Charvel/Jackson wants you!!!

[petedz]

Re: Charvel/Jackson wants you!!!

Alright, here's what I sent 'em:

1. What features make a Jackson guitar (or bass) better than ESP, Schecter, BC Rich, and Ibanez?

The three things that should draw me to Jackson/Charvel guitars are:
a. The neck profiles.
I haven't sat down with calipers, but I know that the necks on my '80s Charvel strathead and Jackson superstrat are both ideal shred necks. Superb. Maintaining that feel is the key to keeping your core customers happy. There have been quite a few Jacksons, especially in the mid to late 90s, that didn't "measure up". I suspect that most of your dedicated customers are like me. We can't quantify it, but if we blindly picked up a dozen guitars with only one good one in the bunch, we'd easily be able to pick out the one that's done right by feel.
b. Nostalgia.
The hair band vibe is not a stigma. It is an asset. Many of us ex hair farmers have good jobs and will buy reasonably priced high end guitars. Also, court the new breed of shredders. Losing Alexi Laiho as an endorser was the single biggest blunder Jackson could have made.
c. Quality.
In my opinion, your competition is NOT ESP/Ibanez/Schecter. Especially not Schecter!? BC Rich, maybe, but they can't seem to keep their act together. No, your competition for my dollars is the small boutique builder like Anderson, Suhr, GMW, etc. Consistent, unsurpassed build quality will win my dollars. If my bud receives his dream custom guitar and it is perfect in every respect, it will drive my business to that builder.

2. What features do ESP, Schecter, BC Rich, and Ibanez guitars (or basses) have that Jackson should consider adding to our products?

Asking this question misses the point. Jackson/Charvel built a reputation by custom building whatever the customer asked for, and doing it right. I don't look at features on production models. I know what I want. If it is available from a given company, they might get my business. However, in the spirit of being helpful, here are some of the "features" that are mandatory on my guitars:
- wide variety of finish/graphic, inlay, wood, and hardware options
- shred neck profiles
- only original Floyd Rose trems on locking trem guitars
- high quality passive pickups (Seymour Duncan, mostly)

3. If you were going to buy a Jackson bass:
A. What features (pickups, body woods, etc) would make it the best bang for the buck?
B. What price point (street selling price - not list price) would you want it to be?
C. What model would you like to see in a Jackson bass (Concert/Dinky, Rhoads, Kelly, King V, etc)?

Sorry, I'm not a bass player. If I were shopping for a bass, Jackson wouldn't be a "go to" brand. My only bass was purchased used.

We are also looking at doing two more "Retro" Charvel models for 2005 (like the Retro San Dimas Bullseye and the Retro Lightning Star). We'll be doing one Star guitar and one San Dimas guitar. I'd like some suggestions on the following:

1. What pickup configuration - 1 Hum or 2 Hum?

2 hum

2. Which "retro" or classic Charvel graphic or finish would you like to see? I need suggestions for the Star and the San Dimas - different graphics "work" differently for each model.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a star. Here's a strat that would get my blood racing:
- ivory bound quilt top (trans amber to orange burst)
- 2 hum configuration with double cream pickups and cream pickup rings
- brass hardware
- non recessed original Floyd Rose trem
- strathead neck

3. Which bridge would you like to see on the Retro guitars - a Floyd or the brass NOS Charvel trem?

Original Floyd Rose

[phill_up]

I know this is an old post. I'm curious, did any of you have any luck with this?

[Super_shredder]

1. classic feelind 80s metal guitar , but also brimming with versatility
2. more 7 strings , emgs and duncans on lower models , more neckthrough stuff
3. If you were going to buy a Jackson bass:
A. neck through 4 or 5 string
B. under a grand
C. king v

1. 1 hum , 1 single
2. san dimas - rising sun
star - gay spider man
3. brass on the star , floyd on the
san dimas

[axeman81]

I guess that's an good enough answer?

[Super_shredder]

lol didnt even realise it was an old thread ( slaps self in the forehead DOH!)

[phill_up]

That was funny! Sorry about throwing that out there bro, I was just curious is any of the people that posted back then got what they ask for?

[mattsmusiccenter]

This is ancient!

[phill_up]

You were here then Matt, Has anyone's wishes come true? Did Jackson really listen?

[Ben...]

*Rob Halford walks in*

*Ahem* RESSSSUUUUUURRREEECCCCTTTIIIOOONNN!!!!

