Mainstream?

[RandyRhoads]

I know that Jackson aren't as universally played as they were in the 80's but do you think they'll ever try to capture the more mainstream guitarist? I know that they're essentially a metal brand hence all the metal-heads that play them but they seem to market themselves as a metal brand. I know that people say stick to what you good at but I honestly don't know why Jackson can't try to market themselves as a slightly more flexable brand (even if it means biting the bullet and trying to whore off guitars to more 'mainstream' guitarists)!

What do you think?

[drockilles]

No

[dg]

I think Fender bought Jackson in order to get a better foothold in the metal market, and I'd be very surprised to see them move the brand into an area they already have completely covered on a couple of fronts, especially after the Jazz'r guitars did so poorly.

[Newc]

Ok, just to set the record straight, RR and I are two different people

Seriously, that's the one thing I do not like about the new ownership - focusing on a niche like Metal. It was great back in the day, when it was popular and people flocked to it, but IMO it hurts Jackson. Business is business, however, and since Fender doesn't want direct competition on the same field with their underlings, it'll never happen unless Jackson becomes an independent builder again.

[VitaminG]

but IMO it hurts Jackson.

that is key. "In your opinion"

I imagine the guys at Jackson and Fender would have a better grasp (and all the research and actual figures to support it) on just how badly this niche marketing is "hurting" the brand, if at all.

[sl2lover]

Well to me it doesn't matter who owned Jackson as long as the "boys," we're still building em!! I will always shop/buy/own/play them regardless of how popular they are/aren't!! I'm the same way with music, why not guitars!

[daemon barbeque]

Well to me it doesn't matter who owned Jackson as long as the "boys," we're still building em!! I will always shop/buy/own/play them regardless of how popular they are/aren't!! I'm the same way with music, why not guitars!

WERD!

[tanpsi]

I'm going to assume the Fender parent company will keep the marketing of the many brands targeted at different markets.

But forgetting all that marketing BS theres no reason Jackson couldn't be more popular with guitarists outside metal. The $599 japanese Dinkys are the best deals out there, great quality with the great Jackson neck feel. I don't think the dinkys really look death-metal either, more hair metal, hot rod guitar that would not look too out of place in country rock or blues.

Instead of branching out, I would like to see jackson just make more variations of Dinkys and get rid of all those freaky shapes!!!!!!!!!!! haha

[RacerX]

Instead of branching out, I would like to see jackson just make more variations of Dinkys and get rid of all those freaky shapes!!!!!!!!!!! haha

Like that'll happen!

[bonghits]

Instead of branching out, I would like to see jackson just make more variations of Dinkys and get rid of all those freaky shapes!!!!!!!!!!! haha

By freaky, you mean like the Mark Morton Sig?!

[straycat]

The guitar player in Garth Brooks's band played a Jackson did he not?

[StukaJU87]

I would like to see jackson just make more variations of Dinkys and get rid of all those freaky shapes!

By freaky, you mean like the Mark Morton Sig?!

I really hope he meant the Morton and not the RR.

[Zerberus]

I think Fender bought Jackson in order to get a better foothold in the metal market, and I'd be very surprised to see them move the brand into an area they already have completely covered on a couple of fronts, especially after the Jazz'r guitars did so poorly.

+1

Every venture Jackson has made into a "less metal" market has been a flop and therefore discontinued after 2-3 years at best. The Surfcaster is probably the only notable exception, and even it´s popularity outside of the metal market is relatively low.

See also:
AT1
Swee-Tone Series
SLAT-series

Also, as mentioned, Fender did not purchase Jackson to produce competition for themselves, but to expand into a niche that they had practically zero foothold in. JCMI expanding too far into a mainstream market would be like getting a gardener to trim the hedges and then finding out he´s banging your wife

.....

Instead of branching out, I would like to see jackson just make more variations of Dinkys and get rid of all those freaky shapes!!!!!!!!!!! haha

One of the main reasons that people play Jackson guitars is that they´ve stayed at least relatively true to their roots over the years. Their Roots are undeniably the Rhoads and Soloist shapes, with the King V and Kelly coming a close 3rd and 4th.

If you eliminate those shapes, you may as well eliminate the brand completely.

If you want something more mainstream, get a Charvel

[BLOOD SPLATTER]

....unless Jackson becomes an independent builder again.

We can only hope!!

[RandyRhoads]

I wasn't suggesting that Jackson go for a whole different approach and starting making basic Strat copies... I just think that Fender should understand that not everyone who plays a Jackson is a metal-head. I'm under the impression that a lot of people on this forum are Metal guitarists and are therefore likely to disagree with me and I respect that, but I myself am not (the closest to Metal I am is 'Hair Metal'), I'm more Pop/Rock (Bon Jovi, Danger Danger, Quiet Riot etc)... despite Randy Rhoads being my guitar idol, I would personally say that I sound more like Richie Sambora.

Take Jackson's website for example... I know it's nit-picking and I'm not in anyway trying to taint the awsome Jackson name (I myself, like someone else said earlier, always have and always will play Jacksons) but the second you enter the Jackson site, you're presented with immediate images of 'Metal'. However, take Ibanez for example. Now I'm not a big fan of Ibanez personally, but they are also a brand that is more popular with the 'Metal' crowd than any other genre. However, when you view their site you'll notice that they don't seem to corner themselves with that image...

Image A:


Image B:


These are 'typical' ad for Jackson guitars and it immediately tells the consumer that if you want a 'Heavy Metal' axe then look no further... but what about people who don't play 'Heavy Metal'?... they'll likely be turned away from Jackson by this ad alone. All I'm saying is that Fender should stop being so freaking awkward and start to acknowledge people such as myself who don't want to be typcast as a metal-head just because I love to play Jacksons (I've lost count of the amount of non-metal guitarists I've seen rocking out on a Jackson)!

Still, I doubt Fender would listen (or care) about the view of one individual eh?