Lo-TRS II ??? - swapping with an Edge and more

wulpul · #1 03-01-2001, 10:42 AM

Why do Ibanez use this inferior piece of equipment (LO-TRS II) on certain models of their range?

How much money can they possibly save using thi in preference to the Edge or LoPro? I know the whole arguement about if they save $1 per guitar and sell ............ but Ibanez should be in the business of producing quality products. This forum alone shows peoples total hatred of the Lo-TRS trem.

For example the JEM555 would be a reasonable guitar if were fitted with a decent trem. I could even put up with the shrunken 'Tree of Life' inlay.

I think most people if they had to would pay a little more to get an Edge or LoPro.

**jemsite** · #2 03-01-2001, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Why do Ibanez use this inferior piece of equipment (LO-TRS II) on certain models of their range?

The obvious reason is because it allows Ibanez to segment their product line clearly and distinctly from 'low-end budget' to a mid-range budget'. It is no different than just about any product line in retail sales. It is all about marketing and product sales targeting various audiences.

Toyota vs Lexus

The TRS (made in Korea) Ibanez equipped guitars are clearly the low-end budget models. They are designed (and priced) to target people in a certain demographic of customer. The bean counters at Ibanez (and other companies) have tagged an EXACT price range they feel this target audience will be attracted too. Never a penny more, for they don't believe it will sell above (or below) a certain price.

The problem with 'paying a little more' is when you multiply a $20 increase in parts times 10,000 guitars you're looking at $200,000 more in production cost alone. That is $200k less profit right off the bat, since price canNOT change or raise.

So if Ibanez puts the Edge on a RG270 (hypothetically speaking) it still must be priced new in stores at $299 or so. OK, so they just lost $200k due to cost of manufacturing. Worse yet, at that point who the heck is going to buy the 'similar' RG550 at $599? There now becomes a less visible gap between model lines.

I don't have sales figures, but it is obvious that the low-end ibanez guitars bring about substantial revenue. The directly allow upscale models like the 2027 to be experimented with and brought to market. If they did not, they'd be off the market too... glen

wulpul · #3 03-01-2001, 01:22 PM

What about the JEM555?
Do you not hink that it would sell a lot better if it Had an Edge or LoPro.

The whole budget thing I agree with to a certain extent but models like the S470 deserves better than a LoTRS.

**jemsite** · #4 03-01-2001, 01:31 PM

Well the 555 exeriment is over so obviously sales didn't last. *I personally am DEAD SET against any inferior signature model axe such as the JEM555 & JS100. I think at their price range, Ibanez customers have lots of better choices. Hence the cheapened 555 was unnecessary.

Personally i think the ibanez lineup has much room for improvement, the 470s are a prime example of models like the 555 that are unnecessary. Ultimately the TRS cost the 555 many, many sales. But it's lower price (especially before the used *& online market exploded) kept it limping along for a few years... glen

Coolstu · #5 03-01-2001, 02:04 PM

Putting the Lo-TRS II on the JEM555 is one of the worst mistakes Ibanez made. I would have bought one if it had not been for the Lo-TRS trem. I played it and was really disappointed. I could put up with baby tree of life, the black body with thehfancy scrathplate BUT NOT THE TREM. *I bought an RG550 instead.

Signature Guitars should be QUALITY instruments. Putting the Lo-TRS on the JEM555, PGM and JS100 was such a cheap thing to do. How could the artists agree to this. Vai and Satch put so much time into developing their models and the the whole thing is ruined by the trem.

I agree with 'wulpul' they should have used an edge or LoPRO. People would have been willing to pay a little extra. I realise Ibanez are a business and in it for Profit but the LoTRS is a major mistake. I would love an S-series as well but most of them have the LoTRS as well (apart from the Prestige models).

Noodles · #6 03-01-2001, 07:57 PM

The trs trem is not that bad of a trem, it's just not as good as an edge or lpe. I do agree they should not be on Ibanez signature models.

dacmo · #7 03-02-2001, 01:51 AM

Noodles.. I disagree... the TRS sucks.. I mean sucks.. it's not exactly a bad design but it's really poorly manufactured with cheap materials.

What I don't understand is why did they not make the routings compatible between the TRS and Edge models. It makes perfect sense for them to segment the market and have affordable guitars... but at least make them upgradeable.

Noodles · #8 03-02-2001, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Quote: from dacmo on 12:51 am on Mar. 2, 2001
What I don't understand is why did they not make the routings compatible between the TRS and Edge models. It makes perfect sense for them to segment the market and have affordable guitars... but at least make them upgradeable.

