AT2T Questions

[PaulB]

I noticed on an old thread concerning the AT1T that a comment was made stating something like, "there are lots of AT2T's around". How true is that? Neither the USA AT1T nor the imported AT2T seem very common.

I find it curious that the latter isn't more popular, unless most Jackson players prefer their guitar with a Floyd. Doesn't the TOM and stop bar appeal to players who want a G#bson style guitar, but want to play a Jackson?

I would also appreciate some clarification on use of the the term 'archtop' in Jackson nomenclature. The AT models are carved top guitars, but are there not quite a few Jackson models with similarly carved 'archtops'?

Thanks in advance for the illumination.

[PaulB]

Bump.... Lots of lookers; any takers? I really would like some help with the 'archtop' term.

[Inazone]

The "archtop" and "carved top" names get thrown around a lot, sometimes in place of each other. Accurate or not, that's the name that stuck in this case.

If the ATs were brought back now, they might be more successful than in the mid `90s. At the time, Floyds and thin necks were major selling points. A different headstock, thicker neck, Armstrong pickups and fixed bridge just didn't seem very "Jackson" at the time. I had an AT2T and loved the look of it, but hated the feel of the bridge and found the bridge pickup to be muddy. Rather than gut the guitar, I sold it for something with a Floyd and hot pickups. I regret it now, because it would have been a useful studio guitar, but that wasn't really a concern when I bought it.

[PaulB]

Thanks for the input.

The pickups on the AT2T seem an odd choice. Was there an existing history of Kent Armstrong pickups on Jackson guitars? Since Jackson already had humbuckers made for them, why these?

I wonder what the sales numbers are on the Fender Toronado. It has 2 humbuckers, Gibson scale length, 2 V and 2 T with a 3-way, and a T-O-M with bar tailpiece instead of a trem. Seems to be aimed at a similar market: those who want something like a Les Paul but don't want a Les Paul.

[Inazone]

Jackson used Armstrongs for a few years in the `90s. The ATs used the lower-output JVA hums, while the RR2 and SL2 had the JP-10/11 set. Some of the imports had Armstrong pickups as well, although I think some had Jackson logos...back when the X-series was briefly called AX/S. The JVAs have amazing clean tone, but just didn't do the high-gain "Jackson sound" very well. I should have kept my AT2T and swapped out the bridge pickup while keeping the neck pickup for cleans, but it wasn't meant to be.

As with the other specs, I think the marketing geniuses at Jackson wanted something different. Again, if the same guitar were released today, it might survive.

[PaulB]

You filled in some Jackson history for me with the explanation of the relationship between Jackson and Kent Armstrong during that time. I suspect, being that the KA pickups are MIK if I understand correctly, that this was primarily for the MIK Jacksons such as the AT2T.

Which Korean shop made these? Is there any overlap in production between the MIK Jacksons and the MIK Ibanez models, such as the lower end JS guitars?