Expanding the line

[Black Mask]

I don't mean to offend to anyone and I don't want anyone to think I'm bashing Jackson, but do you think it would help the company if they expanded their line and became more diverse?

Like I said, I'm not bashing Jackson in any way, but it seems that they do one thing really really well and nothing else. I think in order to remain viable commercially Jackson should try to create instruments that appeal to those outside the metal community.

It would help bring in endorsers... not to mention younger players. Most of the people here are the same age and listen to the exact same music. Plus it would quell people's insistance that Jackson is a "one trick pony". There aren't many bass players that go for Jackson and with such a limited number of non-Floyd Rose models, it's tough to draw in more casual players.

Again, nothing against Jackson. I'm blown away by the quality of existing models, so it would only make sense that they would apply these techniques to newer instruments and draw in young blood.

[Newc]

Re: Expanding the line

Agreed, however, at what point does Jackson start to become "yet another" in the marketplace?
The main cosmetic differences between Jackson and "those others" is the trademark pointy headstock and sharkfin inlays.
Ibanez did a stretch of RGs with 'sharktooth' inlays, which were clearly derivative of Jackson's inlays, and ESPee makes practically nothing BUT Jackson copies (Dinkys and Soloists as their main models).
Jackson has a wide enough range of 'non-Jacksonesque' models like the SLS with its 3x3 headstock, as well as the KV2T (same head), but it does appear the Rhoads, King V, and Warrior models are selling comfortably. Kellys have kinda dropped off, as I see more of them on Ebay than the other models.

I would like to see more diversity within the existing lines, and I'd like for that diversity to NOT be primarily aimed at a dwindling niche market. That means no more single-hum models. More pickups means more tonal diversity. Adherence to history and tradition is NOT the foundation Jackson was built on; it's taking the risk. Risking the loss of "the old guard" is what Jackson was built on. So what if the die-hards were apalled to see Jackson abandon the dwindling Metal market? That risk is what Grover started the brand on. Yes, by the same token, Jackson started off with the most influential Metal guitarist of all time, and continued into Glory providing the guitar of choice for the most popular (and longest-lasting) Metal players - from Anthrax to Slayer to Megadeth to RATT and Iron Maiden, but that is still not the risk that Grover took when he decided to put his own name on Randy's guitar instead of Charvel.

As for my personal suggestions for diversifying the current models:

-Maple fretboards. Dots, fins, flames, or whatever. Plastic inlays are fine with me - it saves me money, which is important.
-A better flame pattern for tops. Seriously, of all the companies making flametop imports, Jackson's flame pattern sucks. It's far too thin and dull. Photo-flame is out of the question. I want to see real flame, and real quilt, not a picture of it. Unless you find a way to make those photo-tops dance like real wood, then you've got something, but otherwise, they're lame and I personally feel that hurts sales.
-Hardtails instead of stringthrough for Soloists and Dinkys and Vs. The RR stringthrough only works if you've got the v-plate to go with it - there HAS to be something behind the bridge or else it looks like you were trying to make a violin. It's not a violin, it's an electric guitar - they are not to be confused. Naked strings coming out of wood does not look "cleaner", it looks like someone forgot something, or had no imagination. If you can come up with an eye-catching plate to put back there, fine, but a v-plate won't work on a Strat-style body. It'd look great on a King V - Gibson, Hamer, and Dean all understand this, why Jackson doesn't get it is beyond me.

Newc

[RP]

Re: Expanding the line

There is also the school of thought that getting away from a core business (in this case a specific-type of guitar) could cause distractions and a loss of focus, causing the entire business to suffer.

If you do one thing really well, it can be dangerous to try something different.

[Black Mask]

Re: Expanding the line

newc - You're VERY right on a lot of points. If the company is founded on taking risks, then I don't think they should adhere so strictly to designs and styles created in the 80s. They can continue producing their signature models and styles, but expand outward.

I agree on the stop tailpiece suggestion wholeheartedly. In fact, offer more hardtail models, period. The truth is kids TODAY aren't using Floyd Roses that much and they are viewed as a hassle. Young people are more interested in playing heavy chords than flailing away on a wang bar.

Also, they should offer some "Les Paul" style single cutaways. Thicker although sculpted bodies are kind of cool. And I like mahogany, too. The flame maple top is a great idea and also they should be marketed more aggressively and put into the hands of popular bands.

