Any plans for Maple Boards?

[Hyperfuzz]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

I like maple too......it's better for syrup! [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[shreddermon]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Originally posted by Toby:

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">But I can imagine that it would be difficult to specify a new USA Select Charvel line. Of course, a single hum Strat with vintage trem and maple board would be cool. But maybe, for many players a single hum is not enough, and others prefer Floyds, birdseye necks and rosewood boards. Would it be possible to handle this variety in a USA Select line. [/QUOTE]

Difficult to spec a USA Select line of Charvels? No. Able to accomodate all of the variety you mention? Of course not. But that isn't what was being suggested. The point of USA Selects is a production guitar with a limited range of options. So, for example, USA Charvels would be only one or two model lines (single hum, double hum, all Floyds?), with the only option being color/graphic. Just like the Selects. If you want something outside of that, you must custom order.

Toby, I think you, Kevin and I are basically saying the same thing, just looking at it slightly differently. Kevin and I are not suggesting the USA Select line offer the custom shop's range of options. Just that there could/should be a USA Select-like Charvel line, and at least one model (or a variation of a model, if preferred) should be offered with maple 'boards. [img]graemlins/toast.gif[/img]

[Newc]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

I think Jackson is looking at the relatively poor performance of the import Charvels from last year.
Now, the major problems with those and the main reason they didn't do too great (IMO) are what was mentioned here when they came out - not holding true to the originals.
They should have had white Guitar-shaped logos, 22 frets, rosewood AND maple versions, and most importantly, they should have had lower street prices. You can't sell many new guitars when there are so many more used ones available for less. Yes the old Model models range from $150 to $5-$600 with case for the M5/M6. Yes, you have to compete with that.
I would have really liked to have a Rising Sun Journeyman, but a one-hum Sears headstock v-trem graphic import is worth $400 with case new. Period. You get what you pay for, and you pay for what you get. You get less, you pay less. You pay less, you get less. It's not a manufacturing-driven market (i.e. if you build it, it will sell), it's a consumer-driven market (i.e. if you make what I'll buy, I'll buy it).
The ideas put forth for those Charvels were considered, but I don't see where they were used as extensively as they could have been for a full production line.
So we couldn't get Stratheads - pointies would have been fine. Maple tops had already been done to death, and graphics are certainly do-able on imports (proven a thousand times by other manufacturers, and by Jackson/Charvel in the mid 90's with the Bullseye Strat and Lightning Bolt Star).
The return of popular models such as the Star would have been a great help as well.

A USA Select Charvel line only makes sense if they are NOT modeled after the Jackson Dinky. They have to be full-sized Strat-shape bodies (rounded edges, rounded horns, solid tops) with
the original San Dimas neck profile - not the Jackson Speed Neck, etc etc. They also must be graphic-only, and the line MUST include a Star body.
That was the problem with the Models, IMO - they were Jackson Soloists and Dinkys with a Charvel logo.

Newc

[Chuckracer]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

As usual, Newc hit it right on the nose. Well said.
I disagree on the Graphics only, but thats nit picking.

[mulder1966]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

A USA Select Charvel line only makes sense if they are NOT modeled after the Jackson Dinky. They have to be full-sized Strat-shape bodies (rounded edges, rounded horns, solid tops) with
Exactly!!!!!

[Chuckracer]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

The ideas for the "new" line of Charvels were indeed put forward, but instead of using these ideas, we got left over "San Dimas Reissue" parts, which didn't sell worth a darn the first time around. So no one at Jackson should be all that suprised that they didn't sell the second time around.
Don't blame the market for the poor sales, Jackson.

[shreddermon]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Well, I agree with most of what Newc said, except on a couple of minor points:

- Doing a USA Charvel Dinky is entirely consistent with being true to the original San Dimas-era guitars. There were plenty of Charvel Dinkys back then. That said, it may make more sense to use the full-sized strat shape, mostly to differentiate it from the existing USA Jackson lines. Or maybe do one of each.

- The points about the current import line are mostly valid, especially about being overpriced. However, IMHO the "Sears" headstock helps, not hurts. Again, something different than the current Jackson line. Pointies are very cool, too. But remember, we're a relatively small % of all buyers, and most guitarists aren't hung up on having a "real" strathead, like those of us that J/C junkies that remember when they were actually made. Not to mention that it opens them up to a whole range of (..closed-minded) guitarists who think pointy headstock = stereotypical "metal" guitar, and wouldn't otherwise consider buying them. That said, how the import line is doing sales-wise, probably only McD and a few others really know.

Otherwise, I think it's very hard to draw conclusions about a USA Charvel line from the import line's experience. Sorry, but the market base for each are significantly different. Folks are looking for a USA line that's largely faithful to the original San Dimas specs. The import line does not do that, nor was it intended to do so. IMHO, they're more like an import line of mid-90s SD reissues, with just a little bit more "real" San Dimas vibe thrown in. (Neck profile, rising sun graphic, 1 hum model, etc.)

[Hyperfuzz]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

I definitely agree with Newc and Shreddermon about the new import Charvels being overpriced.

I don't know a whole lot about the different specs and such that they are talking about (perhaps in time) but I'll offer this:

I was in the market for a new guitar a few months ago. Not that my old guitars (that I've kept....and I've had several) are bad.... I just wanted something new and different. This was before I found the JCF, so even though I was fairly up on things, I was in no way as educated as I am now...and, I admit, I still have a lot to learn.

I had heard about the new Charvel line and since I am a "lifelong" J/C fan and the main guitars that I have kept are from that lineage, I thought I'd look into it. I decided that I would go with a Model A Plus Koa. Looked pretty darn cool, I might say. That was, until, the dealer shot the price back to me. [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img] It's funny, because, even at that time, I was thinking "hell, you could get a new USA Soloist or Dinky for that!" And that was my next idea to do!

