Getting a Jag in a few weeks and after some input and advice

[Thomas]

I dunno I'd have to get my hands on a MIM one to find out. If you're talking about the Jap Special it's got the thinner thumb wheel slim screw type TOM like the old Gibson/Epi ones. So it'd need new holes for the cups etc.

I'm trying to stick to the HH this week to try to warm to it.

[B-Side Alex]

No I' cool with the faffing, to get what you want it usually takes time and work - if you're serious about your music, why should the sound of your guitar be any different IMO.

other than pups, is there anything else you'd recommend doing?

and as for the pups, like I've said I' going to just change the bridge initially for an SD quarter pounder and eave the stock one in the neck and if needed change the neck one later for the Antiquity II. What do you think of the Quarter Pounder, Antiquity combo?

I have a set of QPs in a Jag but not a mixed set. As far as I know the bridge pup is normally higher output than the neck anyway but you might have to be carefull that you don't totally overpower the neck PU if you swith during a song. Check their output. If you're going for a totally different kind of sound in each position then you're probably heading down the right track. There's bound to be someone on here thats tried it at some point who can give you a proper answer.

As you can see from everyone's replies Jags are a very individial thing. I keep the parts regular Jag (US upgrades and different PU sets) I haven't done any "mods" as such, though my 66 ri came with a mustang bridge but I might change it back to a regular one.

I'll be sure to check out the output and make sure it's within the comfort zone.

As for different sound in each position, I figure that so long as it won't cause any major problems I'll be able to see a rougher version of that with just the Quarter Pounder and stock pup combo and if it works for me go for the antiquity II.

[Thomas]

Sounds lika a plan.

[MMPicker]

It seems to me that if there's one version that you can actually play and see if you like it or not before you buy it, and there's another one that you'd actually have to buy sight unseen before you even see it, there ought to be a srong inclination to just decide about the first one before you go take a risk. But maybe that's just me.

I've got an MIM Jaguar with a TOM bridge, and an old Musicmaster II with a different bridge. I just play the things, I never think about, or think to care about, the bridge, it never enters my mind. To me, based on all the posts I've read, that must make my TOM superior to some other Jaguar bridges people have. Because quite a number of these other guys seem to be obessessed with the bridge, and fixing problems with it, and that's something IMO nobody should have to think or care about. It should just be there, and do it's job quietly. That's what mine have done on every other guitar I've owned, and same on my Jaguar. So when people say they don't "like" the TOM, frankly I'm just scratching my head. It seems like it works better.

As for the sound, sustain, etc. as I suggested just play the darned thing, it's in the shop right, and decide for yourself. Bearing in mind that pickups can be changed, if necessary, very personal decision. But then the CIJ isn't in the shop, is it? Advantage #2, MIM.

Someone else mentioned the neck features, radius, frets, and this was in fact what attracted me to the MIM Jaguar in the first place. I haven't played a CIJ Jaguar, but my other guitar has vintage specs with the same scale length, and to me there's a noticeable difference in playability, with strong advantage MIM Jaguar. You can change the pickups, but you probably will not be making the changes to the necks that would be required to make these the same between the models. I'm disposed to disagree with the notion that the MIM would be best as Rhythm guitar, as compared to a similar guitar with vintage neck specs. Because both the flatter radius and the bigger frets noticably improve my ease of playing lead on the guitar, particularly with noting up the neck, vs. my other vintage-spec'd guitar.

This is my first guitar with a tremelo arm, so I can't compare to others. But it seems usable to me. I'm actually having a blast with it. My one complaint would be the arm seems to flop down a lot , but my tech said other variants he's had over the years have had the same issue.

The tech who worked on my MIM said he thought the workmanship was just fine. He thought it was fully comparable to AVRI. I haven't read anyone suggesting that CIJ was better than that.

And no, my Jaguar doesn't sound like a strat. (And I know the difference, my other guitar sounds like a strat.)
It probably doesn't sound identical to the others either, they all come with different pickups dont they? Better or worse, for you to judge.

So again, it seems to me that you've read all this lore, or theoretical bogeymen- much of it which you might find in fact to be completely 100% wrong, or largely irrelevant - but nevertheless they seem to be somewhat impeding you from what to me is the commonsense first step of just going down and playing the guitar that's there. Once you do that, you can proceed accordingly.

[B-Side Alex]

It seems to me that if there's one version that you can actually play and see if you like it or not before you buy it, and there's another one that you'd actually have to buy sight unseen before you even see it, there ought to be a srong inclination to just decide about the first one before you go take a risk. But maybe that's just me.

I've got an MIM Jaguar with a TOM bridge, and an old Musicmaster II with a different bridge. I just play the things, I never think about, or think to care about, the bridge, it never enters my mind. To me, based on all the posts I've read, that must make my TOM superior to some other Jaguar bridges people have. Because quite a number of these other guys seem to be obessessed with the bridge, and fixing problems with it, and that's something IMO nobody should have to think or care about. It should just be there, and do it's job quietly. That's what mine have done on every other guitar I've owned, and same on my Jaguar. So when people say they don't "like" the TOM, frankly I'm just scratching my head. It seems like it works better.

