You must be joking

Fretwired

I'm waiting for their modern take on a Gretsch ... Gentleman's Relish and the saucier Country Gentleman's Relish ... :-)

StuartMac290

Is it inflatable?

SNAKEBITE

I guess the whole pushing boundaries is a good thing, ok, you might end up with a lemon if you introduce too many new things at once but if you pick one thing that is good from several designs then you might just get something decent.

ICBM

I agree with impmann... there seem to be a lot of solutions looking for problems in it, all to produce something which is somewhere between ordinary and a bit ugly.

Sassafras

Reminds me of a wooden spatula.

olafgarten

I think the new one looks far better without the carve, the shape might just be acceptable if it was completely flat, but there are ways to get ergonomics without the guitar looking so fat.

dern

I quite like the red one.

fields5069

Isn't it a bit Campbell? Not the soup, the American maker. Especially with the detail of the headstock outline aping the outline of the horns, as on the Campbell Transitone.

fnpt

I think that developers must in fact push for new designs and features but with a purpose and always keeping in mind that we guitarists are a bunch of traditionalists in what regards design.

So, what I would like to see in a new upmarket guitar is the following:

- Updated conventional design (a la PRS but a bit more modern perhaps and without the ridiculous bling);

- Solderless connections: guitars could even come with different flavoured easy to swap pickups;

- No plastics: you pay thousands of ££ and then you get cheap, fragile PU plastic rings! All plastics, PU covers and hardware should be the same noble material such as shaved aluminium;

- No screws: no screws to access the electronics, the truss rod, to swap PU's, etc. Just good quality made to last clamps;

- Ergonomy: easy access to the higher frets, rolled body and fretboard edges, etc;

- No plastic binding: it looks good in a 1959 LP but not in a modern guitar. In fact, Gibson came to that conclusion in 1960 with the SG, it even allowed for a curvier, more comfortable body;

- Compensated nuts for intonation accuracy.

dindude

@fnpt interesting one regrading screws. I've always though it quite odd that on an electric guitar exposed screws are pretty much par for the course.

Try finding an exposed screw head anywhere within your cars interior, or on anything but the cheapest flat-pack furniture, it's a complete design no-no - yet they are everywhere on a quality electric instrument.

regarding plastics though, I think it's as noble a material as any, if the quality is good (which often it isn't).

impmann

Interesting regarding the screw thing...

From a production standpoint screws are expensive - because where ever you see a screw there is a person needed to install it. People are expensive. That is why cheap things tend to have clip together or glued together casings...

ICBM

fnpt said:

So, what I would like to see in a new upmarket guitar is the following:

- Updated conventional design (a la PRS but a bit more modern perhaps and without the ridiculous bling)

I'd go along with that.

fnpt said:

- Solderless connections: guitars could even come with different flavoured easy to swap pickups

No, they're less reliable than soldered connections, especially in the long term where the connectors might not get moved for years.

fnpt said:

- No plastics: you pay thousands of ££ and then you get cheap, fragile PU plastic rings! All plastics, PU covers and hardware should be the same noble material such as shaved aluminium

Maybe. Although I quite like the aesthetic of most plastic parts, and I'm less sure about metal. It would also make the guitar heavier.

fnpt said:

- No screws: no screws to access the electronics, the truss rod, to swap PU's, etc. Just good quality made to last clamps

You mean those nasty plastic clips which break, meaning that you have to replace the cover with a unique one which you can't get any more?

fnpt said:

- Ergonomy: easy access to the higher frets, rolled body and fretboard edges, etc;

- No plastic binding: it looks good in a 1959 LP but not in a modern guitar. In fact, Gibson came to that conclusion in 1960 with the SG, it even allowed for a curvier, more comfortable body

Agreed with both those. What I really don't understand is why plastic binding is still apparently preferred to the PRS 'faux' binding, which is much nicer if you want that outline look.

fnpt said:

- Compensated nuts for intonation accuracy.

Not really necessary if a conventional nut is fitted and cut really well.


I'm all for change where it actually improves things - just less sure about it when it doesn't really, or causes long-term reliability or replacement problems.

dindude

impmann said:

Interesting regarding the screw thing...

From a production standpoint screws are expensive - because where ever you see a screw there is a person needed to install it. People are expensive. That is why cheap things tend to have clip together or glued together casings...

My point was more that car interiors have screws and so does a lot of furniture, but they go to lengths to hide them for an aesthetic point of view. That's not the case for guitars.

Evilmags

Unless it sounded like the beast played by Hendrix I'd not be seen dead with it. Does it sound better than a Srat, Tele, Les Paul or 335? Doubt it. Would it make you look like a moron. Yup. 

olafgarten

Evilmags said:

Unless it made me as talented as Hendrix I'd not be seen dead with it. Does it sound better than a Srat, Tele, Les Paul or 335? Doubt it. Would it make you look like a moron. Yup. 

FTFY, tone comes from the fingers.

Philly_Q

Evilmags said:

Would it make you look like a moron. Yup. 

The people in the ads on their website look like Swiss hipsters.  Which is kind of what I'd expect.

Although bizarrely Phil Campbell from Motorhead has one.  Mind you, he has a lot of ugly guitars.