Be that as it may, about a month later I ran across a Model A Plus, red quilt top, for a more reasonable price. Even the dealer I got it from admitted that they weren't selling well, at least in his experience.

Good thing, because I was starting to seriously look at Ibanez ...JUST KIDDING!!....JUST JOKING!!That is the only part of this story that is NOT true! That part was just a joke, folks! No offense to Ibanez people out there though. [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img]

Anyway, I still have the tag that has the "list" price and the "retail" price and the receipt for what I actually paid for it.

I think I got an ok deal out of it and I do like the guitar. But yeah, I don't know what they were thinking on those prices. Even for the quasi-uninformed. [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

[roodyrocker]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

But don't these same dealers who supposedly dislike stocking maple fretboard Jackson/Charvel guitars have plenty of maple fretboard Fender Strats hanging off their walls? [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]
I prefer Ebony and Rosewood fretboards myself but I still think the buyer should have a choice of Maple in a production guitar.

Rudy

[shreddermon]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Roody, Fender puts a hard finish on their maple fretboards and necks. Since they're not raw oiled wood, they won't get "dirty" as easily.

[Newc]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

The reason I say the Charvels should be graphic-only is there is very little real difference between a Charvel Model series and the current Jackson line. Jackson used to have their own specific, unique backshape - "the flat spot" - but somewhere along the line (with the demise of the Charvel line) Dinkys and Soloists and all the rest (including the RR, judging by my RR1) adopted the more traditional Fender backshape - round. While the roundness of these recent necks varies, they still do not have the Jackson FlatSpot profile like my 1990 Warrior or my mid-90's KV Pro. The Fusion apparently has always had the rounded backshape (judging from my early-to-mid 90's Fusions), but the Dinky and Soloist have largely been the same guitar with two different construction styles (from my limited experience, anyhow).
Keeping the USA Charvel line so unique that it does not give the buyer the chance to say "Well, yeah, but it's just a Charvel-logoed Dinky" is the only way to sell them en-masse.
And pointy-heads DO sell - ESP, Ibanez, Samick, .....
While the traditional Jackson headstock may be associated with "them HairBallers", the Sears/swollen finger/limp pecker headstock is a total skank IMO; I'd only buy one if it can be trimmed down to look more like a Strathead and less like a half-assed blob. Seriously, it looks like someone started to shape it and then stopped. Since Stratheads are out of the question, stick with the Jackson pointy-head and gold guitar-shaped logos. Those are instantly recognizable as Charvel/Jackson, whereas a Strathead can be confused for a Fender, Warmoth, Allparts, old Schecter, old Chandler, or any other parts mutt. The Charvel script logo would look too much like a Jackson copy.
Since the * popular artist's * SD Charvel's were mainly graphic'd anyway (EVH, Eddie Ojeda, Lynch, Warren, etc etc) you may as well stick with those identifiers - all except the EVH stripes thanks to Mr Van Psycho.
Bring back the Heinekin logo, the Snakeskin, the Bullseye, the Bengal Stripes, and the Rising Sun.
Bring back the single-hum, non-recessed-Floyded, maple-boarded wonders that lit the world on fire.
Ebony and rosewood boards were there as well, but there's enough of them from Jackson already.
Keeping certain features standard and unchangeable like maple boards only means you spend less money on materials for each one and devote that money instead to the more custom features like the graphics or hardware.
Alder/Poplar bodies with unfigured maple necks and boards - dirt cheap and full of tone.

Newc

[Tekky]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

I was under the impression that Fender said no to bringing back the full-sized strat-style bodies. Am I wrong??

[shreddermon]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Newc, sorry but I've gotta disagree totally on graphics-only. Again, you'd be limiting the buyer base to metalheads-only. If the aim is to sell guitars, why do that? Unless, of course, it's a limited edition run to just test the waters for something bigger later on down the line. Eventually, you need graphics, plain-janes, and transparents for a full line.

And, yes, of course pointies sell too. I didn't mean to imply that they don't. Love them, too. Just that you potentially open yourself up to a wider market base & sales with also having the psuedo-strathead. And, let's face it, the reason you and many others are so predisposed against that shape is because you've seen it done better (i.e., real Charvel stratheads), and prefer that. But most buyers today don't remember the early 80s Charvels. It doesn't look "ugly" to them because they don't know there used to be a "prettier sister". [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] If Fender won't let Jackson do real stratheads again (...pretty-please, McD? [img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img] ), we'll just have to get over it and move on. IMHO, it's a reasonably nice shape. Just not as nice. I can't think of any other company's pseudo-stratheads that were any better. [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

As to neck shape, one word: Bullseyes. If you ever get the chance to play one, do so. As Yogi said, it's deja vu all over again. [img]graemlins/images/icons/wink.gif[/img] IMHO, that one feature is worth the price of the guitar alone. And, hopefully, they use it for a new USA Charvel line.

Tekky, McD said in another thread that they'll do the full strat shape on custom orders. And the Winter NAMM Charvels had `em, too. (Check OSG's site to see.) Unlike real stratheads, I can't see any reason why they couldn't use `em.

[ June 11, 2003, 10:36 AM: Message edited by: shreddermon ]

[shreddermon]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Doh!. Ignore the double post. The second one is edited, although I mistakenly hit the "quote" button. Took off the quotes, went back to delete the first on, and then got this error message...

"Sorry, the time in which you may edit your message has elapsed."

Admins, WTH is this? There's now a time limit to editing your own messages? And heck, it was only a couple of minutes later. [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]

[ June 11, 2003, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: shreddermon ]

[Tekky]

Re: Any plans for Maple Boards?

Thanks for clearing that up for me shreddermon.