Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Charvel USA Production Model Series

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rupe
    replied
    Originally posted by Soap View Post
    The feel of the neck was very very close to the original San Dimas if not spot on.
    Statements like this are lost on me. I've played dozens of old Charvels and most of them have necks that feel very different from each other. The pointies were definitely more consistent, but they still had variation as well. Please tell me what makes a guitar feel like an "original San Dimas". The oil finish? It's certainly not the profile as there is no such thing as a "San Dimas profile".

    And I'd like to add myself to the list of those calling out the detractors who are claiming these to be "Fender". By failing to support your assertions, you simply come off looking like a tool. Establish some credibility because at this point your opinion is worthless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Soap
    replied
    Originally posted by ~K~ View Post
    A lot of the purists would tell you that they think those are Fenders too ...
    I understand that and accept and respect their views.
    I'm not a purist in the sense that when a production guitar is made as close as to the specs and materials of the originals as possible, I don't have any negative views and I hold no negative or ill feelings against the purists that do.

    Its all about feel and playability to me.
    When a spec or specs varies from the original by a millimeter or less.
    My fret hand can't feel that close of a difference and I wouldn't know it if it wasn't brought to my attention, because the difference isn't noticable to my hand.

    Its a mind thing to me more than anything else in my view of the purist.
    Before you know your mind will convince no matter how wonderful it plays
    its not the real deal and you won't buy it or have any decent remarks about it.
    Last edited by Soap; 07-17-2008, 02:33 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Newc
    replied
    Reminds me of the griping about "Oh NOES! Now that Fender owns Jackson, they're going to be made in Mexico!"

    Yet the photo on the back of the then-current catalog showed 80% of Jackson employees - the people building the guitars - were Hispanic


    And we're still waiting on the specific differences between these and the old ones that makes these a Fender

    CNC machining? That's kinda like the argument about the v-trem vs Floyd - if they were as readily available in 81 as they are today, they would have used CNCs, just like they would have used Floyds instead of v-trems.

    Leave a comment:


  • ~K~
    replied
    Originally posted by Soap View Post
    Honestly, the 25th anniversary was as close as anyone was gonna get to an original San Dimas, bottom line. As much as the guitars were way over priced still they were jewels. The feel of the neck was very very close to the original San Dimas if not spot on. Played like butter and sounded very nice. I like/ed them so much its the only guitar I'd give a testicle up for.

    A lot of the purists would tell you that they think those are Fenders too ...

    Leave a comment:


  • savage
    replied
    Originally posted by Soap View Post
    Honestly, the 25th anniversary was as close as anyone was gonna get to an original San Dimas, bottom line. As much as the guitars were way over priced still they were jewels. The feel of the neck was very very close to the original San Dimas if not spot on. Played like butter and sounded very nice. I like/ed them so much its the only guitar I'd give a testicle up for.
    Yeah i have heard about them from many
    I had my eye on this one


    and almost pulled the trigger but that starting bid scared me off!

    Leave a comment:


  • Soap
    replied
    Honestly, the 25th anniversary was as close as anyone was gonna get to an original San Dimas, bottom line. As much as the guitars were way over priced still they were jewels. The feel of the neck was very very close to the original San Dimas if not spot on. Played like butter and sounded very nice. I like/ed them so much its the only guitar I'd give a testicle up for.

    With that said, to me and only based on the reviews and comments of people that have played them, I haven't yet.

    For a grand, they seem to be a very good buy and should do really well.
    Aside from that, all the nit pickieness seems to be mostly cosmetic related issues.

    Although, if I had to setup the guitar that would be frustrating indeed.
    If I like the guitar enough, when I buy I insist they set it up at the store/shop
    before bringing it home.

    Setups take time.
    I don't always have the time and at times I just flat out don't want to commit to it.
    In other words, cosmetics aren't a biggie to me having to do a setup is.
    Have the setup done by them at the store you bought it from before you bring it home. That's what the techs are there for.

