why did jackson switch from non-recessed to recessed floyds?

[Bengal]

I have both. I like both...

No real preference...

[toejam]

When I bought my Soloist I had a choice between 2, one recessed, one not, I choose the recessed one and I let the other one go, although it was signed by Mike Shannon. Was that a mistake ?

That was a "Shannon Soloist" they released in the late '90s. It was to resemble the old-school Soloists... non-recessed trem, different neck heel, binding over fret ends. I would have taken that one over the one you did, but I wouldn't worry about it too much.

[DonP]

With a neck angle (required for a high bridge), the headstock is closer to you. The guitar kind of wraps around you, making it a little easier to play, or so I've read in some guitar design books.

Personally I like either. I just got an SL2H, and thought the recessed trem would be an issue, but it wasn't. It plays great.

[Mr Metal]

I like both. I have heard an argument that the slightly more wood on a non recessed body helps the sustain, but this can all be theoretical. I have not personally heard a difference. You could pull more with a recessed Floyd though. Notice that players that pull a lot on the Floyd (such as Vai and Satriani) use recessed Floyds.

[quiksilver]

New to the forum and just wanted to throw in some of my ideas on the recessed vs. non-recessed. I have built numerous guitars (well over 50). One of the main advantages of a recessed trem cavity is its ease of build with neck thru design. If you look at your neck thru with a recessed trem, you will notice there is no neck angle. Also the fretboard bottom is level with the top of the body. It makes it easier to glue the "wings" to the neck. If you were to do a neck thru without a recess, the neck has to be glued to an angle in reference to the "wings". The wings and neck thru then need to be plane flat to each other. On a bolt on neck, especially in the early 80's when Starts were being modified to accept Floyd units, a shim is usually required to angle the neck. The angle is usually 1-2 degrees and really only takes about a 0.03" shim to angle the neck to allow a floating trem. Some people prefer to have the Floyd rest on the body to essentially "Block" the trem from pulling up on the bar. Just my two cents. I have no preference either way.

---

Interesting! Thanks for posting that, and welcome!

Most of my guitars have recessed trems, but I actually prefer the non-recessed variety. I feel like I can "dig in" more when the strings are higher off the guitar, and I also prefer the old school look of the non-recessed setup.

[patricef]

That was a "Shannon Soloist" they released in the late '90s. It was to resemble the old-school Soloists... non-recessed trem, different neck heel, binding over fret ends. I would have taken that one over the one you did, but I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Thanks for the info. Unfortunately I wasn't able to try them before buying, but I love mine, so no regrets !

[danyeo]

I like Reccessed because they sit lower on the body. Add a Tremolno and it works for me.

[excon]

Wow! I'm surprised at how many people prefer non-recessed since most Jackson/Charvel guitars come with parallel necks and recessed Floyds. Back in the '80s it seems half of the Jackson/Charvels made had pitched necks and Kahler trems. I'd really like to see the Kahlers come back.

Personally, I can't play a recessed Floyd guitar because the low bridge height causes the fingers on my picking hand to rub against the face of the guitar.

[Blazphemer]

Bump.

[Newc]

If you were to do a neck thru without a recess, the neck has to be glued to an angle in reference to the "wings". The wings and neck thru then need to be plane flat to each other.

Well, if you're using prefab throughnecks like from Carvin, I could see that, but if you're building the entire neck yourself, why not simply cut the body tenon (where the wings attach) at that angle before gluing it to the rest of the neck?

[J_A / 540s]

I guess it was more demand than non recessed.

Personally I prefer the non recessed Floyds which makes it a pain in the ass for me since I like to play RR's & most are recessed. I can deal with either but I also play a lot of guitars with TOM bridges & finid the transition from one to the other a little easier with non recessed.

[Leftyzrule580]

I don't know why they switched, but I sure like that recessed Floyd

[metalchurch79]

I prefer the Recessed because the neck is on less of an angle and the bridge pickup doesnt have to raised up so high.
I have a couple of non recessed floyds as well and they are great designs as well. I also have a couple with a Kahler and alot of guys dont like them, but thats another story...

[85 San Dimas]

Well, if I can remember back correctly one of the complaints was that the floyd was so tall (take a look at old Kramers) that in order to get the fretboard up to the correct height that the heel had to be about 3/16" of an inch thicker when compare to a standard strat-style body heel. This was in the days before rounded heels were commonplace. So, you ended up with a shredder guitar that was actually LESS comfortable to play in the higher registers. By lowering the Floyd the guitar became more comfortable to play at both ends. The Floyd sat lower (closer to what players were used to), and the heel went back to standard size (what you were used to). Then, the experimentation began with rounded heels and deep recess routes (Jem), and no wood at all (Voyager) as inspired by the Steinbergers. That's the way I remember the development anyway. Yeah, pulling up was a big deal but I think at the time it was secondary to a natural evolution due to player discomfort.

[metalchurch79]

That makes sense.