I know all this sounds like blasphemy to the die-hard crowd, but I think it's very possible to respect tradition while looking ahead to the future. All companies (Jackson included) have to evolve or die.

And saying you should stick to what you know and never deviate is stagnation. If people had that attitude, Fender would never have created a Fat Strat, Gibson would only make Les Pauls and Marshall wouldn't offer a single solid-state amp.

[Black Mariah]

Re: Expanding the line

How many of you guys knew that there was an ES-335 style prototype built? By JACKSON! It's a killer guitar, and probably would have done quite well, but that's just not what people buy Jacksons for. Jackson has an image, for better or worse. Your typical Jackson player would be pissed that it didn't have a pointy headstock or sharkfins. Your typical 335 player would already have a Gibson. Who are you selling to?

What about the JJ? It's only marginally more popular than the Antigravity bass (*giggle*). Why? They're awesome! It's because people have this lameass idea that Jacksons should all have pointy heads and sharks.

In essence, it is the generic Jackson buyer that is keeping Jackson building nothing but pointy headed, sharkfinned, OFR'd shred machines.

[RP]

Re: Expanding the line

I agree with two-thirds of Newc's suggestions (don't care about flame tops, personally).

I thought Jackson did a good job with the looks of the JJ/Scott Ian model. It was a nice Gibson DC-type guitar that still had some attitude that distinguished it from a Gibson.

I don't know how succesful that line has been, but I think you could classify that, even though it was built for and named after a Metal guy, as a little bit of a different direction for Jackson guitars.

But I am a conservative type who fears change.

EDIT: I guess BM answered my question about how successful the JJ line has been. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[ November 20, 2003, 11:41 PM: Message edited by: RP ]

[Black Mariah]

Re: Expanding the line

Quick point about the figured tops. Yes, they could EASILY use a higher quality top, but it would mean cutting costs elsewhere. Which do you prefer? A pretty top and crappy piece of wood underneath of it, or a passable top and a GOOD piece of wood under it?

I'll skip the top altogether, myself. No reason to have it if it's not doing anything tonally.

[KYJoe]

Re: Expanding the line

There are the Sweet Tone models for one thing, and the Charvels can fill this void as well. The Jackson models themselves I can say from trying them out in my search to buy one are very versatile and IMHO would work well in almost any style.

That however is besides the point. Jackson/Charvel's only real problem is getting new endorsers in other styles that appeal to the younger audience. The solution lies more in maketing and advertising than anything. Fender is already opening doors for them is this regard and results will surely follow.

Jackson/Charvel also need to offer more options on the current models, and they are and from what I understand plan on doing so.

What IMO they don't need to do is follow everyone else in trying to please a new generation at all costs. That in the end is a losing battle, the Fender "Strat" model is a good example of why this doesn't work, and every year there are more. These new bands won't last any longer than grunge did, while hard rock and metal continues to endure despite the current trends. Go to melodicrock.com and see for yourself, the rest of the world still has good taste.

Jackson/Charvel will endure and probably become as popular as they were in the 80's, once guitarists discover them again as I did.

Joe

[Newc]

Re: Expanding the line

Single-cutaway - Jazz'R models.
Bad name for it IMO. Jazz'R?? "Hey, I don't play no Jazz, man, so I ain't gonna buy a Jazz guitar. Hey, pass me that Les Paul" [img]graemlins/brow.gif[/img]
So, yeah, they HAVE a single-cutaway model which I'd like to try out, but as one of the most expensive USA models Jackson has (never seen one listed for under $1500), I don't think they're trying hard enough to get them to market.
Make it a set-neck or neckthrough Professional model, mark it down to $850 with case, and see what happens.
A Jackson 335? Piss on it. If I want a 335 I'll go to Gibson or get an Epiphone Sheraton. Why would I want a Jackson 335? Same thing with the JJ. Gibson has one, as does Hamer and Dean and Carvin. Yay for Scott Ian, but piss on it. It ain't for me no matter how good it plays or the name on the head.

Branching out from the "core business" is what we're discussing, not dropping Metal entirely. If Jackson ever dropped the Rhoads, Jackson would collapse. They simply do not make another model that sells as well. It's the only other model (besides the Dinky) that is available in the entire range. The Dinky has a slight lead as it is available in the S series (JS20/30/etc). Put a Rhoads in that line and watch it sell.

