What new models would you like from Jackson ?

[loki: god of chaos]

very unfortunately jacksons popularity has kinda tanked with this dumbass inage of these crappy modern "metal" bands. ive heard our local musicians say jacksons are too "flashy and poseresque". but im not worried, this dumbass phase of "metal" will pass like hair metal in the 80s * no offense to the guys whjo like hair metal bands.

[loki: god of chaos]

i wish we saw more vs and kellys and shit in modern metal.. say does anyone even endorse the kelly anymore?

[Nagash02]

I would endorse the kellys if I had the cash ^^, I'd get myself one in EDS, one in Gold and one in Trans Red ftw

[Confuse-a-Cat]

Do you understand the cost of bound ebony fretboards?

Binding... is tedious... and costly. To offer Ebony and binding on a five-series import is ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous? The SLSMG and SLS3 already have bound ebony fretboards, and they're in the same price bracket as the 5 series guitars, so it's obviously not prohibitively expensive to put it on guitars in that price range.

[wilkinsi]

Production USA Warrior bass

[Grim]

Why is it ridiculous? The SLSMG and SLS3 already have bound ebony fretboards, and they're in the same price bracket as the 5 series guitars, so it's obviously not prohibitively expensive to put it on guitars in that price range.

There is a difference... namely shape, these are TOM, etc etc etc.

[Confuse-a-Cat]

There is a difference... namely shape, these are TOM, etc etc etc.

True, but I don't think the extra expenses for the Floyd Rose bridges and larger body shapes would add up to a huge amount, not at trade prices anyway. (I'm assuming here, so sorry if i'm mistaken).

Anyway, even taking that into account I'm sure most Jackson fans would be willing to pay a little more for a 5 series axe with a bound ebony fretboard than they would for the current unbound rosewood models. I would. Personally I don't even really mind the rosewood, it's the lack of binding that annoys me.

The problem I see is that with the current pricing and the unbound rosewood, i'd be much more likely to say to myself "screw the 5 series, I'll save a bit more for a USA". Of course anything which makes people buy a USA instead of a Pro is a 'Good Thing' as far as FMIC are concerned.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I'm betraying my own preferences. I really should be arguing for all the Pro series to replace their rosewood with maple!

[wilkinsi]

How about this then - we already have the Rhoads and Dinky with maple boards - how about the rest of them? I'd like a Warrior in snow white with maple board for example.

[pro-fusion]

Jackson/Charvel is selling next to nothing, while the other "metal" guitar brands are making a killing.

I wasn't aware we had FMIC's chief financial officer participating on the board.

Neither you nor I have any way of knowing the relative sales of these brands, nor the amount of profit they are actually generating for their parent companies.

Having said that, I figure it's only a matter of time before FMIC shifts production of the cheapo Jacksons away from Japan. You want your low-cost guitar to have an ebony fretboard and fancy appointments? Fine. It's going to be made in China from extremely green wood, and maybe every fourth or fifth one will be usable.

I just walked into Guitar Center today for the first time in months. There was a forest of extremely cheap Ibanez/LTD/Schecter guitars hanging on the wall. All of the ones I tried sucked, to put it plainly. And, lo and behold, there was not a single Japanese Ibanez, Japanese ESP, or USA Schecter to be found. All of those out-of-tune 13-year-olds I see every time I go to GC are going to be mighty disappointed when they finally learn to play well and discover that GC doesn't carry pro caliber metal guitars anymore, apart from whatever shows up in the used section.

[Confuse-a-Cat]

Having said that, I figure it's only a matter of time before FMIC shifts production of the cheapo Jacksons away from Japan. You want your low-cost guitar to have an ebony fretboard and fancy appointments? Fine. It's going to be made in China from extremely green wood, and maybe every fourth or fifth one will be usable.

The point I'm trying to make is about the neckthrough Pro series models, which are hardly what I'd call low cost guitars since they sell for over $1000. Okay, not high end either, but not cheap. However I reckon the unbound fretboards make them look cheap. I don't even care about the ebony like most people seem to. Rosewood is fine, just please put some simple ivoroid binding on it! I don't understand why they put binding on the Pro and MG Dinkys and not on the neckthrough models which sell for far more.

But yes, your point is a good one. If people want too many features production would have to move to stay in the same price range, and I'm sure none of us here want that.

How about this then - we already have the Rhoads and Dinky with maple boards - how about the rest of them? I'd like a Warrior in snow white with maple board for example.