    Leave a comment:


  • savage
    replied
    Originally posted by gregmarmon View Post
    Bionic,
    as far as i am concerned charvel got it right this time-these guys bitching about not being true charvels are just splitting hairs i play a guitar for the feel and the sound-not the heritage or history. I had a charvel in 86 i loved and sold it because i had a moment of weakness and i have never found a guitar i like as much until i plugged in my new so cal today. i think your sales will justify this guitar line because if people like it and it plays great people will line up to buy them- I know as soon as i have the extra money i will get an sd1 or sd2 as a backup for my so cal which i really love-thanks for making these as i will keep mine forever.
    +1
    I own a original early 81 and i have to treat it like a friggin new born baby,if something happened to it i would freak.
    I play the shit out of it at home but never take it out for live shows.
    the new SD USA will be my #1 workhorse live and i will not have the fears i have with my original getting damaged.
    I considered tracking down another old original but once again i would be worried about something happening to it( these go for $5000 and up
    on average) and it is so much trouble worrying about getting stuck with one of the great fakes out there !
    So as far as i am concerned charvel answered my prayers with these new SD's

    Leave a comment:


  • gregmarmon
    replied
    Bionic,
    as far as i am concerned charvel got it right this time-these guys bitching about not being true charvels are just splitting hairs i play a guitar for the feel and the sound-not the heritage or history. I had a charvel in 86 i loved and sold it because i had a moment of weakness and i have never found a guitar i like as much until i plugged in my new so cal today. i think your sales will justify this guitar line because if people like it and it plays great people will line up to buy them- I know as soon as i have the extra money i will get an sd1 or sd2 as a backup for my so cal which i really love-thanks for making these as i will keep mine forever.

    Leave a comment:


  • savage
    replied
    Originally posted by ejpii View Post
    Maybe you can sell off some of the 50 to the rest of us.




    EJ
    yeah anyone got any fenders they can trade?:ROTF:

    Leave a comment:


  • ejpii
    replied
    Originally posted by Hellraiser6502 View Post

    my current collection of Jacksons includes at least 50 San Dimas made guitars.

    Maybe you can sell off some of the 50 to the rest of us.




    EJ

    Leave a comment:


  • hippietim
    replied
    Originally posted by Hellraiser6502 View Post
    They aren't bad guitars but they are not real Charvels either....but that is what they are being sold as.
    And still you have yet to spell out a single tangible reason why these are not Charvels. Let's have real specifics. Otherwise what you are doing just ends up being ranting.

    Leave a comment:


  • Robert Hendrix
    replied
    It wouldn't be so bad is he could actually list his complaints about the guitar. He's been asked several times to elaborate and all he does is say the same thing.

    Basically, since it's not old and it's not original, it's not Charvel. But he can't tell you why. He's like one of those old codgers you talk to when you were a kid.. "Why, back in my day they made real guitars." "Not these crazy looking things with strings on them." "You didn't have to plug ours in to make them work."

    Leave a comment:


  • savage
    replied
    Originally posted by nhspike View Post
    Meh
    There's an ESP fan in every thread around here lately.
    LOL
    yeah dont that stand for "Extremely Small Penis"

    Leave a comment:


  • nhspike
    replied
    Meh
    There's an ESP fan in every thread around here lately.
    LOL

    Leave a comment:


  • Rich#6
    replied
    How can they sell these cheaper?
    Here is possibilities:
    1. They were making huge profits off the CSs.
    2. quantity - take less profit on each and sell more to make up the diffence. Jackson has select series that used to a lot cheaper a few years ago. If these sell well long before the price goes up.
    3. Don't have the master builders work on them. How much do they have to pay guys like shannon to stay at J/C instead of opening his own shop?
    If Carvin can do it why can't Charvel.
    Most of the work has been done on CNC machines for years. Does it matter who is behind the machine to press go as long as the wood is centered properly?
    I am looking forward to getting one. I have never played an original so I will only be going off of the one I get on its own craftmanship.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X