It makes perfect sense not to make the trs and edge routings compatible, as stated above who would buy the rg5xx series if people thought they could turn a 2xx or 3xx into a 5xx and save some cash. Not only would that kill 5xx series but it would kill the 4xx series as well. For those who hate the trs that badly can get an ofr. If you think $250 for a used rg550 and $600 for a new one is not affordable then IMO you should find a new hobby because no company out there will give you a better deal.

(Edited by Noodles at 7:29 am on Mar. 2, 2001)

**jemsite** · #9 03-02-2001, 04:13 PM

Moved to FAQ area. This is not a valid question for Ibanez will address, although it makes for good forum discussion outside the 'Comments to Ibanez area'

YngVaiTriani · #10 08-15-2001, 09:46 PM

I have a 555. It's GREAT. But after I tested out an Edge in a guitar store I couldn't touch the TRS anymore. That's why I am getting the trem cavity routed and fitting in an Edge or Lo Pro Edge.
Amazing sound and feel.... I still am yet to find out this korean crap,.... I can't see it, feel it or hear it.

YngVaiTriani · #11 09-05-2001, 12:25 AM

and... The Lo TRS-II is not "crap". It's just not as good. I hope my retrofit goes well.

**jemsite** · #12 01-19-2002, 03:52 PM

Link to "replacing a TRS with an Edge" from the old forum
http://jemsiteforum.com/discus/messages/34/1320.html

BZ Beetle · #13 02-04-2002, 03:56 PM

I can fully understand why they segment the line with the lo trs. Personally, i like the wizard II neck more than the Wizard neck, and i love the S series. that would make the S-470 my ideal guitar. the problem with that, is it has a lo trs 2 or somthing like that, not an edge. to get an edge i have to move to the 520, which to me personally, is ugly. im just not about the woodgrain guitars. for a shredder that is (give me a nice woodgrain PRS and see if i whine tho

). at anyrate, I LOVE the sound of the S series guitar (say what are they topped with anyway?) and would buy one in an instant, but ibanez put that line out of my reach, by limiting my options. on the RG, basswood is easy enough to cut, so im just going to retrofit an Edge on. *So really, i feel they should have set a line just a smiiiiiiiiiidge higher than the 470 and lower than the 570, and offered essentially 470 series guitars with an edge, and made the customer pay for it. again however, that would allow people to turn thier 270s into 470s with a few minor parts, but you could buy that guitar for less than the parts to upgrade. so all in all i dont think it would be a horrible move for ibanez. I spent 350 for my RG270, im paying around 100 for an edge, and about 100 for pickups (not counting the ones ive already had in it). thats 550 bucks, just make the new guitar like $559 or somesuch. ibanez could still make money on it. or better yet, just sell TRS and Edge versions of the 470, as an option or somesuch.

its probaby never going to happen, but just a thought.

Mykall · #14 03-11-2002, 02:18 AM

I don't think its so much an issue with savings and bottomline cost as it is an issue with ensuring the success of their higher end models.

I think the real reason Ibanez won't offer the Edge/Lo Pro with their cheaper models is precisely that: to segment their market. *Think about it, why will people buy a JS-1000 or a JEM 7VWH if they can get a JS-100 or JEM 555 with a Lo Pro Edge?

The thing that reinforces this further is that they went out of their way to make a different routing scheme for the the Lo TRS and TRS II. *They're making it purposefully difficult for you to move to an Edge/Lo Pro configuration. *This way, the cost it takes you to convert a low end to one of their high ends is so prohibitive it makes better sense to save your money and buy their high end - Typical Marketing, what else is new?

Same story with the new SA series. *These guitars sound so good and are so cheap, if they put a Lo TRS on these instead of the SAT 30, then their S series market goes all to hell.

So no, its not gonna happen. *Not in a million years.

AndersPGM · #15 11-05-2003, 08:46 AM

I bought an Ibanez PGM 30 (Made in Japan 2002) a few days ago off of the internet (haven´t received it yet) and I believe it features a Low TRS II tremolo.
I noticed that the 2003 PGM30 models feature edge pro tremolos.
This seems to be a new model and I wonder if it´s a lot better than the
Low TRS II (which I suspect it is) and if perhaps it would fit in the socket of a LOW TRS II. That is, if I´d like to switch to a new edge Pro would it fit?
It´s the same model (PGM30) only a different year make so unless they´ve now routed the 2003 PGM30´s tremolo socket differently it ought to fit, right?

Well I hope I´ll get it within the coming few days and I´m looking forward to testing the Low TRS II since I´ve heard so much crap about it. I´m curious to find out if it may really be as crappy as people say.
I´m currently playing an Ibanez with a Floyd Rose II and I like it a lot. I have no expectations as to being as satisfied with the Low TRS II but time will tell.

Is it true that the JEM 555 lacks a truss rod? and if so is this also true for the PGM30? To not have a truss rod kinda scares me.

Anyone here own a PGM30? Any comments on it?

Regards, Anders