Page 2 of 3
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:05 am
by George
i've never had a mute but apart from being
another piece of chromeware i gather they aren't that useful?
for the trem lock i only ever use that to help with setting up the trem (if it slides under easily without affecting tuning then you're golden). i think functionally it doesn't do much for me as i don't really break strings
as for the bridge i dunno, get a mastery bridge or something
robroe wrote:buy a PRS if you want a guitar that is easy to play and sounds good pussy.
lmao
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:07 am
by George
but yeah i agree jaguars are poorly designed from a utilitarian point of view, and i don't really like the sound either
i just love that trem
Re: Fender Jaguars are really poorly designed and impossible
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:08 am
by Hurb
Hurb wrote:to setup.
I have been the biggest Jaguar and Jazzmaster fan for a long time, I have had a fender Jaguar since my teens I am 30 in a few weeks and I have to say I can't be arsed with the design anymore.
I haven't setup a Jaguar from scratch since I setup Stewart's Jaguar a few years ago now, and this morning I decided to give mine the once over as it was starting to get a bit clicky and I had changed string gauges too so it was in need.
I started just after 9.30 am at 1pm I was done as I could be(I didn't intonate as I don't have a tuner with me) Everything you adjust knocks something else out of wack my guitar is particularly cuntish as it needs a massive shim to make it work and my bridge has really short (non original) adjusting leg grubs so it is not Ideal. I also set up the mute which is a stupid fucking pointless thing. I finished by making sure the tremolo was adjusted as it was designed so that if I break a string I can rock the button down and keep in tune. But this gives you hardly any travel on the vibrato. Pointless.
I also had some grounding issues as it is old and some grounding points had got a bit corroded, which takes me to the other stupid design of this stupid guitar....wtf the fuck is the point of all those stupid switches ? who uses a strangle switch? pointless! who uses the dark circuit? people who want to sound like they have a blanket over their amp? pointless! The switches themselves are fucking stupid too, lets make things as slow and difficult when we want to change pickups!
Also while I am at it the spongy shit used under the pickups(which have pointless claws on for no reason) why? why use sponge instead of springs used on every other guitar ever? it dries, goes hard and makes the pickups impossible to adjust ever again fuck that shit!
So yes I see it..it's a stupid guitar fuck the Jaguar in the A HOLE!
Also I realise that floyd rose trems are difficult too blah blah blah....but the jaguar is a cunt more!
Oh my how long have you guys known me? I expected to catch the noobs out, but not people who know that Jaguars and Jazzmasters run through my blood 4LIFE
It is true that I haven't set my guitars for a while so it took a while longer but it plays really rather well now.
And robroe your guitar is broken if you can't work the trem with your strings. I used to use zakk wylde strings (11 - 70) and the trem worked fine.
Benecol your offer is very kind sir but despite my bridge being a bit slap dash I can make it work. you have already been over nice to me over the years. x
Anyway sorry guys I was a bit bored the other day.
Re: Fender Jaguars are really poorly designed and impossible
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:18 am
by MattK
Hurb wrote:my bridge has really short (non original) adjusting leg grubs so it is not Ideal.
This is yr problem - drop the saddles down into the bridge tray as low as poss, crank up the leg screws = Jag setup ease.
BillClay wrote:Except for the 3 saddle bridge. Shit will not intonate.
If you use strings with a wound G the pairs intonate pretty nicely together - I have 2 3-saddle Teles and both are zero fuss to setup. And I am picky about intonation - don't forget that even with 6 saddles, a guitar that is intonated correctly on all 6 will still have discrepancies when you play different chords, it's the curse of the even-temper 12-tone scale y'all. 3 saddle Teles just have a slightly different flavour of wrong.
Re: Fender Jaguars are really poorly designed and impossible
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:24 am
by Hurb
MatthewK wrote:Hurb wrote:my bridge has really short (non original) adjusting leg grubs so it is not Ideal.
This is yr problem - drop the saddles down into the bridge tray as low as poss, crank up the leg screws = Jag setup ease.
