Parker guitars (Fly)

[Lunch Money]

It's just so easy to prove your above quoted statement wrong that it would make me laugh if it wasn't for you usually being a polite guy.

Only because you're not LISTENING, and you're making false assumptions again. Check my above post. If you hate admitting to being wrong in public, you can just PM me. Sheesh.

Another thing-- no matter how obvious it is to ME that you are wrong, I have avoided being condescending. You can't seem to escape doing so, though, despite your best intentions.

[Edit: just to be clear, your string example did not take the fulcrum (ie. the NUT... the damned NUT) into account. That was its flaw. I saw right away that you were making the same mistake with your guitar-related post (ie. your first argument) and THAT's what I've been trying to address.]

Greg

[Sascha Franck]

I admit that the nut not taken into account was my mistake, and you're right about that. The rest about my "assumptions" is correct though

But still, you should just do some test by yourself.
Just do so. Then you'll see. Do the FR lock/unlock test if you have one handy. Try to find an old Harmony guitar - these have VERY long headstocks. Bend the G-string. It will feel tighter than on your usual short scale models.
Or get two capos, one really locking the strings (they might be damaged after that - I have some older model that really does the job, I can actually cut the strings behind it), the other one only pressing them down firmly enough to replace the nut (so the strings still glide through).
Place capo 1 at, say, the seventh fret, place capo 2 at the 12th fret. Bend. Now remove capo 1. Bend again. I know, this test is hard to do as most capos simply won't fix the strings. So the best bet would still be the FR test.
Unfortunately I got no tool to measure the required tension to bring a string up a given amount, that would make things way easier.
But no matter how, please do this test and you'll see.
Personally, I allways found it to be a pure pleasure to bend strings on 4:2 headstock guitars, the string tension (as said, only while bending) just feels so much more equal throughout the strings.

To me, no matter how much we argue about the physical side of things, it's just obvious that you have to bend the "complete" string, no matter whether parts of it are behind the nut or not.
Sure, the scale size has an important role as well (which is about the string angle that bending produces... can't explain it properly in english), but it's defenitely not the only important thing, based on my experiences it's even less important than the string length behind the nut.

[Lunch Money]

Heheheh, I think you and I are destined to have circular arguments--

I ended up speaking from a strictly scientific point of view and talking about ONLY the string tension; and I stand by the fact that it's not the tension that's increased or decreased by the position of the machine head.

HOWEVER, I've admitted right from the beginning that it's a different feel. If you like the feel of bending a 4:2, I have no way at all of arguing against that. For me, I didn't like bending the "G" on my tele-style Pacifica, but it was the downward pressure over the nut (rather than string tension) that was the problem-- the solution? I installed a second string tree.

No doubt the length of string behind the nut will play into the equation, especially while bending; as will the height of the posts, the slipperiness of the nut, and whether the nut slots were cut properly in the first place.

Strangely enough, although the 24.75" scale is easier to bend, I still prefer bending a 25.5" scale. It's what I learned on, and what I'm accustomed to, so it's more natural for me to bend to pitch based on the "feel", rather than having to trust my ears.

Greg

[Kim Olesen]

Any of you 2 guys ever owned a parker....or even played a gig on one......hmmm;-)
kim

[Lunch Money]

My argument has nothing to do with that. I could be talking about a weight dangling from a string and I'd still stick by it... wait... I DID.

As to your question-- nope. I'm sure it's a joy.

Greg

[Sascha Franck]

Strangely enough, although the 24.75" scale is easier to bend, I still prefer bending a 25.5" scale. It's what I learned on, and what I'm accustomed to, so it's more natural for me to bend to pitch based on the "feel", rather than having to trust my ears.

I much prefer long scales as well, I have strong (and admittedly rather fat) fingers. But that's not what I was about.
To me the strings on 6:0 headstocks feel unequal when bending (everybody knows how soft the G-string is, compared to the E or B string), so for me 4:2 headstocks do at least a little to equal things out. The B and E strings bend a bit easier while the G-string stays as the longest.

On my short scale guitars I actually use 11-52 strings because they allways felt too soft with 10-46.

And no Kim - I had a Parker at home for a few days once, and while I somewhat liked the even sound of it, I just hated the fretboard. Also (no idea whether something has changed with that), it was string breaking time with that Parker... a friend of mine owning one somewhat confirmed that. He said he just needed another one as a spare for live playing because the strings often wouldn't even last one gig.
Well, the two of us are picking really hard, so for softer pickers it might not matter. And perhaps they changed something too.

For me, the best playing guitar by far is my Anderson Drop Top (semi hollow body). Incredible sustain, even in the high registers of the E string, Feiten tuning (which is marvelleous for semi-driven but still complexed chords) and a nice partially vintage trem that doesn't go out of tune.
Still need to find the proper PUs for it, I'm not that happy with the middle and neck one.
And hell yes... I allready thought of modifying the headstock. We'll see.

[Lunch Money]

Heh, now on to another point of conversation--

Buzz Feitin system--

Even Buzz has admitted that his system is only useful if you actually use a nut. A zero-fret guitar makes the system unecessary. I'm amazed that more companies don't use zero fret, except that it means you WILL inevitably have to replace it.

Incidentally, Anderson makes wicked awesome guitars. Dunno about your particular model, but we're talking even more expensive than a Parker, no? The picture only shows one string tree, for the E/B strings... I'm telling ya, Sascha... if you haven't already done so, go for the extra tree before you think about a 4+2 headstock.

Greg

[Trojan Badger]

You guys really need to come here

I tried the "Fly thing" by retrofitting a Fishman powerbridge into my strat. Not enormously successful, the piezo tone was very very zingy and the bridge made it less of a soloing guitar - it didn't seem quite so liquid and smooth anymore. I have been tempted to remove it.