And yes, the AG bass is laughable. Jackson had the best two bass designs next to the Precision and Jazz - the Futura/Winger and the original Concert (now the CMG). Basses never sell well from any company besides Fender and the boutique masters like Pedulla and Smith, because they do it so well. The USA Jackson basses were great, but they just could not compete against the better bass makers, because they focus only on basses, and build basses with bassists in mind, not "4-string guitars".
If Jackson dropped that horrible thing they call the Concert and that POS AntiGravity and went back to the Futura and CMG Concert bodies, they'd sell. Yes, they'd have to stay in the MG and Pro series, because they still cannot win against Fender and the higher-up basses, but at least they'd have a Jackson bass in the market.

Try a Concert V with a maple board. I bet it'd sell.

Newc

[Black Mask]

Re: Expanding the line

Originally posted by Black Mariah:
[QB] Your typical Jackson player would be pissed that it didn't have a pointy headstock or sharkfins.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">In that case, I think they should work to change who the "typical Jackson player" is. Catering to forty-year olds won't help anyone.

Your typical 335 player would already have a Gibson. Who are you selling to?

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">If they offered new innovations that the 335 didn't already have... who knows? You don't get to endure by NOT innovating.

[YetAnotherOne]

Re: Expanding the line

Like it or not now that Jackson & Charvel are part of the Fender stable they're going to be niche players. It makes very little sense to incur the expense necessary to support the expansive manufacturing process (and inventories) necessary to offer tons of models with tons of options when those additional models will compete with your other brands.

What Jackson needs more than anything is a solid marketing campaign and one or more true superstar endorsers who can singlehandedly sell a ton of guitars just by signing on. EVH did it for Peavy, Vai did it for Ibanez, Jackson needs someone of that stature to do it for them.

Personally I wouldn't be too upset if that doesn't happen. Jackson still builds the best relatively inexpensive (try calling PRS) custom shop guitars on the planet and has regular production line models that smoke just about everything else in terms of pure playability. It'd be fine with me if they stayed the course.

[ November 20, 2003, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: YetAnotherOne ]

[Black Mask]

Re: Expanding the line

I never said anything about reducing quality, dropping existing models or creating a Fender-like empire that's built on dozens and dozens of models. I just think they should produce some new models, sign some new endorsees and work to prove that Jacksons go above and beyond 80s shred stereotypes. "Staying the course" might mean the entire company becomes an obselete relic. Don't you think they'd work to avoid that?

[Newc]

Re: Expanding the line

Originally posted by Black Mariah:
In essence, it is the generic Jackson buyer that is keeping Jackson building nothing but pointy headed, sharkfinned, OFR'd shred machines.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Exactly, which is what Black Mask's point was - Jackson needs a new buyer group. If the same old same old keeps buying only the same old same old, Jackson will only make the same old same old and will wither and decay. Jackson needs buyers for the USA, Pro, X, and MG series, and they need model variations in those lines to attract the people who are buying ESPee and Ibenhad and Spamick and PRSsss.
It's more than big name endorsers, it's market saturation. It's donating guitars to the Prop departments of TV shows and movie sets. It's having tons of mini-posters printed up with someone playing your product, not just posing with it. Send Jenna on a nationwide Clinic to all the Jackson dealers and let her autograph pics of her humping a Rhoads - you won't sell one guitar, but you'll make a lot of porn freaks happy.
Send Scott Ian on the clinic tour and let him demonstrate the tone and power of a Jackson, and you'll sell a few guitars.

Newc

[YetAnotherOne]

Re: Expanding the line

Fender bought them because they occupy a niche that Fender's previous portfolio did not. So long as they continue to successfully occupy that niche it's unlikely they'll become an obsolete relic. That's probably a lot more likely to happen if they move away from their core business and try to go head-on with other manufacturers in other areas of the market. Witness Newc's statements above about the JJ and the 335 prototype.

[toejam]

Re: Expanding the line

I really want one of the Swee-Tone Archtop models with the Triple Decker pickups (Duncan Pearly Gates Esquire tele bridge pup, Little '59 middle, and STKP1N P-90 neck). [img]graemlins/drool2.gif[/img] They've got a 25" scale, 10-12 degree compound radius, and two neck shape profiles are offered. The price is pretty steep, though. http://www.jacksonguitars.com/gear/g...Archtop_STAT2H