How many Grover Jackson's existed in the 80's ?

[Nik]

I would ask the forum members in general and specifically those who know the Jackson Dinky made in USA from the 80's/90's what they make of the different signatures I have found on these....So just how many people with that name were signing guitars back in the 80's ? Just one ? Really ? Or was it more like Rembrandts workshop, where his pupils signed at times as well...
How many of these signatures are real ? All of them ? (photos from the web and this forum, one of those shown is for sale..and I rather like it..but would very much love to hear what people on this here forum think about it all..) I am not working for the CSI, so I don't really want to go too far with guesswork, but there are a few differences even a yokel like myself can tell : 1) 2 are numbered, 2 are not. It was believed that there were 100 or 500 (depending on where you read) signed copies of the Jackson Dinky in crackle finish signed and numbered, possibly even of each colour. That would account nicely for the first two photos. What about the other two ? 2) The way the letters in the signature are drawn varies. The ending of the letters vary. If I was a bit less paranoid, I'd think "Hey, we all vary our signature a bit". However, I am all out of medication..and start to worry.. 3) The 5th photo is the exception in as much as the process of signing took longer, the place is more unusual and I think it would be fair to assume that this signature took longer and was therefore more elaborately done. If we take this as the mark for all others, the differences in the signatures become more apparent. There is at least one signature that looks as if the first letter was "stopped and re-started"....What can I say, other than PLEASE HELP ME DEAR JACKSON FORUM PEOPLE...


















(disclaimer : if you are the owner of any of these guitars and do not want me to post them here, just drop me a message and I will take it off. The use of the photos is only for demonstrating the variety of signatures found..and to help me to hopefully buy the one Dinky for sale among that lot..)
<br>

[pianoguyy]

You're gonna need to be more specific with your question.
There was a Grover Jackson model (maybe even a brand and factory?).
But then there are ones he signed at the factory. Which are different than the ones he signed at fan events.

[Newc]

I think he's trying to make sure the sig on the one he's looking at is real. Like it matters.

[neilli]

Grover signed a TON of bolt-ons in (I think) 1988 - most of the h/s crackles (dot inlays, JT6, blue or red crackle) were signed, plus a bunch of other solid colours..

[xenophobe]

Yeah, he did sign a ton. I remember reading one series got 250 signatures domestic 250 import. 88 Limited I think? And a few hundred here and there. Probably around 1000 units.

If you're wondering if they add any value at all, no Grover's signature on a guitar isn't worth the sharpie he used.

[Axewielder]

The sigs are kind of cool but not worth anything. The black strat is mine. I always thought it odd that he signed and numbered a run with very pedestrian features. The point being, he didn't reserve his John Hancock for the cream of the crop or anything.

[Nik]

Thanks for the input, xenophobe. It was curiosity that got me into looking at signatures (and other features). From a collectors point of view his signature will eventually have a certain value (I hate to explain the "when" bit). The seller of the one I am after did stress as well that the signature was irrelevant and did not add value.

[Nik]

Thanks for the input, Axewielder. Yes, it seems curios for a "normal" guitar (normal then, now Made in China is normal and everything else is "wow"..or so some think) to have a signature. It may have been a kind of departing gesture, as he did leave the company for good soon afterwards.

[Nik]

Thanks for the input neilli, you have described the exact model I am looking at...couldn't figure out why all of a sudden there was this licensed Floyd Rose on a guitar that previously had better stuff..according to one web source it was a 1988 "improvement", as in after the San Dimas era...

[Nik]

Thanks for the input Newc. As was stated by the owner of the guitar for sale, the signature does not add value, so from an economical point of view, it doesn't matter if it is signed/unsigned. However, from a guitar history point of view, it does. Plus, in all honesty, I am not willing to put down a guy who developed his own guitar brand just THAT quickly and thoroughly... I for one am unable to develop anything other than flue...

[Nik]

Thanks for the input pianoguyy. I am going to reload the pics, not sure what happened, showed nicely in "previsualize"... Could it be that the factory signed guitars have numbered and un-numbered models ? As neilli pointed put, most of that particular model on sale where signed at factory...Was this an exception and someone had it signed at an event , hence the lack of serial with the signature ?

