To bevel or not to bevel?

[LEOKV2]

Seeing those new X-mas customs that have arrived to you guys, I really like the body binding on the red Kelly and the chlorine Rhoads.

I take it that they must have a flat top in order to get the binding, from what I see in the pics.

I have 2 issues going on...

1) I'm getting a flame maple top for my custom KV-2 (trans green) and I wonder how would it look with the binding on it... I mean, I've seen quilts but not flames, maybe it won't be so great, maybe a pic will help.

2) I love the Jackson V shape, but I also like the body binding, will removing the bevels of it, kinda like take away the uniqueness of the King V, won't it make it look like the BC Rich V shape or the Rico Jr. shape? And, If I want it to have full body binding, at the back too, won't it be a bit "chunkier" to play? Like, the back of the V near the neck will no longer be beveled thus more comfortable to play, instead, it will be like a solid piece of wood the same thickness as the rest of the body (since I want the back body binding too, if I get bindings it will be FULL), any experience? Like a full bound V ?

What do you think?

[quakana]

I like the Body binding myself. But that does not bind you to having a flat-top either. you can do an arch top with body bindings. I actually have thought about this same subject and came up with body binding on the top with bevels on the back side. That might suit you as well in keeping the shape

[toejam]

Here's an Archtop Rhoads with binding... though, it's only on the top of the body.

http://www.jcfonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51765&highlight=archtop+Rhoads

[Newc]

You can also get a figured top with natural binding - body trim that doesn't get painted, just cleared and trimmed in thin strips of paint to look like wood binding.

If you're going to get a Custom Shop V, I'd say keep the bevels but have them do natural binding along the top edges.

It'd be unique, to say the least.

[slash-ed]

I like the Body binding myself. But that does not bind you to having a flat-top either. you can do an arch top with body bindings. I actually have thought about this same subject and came up with body binding on the top with bevels on the back side. That might suit you as well in keeping the shape

Hey dude... since you have like the most cool Kellys around that I know of, can I ask you something? You know how the KE2Ts have flat tops and binding? Is there essentially anything different about the body shape compared to the KE2s etc, because I always thought that Marty's Kellys with the binding looked completely different from the ones with bevels. Or is it just a visual effect of having a completely flat top + binding?

If you know what I'm getting at.

[Zerberus]

What "bothers" me: how comfortable are the Kelly, KV, and more importantly (for me) the Rhoads without the bevels?

I ask because when I look at the playwear on my Rhoads and the callous on my right forearm, I can well imagine that having a 90° edge right there at teh top edge could be somewhat bothersome or even painful depending on picking style.

Any comments from those that own flattop Rhoads, KV or Kelly models?

[Carbophos]

As for me, beveled bodies provide more comfort for the right arm rest. And plabylty for me is 1000 times more important than the look, I just hate playing binded guitars.

[Newc]

Flat tops definitely cut into you if you're used to having a sloped/beveled top to rest your arm (like me).

Even my Les Paul will dig into my arm if I wear it high enough.

People keep asking me if my arm gets caught on the spikes on The Halford Warrior, but I rest my arm on the bevel and pass right over them.

[shreddermon]

IMHO, the bevels on Jackson guitars are shallow enough that there's almost no difference in playability or comfort. For the Kelly, RR and KV, I mean. The comfort bevel on a strat or dinky is big enough, deep enough, and sloped enough that it is definitely a playing comfort issue. But on the others - whose bevels are small and shallow - it's definitely more just a stylistic thing. The playing comfort difference is marginal, at best. I don't notice it at all. To each his own, though.

[kelly user]

i wasn't a fan of the flat top, but the binding looked super sexy..... either that or it was just the gold hardware that i didn't like. Keep the bevels. i don't see why bevels wouldn't allow you not to have body binding.

[shreddermon]

Simple: because binding with bevels would look goofy.

[quakana]

Hey dude... since you have like the most cool Kellys around that I know of, can I ask you something? You know how the KE2Ts have flat tops and binding? Is there essentially anything different about the body shape compared to the KE2s etc, because I always thought that Marty's Kellys with the binding looked completely different from the ones with bevels. Or is it just a visual effect of having a completely flat top + binding?

If you know what I'm getting at.

The kelly body shape is pretty much all the same except for the king kelly aka explorer kelly which is a bigger body style. In all actuality the kelly with bevels and the kelly with body bindings are both flat tops. I just think most refer to a kelly with body binding a "flat top" The bevels on a kelly are really just beveled edges of the body.

[toejam]

The kelly body shape is pretty much all the same except for the king kelly aka explorer kelly which is a bigger body style.

There was also a medium-sized Kelly before they made it smaller again for Marty Friedman. The smallest size is what we all know today.

[kelly user]

Simple: because binding with bevels would look goofy.

goofy but still possible

[m2pmd70]

For a flat-top King V you can look at the KV2T.

I think a beveled KV would look sweet with "natural binding" (good description here). Like a little strip of natural wood showing through along all the edges. I think it'd give a similar effect to the "modern pinstripes" in the CSG.