Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why are non-recessed OFRs not more available? (Jackson/Charvel or other makers)

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

  • Banjowarrior
    replied
    My EVH Stripe Series and EVH Star both have unrecessed Floyd's's's.
    My Soloist doesn't really count as it's an '88

    Leave a comment:


  • Number Of The Priest
    replied
    Originally posted by Axewielder View Post
    I'm a NR guy all the way as far as playability and appearance and vintage mojo goes, but everything is just a bit cocked on a NR trem guitar. The neck is cocked relative to the body, the bridge is cocked relative to the posts, the strings are cocked relative to the pickups, etc etc. Everything is nice and square on a recessed trem guitar, so I can see why guitar builders would migrate towards that design.
    Crooked works. Just ask archtop jazz guitar builders. I bet the tip of the headstock is touching the floor in this picture.

    Leave a comment:


  • mr426
    replied
    Got ya. Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • xenophobe
    replied
    Originally posted by Catharpin View Post
    Example RR. See where it looks as though the binding is lifting from the body. That is the neck angle.
    That's the angle I'm talking about, but that's not really higher, the neck is actually lower if you want to count a few frets the other direction. lol

    Leave a comment:


  • neilli
    replied
    The easy way to think of it is that non recessed works well for LP players, recessed for strats..

    Leave a comment:


  • Axewielder
    replied
    I'm a NR guy all the way as far as playability and appearance and vintage mojo goes, but everything is just a bit cocked on a NR trem guitar. The neck is cocked relative to the body, the bridge is cocked relative to the posts, the strings are cocked relative to the pickups, etc etc. Everything is nice and square on a recessed trem guitar, so I can see why guitar builders would migrate towards that design.

    Leave a comment:


  • Catharpin
    replied
    Originally posted by xenophobe View Post
    The fretboard isn't actually higher, it's just angled whereas a recessed Floyd does not have an angled neck.
    Example RR. See where it looks as though the binding is lifting from the body. That is the neck angle.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	RRangle.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	47.4 KB
ID:	2448145

    Leave a comment:


  • xenophobe
    replied
    Originally posted by mr426 View Post
    How high is the fret board above the body on a non recess? My fear would be it's too high.
    The fretboard isn't actually higher, it's just angled whereas a recessed Floyd does not have an angled neck.

    Leave a comment:


  • mr426
    replied
    How high is the fret board above the body on a non recess? My fear would be it's too high.

    Leave a comment:


  • Newc
    replied
    Vai is credited with the first recessed Floyd-style bridge, the Lion's Claw he carved into Green Meanie, which later was done on his JEMs. He's also credited with the scooped out lower front horn.

    The guitar has to be built around the concept of a non-recessed Floyd, so if you like that setup, just get the non-Floyded version and have a Floyd added. Greater neck angles to accommodate top-mounted Floyds that also have enough room to pull way up also have a greater risk of headstock trauma and require thicker cases, so there's a cost-savings consideration for manufacturers.

    Recessed Floyds do take some getting used to, and on some body shapes it's actually more work to play the guitar than it should be due to the bridge being so low.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aso
    replied
    I have two non-recessed floyd guitars. My 87 charvel model 5 with a 42mm brass block and my soloist with a 37mm brass block
    .

    I don't really have a preference on recessed or non-recessed but single hum is where it's at for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Why are non-recessed OFRs not more available? (Jackson/Charvel or other makers)

    I started off playing an Ibanez RG560 and Jackson KE3 that had fully-recessed trems, 32mm sustain block, neck parallel with the guitar body.

    When I got my Jackson SHS1 and Edwards Les Paul, I fell in love with the 4° angled neck joint and the bridge situated high above the guitar body. In the case of the Soloist, it has a non-recessed OFR, 42mm sustain block. (I can pull up on the bar for a while before the bridge collides with the body.)

    I also understand there is a semi-recessed option with a 37mm sustain block, but I'm not aware if it allows pullups.

    Is Steve Vai to thank for digging cavities under his Floyded guitars so that he can do bigger pullups? Memory is fuzzy but I seem to recall he also put a pad on the forearm portion of the body so that his arm would rest at the height of the bridge. Did this lead to manufacturers and designers sinking the Floyd deeper into the body so that the fretboard is parallel with the body and guys like Steve could rest their arms on the guitar body?

    If so, screw that. For guys like me who prefer the bridge way up high, guitars with a high trem and a 42mm sustain block are VERY difficult to find for affordable prices, because the 32mm blocked guitars are now "the standard".

    Come on, I just want a simple and affordable one-hum (or two-hum) Strat with a 42mm sustain block and 4° angled neck joint.
    Last edited by Number Of The Priest; 03-17-2016, 11:46 AM.
Working...
X