What's fact, what's not and manipulating the public opinion

[Argos]

What "science proven facts" are you talking about? There's a distinction between the accepted principles of physics, acoustics, woodworking, etc. and their potential applicability to the guitar. And, while there's plenty of research in that vein which has been done on the acoustic guitar and other classical instruments, I know of little that relates to electrics. My assumption is that since an electric guitar is specifically designed to produce an easily manipulated sound, doing lots of "R&D" on the electric guitar as we know it would be little more than an academic exercise.

Research is done, just in different areas. Amp makers, software companies, etc. There are even some very small guitar companies doing interesting things. If you want a forward thinking guitar company, (ironically) look at Gibson. But you'll also find that their robot guitars have recieved a mellow reception. As far as companies like Fender and Jackson, you're paying for a legacy product. We all get excited when new models come out but at the end of the day it's the Rhodes and the Soloist that keep on selling, just like they have for the last 25 years. It's been proven that the violins made by the masters in Cremoa sound no better than well made modern instruments, but the difference in value is striking. You're paying for both a physical product and the sentimental value it's perceived to have.

I'm one of the most analytical guys you'll ever meet; I get boners reading journal articles. And I've been thinking for some time about the very point you're struggling to articulate, so don't think me unsympathetic. But I don't think about it anymore, because music (and musical instruments) is an exercise in compromise. Absolute musical perfection does not equate with perfect music, and technical perfection does not equate with a perfect instrument.

[Beavis]

technical perfection does not equate with a perfect instrument.

I know where you are coming from but to me, it does. Otherwise it wouldnt be called "perfect". However I dont wanna get involved with playing words and all, im saying 2 simple things:

1. It is not acceptable for any company to produce dud product if they are advertising their products as hand made with all other fancy words. Quality shouldnt be hit and miss. You cant just say there are lemons everywhere. Yes there are, so true but today you accept that concept, tomorrow you get used to it and perceive it the "normal way" which is today`s consumers main mindset. Having said that, I am not trying to open fire guitar companies, I just want intellectual talk. We all may love jacksons but so? Does jackson love us too or just the money? That is why im not/have never been a fanboy for anything I have owned. Loving something and being a fanboy are two different things, to me.

2. Can any one claim a ferrari doent consume as much as a regular toyota? No. Because we know the reason why not. Then why wouldnt it be applied to making guitars? Its not rocket science? [my dad is really a rocket scientist and he said its not]. Why we consumers arent informed enough to make our decisions? Because there are various demands for various products, so the companies are manipulating the public with their ads. And thats my opinion, so far no one is disagreeing but at the same time everyone`s belief is different in regards to production methods. Then there`re no facts but there should be. Thats all about it.

[Argos]

I agree with a lot your of points, but I think you're trying to put a few very loosely related eggs into the same basket.

1) Expensive guitars from reputable companies should be perfect leaving the factory.

I unequivocally agree, and so should anyone spending thousands of dollars on a guitar. And I think most guitars are perfect leaving the factory; unfortunately the internet allows the few mistakes that do happen to be magnified (usually beyond merit). I've had guitars arrive with slight issues and I tore into the dealer right away. I won't apologize for Jackson's mistakes but I do think that the dealers should be the last link in the quality control chain. The bottom line is no high-end guitar that isn't spotless should ever end ip in the hands of a customer.

I like the second question you raise and will write on it a bit more when I have time later today. But in the interim, consider this: are you familiar with the balanced/equal/progressive string tension debate? If not, do some reading. I think it's a good module to examine how the guitar industry and players react to advancements (and the introduction of scientific reasoning).

[Beavis]

I won't apologize for Jackson's mistakes but I do think that the dealers should be the last link in the quality control chain. The bottom line is no high-end guitar that isn't spotless should ever end ip in the hands of a customer.

I like the second question you raise and will write on it a bit more when I have time later today. But in the interim, consider this: are you familiar with the balanced/equal/progressive string tension debate? If not, do some reading. I think it's a good module to examine how the guitar industry and players react to advancements (and the introduction of scientific reasoning).

yep, the last link is def. the companies, not the dealers. However one of the guys here said that if a neck develops a twist or weird warpage he can simply take it to the sotre/jackson. NO. You cant just take your guitar to the company and expect to be served on the base of "LIMITED" life time warranty. Here is why or here is the "catch"

The following items are not covered by this warranty.

1. Fret wear, saddle wear, nut wear, strings and batteries.
2. Setups, adjustments or routine maintenance of any kind.
3. Damage to finishes or cracks, splitting, or warpage of wood due to changes in temperature or humidity, exposure to or contact with sun, fire, moisture, body salts and acids of perspiration, guitar straps, guitar stands/hangers made from vinyl, plastic, rubber or other synthetic materials, any other chemicals or non- FMIC -approved polishes. e.t.c. http://www.jacksonguitars.com/support/warranty.php

All corporate guitar companies got these terms. I found that out a year ago.
Now I believe I make even more sense.

[toejam]

All corporate guitar companies got these terms. I found that out a year ago.
Now I believe I make even more sense.

No. Carvin has a five-year warranty for any kind of warpage.

[Beavis]

No. Carvin has a five-year warranty for any kind of warpage.

