Fran wrote:That bridge is horrendous mate. We are talking about a company that made electric guitar what it is; elegance, body contours, numerous tremolo designs etc. Then they come out with this shit, its gash, would you do that to one of your guitars? I would'nt. It looks amateur.
Scratchplate under bridge lolz....
lulwut? The Jaguar and Jazzmaster have scratchplate under the bridge! In almost exactly the same place!
Because its a floating bridge that moves it has to sit off the body, there is no reason for these to or the scratchplate to continue underneath. I cant decide whether it is shoddy or they are trying to be quirky, mind you, cant be worse than that hard tail Strat bridge on the Mustang.
As for the mod friendly theory i doubt that very much, as percentages go i dare say the majority of guitar players do not want to modify their instruments (especially NEW ones) beyond perhaps a pup upgrade. In fact a lot of people wont even attempt that never mind drill a bridge out.
basically the only reason I can think they went with this bridge is because they were trying to find a way to make it shittier than the fender models. for cost reasons they didn't want to use the full trem. they couldn't use a stop tail because, well, they already make a fender model like that. and they have new offsets coming out with strat hardtails... so what exactly can we put on this that will be a step below any other bridge that we offer? what bridge can we find that will be most shit-tastic thing we can get?
actually, thinking about it I think they didn't use a strat hardtail because they would have had to re-engineer the neck pocket. this bridge was probably an easy drop in replacement. and it wasn't a stop-tail design that they already offer on the BT jag and the HH jag. still, like billy said I don't why they didn't just use the CV duo bridge.
I played these yesterday. The neck on the Jaguar was very nice, good and glossy with plenty of shoulder. The bridge looks stupid and inelegant and so does the strat jack. None of it looks like how you would design a guitar if you had much choice or many resources. The Jaguar I played had horrible wood with massive dark brown knot right by the jack. Terrible wood, like stuff that you wouldn't use for a chopping board.
The Jazzmaster looked much better (apart from the strat jack and bridge). The neck was pretty hefty and the fingerboard flatter than I would have liked. I don't really like big necks but reckon I would have got along fine with this one if there was a smaller radius on the board.
I've just looked it up and apparently these Jazzmasters have a 9" radius on them. Didn't feel anything like it, I thought it felt more like 12" but I suppose that might have been the heft of the neck.
got a chance to play both yesterday at the ole' GC..... fit and finish were nice, the bridge is Wanky and ugo but worked after alittle getting use to (I am a heavy palm muter)... the frets were good with no sharp edges but the Jag did have some high spots....both were chunkier necks
both desperately needed setups
one note on the bridge was that on the Jag it looked like the rear anchor(that is screwed directly into the wood) was wanting to pull out of the Soft Basswood, the Jazzmaster made of Alder did not seem have this problem
The Electronics were crap, if u moved the Vol or Tone off 10 then it became nothing but mud... the Jag sounded lifeless, but I feel the Jazzmaster would be proper with pot and cap replacements.....
Overall I would say the Jag is so-so and the Jazzmaster is Decent.... Neither would be good as a straight purchase to be played as is....
But I would not mind having the Butterscotch JM and replacing all the electronics but prolly keep the stock pick ups..get a pro set up... and prolly a new bridge down the road too
lorez wrote: I'm a fuzz lover so my clean is another man's crunch
Played both of these the other day, the neck on the Jazzmaster was lovely but I was left very unimpressed by the rest of the guitar. It wasn't bad it just wasn't very exciting, I was annoyed at the direction the pickup selector worked in too so if I were to buy one it would be an easy fix. The jaguar disappointed me.
I played a fender lite-ash telecaster, the korean one? Which was worlds apart although only a little more expensive being secondhand - when I have some money I'd love to pick up one of these, the neck was a lovely D shape and was just the way I like them.
Nick wrote:I like the white covers/knobs......that tort might even look good if it was good tort.
Agreed, we're slowly approaching something recognizable from the Fender catalog of yore...However, even with variations in incandescent light and stuff with the pics we're all seen, I wonder if I'm the only one who is sensing that this model of Squier Jazzmaster is starting to look less badass a la butterscotch Telecaster '51, and more like an unappetizing banana slug yellow.
that tort definately ruined it.... it looks like someone was changing their baby's diaper and at the exact moment they got the diaper off they realized u should prolly not have fed the kid White Castle and the smell made them throw up.... looks like a fuck-tastic mess
lorez wrote: I'm a fuzz lover so my clean is another man's crunch
I quite like the tort. It almost makes the guitar look gold. It goes a little to close to 'stained warmoth strat with calaham parts and black pearloid pickguard' territory but it's a definite improvement on how these look stock.
but not use it for most of our set 
