ShortScale.org

benecol wrote:

hotrodperlmutter wrote:the jaguar is the fender flagship? do you know what a flagship model is?[/i]

Newsflash Herp: the Jaguar was Fender's self-proclaimed flagship model for most of the sixties.

attention Derp: self-proclaimed, eh? i remember reading that they claimed it was 'top of the line,' and was the most loaded guitar they sold, and then it bombed. never heard it referred to as a 'flagship,' which is something that has an immediate popularity, and doesn't need anything but the name to sell it.

if the last resort, in an attempt to save your never popular flagship model, is adding a maple neck with black blocks then that sounds like a massive failure. it might have been their most expensive guitar, but ships that countries put their flags on it usually float.

I can't decide between Mustang and Jaguar. I will probably own one or the other eventually, and it will probably be a mustang....but I can't be sure of that yet

As the proud owner of a Mustang and Jag....

Jag. For looks and just how it sounds.

But honestly, it is the best looking guitar I think money can buy. Nothing really competes in my mind. It is perfect.

hotrodperlmutter wrote: attention Derp: self-proclaimed, eh? i remember reading that they claimed it was 'top of the line,' and was the most loaded guitar they sold, and then it bombed. never heard it referred to as a 'flagship,' which is something that has an immediate popularity, and doesn't need anything but the name to sell it.

if the last resort, in an attempt to save your never popular flagship model, is adding a maple neck with black blocks then that sounds like a massive failure. it might have been their most expensive guitar, but ships that countries put their flags on it usually float.

ITT: HRP takes refuge in semantics because he CAN'T HANDLE BEING WRONG.

Explain to me again how "top of the line" (itself, ironically, another nautical reference) doesn't equate to "flagship"?

Jag-stang.

The neck is nicer than everything.

The neck pickup sounds nicer than everything.

I don't understand this discussion.

benecol wrote:

hotrodperlmutter wrote:attention Derp: self-proclaimed, eh? i remember reading that they claimed it was 'top of the line,' and was the most loaded guitar they sold, and then it bombed. never heard it referred to as a 'flagship,' which is something that has an immediate popularity, and doesn't need anything but the name to sell it.

if the last resort, in an attempt to save your never popular flagship model, is adding a maple neck with black blocks then that sounds like a massive failure. it might have been their most expensive guitar, but ships that countries put their flags on it usually float.

ITT: HRP takes refuge in semantics because he CAN'T HANDLE BEING WRONG.

Explain to me again how "top of the line" (itself, ironically, another nautical reference) doesn't equate to "flagship"?

ah, i'm just pissing up the rope now. and this gay banter with you is surely to end well, so i'll surrender now.

i voted jaguar, it might just be the only guitar i'll ever own, maybe.
to me it's the most versatile guitar, and probably the best looking out of all the shortscales, and most comfortable.

i say mustang, but i still need to try an old duo or bronco. hardtail and a bridge pickup is all i really need. jags are cool, and maybe i'll come around on their looks, but they're a little too flashy for me at this point.

Super-Sonic. I've seen two in person so far, and they both sounded and felt brilliant(but not a huge fan of the sparkly ones.....). Though I love Jaguars, I have a soft spot for Super-Sonics. The person who has the first Super-Sonic switched the pups, and gave it a better sound. The second was stock but still sounded pretty intense.

Jaguar. They're really as versatile as everyone says... mine was a guitar most of the day, but sometimes we'd tart it up and hit the disco.



Heavy times.

I don't really class it along with the rest of the shortscales. They have one vibe and Jags/Jazzies have another.

And all the term "flagship" really implies is that the company at the helm puts more effort into it under the proviso it be the best thing they've done and lead their range of shit. The Strat was meant to improve on the Tele, the Jazzmaster was meant to be the dog's bollocks and the Jaguar was meant to improve on the Jazzmaster. Every one of these guitars was the "flagship" at some point.

JAG obviously, there are no doubt in my mind.

am i the only one who doesn't find jags versatile at all? they do a jag sound, and with the rhythm circuit engaged, a muffled jag sound.

stewart wrote:am i the only one who doesn't find jags versatile at all? they do a jag sound, and with the rhythm circuit engaged, a muffled jag sound.

I think the neck and bridge pickups sound wildy different, and that the strangle switch works great with dirt, but then I don't have cloth ears.

I'm also in love with both pickups on and a little dirt.

It's probably because i'm a bridge-pickup-only luddite.

Of all the guitars I've had Jaguar pickups yield the least difference between neck and bridge. I almost always used the neck, with it's chime and cutting power it's fucking awesome. This I put down to the 1k pots and plinky plonk floaty bridge style.

I got quite a bit of variety from my Jag - from almost Jazzmaster/nice strat sounds at the neck to more-tele-than-tele sounds at the bridge. Very nice.

GeorgeF wrote:Of all the guitars I've had Jaguar pickups yield the least difference between neck and bridge.

That's why I like them. You can actually use the neck for dirty chording and not sound gash.

stewart wrote:am i the only one who doesn't find jags versatile at all? they do a jag sound, and with the rhythm circuit engaged, a muffled jag sound.

not at all.

SHEER ROCK LOOK AND FEEL > TONAL VERSATILITY

I've owned three Mustangs and one Jaguar. My Jaguar with the Mustang bridge and SD pickups is my favorite guitar I have.

I believe that out of the box, Mustangs are the short scale to rule them all, as they play very well out of the box. There are not many non-hardtail Jaguars that don't need some love before they perform to potential, and no, I don't want to play with 13s and I don't want to play flats. The Jags that do play well out of the box are usually not very vintage-accurate. Mustangs don't really have that problem. A stock '65 works just fine, no matter vintage or reproduction, and no matter what strings you use.

However, the Jaguar has several things going for it. Once modified to your liking, it looks, plays, and sounds so damn good. It's a high class instrument and when you look at that Jag, it's the kind of instrument that makes you go, damn, I'm glad I play guitar because that thing is hoottt! Also, the contours are nice. I do wish that there were more Mustangs that were contoured.

Also, in 2011, the Mustang is one of the most expensive guitars in Fender's lineup, as in the '65 RI is the cheapest version of a Mustang, which is far more than you have to pay for an entry level Jaguar or Jazz. The '65 RI is a fantastic instrument, but it just cannot be justified at $939. That costs the Mustang some serious points, as $939 is enough to get a used Japanese Jaguar. It's supposed to be a student guitar but is priced like a high class instrument, and that leaves a really bad taste in my mouth, since for $939, you get an instrument that really needs another $120 in pickups before it sounds like a thousand dollar guitar.

That said, I have a deep love for the Mustang. The nice thing is you can pick one up in good shape used for just about $500, put some good pickups in it, and get this pretty little thing that is light, plays like a dream, and sounds terrific. Nobody appreciates the Mustang for its looks but once you have one, you just find them really appealing. Plus, I love the switching on it. It just makes so much sense to me.

To me, the perfect guitar, you start with a '69 Mustang, put a Jag/Jazzmaster vibrato, and quality Strat pickups. If you think of Bilinda Butcher's custom Mustang, that's pretty much it. I'll build one some day.