NEW GUITAR PR0N

Rox · Post by **Rox** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:32 pm

endsjustifymeans wrote:yeah really curious about the neck as I've wanted the telemaster since they released it.

Me too . One of them with a 25.5" Jagmaster neck would be proper

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:43 pm

Thank god those pics seem to be borked.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 6:32 pm

hotrodperlmutter wrote:Thank god those pics seem to be borked.

what? the pics work fine

SGJarrod · Post by **SGJarrod** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:56 pm

robroe wrote:
hotrodperlmutter wrote:Thank god those pics seem to be borked.
what? the pics work fine

yeah, if you wait for fn 5min for them to load then resize...

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:28 pm

ohh I forgot some of you kids still use fuckin compuserve.

too bad, i cant help that shit. get better internets ?

everyone who has an issue with the photos please PM my wife and yell at her for making me buy her a super expensive camera that takes the biggest photos ever.

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:47 pm

robroe wrote:too bad, i cant help that shit.

Except you can, when you upload using the photos from your camera using whatever application, you can just export them as a lower file size. Hogging the bandwidth hits all of us in our pockets when we have annual server whiprounds.

Thom · Post by **Thom** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:49 pm

Looks better with rosewood - maple neck not worth the load time wait.

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:03 pm

Rob I bet they're dremeled out inside because these are the same bodies they use for the p90 versions, enlarged just enough to fit their new Jazzy pickups inside.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:23 pm

benecol wrote:
robroe wrote:too bad, i cant help that shit.
Except you can, when you upload using the photos from your camera using whatever application, you can just export them as a lower file size. Hogging the bandwidth hits all of us in our pockets when we have annual server whiprounds.

lower file size? so i should have bought a 50 dollar camera instead of this 400 dollar one? ive been telling that to hilary for 5 years. you try telling it to her

benecol · Post by **benecol** » Sun Jan 30, 2011 11:40 pm

No, you're deliberately misunderstanding this. After you've moved the images from the camera to your computer, export them from that application as a lower file size. There'll be a setting called 'screen' or 'medium'.

Try thinking of it this way - that pop-up ad at the bottom of the screen you grouse about? Your fault.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 1:46 am

the application i use to transfer is called "take the SD card out of the camera with my fingers and jam it in the computer"

paul_ · Post by **paul_** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:05 am

benecol wrote:No, you're deliberately misunderstanding this.

This shall be my new thing at work.

robroe wrote:the application i use to transfer is called "take the SD card out of the camera with my fingers and jam it in the computer"

Yep, then we all come over to your living room to look at your monitor. No wonder it's so slow.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:09 am

actually, the card reader quit working just now.....

WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU DO TO IT ?

ekwatts · Post by **ekwatts** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:55 am

There should be a setting on the camera itself to take lower resolution, smaller image photos I think. I take all my photos using "simple" mode, which takes fairly hi-res, huge images that come out around 2000x1000 or something daft like that. Then I resize them all in GIMP or Photoshop. Takes me about five minutes.

plaidbeer · Post by **plaidbeer** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 3:20 am

You can always upload the pics from your computer to Photobucket. Photobucket lets you choose a resize option before uploading them so they they're not necessarily the same size they are on your computer.

Mages · Post by **Mages** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:05 am

ekwatts wrote:I really like the look of these, but would a "proper" JM pickguard fit these?

the body is actually quite a different size and shape than a real jazzmaster. ultra posted a picture a while back that compared them. I'm kind of into the idea because I think it may actually be a good amount smaller, look at it it in the pic next to the mustang, it's almost the same size. I've always found jazzmasters kind of bulky and uncomfortable, so I think I'd like to try these out.

robroe · Post by **robroe** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 2:21 pm

its the same size as my jaguar. i have them hanging on the wall next to each other.
jaguars are smaller than jazzmasters though

hotrodperlmutter · Post by **hotrodperlmutter** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:02 pm

oh yeah, they're smaller. by about .2 cm².

Mages · Post by **Mages** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:01 pm

hokay, here is the pic I was talkin 'bout

ultratwin wrote:Hmm, a lot more different than I had thought: The GFS strap pin nearly reaches the 12th fret.

they actually did a really good job of slightly altering the shape in an aesthetically pleasing way. agile/sx should take some notes. I think this guitar sits in esteemed company with other oddball offset knockoffs of the past like the harmony bobcat or the supro s555.

SKC Willie · Post by **SKC Willie** » Mon Jan 31, 2011 7:13 pm

I think he was referring to robroe's post about a Jaguar being smaller than a Jazzmaster . . .