Charvel vs. Jackson

[jmh151]

An interesting interview I found- an interview with Wayne Charvel, as well as Grover Jackson, regarding the origin of Charvel and Jackson guitars. The two don't seem to like each other too much.

http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/interviews/rock_chronicles/rock_chronicles_1980s_wayne_charvel.html

 

[KeeperOS]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Got that was long (first reply to this article, and, man, was it not... )

Well, I have to admit that I knew (still know) nothing about the Charvel/Jackson (hi)story so as to be fairly certain of what really happened (apart from the fact that there's some bad blood between the two).

I feel however that the differences in their stories could be attributed in the very different natures of the two men.

For instance even before Grover's reply I could already imagine Wayne to be the laid back type of guy, the one that doesn't like things getting complicated nor appreciates strict discipline or rules.

On the other hand, both Wayne's interview and Grover's reply reveal that Grover Jackson is and always has been a methodical guy. The guy with the plan (he calls it a dream, IMO however, a dream is nothing without a plan to make it happen). The guy that always gets worked up over every little detail.
He obviously never shied from any kind of labor and has never been afraid to get his hands dirty (not necessarily in a bad sense).

So, it appears to me that the extremely dissimilar views of the events is primarily (if not, almost entirely) based on the very fact that these two men are complete opposites.
Both as personalities, aspirations and, well their dreams.

Frankly I cannot begin to imagine how these two people ever got along long enough to be working together...

 

[Ayrton]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Good read....

 

[vinterland]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

These companies are very different now from when they had a say in them.

 

[Jackson Distortion]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

All I know is that Charvel found the Concorde/RR model too radical, so Jackson decided to put his name on the headstock. Therefore, that in and of itself indicates that one seemed (a tad) conservative in his views than the other. Basically, why I've never been a fan of Charvels, because in comparison to Jackson's, they seem slighty more traditional in their designs. Not a bad thing, but Charvel's just don't grab me because of that.

 

[vinterland]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

All I know is that Charvel found the Concorde/RR model too radical, so Jackson decided to put his name on the headstock. Therefore, that in and of itself indicates that one seemed (a tad) conservative in his views than the other. Basically, why I've never been a fan of Charvels, because in comparison to Jackson's, they seem slighty more traditional in their designs. Not a bad thing, but Charvel's just don't grab me because of that.

That's because a Charvel is "the" traditional soooperstrat. Full size strat bodies and headstocks with floyds and awesome necks.

 

[jerryjg]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

That's because a Charvel is "the" traditional soooperstrat. Full size strat bodies and headstocks with floyds and awesome necks.

Yeah. I want a maple neck full sized body Charvel. I want a Charvel like one of Xcessives Charvels.From what I hear those new US $1000.00 Charvels are the new modern standard of production.
That said, my Jackson Soloist is non negotiable.

 

[Ayrton]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

All I know is that Charvel found the Concorde/RR model too radical, so Jackson decided to put his name on the headstock. Therefore, that in and of itself indicates that one seemed (a tad) conservative in his views than the other. Basically, why I've never been a fan of Charvels, because in comparison to Jackson's, they seem slighty more traditional in their designs. Not a bad thing, but Charvel's just don't grab me because of that.

Was Wayne even involved (with Charvel) when Grover built the RR?

 

[Jackson Distortion]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Oops, I just got something wrong...

In '77 GJ began working for Charvel and in '78 he bought the company. In '80 GJ moved to a larger facility in San Dimas, CA and met RR (that's Randy Rhoads). RR wanted Jackson to build him a guitar according to RR's own drawings.

Now for the clarification: The Concrde/RR model was radically different than previous Charvel guitars, Jackson decided to put his name on the headstock. In '83 came some of the first Jackson production models.

So, I guess Wayne didn't find it too radical after all, if he was even there at that time. Oops. But, all of which is posted above is true, taken from official source material, like say a catalog from '03 lol, instead my rusty ole noggin'. Sorry.

 

[Ayrton]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

LOL...no worries.

I had always thought GJ used his name in case the guitar "failed" and he did not want to associate it with the Charvel name.

How silly that all seems now.

 

[Atomic Chameleon]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

That's because a Charvel is "the" traditional soooperstrat. Full size strat bodies and headstocks with floyds and awesome necks.

Yup, Charvels rule! I acknowledge Soloists' contour/playability advantages but they look a tad on the anorexic side.

 

[AcousticSmash]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Cool, personally I am more into Charvel's, however there are some nice Jackson guitars out there. Both make similar guitars, I just like the necks on Charvels's a bit better. The compound radius fretboard on Jackson guitars feels far too much like my Ibanez RT650, why would I buy a more expensive version of a guitar that plays just like what I have?