That would be fantastic. I'd love to collect white Jacksons with the maple boards. I've got a DK2M, and I would seriously like a white/black bevels RR24M if it weren't for the fact that it only has one pickup, and that's an EMG (where I'd rather have passives).

So, Jackson, SL3M, KV5M, KE5M please.
Plus introduce a WR5 and do a maple version of that one too.

And please, please, no more white guitars with black headstocks. Matching headstocks are far better looking, as is the maple headstock on the DK2M.

[Nagash02]

Confuse-a-cat : I just read your message and then I looked at your signature...I must say I LOL'd ^^

But indeed Jackson needs more maple, as they need more mahogany

[Grim]

True, but I don't think the extra expenses for the Floyd Rose bridges and larger body shapes would add up to a huge amount, not at trade prices anyway. (I'm assuming here, so sorry if i'm mistaken).

Anyway, even taking that into account I'm sure most Jackson fans would be willing to pay a little more for a 5 series axe with a bound ebony fretboard than they would for the current unbound rosewood models. I would. Personally I don't even really mind the rosewood, it's the lack of binding that annoys me.

The problem I see is that with the current pricing and the unbound rosewood, i'd be much more likely to say to myself "screw the 5 series, I'll save a bit more for a USA". Of course anything which makes people buy a USA instead of a Pro is a 'Good Thing' as far as FMIC are concerned.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I'm betraying my own preferences. I really should be arguing for all the Pro series to replace their rosewood with maple!

I dislike Rosewood too. Maple would be nice. It's actually the cheapest to do, too.

[alex9152]

Having said that, I figure it's only a matter of time before FMIC shifts production of the cheapo Jacksons away from Japan. You want your low-cost guitar to have an ebony fretboard and fancy appointments? Fine. It's going to be made in China from extremely green wood, and maybe every fourth or fifth one will be usable.

Geez, when you put it that way, I take back what I said. But, the RR24 and SLS 3 and MG have ebony and are in the same price range. I'll be willing to forgo binding.

As for a bolt-on lower-end USA line, might as well make that maple only.

[veniculum]

I wasn't aware we had FMIC's chief financial officer participating on the board.

Well...I take it that you're saying that with a bit of sarcasm...but I'll respond anyway: Give me one industry that produces products for the public and is not subject to criticism...whether it be the media, online forums, blogs, etc. When someone in the automotive press writes a negative review of a car, is it assumed that he/she claims they have what it takes to be the CEO of the company? When Guitar world editors write a review of a new guitar and it's not necessarily positive, does he get bashed and told he's trying to take over the company. I could go on. That's a really silly statement. This is a FORUM...isn't the very definition of a forum an outlet for people to discuss an area of interest, and share their opinions? Well...what I've been saying is my opinion. That doesn't in any imply that I assume I can head a company like FMIC. I'm simply stating my opinion in terms of their marketing...of Jackson guitars in particular.

Neither you nor I have any way of knowing the relative sales of these brands, nor the amount of profit they are actually generating for their parent companies.

I don't know the sales numbers of Jackson off the top of my head...but I most certainly do have a way of finding out their sales number if I really wanted to research that information. FMIC is a publicly owned/traded corporation...their sales numbers are certainly obtainable if so desired. Despite this, is this really necessary? I can walk into any music store, chain or mom-and-pop...and I see lots of Ibanez, Schecter, LTD/ESP (as well as the classic brands - Fender, Gibson, Gretch, etc)...but i see very few Jackson/Charvel. I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jackson's numbers don't touch that of the other "metal" style guitars...even if you factor in online sales.

Having said that, I figure it's only a matter of time before FMIC shifts production of the cheapo Jacksons away from Japan. You want your low-cost guitar to have an ebony fretboard and fancy appointments? Fine. It's going to be made in China from extremely green wood, and maybe every fourth or fifth one will be usable.

Umm...last I checked, 90 percent of Jacksons made in the Japanese factory are of a higher quality...and have been so for close to 20 years. Current JS series guitars are made in India...before that, it was Korea. Regardless, I could really care less where they're made or of what quality they are...that's not my point. My point is getting these cheapos in the stores, for the young kids...beginners. Something to start them on...just like the other brands...who are also building their bottom of the barrel models in China, India, Korea, Indonesia, etc.

I just walked into Guitar Center today for the first time in months. There was a forest of extremely cheap Ibanez/LTD/Schecter guitars hanging on the wall. All of the ones I tried sucked, to put it plainly. And, lo and behold, there was not a single Japanese Ibanez, Japanese ESP, or USA Schecter to be found. All of those out-of-tune 13-year-olds I see every time I go to GC are going to be mighty disappointed when they finally learn to play well and discover that GC doesn't carry pro caliber metal guitars anymore, apart from whatever shows up in the used section.

