Would you pay more for a guitar with an Original Edge

[Sickbean]

Originally Posted by Rich

"Japan is in love with it, they're looking to put it on everything".

Japan is also in love with porn involving squids, and they're looking to put that into everything.

If Ibanez design is now the sole responsibility of the Japanese, I'm glad I went with a Suhr (with it's perfect Gotoh Floyd).

[RedTiger]

Originally Posted by jono

I can seem them being proud of the Lo-Pro edge which was designed to be low profile and then the Edge Pro which was designed to be still further refined along the same lines. But to me (and I don't particularly see myself as resistant to change) I think each bridge has actually been a step away from the core ideals of what a locking bridge has to do.

Out of curiosity, what do you think those core ideals are? I always figured a double-locking setup pretty much had one purpose; making the tremolo actually usable. Instead of just being something for tame vibrato, you can use it as an extra tool for expression.

Originally Posted by Yousef

I really don't want to see the original edge or lo pro popping up on new high end Ibanez guitars. Yes, I love the edge trem, but its a design from 1986. I think that the edge zero is a great design, all they need to do is fine tune it.

The Floyd Rose is even older and its still used today. Look how long Fender used the six screw bridge. Hell, how old is the Gibson tune-o-matic? Being a chunk of medal with few moving parts helps in prevent obsolecence.

When you look at a Floyd, the thing that sticks out to me is the springs. The Floyd looks very modern and elegant, but the springs stick out as a throw-back to the last 50 years of Fender, so those are the obvious place to make improvements, which is what Ibanez did. Apparently something got lost along the way between concept in finished product.

[S-man]

I voted yes... I'd easily pay an extra 100 bucks for one.

Even if I think they are taking advantage of us at that price point.

Who knows?...maybe that's part of the "Master Plan". LOL!

[mike570]

Originally Posted by Rich

I've asked and the only answer I get is that "Japan is in love with it, they're looking to put it on everything". It doesn't matter what any of us say or think, the only thing that will stop them [IMO] is if sales fall in the toilet and the bridge is the main reason. I've stated my case several times to the right parties, but Japan doesn't care what any of the American employees think anymore. All they want is worker bees in the US, all R&D is centered in Japan now.

So.... how do they know if sales are in the toilet due to:
1. The crap economy?
2. The $hitty exchange rate?
3. The trem?
That doesn't make much sense to me. I really hope they keep the RG15XX series alive with Edge Pro; my favorite trem. I'm kind of drifting away from trems anyway so whatever. I might pay more for an Original Edge but it really would depend on what guitar it's going on.
Personally, I think it would be great to get a Prestige fixed bridge...but that's another thread.
But hey, they gave us back colors and the super wizard so it's not all that bad.
And, if I have it right, in Japan when the daimyo is in charge, people down the line pretty much do what they say.

[jono]

Originally Posted by RedTiger

Out of curiosity, what do you think those core ideals are? I always figured a double-locking setup pretty much had one purpose; making the tremolo actually usable. Instead of just being something for tame vibrato, you can use it as an extra tool for expression.

It should stay in tune, that's a given, but it should also be well constructed so as not to compromise the overall playability of the instrument. First and foremost it has to work as a bridge, then as a whammy unit.

I've found (and I've got about 20 years experience on the Edge family) that as each generation has appeared, the overall playability of the bridge has suffered in the name of technical progress. It might just be the guitars I've had (and I've had a few ) but I think the design of the Edge for durability, stability, construction and long term playability outweighs the refinements seen on the Lo-Pro, and its successors. Don't get me wrong, I love the Lo-Pro as a bridge, but I don't think it's as stable as the Edge, even the saddles don't seem quite as well anchored as on the Edge, and it just gets marginally worse each time.

so whilst I appreciate Ibanez are refining a perfectly good design, I can't help but feel by stretching the desing in other directions, they're having deleterious effects upon the bit that was right to start with.

Originally Posted by RedTiger

Apparently something got lost along the way between concept in finished product.

I think this sums it up in a nutshell

[RedTiger]

Originally Posted by jono

I've found (and I've got about 20 years experience on the Edge family) that as each generation has appeared, the overall playability of the bridge has suffered in the name of technical progress. It might just be the guitars I've had (and I've had a few ) but I think the design of the Edge for durability, stability, construction and long term playability outweighs the refinements seen on the Lo-Pro, and its successors. Don't get me wrong, I love the Lo-Pro as a bridge, but I don't think it's as stable as the Edge, even the saddles don't seem quite as well anchored as on the Edge, and it just gets marginally worse each time.

Its interesting you say that. When looking at Ibanez guitars, I knew I would basically be getting either an Edge Pro or an Edge Zero. There weren't any other options on the ones I was looking at other than those. Jemsite guys were saying the Edge Pro was better than the Zero. Other forums had people saying they loved the Zero, mostly the stability.

