Jackson soloists - what's the worst era?

[jim belisario]

Hey gang: I've been trying to gain more knowledge as to the USA soloists. What era which I avoid considering. Thanks in advance. [img]graemlins/headbang.gif[/img]

[ May 24, 2003, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: limbo ]

[BK]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

If the head on the soloist says Ibanez i guess it's from one of the bad eras [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[jim belisario]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

[img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] No, really, I'm sure players believe that certain years are best to stay away from.

[Dave L]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

To my knowledge, different eras of Soloists are different. Not necessarily "better" or "worse" but definitely different. It all depends on how you like ´em...neckangle, neckshape, recessed trem vs. non-recessed. The newer ones imho have a slight advantage with the Floyd Original, but the craftmanship is topnotch thru every era. I own a 2001 Ft.Worth and a 1988 Ontario, and they´re equally good guitars.

[RacerX]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Yeah, I'd agree with Dave. Excellent axes, and there is no era to avoid.

[xenophobe]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Yeah, there are no eras to avoid. I'd prefer something with a floyd, non-recessed, but any of them are great.

[Newc]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

"2001 Ft Worth"? WTF is that? You mean a Professional (Japanese-made) model?
Jackson never made one guitar in Ft Worth ever.

Newc

[Dave L]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Sorry, I was under the impression that they moved the shop to Ft.Worth after Ontario...but I must remember wrong, I guess...apparently I gotta refresh my memory [img]graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] But I hold true to that different eras are equally good but different.

[Newc]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Nah they moved the business office and tech support center there, but the actual woodcutting shop never left California.

Newc

[Dave L]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Allright, thanks for clearing that up! [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img] Somehow I´d missed that...they never spoke that much of where the actual construction took place, did they?

[JACKSONFREAK]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

I have a n 86 ontario and a 96 ontario and a 95 fort worth:lol just kidding. Its a soloist Std.
And there is no differance in quality they are all great gutars. Each has its onw tone and own charactor, but all play and sound great. Not sorry i spent the money on them at all.
Gil

[peedenmark7]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

the soloists I really dont care for have recessed trems, scalloped heels, paper thin necks....whatever vintage that fits '90 to present?..... I love the '86-89 ones, the necks seem a bit fuller than the dimas made ones which at times I really dig, but the covered pickups are a drag and the locknut behing the nut ala jt-6 is bunk.....ok, I will admitt it, I like the early ones best!!! john

[Tetsuo]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Originally posted by Newc:
Nah they moved the business office and tech support center there, but the actual woodcutting shop never left California.

Newc

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I don't doubt you on that but I ahve a friend who lives in Ft Worth who went to the shop and they do have a woodshop there he said. Now he could have never gone there and only drove by also

[pro-fusion]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

I see four basic Soloist "eras":

1. San Dimas (1983-86). Since these were all custom-made, it's hard to generalize too much, but the most common features: fairly thick neck shape, low-wide frets, relatively medium-output pickups, and Kahler suggest that the Soloist was initially intended as a way to get a Les Paul player into a strat-shaped guitar. I know that's what got me hooked into an SD Soloist back in the day. This was also just before the shred craze went nuclear with Yngwie and all the Shrapnel guys.

2. Early Ontario (1986-91). The shred factor comes into play: bigger frets and slightly thinner necks (although some have huge necks). Also, the neck heel receives its first redesign about 1989 to the Stephens-looking version. Hotter pickups and usually with some kind of boost circuit. All with the goal of allowing maximum meedley-meedley! But not as radical as later stuff.

3. High Shred (1992-95). Grunge? We don't need no stinkin' grunge! Skinny necks. Humongous frets. Bill Lawrence humbuckers. Recessed trems. Neck heel redesigned yet again. I've got a 1994 Soloist CST on the way from an eBay transaction with this description, and I'm getting antsy!

4. Modern Era (1996-). More conservative era attempting to incorporate a little PRS aesthetic into the Soloist. Bigger necks return. Flame maple. Trans finishes. Chrome Hardware. Seymour Duncan pickups. All apparently aimed at making the Soloist more of a universal appeal guitar. Not a bad idea, but I wish Jackson still offered a more aggressive version of the Soloist and a few more outrageous options without resorting to custom shop prices.

Geez, you could almost have one of each, couldn't you?

[ May 29, 2003, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: pro-fusion ]

[toejam]

Re: Jackson soloists - what\'s the worst era?

Originally posted by pro-fusion:
Bill Lawrence humbuckers.

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the "Bill Lawrence" humbuckers that Jackson used were the imitations that Stew-Mac sells and not the real BL pups. Did Jackson ever use the real version? [img]graemlins/scratchhead.gif[/img]