As for the sound, sustain, etc. as I suggested just play the darned thing, it's in the shop right, and decide for yourself. Bearing in mind that pickups can be changed, if necessary, very personal decision. But then the CIJ isn't in the shop, is it? Advantage #2, MIM.

Someone else mentioned the neck features, radius, frets, and this was in fact what attracted me to the MIM Jaguar in the first place. I haven't played a CIJ Jaguar, but my other guitar has vintage specs with the same scale length, and to me there's a noticeable difference in playability, with strong advantage MIM Jaguar. You can change the pickups, but you probably will not be making the changes to the necks that would be required to make these the same between the models. I'm disposed to disagree with the notion that the MIM would be best as Rhythm guitar, as compared to a similar guitar with vintage neck specs. Because both the flatter radius and the bigger frets noticably improve my ease of playing lead on the guitar, particularly with noting up the neck, vs. my other vintage-spec'd guitar.

This is my first guitar with a tremelo arm, so I can't compare to others. But it seems usable to me. I'm actually having a blast with it. My one complaint would be the arm seems to flop down a lot , but my tech said other variants he's had over the years have had the same issue.

The tech who worked on my MIM said he thought the workmanship was just fine. He thought it was fully comparable to AVRI. I haven't read anyone suggesting that CIJ was better than that.

So again, it seems to me that you've read all this lore, or theoretical bogeymen- much of it which you might find in fact to be completely 100% wrong, or largely irrelevant - but nevertheless they seem to be somewhat impeding you from what to me is the commonsense first step of just going down and playing the guitar that's there. Once you do that, you can proceed accordingly.

As I mentioned, I did try a MIM in a couple of shops and it felt easy to play, but almost all electrics do after playing only acoustic for a couple of years. Like I've said before it just didn't seem to have the nuances in its sound that I liked about the Jag my friend had (his was CIJ), not so much with effects (and depending on the effect) but definitely clean. However I do appreciate memories aren't trust worthy.

I'm going to see if the one place that said they'd order one in for me will do just that and let me compare, as you guys have made it clear that the differences are subtle enough that there isn't a right or wrong answer when it comes to the MIM and CIJ, just what is right for you. Which is a good thing and what I expected the case to be, but the part of me that wanted there to be a definite answer as to which one, is dissapointed due to the trouble I'm having finding both and giving them a try. I'm thankful though of all the help you guys have been on this post and all the others I've read. At least I now understand the whole hoo-haa about the bridge and have a good idea of what pups to get and so on. So in the end Iam a few steps forward in a round about way. Thanks and please continue to post and raise anything not already mentioned.

[MMPicker]

Sorry I missed that you'd played it; speed-reading, no doubt.

If you play it & don't like it, then you need to judge for yourself if it's just the pickups , provided you'd be changing them in connection with the alternative purchase anyway. Or just move on, till you find what you like more.

I can tell you switching the pickups makes a huge difference, but it can be hard to perfectly predict what the guitar will sound like after the change, and there's expense and trouble involved.

Always best to find something you love from the get-go, obviously.

[dots]

I don't understand the hate for the TOM either, it's pretty much one of the best bridge designs ever.

+1

in similar fashion to how i feel about humbucker hate, anti-TOM folks perplex me. i do a lot of palm muting and don't have any problems with comfort on a TOM ever. meh. . .

[Thomas]

The weirdest thing with me is the first guitar I owned had a TOM and I loved that guitar, like I said I guess it's just what I'm used to know.

[Reece]

I find palm muting really weird to do on strat bridges, I could do it then I didn't play my strat for a while and when I came back it felt weird and hasn't ever felt right since.

I'm fine with TOMs and the jag bridge, neither really feels any different to me. I do have a bit of trouble palm muting on teles, I assume I'll get to used to it when I finally get one.

[aphasiac]

To break it down, I want my Jag to have plenty of tone (especially clean), I want a Jag that sound like a Jag, I want it to have some real kick when it's needed and not sound too thin and I want to have a little more sustain than the CIJ Jag apparently has.

If you want tone, do not get a CIJ Jag; worst. pickups. ever. Plus you need to upgrade the bridge immediately.

MIM fixes all the problems; buy that one, or choose a different guitar.

[Reece]

Plus you need to upgrade the bridge immediately.

Wrong.

[Thom]

Plus you need to upgrade the bridge immediately.

Wrong.

[robroe]

Plus you need to upgrade the bridge immediately.

Wrong.

[BobArsecake]

Wrong.

[Thomas]

Etc.

[Fran]

[othomas2]

sorry dude....

[othomas2]

[aphasiac]

You guys ALL use the original jaguar bridge and have no string slippage problems??

really??!

[Reece]

You guys ALL use the original jaguar bridge and have no string slippage problems??

really??!

I do have a... slippage... problem, but it's perfectly manageable, only the low e slips and if it does 2 seconds to grab it and pull it back up and I'm off again. I'll get around to filing the bridge at some point. I think fran used lighter strings on this jag and I haven't changed anything other than the intonation and bridge height since I got it.