ShortScale.org

mage wrote:ok. man, it took me a long time to understand what you were saying, heh. you're saying they moved the bridge to compensate for the 24" scale but didn't change the pickup location. it's really hard to tell but you may be right. you can't judge by the pickguard though as they are both different. this new one has the pickguard like a 90s duo sonic.

EDIT: hmm well, looking at them side by side they appear to be completely different in almost every way. still a cool guitar but I would consider less like a reissue and more like a 90s duo sonic... II.

the pickups look like they're in the same place. the bridge is farther out b/c the guitar is built around a 25.5" scale (the neck is conversion).

esteban wrote: the pickups look like they're in the same place. the bridge is farther out b/c the guitar is built around a 25.5" scale (the neck is conversion).

Kind of weird that Squier would design this with a conversion neck... perhaps they had originally planned to release this as a 25.5" scale, but changed their mind once production had started, or was just about to start.

astro wrote:

esteban wrote: the pickups look like they're in the same place. the bridge is farther out b/c the guitar is built around a 25.5" scale (the neck is conversion).

Kind of weird that Squier would design this with a conversion neck... perhaps they had originally planned to release this as a 25.5" scale, but changed their mind once production had started, or was just about to start.

my theory is that they can use the same tooling for the jagmaster.

esteban wrote:

astro wrote:

esteban wrote: the pickups look like they're in the same place. the bridge is farther out b/c the guitar is built around a 25.5" scale (the neck is conversion).

Kind of weird that Squier would design this with a conversion neck... perhaps they had originally planned to release this as a 25.5" scale, but changed their mind once production had started, or was just about to start.

my theory is that they can use the same tooling for the jagmaster.

That makes sense...

if they'd never made the 25.5" jagmasters, then we'd have access to cheap and proper 24" necks from squier... too bad, 'cause I'd love to build a jaguar project with a maple fretboard...

...but doesn't this mean that we can use these necks to convert regular scale Fenders into shortscales? 'Cause that would be pretty cool...

The pickups are clearly in a different place. The bridge and neck pickups are BOTH further up on the new one, meaning the neck is closer to the neck pocket, and the bridge is further from the bridge saddles. It's clear as day.

Yes Mike, clear as day...



esteban is correct, the bridge is moved and the neck is a different size, otherwise it's identical. Interestingly enough, the neck pickup has a slightly different slant if you carefully examine them one over the other. The knobs and pickguard shape are always different, but the pickups are very much in the same place.

I'm not looking at your Epilepsy-inducing gif (if you slowed it down considerably it might be viewable). Just look yourself at the spacing between the neck pickup and the neck on those pictures.

Malik wrote:esteban is correct, the bridge is moved and the neck is a different size, otherwise it's identical. Interestingly enough, the neck pickup has a slightly different slant if you carefully examine them one over the other. The knobs and pickguard shape are always different, but the pickups are very much in the same place.

The pickups might not have moved in respect to each other, but they have relative to the resonant elements on the guitar, such as the bridge, they will sound different. Look at the amount the bridge is jumping in your gif, that's a whole lot of difference in treble response. If you made a gif with the bridges lined up it would illustrate my point perfectly.

Mike wrote:

Malik wrote:esteban is correct, the bridge is moved and the neck is a different size, otherwise it's identical. Interestingly enough, the neck pickup has a slightly different slant if you carefully examine them one over the other. The knobs and pickguard shape are always different, but the pickups are very much in the same place.

The pickups might not have moved in respect to each other, but they have relative to the resonant elements on the guitar, such as the bridge, they will sound different. Look at the amount the bridge is jumping in your gif, that's a whole lot of difference in treble response. If you made a gif with the bridges lined up it would illustrate my point perfectly.