[Nik]

Hopefully the pics will stay up this time... Counting on your help and advise, I am posting some pics of the actual guitar on offer..and the info I have gathered so far from the web. If I am wrong (as I very much suspect I will be on at least some of the info..), I would very much appreciate if you could correct me. Thanks for your help..












This is what I have seen so far on the web :

Jackson took over Charvel and continued selling Charvel and Jackson guitars until he sold the company in 1985 (other sources state 1989). He remained with the company a little while longer, until finally leaving and thus breaking all ties with the manufacturing of his guitars in 1990 (?). By 1986 (?), Jackson stopped being the all-american quality guitar, as production of some models was now outsourced to Asia. Some models where still Made in USA, but underwent changes probably not for the best when the company moved from the San Dimas premises to Ontario, California to a bigger place. Everything that makes this guitar "middle of the road" instead of handcrafted USA super-axe started after the San Dimas move : hardware was replaced with more economical solutions (Kahler tremolos previously used were substituted with a Floyd Rose licensed to Jackson tremolo of low-ish quality). At the end of the Grover Jackson era at Jackson Guitars, he signed some of those Dinky cracle models, made in Ontario but with a San Dimas neckplate (excess stock has to be used, after all) in 1987/1988.

I am dying for someone to put my facts and figures straight..

[neilli]

I think he sold in 89 but could be wrong. 1986 was still San Dimas (actually Glendora), but yeah there were certain changes tied to the move to the new Ontario factory in 1987 which probably weren't for the best i.e. the JT6 and oversized pickups. But I personally don't believe that the quality of the woodworking / finishing of the US made guitars themselves went down, it's just the hardware was a cost cutting measure (JT6 was possibly a response to Kramer having an agreement with Floyd Rose and Jackson needing to offer a Floyd rather than the Kahler because of market demands).

[Nik]

The year varies according to source, neilli :
Wikipedia says in a Charvel result 1989 :
"Charvel (and Jackson) guitars remained in production at the Gladstone Street shop in Glendora, California until 1986. In 1986, the manufacturing facilities moved to Ontario, California, and production of U.S.-built Charvel guitars ceased shortly thereafter.

The success of Charvel in the 1980s led to Jackson's planning to mass-produce popular configurations in Asia. Each California-produced Charvel guitar was essentially a hand built custom instrument—but the Japanese assembly line versions that appeared in 1986 were categorized into model numbers.
In 1989, Jackson sold Charvel/Jackson to the Japanese manufacturer IMC (International Music Corporation), who made Charvel brand guitars exclusively in Japan from 1986 to 1991"

The same Wiki says for Grover Jackson again 1989 :
"Although Jackson and Charvel Guitars became popular with the rise of hard rock and heavy metal music in that era, Grover Jackson sold the Jackson/Charvel brand to the Japanese manufacturer IMC (International Music Corporation) of Fort Worth, Texas, in 1989, and eventually left the company in 1990."

Now for the funny part - this is what Grover Jackson says about himself on his new page http://gj2guitars.com/history/ - 1985 :



"In 1985, Grover Jackson sold the business to International Music Co. (IMC), a distributor of various brands of music-related products. IMC folded the Charvel and Jackson product lines into one homogeneous grouping with little to distinguish the two brands. In a story that has been repeated many times over, after an initial boost under IMC, Charvel and Jackson, the brands and the instruments, started a long swoon towards irrelevancy. Disenchanted with what the brands had become and foreseeing the inevitable, Grover left the company."


...needless to say, I wrote to the man, but may get a reply back first from Marvin the Martian about carrots being suitable for harvesting on Mars...


http://www.jacksoncharvelworld.net/Home.html

Something else I dug out ....this gives some timeline details (and some insight into personal relations )

[xenophobe]

Thanks for the input, xenophobe. It was curiosity that got me into looking at signatures (and other features). From a collectors point of view his signature will eventually have a certain value (I hate to explain the "when" bit). The seller of the one I am after did stress as well that the signature was irrelevant and did not add value.

Sorry, the "when" bit is never. He autographed a whole bunch of guitars, most of them were fairly bland as far as US customs go. I'd go a lot farther in saying that Grover Jackson's autograph on a guitar will never add value whereas Mike Shannon's signature might. Even Wayne's signature on a guitar doesn't add value. Over the past 30 years, US Jacksons have not held value up to inflation except for very few rare things. Very few Jacksons have any actual investment value.