[Aaronharmon]

The guys at Jackson want to get your opinions,wants and desires for next years line up. They are asking questions like

1. What features make a Jackson guitar (or bass) better than ESP, Schecter, BC Rich, and Ibanez?
2. What features do ESP, Schecter, BC Rich, and Ibanez guitars (or basses) have that Jackson should consider adding to our products?
3. If you were going to buy a Jackson bass:
A. What features (pickups, body woods, etc) would make it the best bang for the buck?
B. What price point (street selling price - not list price) would you want it to be?
C. What model would you like to see in a Jackson bass (Concert/Dinky, Rhoads, Kelly, King V, etc)?

We are also looking at doing two more "Retro" Charvel models for 2005 (like the Retro San Dimas Bullseye and the Retro Lightning Star). We'll be doing one Star guitar and one San Dimas guitar. I'd like some suggestions on the following:

1. What pickup configuration - 1 Hum or 2 Hum?
2. Which "retro" or classic Charvel graphic or finish would you like to see? I need suggestions for the Star and the San Dimas - different graphics "work" differently for each model.
3. Which bridge would you like to see on the Retro guitars - a Floyd or the brass NOS Charvel trem?


Do you have opinions? I know ya so ... you can send em too

[email protected]

1) Jackson is legendary. I love the legend, but they need to up the ante to stay competitive

2) Schecter has tons of bang for the buck; The C-1 Hell Raiser for example has an OFR, grover tuners, abelone inlays, a quilted maple top and EMGs for around $850.00. It would more than twice that to get all those features in a Jackson.

As for the "Retro" Charvel, 1 Hum guitars appeal to a much narrower audience as far as I am concerned. Don't do it.

[Aaronharmon]

Thats funny. I haven't been a member that long, so I didnt realise it was an old thread either. I was actually thinking "damn, a lot of people have posted on this already. It is a hot topic."

[85 San Dimas]

I own 3 85 Jacksons, A 2008 wayne, and a 1990-1991 Charvel 375 and have owned many others (but no pre-pros sad to say). To me?

Build the JB Soloist. Build the real Rhoads. Don't gouge the price. It doesn't need to cost 7 or 8 grand. That's a money grab based on the Gibson marketing model when the thing that needs to be grabbed is MARKET SHARE and/or a return to ICON status for the line. Get back to what made Jackson great to start with. Every effort has to be made to get a high quality USA Jackson neck-thru to the public at 2 price points. 2 grand and 2500. if someone wants a Jackson CS (which is redundent since Jackson is already supposed to be a CS) then those are priced to order.

If Music Man could bring the EVH's to market for 1700 in 1991 (with THAT royalty payment, and THAT neck) then in this age of technology there shouldn't be any non CS model over 2500 bucks. If Wayne Charvel can get me a custom painted bolt-on for 2500 bucks (low overhead but also low production-no way to make any money on volume of any kind) then this can't be impossible to do.

If it were up to me I'd get rid of any Jackson line that is lower than Made In Japan. it hurts the reputation of the line. Personally I'd get rid of the MIJ line too, but it can be an entry point for one single lower price point for the teens without loaded parents.

Drop all the dxqfmxyz123-type model designations. Ibanez does that. The order number may need all that junk but the model name doesn't. Jackson doesn't need to. it confuses all but the hard-core gear hounds. I don't need a vin number. A Soloist, a Rhoads, a Kelly, etc. Some finishes are standard other available only through the CS. Colors are irrelevent, it's just paint. You can change the pallette anytime you want. If I say "I have a Pink 85 San Dimas Student Soloist" everyone knows what I have. I don't say I have a "SDPSS"

Use whatever exotic woods you want, but you probably need mahogany in this current "tonehound" climate. Fine. get some. Offer color finishes like Soloists were, and also do some bursts, etc. But you don't need a bunch of different stuff.

I can be thrilled with my 2009 Bubblegum Pink Soloist with black hardware, floyd, sharktooth, Duncan Distortion hard rock machine and some guy in nashville can have the same guitar painted black or tobacco-burst and bound with a gold strat bridge or stop bar, three Lindy Fralins, and a JB Soloist type pickguard. Same guitar, different execution.

if you don't believe me build six of each kind and show up at NAMM with them. You CAN build something that most people can find appealing, yet not try to be all things to all people. 1957 Chevrolets came as 2 doors, convertibles, station wagons, and 4 door sedans. We don't need the garden variety 4 doors and wagons here trying to compete with Schecter, ESP, etc. How in the world did we get sucked in to competing with them anyway.?

