Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RR1 vs Warrior

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RR1 vs Warrior

    Ok, I'm looking to buy a Warrior, but haven't had a chance to play one yet. I already have an RR1 and love it to death . Playwise, are they similar ? I know they both go 25 1/2 scale , but curious about the neck profile. Any help would really be appreciated.
    I'm not afraid to bleed, but I won't do it for you.

  • #2
    warrior has a thicker neck profile. well, it feels that way.
    Fuck ebay, fuck paypal

    "Finger on the trigger, back against the wall. Counting rounds and voices, not enough to kill them all" (Ihsahn).

    Comment


    • #3
      LOL Warrior has a THINNER neck profile. WR, KE and KV have the same 775/835 "faster" neck, while RR and SL have 790/850 profile which is a bit more rounded as well.

      To me it isn't a significant difference, though I like 790/850 profile better
      Last edited by Carbophos; 12-13-2006, 03:12 AM.
      Because I don't say it
      Doesn't mean I ain't thinking it

      Comment


      • #4
        The Rhoads neck sits more level to the ground, the Warrior neck points up nicely. The Rhoads neck also sits more to the left, while the Warrior is a little more centered to your body... in other words, the 24th fret on a Warrior is closer to the center of your body, the Rhoads is to the left of you...

        The Warrior is great sitting down. Perhaps the best body style for sitting. Once you plant it in your lap, you don't even need to hold the guitar, no squeezing your legs together, and the neck just 'floats' in that proper spot.

        The Rhoads needs to have one leg raised, your legs clenched, and the neck tends to dip when you let it go.

        Both are excellent guitars to play while standing.
        The 2nd Amendment: America's Original Homeland Defense.

        Comment


        • #5
          i was in your situation in the past. played both and chose the warrior.

          i think the necks are similiar, but on the warrior you get 24 frets and a better sitting position
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCw4Es1ARzY
          http://www.soundclick.com/milkmen

          Comment


          • #6
            Hey , thanks a lot for all the advice ! I'm headed down to a store in Baltimore tomorrow to check a WR1 in person. With any luck, I'll come home with a new toy.
            I'm not afraid to bleed, but I won't do it for you.

            Comment


            • #7
              Hey guys,

              I'm also in this kind of position.
              I also have a RR1 but 've been dreaming of a WR1 for quite a while now.
              Does the sightly thinner neck influence the sound significantly compared to the RR's? I mean, because of the neck-through, it (RR) sounds full yet hollowish and it misses a kind of 'snap' IMHO.
              I mean, I have a PCS Dinky with a bolt on speed-neck (supposedly like in the WR1s) and I was wondering if you could compare it more with the RR1 (due to the neck-through) or the Dinky...?
              I know, stupid question, but I've been thinking of getting a custom warrior built, with bolt-on neck...


              thanks

              Comment


              • #8
                You really should play one. I really liked the looks of a warrior. It looks badass. I played Darksaga's Warrior and also played a Rhoads. I would take the rhoads any day of the week. It was just so much more comfortable and playable to me.

                -Nate
                Insert annoying equipment list here....

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Iced Dragon View Post
                  Hey guys,

                  I'm also in this kind of position.
                  I also have a RR1 but 've been dreaming of a WR1 for quite a while now.
                  Does the sightly thinner neck influence the sound significantly compared to the RR's? I mean, because of the neck-through, it (RR) sounds full yet hollowish and it misses a kind of 'snap' IMHO.
                  I mean, I have a PCS Dinky with a bolt on speed-neck (supposedly like in the WR1s) and I was wondering if you could compare it more with the RR1 (due to the neck-through) or the Dinky...?
                  I know, stupid question, but I've been thinking of getting a custom warrior built, with bolt-on neck...
                  thanks
                  It's a bit difficult to compare stock RR1 and stock WR1, because they've got VERY different pups. Bridge SD Invader in WR1 has more low-end emphasis and a bit cut down highs compared to SD JB. Though I beilieve RR1 (along with KV1) has more higher mid emphasis itself due to the shape and amount of wood as well. Neck thickness difference between Jackson "standard" and "speed" profiles is notch. I mean it's like .015", G string of 9-42 set. It's more shape/feel thing than tone.
                  Because I don't say it
                  Doesn't mean I ain't thinking it

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'd go with the WR1
                    Check my bands!
                    www.myspace.com/magicktr
                    www.myspace.com/sinif64
                    www.myspace.com/dementiatr

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Carbophos View Post
                      LOL Warrior has a THINNER neck profile. WR, KE and KV have the same 775/835 "faster" neck, while RR and SL have 790/850 profile which is a bit more rounded as well.
                      I just got a new RR1T yesterday and measured the neck with a very accurate digital caliper and measured 775/835 on mine (!) So much for 'published specs'.

                      But .015" isn't much as Carbophos says.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        In general neck thickness may vary within the same model even. That's natural for Jackson for some mysterious reason
                        Because I don't say it
                        Doesn't mean I ain't thinking it

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          WR-1 as well. There sexy

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X