If you're trying out those (cheaper) guitars, I have to assume that we are just coming from a different head space....and I mean no disrespect by saying that. It's just that I am at a point in my life where it wouldn't even occur to me to pick up one of those guitars. I have absolutely zero interest in a 200 dollar guitar...of any brand. BUT...when I was 13 or 14, then you bet I would be trying those out...because in those days, it was all I could afford...and I probably wouldn't have known the difference between a 100 dollar guitar or a 1000 dollar guitar anyway.

Regardless of my own interests/experience...when was it ever different than it is now? I remember very clearly walking into Sam Ash in 1989 and browsing the wall-o-shit....guitar after guitar costing 100-200 bucks...all of which sucked...played terrible, sounded terrible. If anything, those guitars back then were even worse. At the time, they were all made in Japan...they didn't have the kind of technology they have today. Guitar quality was terrible! Case in point...I had a Japanese Kramer Stryker that might have well just been called the Kramer Shit Box. It was that bad! If you wanted something that sounded and played good, you really did have to pay quite a bit more than you do nowadays. There were very few sub-$1000 guitars in those days that were worth even picking up. But to a kid who is 13 years old, you play what you can afford....which is a cheapy 150 dollar guitar..and that's if you're lucky. This now creates the possibility of a brand loyalty. A few years later, that 13 year old kid might then be able to afford a little higher end instrument...and low and behold, he wants another of the same brand. (hell...even I went and bought a Kramer Nightswan after the Stryker debacle). Guitar Center and Sam Ash both carry a ton of cheap guitars...like Ibanez/LTD/Schecter, and then, way up high, or behind the counter, there are a few higher end Ibanez 'Prestige' models...and "custom" Schecters...ESP (as opposed to LTD). Of course there aren't many...but there never have been...today or 20 years ago.
With Jackson, there's only a few cheapies, and very rarely even a Japanese (quality) guitar, in these stores. I think it's sad, and it certainly does nothing to help the brand's reputation or it's future growth.

Why does this affect me...very simple. If Jackson becomes a 'boutique' or 'custom shop'-only brand, that means much fewer models to choose from, including the higher-end Japanese and USA-made stuff...It also means that you won't be touching anything Jackson for less than 3 or 4 grand. I might not be checking out the $150 guitars on the wall...but I don't necessarily need to buy 4000 dollar guitars every time I want to make a purchase either. The simple answer is that FMIC needs to fill up the stores just like Ibanez/Schecter/BC/LTD does....this creates more interest, which creates more sales, which results in more models, which means more higher-end models at prices that are obtainable. It's pretty simple if you ask me. I think the real question is, does FMIC really have an interest in growing the Jackson brand? Now that's the real question here...and I certainly can't answer that.

[VitaminG]

Well...I take it that you're saying that with a bit of sarcasm...but I'll respond anyway: Give me one industry that produces products for the public and is not subject to criticism...whether it be the media, online forums, blogs, etc. When someone in the automotive press writes a negative review of a car, is it assumed that he/she claims they have what it takes to be the CEO of the company? When Guitar world editors write a review of a new guitar and it's not necessarily positive, does he get bashed and told he's trying to take over the company. I could go on. That's a really silly statement. This is a FORUM...isn't the very definition of a forum an outlet for people to discuss an area of interest, and share their opinions? Well...what I've been saying is my opinion. That doesn't in any imply that I assume I can head a company like FMIC. I'm simply stating my opinion in terms of their marketing...of Jackson guitars in particular.

You are correct -this is a forum and you are entitled to your own opinion. But pro-fusion was responding to your statement of fact. You didn't state that you reckon Jackson must be selling next to nothing - you stated that they ARE selling next to nothing.

I don't know the sales numbers of Jackson off the top of my head...but I most certainly do have a way of finding out their sales number if I really wanted to research that information. FMIC is a publicly owned/traded corporation...their sales numbers are certainly obtainable if so desired. Despite this, is this really necessary? I can walk into any music store, chain or mom-and-pop...and I see lots of Ibanez, Schecter, LTD/ESP (as well as the classic brands - Fender, Gibson, Gretch, etc)...but i see very few Jackson/Charvel. I think it's pretty safe to assume that Jackson's numbers don't touch that of the other "metal" style guitars...even if you factor in online sales.

so you don't want to find out those sales figures? Isn't that the basis of your whole argument here? And yet you have access to those figures but don't want to look them up. It would certainly support your assertion that Jackson are selling next to nothing.