No bro, its not. GUITARS: All guitars and basses, including Cobalt acoustic guitars, are warranted for 5 years against manufactures' defects. The following items are not covered under warranty: d) crack or warping due to extreme weather conditions or improper storage.
http://www.carvinservice.com/crg/home.php

However even if they had it, it would prove my point because it then means there`s a company X that is freely offering Y time of warranty including the warpage while company Z cant dare due to their inferrior method/materials used. Anyway the topic is not why they dont offer warranty for warpage, im just saying you cant just get served off of the ltd warranty, it is not your shelter and should not be.

[Nightbat]

Beavis, what part of "personal preference" don't you get

Why isn't everyone playing the AXE-FX, but still clinging to the 100 old tube amp design
Why -if neckthough is superior- people will still prefer bolt-ons?
Why are you using a quarter while there are ergonomically specially designed picks available?

"Quality shouldnt be hit and miss"

Well if $200K lamborghinis can spontaniously combust with risk of loss of life, medication be brought on the market that can kill you if you happen to be that 0.1% of the people that 'may' have an allergical reaction,
fake tits start to leak without reason

Then a flaw in a $2k guitar doesn't sound that odd

And rocket science is engineering,.. not a science

[Beavis]

Dont expect me to answer your post. You obviously dont get my point.

[LouSiffer]

The problem is that you are dealing with 2 important components that are inherintly flawed: People and wood.

People: There are known principals and accepted " sciences " that we rationalize with when working with wood. Such as what woods are bright and which are dark, recommended moisture content after drying, etc. As people, we stick with what works and we try to rationalize what went wrong. Once we find a consistant formula, we do not like to stray from it.

Wood: It is impossible to scientifically prove if neck thru is better than bolt-on for sustain. The reason for this is because no two pieces of wood have the exact same grain pattern or density.....even if you cut them from the same tree, there are still variables that can be argues such as " what portion of the tree did it come from?" Wood cut from the bottom of the tree has been compressed from all the weight versus a piece from the top of the tree. The only accurate way I could think of would be to build the neck-thru and run your tests, measure the air pressur, measure the humidity, check many other varia les I am sure I am forgetting, cut the neck-thru up and turn it into a bolt-on, use the hardware from the neckthru and somehow make sure all the external variables are exactly the same as the neckthru test. Its just not going to happen.-Lou

[Beavis]

The only accurate way I could think of would be to build the neck-thru and run your tests, measure the air pressur, measure the humidity, check many other varia les I am sure I am forgetting, cut the neck-thru up and turn it into a bolt-on, use the hardware from the neckthru and somehow make sure all the external variables are exactly the same as the neckthru test.

Very possible, but they just wont do that for the reasons I have mentioned earlier. Calculus is a great tool, possibly the most amazing thing human being ever invented. It is used for approximation and I am so sure, the method you've mention as well as various other methods can be applied to test the validity of the case. 0.9999 is still 1. You can neglect the butterfly effect. Good points though.

[ralph]

1.) Manufacturers could not possible offer a warranty on wood, you will have to take that up with the tree it came from

2.) Hand made, by definition, means that no two items hand made could be exactly the same, so you have to expect variability between hand made items

3.) 0.9999 does not equal 1, in many instances it can be taken as 1 as long as it is accurate enough for this particular instance

4.) Esp necks in my experience tend to be fatter than other manufactures, perhaps this is why they can use flatsawn wood, maybe not

[Beavis]

1.) Manufacturers could not possible offer a warranty on wood, you will have to take that up with the tree it came from
2.) Hand made, by definition, means that no two items hand made could be exactly the same, so you have to expect variability between hand made items
3.) 0.9999 does not equal 1, in many instances it can be taken as 1 as long as it is accurate enough for this particular instance
4.) Esp necks in my experience tend to be fatter than other manufactures, perhaps this is why they can use flatsawn wood, maybe not

You`re hair splitting. No one is writing an academic paper here, I just gave examples to reinforce what I m trying to point out. So, dont stuck with my previous posts, probably you havent read all of my posts. Anyway, I hope you never get a dud guitar neck. If you do, keep buying the same brand of guitar cause to you, its the nature to blame not the manufacturer :dunno: right?

[Chad]

You can look at specs, descriptions, ads, etc., but it all comes down to whether or not you bond with an individual guitar. I posted several times in that linked thread and gave my opinion on Jackson's "neck through" naming. But I also said that I still like them just the same.

You can't speak in absolutes when dealing with something like wood. Quartersawn or flatsawn neither guarantee a neck will warp or won't warp. Construction method will not guarantee more or less sustain. You can't do tests that 100% prove anything because it's impossible to narrow it down to one, and only one variable. Neck-through becomes part of the body. If you were to cut the neck to make a bolt-on like Lou mentioned, then the body has been changed and new wood has to be brought into the equation. Or the same wood has to be re-joined,. Then the quality of the joint(s), amount of wood glue, etc. add variables.

Regardless of what those warranties say, I've heard of Fender and so forth providing repair or replacement for warpage issues. I think they put in those exclusion clauses to cover themselves in extreme situations. i.e. idiots that totally and completely abuse their instruments.

[Beavis]

I`ve said everything I needed to say. From now on I will just see what people think . Cause some people are still stuck with warranty, warpage, neck thru thing, instead of getting the whole picture. Thanks for all the inputs anyway.

[Chad]

are you familiar with the balanced/equal/progressive string tension debate? If not, do some reading. I think it's a good module to examine how the guitar industry and players react to advancements (and the introduction of scientific reasoning).

I've studied this topic extensively and there's a lot of bologna out there. Just curious what links you have been reading? I always enjoy reading more about the subject.