Star vs Warrior-Any preference besides aesthetics?

[jco5055]

Hey guys,

So I am a big X shaped guitar fan...I also love Vs, but (and correct me if I'm wrong) I feel like the X shape in general is just a tad more ergonomic, especially when sitting in a classical kinda position (not to mention that the fret access is better on a Star or Warrior).

Now between the two guitars, I feel like from pure aesthetics I am a Star guy, and it's a shame the Star is not a regular production model besides the Gus G signature (I like trems), but I was wondering for those that have played both and know both shapes well, do you have a preference for one or the other BESIDES just an aesthetic/mojo kind of reason? I've never gotten to play either shape at the same time at a guitar store, so I've never been able to direct compare. A friend of mine has owned both shapes, and his only critique is that some of the Stars seem to have the output jack on the lower horn which makes it harder to play classical style, but other than that doesn't notice a difference. Unfortunately that is how the jack is on Warmoth star bodies (which I'd probably do to get a Star since Desolation Stars are pretty rare on Reverb and the like).

Thanks!

[metalhobo]

to me it comes down to three things:
1. aesthetics
2. balance (standing up)
3. the lower jack placement

the thing about all three is they are variable depending on the specific model you get. for instance, for aesthetics, what kind of headstock? strat or pointy? and even within the warrior subclass there are various aesthetic differences, like how the warrior pro is much more beveled than others.

balance is a huge issue with x guitars. the good thing is it's usually mitigable but moving the strap buttons, but that usually results in extra holes. my WRMG didn't balance for shit and that was one (of several) reasons I didn't get along with it. usually with a star (not a warrior) you will have to move the strap button that's normally on the upper part of the body to the back of the body if it isn't already there. a less common thing is to also place the lower strap button on the back of the guitar. this could work on both a warrior or a star, but I've only tried it on stars. I've had the experience that both these things can improve balance on x guitars greatly.

the lower jack is likewise variable from model to model. I agree that the upper bout placement is better, but using a right angle cable can offset some of the problem if you end up with a guitar with the jack in the lower part.

independent of these three aspects, I'd have to say I don't have any preference for star vs. warrior in general.

[jco5055]

to me it comes down to three things:
1. aesthetics
2. balance (standing up)
3. the lower jack placement

the thing about all three is they are variable depending on the specific model you get. for instance, for aesthetics, what kind of headstock? strat or pointy? and even within the warrior subclass there are various aesthetic differences, like how the warrior pro is much more beveled than others.

balance is a huge issue with x guitars. the good thing is it's usually mitigable but moving the strap buttons, but that usually results in extra holes. my WRMG didn't balance for shit and that was one (of several) reasons I didn't get along with it. usually with a star (not a warrior) you will have to move the strap button that's normally on the upper part of the body to the back of the body if it isn't already there. a less common thing is to also place the lower strap button on the back of the guitar. this could work on both a warrior or a star, but I've only tried it on stars. I've had the experience that both these things can improve balance on x guitars greatly.

the lower jack is likewise variable from model to model. I agree that the upper bout placement is better, but using a right angle cable can offset some of the problem if you end up with a guitar with the jack in the lower part.

independent of these three aspects, I'd have to say I don't have any preference for star vs. warrior in general.

Awesome response! Yeah I didn't consider that each shape can have so many tweaks that aren't "required" for it to be considered the shape, so really it does just come down to aesthetics and then from there can search for specific models.

[Mechayoshi]

My WRMG balances great, but then again so does my Kelly, so maybe I just have a good track record with that sort of thing. For Star shapes it should probably being on the back heel for the best bet, kind of like with Kellys. That output jack point is valid though, because I also play classical. I’ve made it work with angled jacks. Lastly, Warriors look cooler to me.

[jco5055]

My WRMG balances great, but then again so does my Kelly, so maybe I just have a good track record with that sort of thing. For Star shapes it should probably being on the back heel for the best bet, kind of like with Kellys. That output jack point is valid though, because I also play classical. I’ve made it work with angled jacks. Lastly, Warriors look cooler to me.

Yeah I had a bcrich stealth, and the neck dive was sooooo bad I was exclusively a superstrat guy for years after haha

[Razor]

One of these days I'd like to pick up a Star. I never cared for the Warrior shape but the WASP fan in me wants a Star.

[jco5055]

I actually played a Gus G star today, and I love it except for one thing: the lower cutaway is not enough so my hand hits the guitar up near the highest frets.

Can anyone confirm if a warrior has more spacing up there? I tried to upload a pic but currently I’m having trouble.

[john.w.lawson]

I actually played a Gus G star today, and I love it except for one thing: the lower cutaway is not enough so my hand hits the guitar up near the highest frets.

Can anyone confirm if a warrior has more spacing up there? I tried to upload a pic but currently I’m having trouble.

Warrior Pro (not mine)








Star not mine

[metalhobo]

I should also note, a lot of warrior models have the D-shaped "speed neck" profile which is divisive. some like it, some don't. I've never held the gus g model so I'm not sure how it compares to the neck profile on that, but it's definitely a bit different that the c-shaped profile you'll see on soloists, etc.

[wilkinsi]

I prefer the Warrior.

Aesthetics: Warrior - sharper and futuristic looking, must be a Warrior with bigger bevels and scalloped horns, like the Warrior Pro, which I have. I like both the C shape neck of the Early 90's Pro and D shape neck of the USA WR1. To me, the Star looks blunt, and isn't availeble in gloss black. I don't want a piss colour finish or chrome hardware either.

Balance: The Warrior is the only X shape guitar I like that balances perfectly. I've had issues with Kellys and RR's. If it doesn't balance right, even after the strap button is relocated, I don't want it. The shape of the front arch/horn suggests the Star might have balance issues.

Comfort: The bevels help a lot. My Warrior has nice bevels. Unfortunately, I don't have a Warrior bass, so I've had to settle for a couple Concert basses. I won't buy a flat top Warrior.

Output jack: I actually prefer this to be on the rear upper wing, so its out of the way. My Warrior Pro has a recessed jack on the lower rear wing, making it easy to get pulled out, and it happens a lot.

[toejam]

I've had a Warrior (WRMG) body paired up with a PS-4 neck, and it balanced perfectly, felt great standing or sitting.

I also enjoyed the Charvel Star I owned, thought the balance was okay, but the body did tend to tilt forward, away from the stomach, just a tiny bit... similar to a Kelly, RR or Explorer, but didn't tilt as much.

[pianoguyy]

Why are we sitting down in a classical position?
I'm getting too old for this shit.
Buy yourself a nylon string acoustic. Put on your fancy suit, with your stool and foot rest at just the right ergonomic height. Drink your sage tea and fuck off.
These guitars are made for head banging on a stage in front of a bunch of sweaty metal heads that are headbanging right along with you.
What's the world coming to.

[toejam]

The Warrior and Star are perfectly fine for sitting in the classical position. I don't know why people have a hard time with that. Explorers, Kellys and Vs also do fine between the legs in the classical position.

[jco5055]

thanks for the responses guys! And in regards to sitting vs standing, well I assume everyone spends most of their playing time not on stage lol so when sitting I prefer classical position (Well quasi as I don't have a footstool).

[wrldeatr7]

That's one of the amazing things about the X shapes, how ergonomic they are. They can be played in any position. My WRXTMG balanced perfectly. My JS Warrior has a slight neck dive, but then I did change the tuners so that added some weight to the headstock. No experience with the Star shaped but not a fan of the rounded horns. I'm interested in one of the X Series Gus G with the TOM bridge since Jackson refuses to produce TOM bridged mid-range Warriors. All Warriors have been coming for a while now with the jack on the upper horn.