Umm...last I checked, 90 percent of Jacksons made in the Japanese factory are of a higher quality...and have been so for close to 20 years. Current JS series guitars are made in India...before that, it was Korea. Regardless, I could really care less where they're made or of what quality they are...that's not my point. My point is getting these cheapos in the stores, for the young kids...beginners. Something to start them on...just like the other brands...who are also building their bottom of the barrel models in China, India, Korea, Indonesia, etc.

I think you missed the point. To compete with other guitars in the same pricepoint, with all the options that LTD, etc. offer, production of lower models will need to be moved away from Japan. If binding bodies with MOTO and putting real EMGs into guitars is deemed what it takes to get a 13y.o. to buy one, Jackson might have to forgo keeping the bulk of import production in Japan.

If you're trying out those (cheaper) guitars, I have to assume that we are just coming from a different head space....and I mean no disrespect by saying that. It's just that I am at a point in my life where it wouldn't even occur to me to pick up one of those guitars. I have absolutely zero interest in a 200 dollar guitar...of any brand. BUT...when I was 13 or 14, then you bet I would be trying those out...because in those days, it was all I could afford...and I probably wouldn't have known the difference between a 100 dollar guitar or a 1000 dollar guitar anyway.

given the timeliness of pro-fusion's visit to GC in relation to this discussion, maybe he felt compelled to pick up a couple of cheapies to see what beginners are getting into now. I know I will occasionally play a really low end Squier or Epi for shits and giggles when I go to the guitar store. Last time it was because I wanted a cheap starter strat for my son - I ended up taking an SX home for him.

Regardless of my own interests/experience...when was it ever different than it is now? I remember very clearly walking into Sam Ash in 1989 and browsing the wall-o-shit....guitar after guitar costing 100-200 bucks...all of which sucked...played terrible, sounded terrible. If anything, those guitars back then were even worse. At the time, they were all made in Japan...they didn't have the kind of technology they have today. Guitar quality was terrible! Case in point...I had a Japanese Kramer Stryker that might have well just been called the Kramer Shit Box. It was that bad! If you wanted something that sounded and played good, you really did have to pay quite a bit more than you do nowadays. There were very few sub-$1000 guitars in those days that were worth even picking up. But to a kid who is 13 years old, you play what you can afford....which is a cheapy 150 dollar guitar..and that's if you're lucky. This now creates the possibility of a brand loyalty. A few years later, that 13 year old kid might then be able to afford a little higher end instrument...and low and behold, he wants another of the same brand. (hell...even I went and bought a Kramer Nightswan after the Stryker debacle). Guitar Center and Sam Ash both carry a ton of cheap guitars...like Ibanez/LTD/Schecter, and then, way up high, or behind the counter, there are a few higher end Ibanez 'Prestige' models...and "custom" Schecters...ESP (as opposed to LTD). Of course there aren't many...but there never have been...today or 20 years ago.
With Jackson, there's only a few cheapies, and very rarely even a Japanese (quality) guitar, in these stores. I think it's sad, and it certainly does nothing to help the brand's reputation or it's future growth.

is that how you came to the brand? I know I didn't. I'm sure I'm not so special or unique to be the only one either. Loads of new members join the JCF every year with an introduction that states that after 30 years of playing, they finally decided to try one o' them pointy Jacksons and at last they know what all the fuss is about. We seem to see plenty of kids who are seriously jazzed about finally being able to upgrade from their beginner guitar to a nice DKMG, or what have you, too.

Why does this affect me...very simple. If Jackson becomes a 'boutique' or 'custom shop'-only brand, that means much fewer models to choose from, including the higher-end Japanese and USA-made stuff...It also means that you won't be touching anything Jackson for less than 3 or 4 grand. I might not be checking out the $150 guitars on the wall...but I don't necessarily need to buy 4000 dollar guitars every time I want to make a purchase either. The simple answer is that FMIC needs to fill up the stores just like Ibanez/Schecter/BC/LTD does....this creates more interest, which creates more sales, which results in more models, which means more higher-end models at prices that are obtainable. It's pretty simple if you ask me. I think the real question is, does FMIC really have an interest in growing the Jackson brand? Now that's the real question here...and I certainly can't answer that.

by your reckoning, this should have happened years ago. As soon as it was announced that FMIC had bought the marque the doom-sayers were declaring that they were going to run the company into the ground. 8 years later and people are still sharing pics of their brand new Jacksons. Brand new Charvels now too.

And of course, the same thing was said about AMIC before them.