Then I tried a Godin but the electric sound didn't quite do it for me, although the Piezo was much improved.

So I really pushed the boat out and now I have a PRS Archtop with a piezo pickup. Lovely. I've played a couple of Parkers and I think I've made the right choice in going the way I have. But it's very much horses for courses - for what I do I have to have a good acoustic tone first and formost and dial in the electric tone on demand.

Oh, and it's impossible to bend the strings on the PRS. I use gauge 12s.

[Sascha Franck]

Even Buzz has admitted that his system is only useful if you actually use a nut. A zero-fret guitar makes the system unecessary. I'm amazed that more companies don't use zero fret, except that it means you WILL inevitably have to replace it.

True. I'd prefer a zero fret guitar any day as well, just as on almost all guitars I've ever played the first fret feels somewhat unnatural (no matter whethere it's "feitenized" or not). To bad there's not much... and a modification would be WAY expensive.

Incidentally, Anderson makes wicked awesome guitars. Dunno about your particular model, but we're talking even more expensive than a Parker, no?

Well, back then it was one of their top of the line models (youi know, all that structured maple stuff, really luxurious translucent blue laquer and shit), but I didn't buy it for all of those fancy optic things.
When I played the guitar for the first time in the local shop, I was like "man - feels as if I'd own this one since ages allready". This rarely happened before... I was all excited!
From a technical point of view, there's a LOT of flaws with this model, namely:
- The close to non-existing shielding (the PUs offer true single coil operation, so shielding defenitely is something)
- The screwable vibrato. I prefer ones that you just stick in along with some "sidescrew" (god, my english) to fix the thing, such as the Wilkonsons or the one on my G$L
- The PUs. While the bridge PU sounds great, it could have a bit higher output (and I'm no high gain fan at all). The middle and neck PUs IMO sound so-so-ish. Clean and pretty much "exact", but there's no blues in them.
- The PU switches. While I got used to them, I still prefer a 5-way switch with the middle position being bride and neck together (I never use the middle PU alone).

I'm going to get a new pickguard soon, along with some new middle/neck PUs (ah well, I allready said so 7 years ago...) and a 5-way switch. I like those Fender noiseless PUs. Pretty much strat-ish, no noise and a bit higher output.

As for the price: I paid 4200 German marks (around 2000 US$) back then (list price: 6500!), which was actually because the shop was almost bankrupt and had to get rid of some stuff.
Not a bad deal IMO, especially considering that by the time I bought it, the stock prices have been raised enormously.

The picture only shows one string tree, for the E/B strings... I'm telling ya, Sascha... if you haven't already done so, go for the extra tree before you think about a 4+2 headstock.

Well, the Grover locking tuners are staggered, so the angle behind the nut is perfectly the same for all strings. I hate those Grovers too, btw., Sperzels are thousand times better (even if they are a bit heavier).

FWIW, I don't know if I would buy such an axe again.
It feels great, is rather light (due to being a semi hollow body) and performance is somewhat great.
But then, it defenitely lacks of some sort of own character.
I have a whole bunch of other guitars as well, one among them being a really old Ibanez semiacoustic (WAY older than their Artist series, was build when they were cloning guitars), and even if it's made of plywood, I allready had some offer to trade it in for an original (a 335 that is). THAT guitar has character, overtones galore (you know, all that Tuck Andress style-ish "slightly-tap-the-notes-12-frets-above-their-fingerings" is working just awsome!) and a really great feel as well.
I also have an old Ibanez Tele (same thing, way before any of their "series" stuff) which is great as well. Unfortunately that one needs to be refurbished BIG time - but it's a very characterful guitar as well.

Maybe, when all those old axes will be finished one day, the Anderson will gather some dust (apart from being used for rather lame commercial jobs).

[Hink]

this whole disscussion has been interesting for sure. But I got news for everyone, I have the best guitar in the world. Hands down, nothing comes close. You know why? Because it's mine, I'm not saying that it would be your first choice, but it is mine. I once read where Brian May hates to play anyone else's guitars. I have also heard others say they have no clue how he plays that thing.

There's more then string length to consider. Let's face it strings come from many companies. They all sound different, I don't like dean markley strings because they seem to hold onto that new string sound too long, the very reason most people who like them buy them.

Gary Moore and SRV play (played) .013's, so if you're playing .009's and your "G" string (or 4th string as it is for me) is a .015. Imagine what the G string is then and the stregnth it takes to bend telephone cable like that. Where Brian May customizes his strings. It's been a while but his last three I think are .013, .010, .010... 3 E strings.

You can't honestly expect people to play the same thing as you, nor can you expect people to like the same thing as you. So I ask, why are people always using the brand, model and price of a guitar to validate their talent? "Well I got a Les Paul so I'm better". C'mon we've all heard it...but for me I left that back at middle school over 30 years ago.

My main guitar was built by me, I took great pains in creating my signature so I could use carbon paper (except I just did the kid thing and made my own carbon paper) to copy it to my neck, then I went over it with a sharpy. If I took that guitar to a shop to sell (I worked music retail a long time and have bought 100's maybe 1000's of guitars) my guitar would be worthless. It's not worthless to me, in fact I can't imagine life without it. But if someone else hates it, well that's not really any problem to me now is it?...

[Lunch Money]

Good on ya, Hink. I'm making my own guitar right now, too, and I have no doubts that it will be my favourite guitar.

However, I don't think any players in THIS thread anyhow, were discussing their guitars as status symbols. Both my electrics are sub-$500 CDN. My acoustic cost more, mind you, but that's not why I bought it.

Greg