Jackson vs. Charvel - Why two seperate camps?

[JACKSONWOLF]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

I've always had Jacksons (excluding Charvel Imports) until this year when I finally got a (real) San Dimas Charvel (I did have a '95 SD III a few years back). Basically, US Charvels were never available here in England so there aren't too many around. I happen to like both brands although there is definitely something special about the SD's neck!!
Steve

[Stinkbug]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

I generally prefer bolt-ons and when I started playing, Charvels were popular among the guitarists that I admired. So the first quality guitar I purchased was an '85 or '86 Charvel. I really haven't found their equal since. When the Japanese versions came out I gave up on new Charvels (imports). They are good guitars, but they don't campare to the San Dimas Charvels in my opinion. It has been down hill for Charvel since then until the recent models. Also, as you all know they are tough to find so I only have a few. I did have an '89 Jackson Bolt on blood splatter that I sold years back. It was a great guitar...I wish I still had it. The only neck throughs I really ever wanted were Rhoads models and I have a few now. So for me it was a bolt-on vs. Neck through issue. However, old USA Jackson bolt-ons are pretty much the same as the SD Charvels. So I guess for me it is more an old vs new issue. Generally, I prefer older USA Charvels and Jacksons to new ones.

[Bengal65]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

I first saw the Charvel's when they came out. I said hey they look just like the guitars I'm building only this guy went public (and had a few celebrity breaks). I had no need to to try a Charvel. I already was building some neat Super Strats back then. Later when Grover took over and I started seeing those neck through's. I said to myself now that's a guitar. It feels kinda sexy to pick her up by the heel of the neck. [img]/images/graemlins/popcorn.gif[/img]

[SEEGERMANY]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

[ QUOTE ]
Probably because you have the guys who still think "first" is "better", and the whole resale value thing, as well as that mysterious "mojo" and "vibe" stuff.
Newc

[/ QUOTE ]

Wal-Mart sells Miracle Mojo in 24oz aerosol cans. It even works on Gibsons.

[slo100]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

What a great topic!

When this whole thing got started way back 25 years or so ago this was not an issue. Jackson was a product of Charvel Mfg. not a brand. Technically until Grover changed the name of the company to "Jackson/Charvel" from "Charvel Mfg." every Jackson guitar was a product of Charvel Manufacturing. During those precious few wonder years up until early 1986 Charvel Mfg made two kinds of guitars: bolt-on and neckthrough. Bolt-on = Charvel Neckthrough = Jackson. These were the camps of the time.

At some point things got REAL complicated. For example:

A bolt-on strat with a Kahler or a Floyd made in the spring of 1986 is not a heck of a lot different from one made in the spring of 1985. The logo might be different but that's about it.

A Charvel Model 6 made in 1987 is not a heck of a lot different than a Jackson Professional soloist made in 1988 (or whenever they came out). Same guitar, different logo.

There are many more examples of guitars coming off the same machines by the same workers in the same plants with different logos yet still there will always be "camps" of people who swear by an M6 and swear off Jackson professional strats. Or guys like me who have spent lots of money on Charvel San Dimas strats but really have no interest in Jackson San Dimas strats for $450.

No one ever said guitar players made any sense.

To try and separate the two brands is very difficult to do. In most cases you can find guitars that are identically built right down to straight lug tuners or Kahler Pro trems that sport either logo. This includes US and Asian manufactured Charvels and Jacksons.

I don't think Grover ever won any awards for his marketing prowess!

The point of all this is that Charvel and Jackson now exist as two brands (of Fender by goodness) yet share similar heritage and audience. There are those who can buy a guitar blindfolded and choose based on tone, playability, and comfort (we should all be as such); those who will buy a logo; those who will buy based on year of manufacture; those who buy on look; etc. Fender's challenge is to appeal to as many of these segments as possible but I don't think dividing the brands that share a common history is the way to go.

If I were running things I'd go back to neck-through/bolt-on Charvel vs. Jackson structure and have various lines of each. It would be great to see this:

Jackson neckthrough custom shops
Charvel bolt-on custom shops

Charvel USA San Dimas standards
Jackson USA "Custom" and "Student" standards

Jackson Professional import neckthroughs
Charvel Models 1 - 4 import bolt-ons

The only way for J/C to prosper as a brands under Fender are to appeal to old guys who remember the glory years and want to go backwards in time as well as new kids who hear all the old guys tell these complex product line stories and need an intuitive product line to choose what they want.

[mudkicker]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

I have never really thought about it, but I have never owned a Jackson. As many others have said in this thread for me personally it's bolt on versus neck through. I have played several Jackson and Charvel neck throughs they just don't appeal to me. To me the neck throughs feel as if the neck wraps around behind you. I'm sure it's something I could get used to but I very comfortable with my bolt on Charvels. Now that I'm married and have triplets it's simple economics. At todays prices I can pick up a model series bolt on and mod it cheaper than buying a Jackson of similar quality. As for the SDs I consider myself lucky to have just one. If I wanted another I would have to sell a kid, wait I have a couple to spare who wants a 3 year old [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]. Just "kidding" the kids aren't for sale .

Brian

[Toby]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

I agree with Bret (slo100).

For me, there's no Charvels vs Jacksons. i don't separate in two different camps.


Charvels and Jacksons are built by the same people at the same factories and with same high quality, the same identity and the same philosophy. In the past, Charvels and Jacksons appeared together as one Charvel/Jackson brand. It's a historic reason that particular C/J model lines have either a Charvel or a Jackson logo.