All we need is the the hardtop and the convertible. Just make sure there is 8 cylinders under the hood

Do what Jackson did best. produce the best high performance machine out there. But don't get too greedy. Gibson has opened up an opportunity at the 1800-2500 market.
I know adjusted for inflation that the guitars I describe would not be available at that price, but you have the resources. Just find a way to do it. try to avoid GC. You can't let someone with that power in the market in the door.. They'll ruin the line by defeating every suggestion I've made. They're Wal-Mart.
Build the guitars. There are other stores out there. if the word gets out that Jackson is back in a serious way, then people are going to find them-including GC. if it can be sold then they will come to you. What do you have to lose?

Think of yourself as Gibson or Fender in 1985. No one is buying the guitars in great numbers. How to correct? start building the best Strats and Pauls you can and 3 or 4 years down the road people are going to look and say "Man, that's nice. I always wanted one", or "Those are some dollar for dollar the best machines out there". That's where you want to be.

Just my rant.

[Cygnus X1]

Dead on, 85!

Great post.
Inflation makes the price points a bit off, but still, the point is...don't ruin the name.

I'm still with Charvel being the "other" guitars that Jackson wanted to market.
Just keep (or return to) having Jackson branded guitars in pro quality.
My 80's experience with them was that the name was undisputed quality.

I know...I'm a hypocrite.
I love my Jap-Jacksons.

[Charlz]

Wow, I didn't realize this was old either... Oh well... here's my $.02

Jacksons (and Charvels...) simply look 'sexy' to me. They look comfortable. They 'look like they sound good'... (Does that even make sense? Kinda like a car that looks fast just sitting still...)) The sharky's, the pointy, the 'sleek' soloist body, KV, RR, Star... even the dinky bodies and strats kinda 'turn me on'... (Not in a weird gross, sickness way...) No other guitar out there has the same look that gives me that 'wow' feeling when I just look at it. (Although I do have a softspot for LP's...and Explorers, although (strangely?) I am not a Kelly fan...(???)) The necks: WOW!!! What else can you say? The neck on my CS KV 7 string is my favorite neck of any guitar I've ever played, 6 or 7 strings. (It's a speed neck profile, unfinished mahagony... Doesn't even feel 'big' like other 7's...) I'm also a huge neck-thru fan.

I would love a USA production 7 string. Star? Soloist? KV? RR? Any / all models... even if just solid colors.
Also like body binding, especially on arch tops... Oh yeah, bring back arch tops...:idea:
Like the EMG as an option idea...

Don't know much about specs on the bass, however I LOVE the old looks of Charvel model series neck thru bass... (The cobalt blue one in the '87 (?) catalog still gives me tingles...) Of course, need 5 strings...

One or 2 hums. I like 'em both, although I usually choose the 2... Like the Floyd, but I really like the tunomatic option.
White with maple, strat head would be cool. (Ala Adrian Peterson Jackson...) Also love the candy apple red, and plain old black... As far as graphics - Crossed Swords; Hot Rod flames...

On the star, I like the pointy, but I like the strathead as well... Hmm... Do both...??? (options...)

???

[phill_up]

I noticed some guys from Europe was wanting better accessibility to the USA Jacksons and Charvels, has any of that changed or is it still almost impossible for the working man to get one of these guitars?

Some of these guys predicted the future pretty much dead on.

ah crap...just give me FULL SIZED STRAT BODIES, maple boads, dual hums and non-recessed floyds.$850.00 no graphic. $1150.00 for graphics...keep it simple stupid..

Heh biggest things I'd like to see are an affordable USA guitar that doesn't have all the "bells and whistles", ie, binding, sharkfins. I'm a fan of plain old guitars with all balls and no tits.

I'd like to see more models available in 24.75 scale

. A friendlier Jackson, one with actual contact information.
. Serial number and model information for the public. Like an answer to one of my posts, access to uthenticating documents, charge if needed. "Make" that number mean something on the neckplate of a foreign made model. "Keep" the meaning of the USA made models. You are selling the illusion of owning your own custom, that starts with a serial number.

Opening up the whole Bass Player issue would be a trip. Could you see "Flea" doing the "snap pop and Tap" on a RR Bass? What about Les Claypool on a 6 string Star Bass?