to do something with "mojo" I've got an 83 SD Bengal and I just scored that Jap bomber GMW off of the Bay last Friday. Well the neck shapes and the feel of the necks are very close ,yet because the GMW isn't broken in at all the mojo isn't there yet. I can feel it with the bengal, it's like an old pair of shoes that fit perfect. The GMW will get there, I can feel it, it's just not there yet, and it will be a different mojo because I'm the one breaking it in and aging it. it will a more personal mojo
just my 2 cents [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]