It's a matter of personal preference, which models of the Charvel/Jackson brand one prefers .

[pro-fusion]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

As someone who remembers seeing strathead Charvels on the wall of my local guitar store at about the time that Jacksons were first introduced (and were very rare), I've always believed that the introduction of the Jackson as the 'exotic' guitar devalued the Charvel brand very quickly. After all, by 1985 the market for bolt-on super-strats was pretty crowded with Kramer being the king of the hill. But neckthrus were still an exotic species at that time. So, to a kid like me at the time, the Charvels looked pretty much like half the other stuff hanging on the wall at the store, while the Jacksons were rare, exotic and desireable--even though the truth was that all C/Js of that time were amazing instruments. Obviously, Grover saw this happening as well, and is undoubtedly why he finally destroyed any remaining cache in the Charvel name by making it the budget import line. He wouldn't have risked the name otherwise.

I think FMIC has a long hard road ahead of it to reestablish Charvel as anything other than a specialty replica line. Even if not entirely fair, the Charvel name is now a lot more obscure and/or unappreciated among the wider world of guitar players than is the Jackson name. I guarantee you that FMIC will NOT revive the 'bolt-on Charvel/neckthru Jackson' distinction--that would be a very risky move that would place the entire line in jeopardy, even if it would be fun from a nostalgic point of view.

[Firebird V]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

[ QUOTE ]

I think FMIC has a long hard road ahead of it to reestablish Charvel as anything other than a specialty replica line. Even if not entirely fair, the Charvel name is now a lot more obscure and/or unappreciated among the wider world of guitar players than is the Jackson name. I guarantee you that FMIC will NOT revive the 'bolt-on Charvel/neckthru Jackson' distinction--that would be a very risky move that would place the entire line in jeopardy, even if it would be fun from a nostalgic point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]

ABSOLUTELY! I guess we will see what happens 5 years down the road if they are even making Charvels then....

[quiksilver]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

Fun thread. I'm with RP, Bengal651, and Pro-Fusion.

In my formative years, I wanted a Kramer Baretta, settled for a Kramer Focus 1000, dreamed of a Jackson Soloist, settled for a Charvel Model 2.

To me, Jacksons have always been the exotic Thoroughbreds of the guitar world, and having FINALLY (20 yrs. later) just obtained my first USA Jackson (SL2H), I'm happy to say that it lives up to this image. Sleek, sophisticated, top quality that I couldn't build myself.

Charvel, on the other hand, means hot-rodded bolt-ons to me, like something I could build myself. Still cool, but not exotic. Kinda like a Ferrari vs. a Mustang 5.0. Or to continue with my horse analogy, a Thoroughbred vs. a Mustang (the horse, not the car). [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[siggy14]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

mudkicker, i will trade you a charvel neck thru for one kid (LOL) anyway i am also from VA so figured i would say hi.

[fuel0707]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

[ QUOTE ]
Fun thread. I'm with RP, Bengal651, and Pro-Fusion.

In my formative years, I wanted a Kramer Baretta, settled for a Kramer Focus 1000, dreamed of a Jackson Soloist, settled for a Charvel Model 2.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm from a similar perspective. I graduated high school in 1985 and as much as I wanted a Jackson or Charvel, I couldn't afford one, even a Model series. So I settled on a Kramer Focus 6000. About 7 or so years ago, I decided to get a Charvel or Jackson and I didn't care which it was as long it was a USA guitar at a good price. I ended up with an '89 Dinky bolt-on. Since then I've been able to add another Jackson - a late '80's Strat 24.

Honestly, I'd love to add a Charvel because I don't care about "Charvel vs. Jackson". I do care about quality, playability and tone and I think both Charvel and Jackson have made great guitars. And I think that those great guitars can come from Japan as well as the USA.

Very interesting topic.

[Bengal65]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

As a follow-on, in 1985 this was my answer to the Charvel, Kramer and Jackson craze. A custom made guitar. The first one I ever built! It took me forever to come up with the graphics LOL!

[Bengal65]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

The neck is pretty interesting, a mix of Fender, Gibson and Jackson attributes. It was a bolt on Fender style, Explorer head stock, Gibson 24-3/4" scale and a Jackson Soloist neck radius (back of neck), with a compound radius fret board. It was finished in a satin lacquer very lightly and buffed out. This basically why I didn't choose a Jackson or Charvel, because at the time I was mostly a Les Paul guy.

[RR05xx]

Re: Jackson vs. Charvel - Why are there two camps?

Whe I was a kid, I had an '85 HSS Charvel which I could not stand because I did not and still do not like have a middle single. It was traded away and eventuall in '87 I traded for an '84 RR student which I still have. Next I picked 89 KV which also kicked ass (and I still have it). At the time I was in death metal bands and you had to have a V or something. In 1991 the guitars get closeted.

Fast forward to 2001 and I start playing a again. However, I wanted a "regular" guitar. I bought an SL2 - very cool guitar and also had a local guy build be a bolt on superstrat. Then I started looking at guitars online remembered Charvel (found GMW) and I have been soley playing Charvels and Charvel copies ever since. The Jacksons are keepers and have been through alot, but they are not what I want to play at the moment (who knows, maybe my kid will take a liking to the Jacksons).

I think that for me it may really boil down to now prefering bolt ons over neck through guitars (and I know that someone recently received a neck through Charvel from the CS and that is cool, but if I want a neckthrough, it will always be a jackson).