Funny thing is, ultimately what made me chose the Zero was the trem arm setup. I like something that screws in or can be fastened by screws. The whole plastic bushing+friction thing on the Pro seemed really, really cheap to me (ironically, the Edge Zero still has a bushing , but I like the addition of a screw mechanism). If I was really attached to a guitar with a Pro, I'd get that changed ASAP if I could. TBH, I don't really find the Edge Pro very appealing. Something about the "Pro"in the name and the fact that it looks like a watered-down flimsy Edge/Floyd.

I think I'm with you Jono, in some respects. If I really wanted a particular Ibanez, an EZ wouldn't stop me. However I think any future Ibanez will probably be an older one.

[AxeHappy]

Did they reduce the price when they switched from the Edge Pro to the Edge Zero? That should be the answer to the question.

[cm_17]

Funny (sad?) thing about "Japan is in love with it" is that that can only refer to the management or R&D section. I spoke with one of the techs at Kurosawa in Tokyo about the EZ, and he stated that he finds it inferior to previous trems, plus customers seem reserved about it as well.

So it's not just snobbish Americans complaining I figured .

[IbanezDaemon]

Originally Posted by newbieguitarmaker

I would probably say yes, especially if it was a lo pro.

+1. Yes for an Edge, but more for a LO Pro.

[prydogga]

I would easily pay $100-200 more (Aus) for a 6 stringer with Edge and $200-300 for Edge 7. (Best trem in the world)

[jb4674]

I have paid extra for an Edge and Lo-Pro, so I would definitely do it again.

Jimmy

[BozTheK]

I don't really know much about the Edge Zero, but the original Edge on my DY is better than any other floating bridge I've ever used. Also, is it true that the design of Edge Zero allows you to keep the ball ends on the strings and load them in as you would a fixed bridge?

Cos that's useless to me I load the ball ends up through the headstock and that works perfectly! So I'm saying yeah, If I was to buy a new guitar I'd want one with the original Edge.

[nuno]

Originally Posted by BozTheK

... is it true that the design of Edge Zero allows you to keep the ball ends on the strings and load them in as you would a fixed bridge?

every Ibanez trems since the original Edge on, EdgePro and EdgeZero including, allow you to load the strings either with or without ball-ends. you can either cut them off, or you can keep them at the headstock, no matter.

i'd pay some extras just if the new Edge/LoPro featured the EdgeZero arm-insert system. i can't stand to replace the nylon washers every given week. also, i never had any clue of a problems with the EdgeZero. it will become a hero when a new Ibanez trem will come out, exactly what happened to the then behatred EdgePro when the EdgeZero came out.

[eviltwin]

The whole plastic bushing+friction thing on the Pro seemed really, really cheap to me

To me it's the exact opposite: OFR style threaded nuts to fix the whammy bar seem really crude. A push in bar, with washers is much more elegant and when installed properly the washers will last a long time. The choice of one or two washers allows free swinging or fixed position whammy. There will be people who try to put a guitar in its case with the bar in; easy removal of the bar is to be preferred.

OFRs have always looked cheap to me: the whale tail, the stamped base plate, the combined string locks/fine tuners and the trem arm insert. Original Edge at least has a cast base plate, but the other poor features are still there.

every Ibanez trems since the original Edge on, EdgePro and EdgeZero including, allow you to load the strings either with or without ball-ends. you can either cut them off, or you can keep them at the headstock, no matter.

True but, the plastic ball holders on the inside of Edge Pro were specifically designed to allow the ball ends to be kept at the trem side. (stupid reason imho) It might have to do with the fact that some people (read: idiots) wrecked trems by locking the ball end at the saddle or other strange ways of mounting the strings at the trem.

I load the ball ends up through the headstock and that works perfectly! So I'm saying yeah, If I was to buy a new guitar I'd want one with the original Edge.

I can't see any other way working for me, and I have been doing this since at least 1992; The 92 catalogue also shows Steve himself doing that. Makes the Edge Pro seem superfluous. Also means you can leave the nice colour coded D'Addario ball ends on.

As for the original question, I still feel the EZ is a piece of junk: a deal breaker. I have no objection to owning an EP, so would not pay extra for a LoPro. My picking style is incompatible with either OFR or original Edge, so I would not be paying for them at all, let alone extra.

I think the design of the Edge for durability, stability, construction and long term playability outweighs the refinements seen on the Lo-Pro.

I don't agree, the separation of intonation, string locking and fine tuning is essential to stability.

So any construction advances in that direction are indeed an improvement, as could have been the introduction of intonation chips on the EdgePro, unfortunately their construction isn't perfect and there are the non locking posts, obviously.


@Rich, isn't it true that the OFR patents might have run out, but the later LoPro patents haven't? The Edge Zero circumvents those by "improving" on the intonation adjustment.

[BeboRock91]

I would. my 20th with edge was great