I'm not debating that, that is clear as day. The fact is, Squier have kept the pickups in the same place as the old one, but with the apparent usage of a conversion neck, the bridge has moved and the neck pocket has had to change shape. So yes, it will sound relatively different, but it looks relatively the same and I guess that's their priority. Until we get the Classic Player Duo-Sonic, I doubt we'll be seeing that.

you guys are talking about it sounding different that a 50's duosonic like its a bad thing.

who fucking cares if it sounds different really? 50's duosonics' aren't exactly a guitar that everyone on earth is rushing out to buy because they sound so fucking awesome.


i don't even know what a 50's duosonic sounds like. im assuming kinda plunky with weak 50 year old pickups

Mike wrote: they have relative to the resonant elements on the guitar.

i don't think words like resonant and duosonic should be used together.
by no means am i bashing this guitar. i love this guitar but you guys are getting in this heated discussion using words and terms meant for vintage 50's strats, teles, esquiers, hell even broadcasters.


its a fuckin duo sonic for 279.00.
its a fuckin guitar that looks cooler than a strat or tele
its a fuckin guitar that you can mod without giving a fuck

most importantly
its a fuckin guitar with a neck that was dipped in gloss 18 times and then someone had the brains to put WHITE PEGHEADS on it.
i don't give a shit if the pickups are 1mm forward or if the bridge is 10mm backward. hell, this thing could come with fuckin jumbo frets on it and i wouldn't care really. its already won me over and the thing looks like someone pooped on it, wasn't satasfied with the poop color, so they waited a day, ate some different kinds of food and pooped on the pickguard so it would be a diffreen't shade of poop

robroe wrote:

Mike wrote: they have relative to the resonant elements on the guitar.

i don't think words like resonant and duosonic should be used together.

I'm talking about how trebly the bridge pickup will sound. it's hardly mojo bollocks -it's plain fact.

mike, have you ever played a version 1 duo-sonic? they're already pretty bright. the metal pickguard really does add to that.
i don't think it'll sound even remotely bad with the bridge pickup moved up a little.
the only thing that even kinda bugs me about this guitar is the way the pickguard extends down, almost like a p-bass. but it's really not that big of a deal.

Nope, I've never played one other than a Duo-Sonic 2 (Hurb's) which I know is a completely different beast.

I didn't think about the metal pickguard, maybe that will spank it up a bit. Doesn't stop the distance from the bridge to the pickup being an eyesore though. I realise I'm being picky, but it's the internet - i'm allowed.

bubbles_horwitz wrote:mike, have you ever played a version 1 duo-sonic? they're already pretty bright. the metal pickguard really does add to that.
i don't think it'll sound even remotely bad with the bridge pickup moved up a little.
the only thing that even kinda bugs me about this guitar is the way the pickguard extends down, almost like a p-bass. but it's really not that big of a deal.

i didn't notice that about the pickguard. seems like they moved the knobs over a bit. i wonder why they made it SLIGHTLY different??? this happens on all the squiers; the dimensions are barely off of what fender makes, so there are these small incompatibilities everywhere.

esteban wrote:

bubbles_horwitz wrote:mike, have you ever played a version 1 duo-sonic? they're already pretty bright. the metal pickguard really does add to that.
i don't think it'll sound even remotely bad with the bridge pickup moved up a little.
the only thing that even kinda bugs me about this guitar is the way the pickguard extends down, almost like a p-bass. but it's really not that big of a deal.

i didn't notice that about the pickguard. seems like they moved the knobs over a bit. i wonder why they made it SLIGHTLY different??? this happens on all the squiers; the dimensions are barely off of what fender makes, so there are these small incompatibilities everywhere.

I was wondering that myself, maybe so people can't just tart the Squiers up and pass them off as genuine Fenders?

This guitar is the 90s duo sonic done up to look like a 50s duo sonic. the pickguard is the exact same shape as the 90s duo sonic. the lessened angle of the neck pickup is the exact same as the angle on the 90s duo sonics. look carefully at the body shape of the guitars. they are different. To make this new one they must have used the template from the 90s one.

mage wrote:This guitar is the 90s duo sonic done up to look like a 50s duo sonic. the pickguard is the exact same shape as the 90s duo sonic. the lessened angle of the neck pickup is the exact same as the angle on the 90s duo sonics. look carefully at the body shape of the guitars. they are different. To make this new one they must have used the template from the 90s one.

Yes the body is different, the fitties one is flatter at the bottom. I still want it tho'

don't forget that upper horn.

why would an aluminium pickguard affect the sound?