.
read above I don't really have a problem. Also I disagree with that way of setting up a Jaguar bridge, The saddles need a bit of tension in those grub screws or they tend to work their way down over time. So you need them raised just enough so that the strings don't buzz on the intonation screws. But high enough so they lock into place. This avoids the need for any thread lock balls. Also you need the hight to get the right radius for the neck.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:26 am
by George
we all get a little upset with jaguars sometimes
nothing to be ashamed of hurb
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:29 am
by Hurb
George wrote:we all get a little upset with jaguars sometimes
nothing to be ashamed of hurb
haha
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:09 am
by Chris Fleming
I do wish they would address a few of it's flaws though. I get that people want to keep to the original spec, but having the trem too far back and those stupid saddles and the string spacing that isn't great just to be authentic seems pretty dumb?
All that said, I do love the fucker
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:15 am
by MattK
Either I missed gentle sarcasm or you haven't seen the Classic Player Jag. Also the 50th Anniversary has a closer bridge placement.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:16 am
by Hurb
Chris Fleming wrote:I do wish they would address a few of it's flaws though. I get that people want to keep to the original spec, but having the trem too far back and those stupid saddles and the string spacing that isn't great just to be authentic seems pretty dumb?
All that said, I do love the fucker
You can get Jaguars with the trem closer to the bridge.
Not sure what you mean about string spacing though? You can pretty much put the strings anywhere you want on the original bridge saddles?
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:38 am
by johnnyseven
matte30is wrote:I agree with above poster. Telecaster seems to be rock solid. If you get one with jumbo frets its super tits to play. Plus there are a bazillion techs that can setup your tele. Only and handful that know how to massage a jaguar the right way.
I used to be a super Jazzmaster fan, but since getting my US Tele i'm a Tele convert. I mucked around the the pickups and electronics for ages trying to get my Jazzmaster to sound the way I wanted, I just put a new set of pickups in my Tele and it now sounds like my idea guitar. It could do with an arm contour on the front though, 3 hour rehearsals chafe a bit.
My Strat is the most comfortable guitar to play that i've ever had, but the sound just doesn't have the balls that my Tele has - i'm guessing it's because of the weight of the guitar.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 11:39 am
by gusman2x
Chris Fleming wrote: the string spacing that isn't great just to be authentic seems pretty dumb?
I believe the string spacing is an issue when using a Std Mustang bridge.
If you can't like the Std bridge (understandably so, I can't) then the Staytrem bridge is a lovely bit of kit. Mustang bridge with correct string spacing, deep enough grooves on the treble side so the strings don't come out, and plastic bushes on the height screws to eliminate movement/rattling.
Very very nice bit of kit.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:07 pm
by Chris Fleming
Might give it a go when I have the bucks
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:24 pm
by BobArsecake
I just filed the grooves on my Jag bridge and the stings are fine, I never have any issues with it.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 12:52 pm
by NickS
jagsonic wrote:Playing a jaguar is like driving an old car. You have to take a little more care for it.
... ok, you just can drive a new, plastic smelling car, but you will loose your style...
Fixed.
Posted: Mon Jun 24, 2013 1:09 pm
by Awstin
robroe wrote:buy a PRS if you want a guitar that is easy to play and sounds good pussy.
Lulz
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 4:58 pm
by stewart
apart from changing strings i haven't done a damn thing to my jag since hurb set it up when i first got it. still plays fine.
ROCK SOLID
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:34 pm
by Hurb
stewart wrote:apart from changing strings i haven't done a damn thing to my jag since hurb set it up when i first got it. still plays fine.
ROCK SOLID
Don't you have a new Jaguar? I can do that one next time you come round!
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:43 pm
by taylornutt
I haven't changed the setup on my AVRI Jaguar since I bought it used from Guitar Center a couple of years back. Whoever had it before me did a really good setup job with a Mustang Bridge. I run .11s on it and it is one of the main stays of my guitar collection.
Posted: Tue Jun 25, 2013 5:43 pm
by robert(original)
i figured you were just having a laugh.
the only thing i think they could do better with the jaguar is move the trem up about an inch. and add the micro tilt. actually i think they should bring back the micro tilt altogether, it would make shiming alot easier and there is a company that had a design that i saw recently that was superb! so if fender could just use that as a basis and then execute it well i believe it would be a new standard for them. and or if they would just cut the neck depth short by about 3 mms i think that would help out tremendously.
really tho, as long as you have been playing for 5+years and tinkering for at least 1 year, you should be able to set your own gear by this point. unless you are completely retarded, in which case i shall buy your jaguar off of you with the understanding that it is broken and will never work properly so it can't be worth more than fifty bucks.