Bad news guys

[Tekky]

Re: Bad news guys

That happens with old age. [img]graemlins/images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

(I should shut up though... I'm no spring chicken myself.)

[ September 18, 2003, 01:52 PM: Message edited by: TEKKY ]

[Top Jimmy B]

Re: Bad news guys

Good point there too, Chuck. I can't argue for or against these guitars...I've never played one. I had an 86/87 San Dimas plated Ontario Volcano graphic and it was nice...but certainly no mojo or anything to make me want to sell my kids so i could aquire more. Those days are long gone.

[atomic charvel guy]

Re: Bad news guys

who said anything about selling your kids,
just join up with me. all you have to risk is your life and the treasures of old can be yours jimmy.

atomic of loxley

[Jim Shine]

Re: Bad news guys

Alot of the 'mojo' of the San Dimas era was lost in my opinion when they stepped up production in mid-late 1985. Others will probably disagree, but in my experience most of the Jacksons made in this era tend to be average guitars at best, but because they are the most plentiful, they are the ones people usually end up playing and basing the whole San Dimas era on. They are still high quality guitars, no doubt about that..there just is something different about them. Lets not forget cheaper pots, inhouse made pickups, getting rid of the binding 'nibs' by the frets, aftermarket jackplates, logoed tuners, and the start of getting rid of the brass cavity shields all started in the San Dimas era.

[Chuckracer]

Re: Bad news guys

I agree with that 100% Jim.

[Top Jimmy B]

Re: Bad news guys

Atomic Tommy, send me the application for membership...I'm up for anything.

[toejam]

Re: Bad news guys

I've only played one San Dimas, and that was WarriorX7's red Explorer. Mind you, I only played it for like a minute, but the neck was oiled and very nice, the profile was a little rounded, and it had some beef to it but not too much. If all the SD necks are like that, I think they're winners!

[yogadork]

Re: Bad news guys

I think a mistake in understanding the "mojo" of early Charvels is looking at them as 80's guitars when in fact the strat as a work of art and or superior craftmanship was really a 70's phenomenom. Granted the Charvel superstrat concept was a late 70's development but the concept of a masterbuilt strat was in full bloom at the time thanks to companies like Schecter. As Jim said once the "metal" craze took hold the real 80's guitars were a sucsession of cost reducing reducing factors and a demand for supply that could not give the individual attention a prepro or early production guitar would need except maybe for the graphic paintjob.If Fender is going to just put out a strat shaped body and neck and just change the logo and the pickup configuration and trem to satisfy a cetain target audience they are well equipped to do that but hopefully they will include a line of hand made Shannon stratheads and start to reproduce brass trem saddles instead of trying to hype stainless steel ones as somehow superior when the truth is they are just out of production.There was a quality and a resonance of the boutique 70's and early 80's guitars that was as real in terms of sound and feel as the great 50's guitars that again started to cheapen in quality after the British invasion. This quality transcended serial #'s and work orders, it was in the wood.

[slayer]

Re: Bad news guys

What changed in 1993, that some of you are saying you like the Jacksons up and including 1992? I only ask this, because my 1993 Custom Shop Archtop Soloist is about as flawless as any guitar I have ever seen, and has tons of Mojo, just curious as to the change in 1993? Select Series maybe? Thanks-Jack.

[Greg Crowe]

Re: Bad news guys

Nothing really changed in 93. Where I find things changing was in the late 90's when the necks started getting thicker and quality control started lacking. Some of the stuff made in the final year of AMIC was truly bad.

[Jim Shine]

Re: Bad news guys

I draw the line around that year because the standard production guitars were no longer built to order, but in batches. The Custom Shop models are the exception.

[ September 18, 2003, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Jim Shine ]

[Jim Shine]

Re: Bad news guys

PS- Just to clarify, I am not saying that ones made after that time are junk, its just a different era of building style, so I set it apart from the earlier era when ALL Jacksons were Custom Shop guitars.

[Newc]

Re: Bad news guys

Devil's Advocate time concerning the loss of quality in the future:
-My 1990 USA Warbird Warrior has visible and feelable excess glue around most of the sharfkin inlays.
-How many of the 2001 JCF-YCE's were heavily flawed? From bent v-plates to bad bridges to poorly finished wingtips? These were USA Custom Shop models done (supposedly) entirely by hand (one piece head/neck, etc), not to mention the glaring oversight of the pickup colors being ass-backwards.

On the other hand, every other Jackson I've owned (from San Dimas to Ontario to Japan) has been nearly perfect, though most are aware I go more for the used beaters than new ones. While the bodies of the ones I get may be dinged from use, the necks do not show any signs of bad construction (i.e.: frets popping up, bad fret ends, bad binding (one spot on a Snakeskin Fusion, but that was the only one and may have been due to the previous owner), excess glue, etc).

With CNC doing roughmilling, that's fine. If a computer running a program is doing it all from blank to clearcoat, it's gonna be crap. You have to have some skill in luthiery to build a guitar. It's not a mathematical formula, it's individual attention. Luthiery is not and CANNOT BECOME an exact science - if you try to squeeze it down to 1's and 0's you end up with vertex points in a 3D environment and that's all you get - you don't get those little human touches that a computer cannot produce. You can laser-scan a genuine SD Charvel neck and the CNC will spit them out all day, but each handshaped neck is different in some way, and while not everyone will get the exact same neck down to the tiniest micron, that's a good thing.

Call it nitpicking and then go find a 100% computerized guitar and compare it to a guitar that was only even 30% handmade by a skilled luthier. The handmade guitar will always come out on top.

Newc

[Newc]

Re: Bad news guys

Jim - Thanks for the clarification on how the info wound up on the FDP - was not aware of that.
However, I do feel it is an important announcement that could have been made public on the Jackson website when FMIC made the decision to actually do the move. Yes we would have complained about it, and we have reason to.
In a perfect world it'll all work out for the best, but we don't live in a perfect world.

Newc

[Boxcar Willie 84]

Re: Bad news guys

I compared my San Dimas Rhoads to a new RR1T when I bought it last year, and I noticed a few differences (besides a Floyd Rose trem)...the neck on mine had a bit more meat, which I like, the RR1T was a bit lighter, the fretwire was different, and little things like that. I'm no expert but they seemed to have more similarities than differences as far as I could tell in the short amount of time that I spent comparing them. But these things to me don't really make one or the other better or worse, just better for any particular person's taste. I am hoping that the factory move will result in lower costs, and also that they start making more SD-style Charvels again. Since I have little to no chance of being able to afford a real SD Charvel strat or something, this seems to be my best bet personally as long as it's a rad guitar.

By the way Ralph do you still have that green Bengal guitar of George Lynch's?? I used to love looking at your site when it was up.