 

[jmh151]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Yup, Charvels rule! I acknowledge Soloists' contour/playability advantages but they look a tad on the anorexic side.

I have a USA Soloist and a Charvel Replica I made from Musikraft parts.

The Charvel body does seem slightly larger than a strat- I haven't taken a tape measure to it, but it looks fatter than the 2 Fender strats I have next to it. Maybe it's the edge radius.

The Soloist is tiny, but has killer tone.

 

[stratsandaks]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

That was a good read. Does anyone have a link for the old Grover Jackson interview that was mentioned in the article?

 

[Ascension]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

My 88 Gibson Showcase U2 was a Charvell design so when did Wayne leave Jackson Charvell? I know Grover was at Washburn in 92 but it was not announced untill Febuary of 93 that he was running Washburn USA.
I prefer Grovers Jacksons stuff to Wayne Charvells designs myself.
All of my USA Washburns are Grovers designs and all were built while he was Chief of USA operations except the 99 WM-4. My Washburns USA's were frankly more true Jackson than anything that Jackson Guitars had built in over a decaid untill the recent Grover Jackson re-issues.

 

[Ascension]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Cool, personally I am more into Charvel's, however there are some nice Jackson guitars out there. Both make similar guitars, I just like the necks on Charvels's a bit better. The compound radius fretboard on Jackson guitars feels far too much like my Ibanez RT650, why would I buy a more expensive version of a guitar that plays just like what I have?

Grover actually loves chunky thick necks surprisingly. I own a Prototype for the MG 122 and a very early production 94, both have chunky necks and honkin HUGE frets. The late production MG122 has a slim shreadder profile neck though. The very first of these would not sell due to the necks being so chunky but that is what Grover wanted. I have to admit that the tones on the thicker neck guitars is noticably better. My early production 94 MG 122 sounds like a very very good Les Paul in tone even though it is a bolt on Superstrat!!

 

[AcousticSmash]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

I hate guitars with big necks, it's like holding a baseball bat for me. The compound radius is nice and fairly comfortable for me to play on, but again it is so much like the Ibanez Viper neck styles that the RT series was using and I am sure the Andy Timmons model uses the same neck since it is designed around the RT450 that he used for much of the 90's before getting a sig model. My uncle has a Jackson, I am not sure which model it is but it is black with a double cutaway, Floyd Rose trem and EMG active pickups. Plays nice but I like my Ibanez better personally.

 

[NoOnesFang13]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Wow 2 other RT owners in the same thread! i could have swore i was the only one that had one. Sorry for the highjack. But i can contest to the fact the RT has a great feeling neck, mine had the finish sanded off before i got it so its really smooth i just have to clean it alot.

 

[Zerberus]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Good read, thanks for the link :friday:

All I know is that Charvel found the Concorde/RR model too radical, so Jackson decided to put his name on the headstock. Therefore, that in and of itself indicates that one seemed (a tad) conservative in his views than the other. Basically, why I've never been a fan of Charvels, because in comparison to Jackson's, they seem slighty more traditional in their designs. Not a bad thing, but Charvel's just don't grab me because of that.

Actually, Wayne Charvel was out of the company years before the first plans for the Concorde /RR were drawn on a napkin by Randy.

Grover however did feel that the shape was too radical for the more conservative Charvel style, and therefore this instrument became THE first Jackson guitar. The idea was not to risk 86ing the good reputation they had built by introducing somethiing so left field. As we know today, the guitar did not crash and burn like its namesake, but flew straight into the hearts of rockers everywhere, and is now one of the most Iconic Pointies there is, if not THE most iconic. As a result Charvel took zero damage, but Jackson started off with a huge Bang

Side note: while Wayne is touted by many as teh God of the superstrat, the fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as a Wayne Charvel made Charvel. There are Wayne Charvel assembled parts guitars, yes. But the Onsrud pin routers that roared to life in the early 80s when actual In house production started never saw Wayne´s hands anywhere near the controls

Wayne left in 78 almost immediately after Grover bought him out. However, 79-86 are generally touted as the Golden Age of Charvel instruments. Btw any Jackson Strat or dinky with a pointy headstock from that time frame is essentially 100% identical to a Charvel from the same period, just with a different logo on the HS and Neckplate.

BTW, there was also never a Jackson or Charvel guitar produced in San Dimas, nor was there ever a Factory there. The facility was in Asuza, CA., San Dimas was merely the PO Box Address of the company. The PO Box address was retained when the plant was moved to Glendora

 

[WITH FULL DISTORTION]

Re: Charvel vs. Jackson

Interesting stuff