Did Vai reinvent the jackson soloist?

[dex]

Originally Posted by jemsite

Even without Vai IMHO Ibz would have copied the other superstrats and developed the RG (eventually).

That's all I'm saying, it would have taken them a few more years until they realised that hair players want edges.

Originally Posted by dex

This is well publicised but in 86/87 all guitar companies that aproached Steve with endorsment deals wanted him to play a full production model and Ibanez were prepared to make him a guitar up to his speck.
What I make from that is that had Jackson taken onboard all his silly requests for routing/colours/electronics and inlay, we would have been on the JCM forum right now bigging up the Jackson Jem.
Ain't no doubt about that.

[jim777]

Glen, I think you and Dex are on the exact same page on this one. You're saying Ibanez was a company that copied what others were doing at the time, and Dex is saying they didn't come up with the shape themselves. Both are sides of the same coin.
In the same vein, I just played an '85 San Dimas Soloist the other day for the first time, and it absolutely blew me away. I'd have bought it on the spot if it had been for sale.

jim

[RCB]

I dont think Glen and dex are saying the sdame thing..... i completely agree with glen, and not so with dex.

Dex seems to think that steve vai iluminated ibanez with the Rg design, and if not for him Jackson would still be the king. Glen is saying that the Rg design is an IBANEZ design based on the current superstrats other compnaies were making (and that is EXACTLY what I said)... and that, regardless of Steve Vai they would ve come up with the same design.

What makes the RG so succesfull and the Kramer, Hammer, Yamaha, and even the Jackson not so succesfull? Its the minor details in the design, the angle of the horns, the "amount of pointyness", the shape of the pickguard, etc, etc, etc. Its the EXACT shape of the RG, not the rough idea of making a "superstrat with edges" what maked the design such a huge succes. That is 100% Ibanez designers credit.

BTW, I think Rich Lasner later moved on to Yamaha and devolped the RGX, the second best superstrat shape IMHO. Not a coincidence.

The Raduis the P and the Saber were very similar guitars if you look at them from the front, but as you know they are very different guitars. The S series sold pretty well at the time. The Radius had poor sales until it became the JS. The power did horribly bad.... so they are very different guitars, even though they are very similar if you look at them from the front.

On a side note, and I aknowledge that is just a wild guess, I think that the S series could have done as good as the RG did if they had strong endorsers and they developed the line as they did with the RG.

[dex]

It seems to me that we all agree on pretty much everything but there is a missunderstanding on who thinks what.
What I think in easy chunks.
1. in 1986 Ibanez are strugling coming up with a superstrat that's apealing to players - Pro Line and Roadstar DX
2. In 1987 Ibanez redesign the Roadstar to incorporate Pro Line's sharper headstock and diferent body radiusing to try and get more sales
3. At the same time Ibanez copy the Green Meanie and it proves an overnight success

Originally Posted by Rich Laner

- when and how did the RG design come up?

After the huge success of the JEM guitar, we were faced with lots of pressure from dealers and the head office to make a less expensive version that more people could afford.

- was the first RG prototype much different from the production model?

No. Since we were really just taking the JEM idea down a couple of price levels, we had the JEM design to guide us. Except for some trim differences, the RG proto was much like the finished version.

4. The fact that Steve Vai - the hottest player in 86,87,88,89 and 90 (apart from Yngwie) is playing Jems makes the RG what it is - a huge hit.
5. Conclusion - Steve Vai is 95% responcible for the success of the Jem/RG (we are arguing over this here on the Jemsite ) and Ibanez were just lucky to have Steve.
6. Had Steve gone to ANY other company at the time - we would have been on that company message board right now bigging them up..........ESP/Hamer/Kramer/Peavey/Jackson...you name it
7.

Originally Posted by GuitarAkuma

Did Vai reinvent the Jackson soloist?

Abso-explicive-lutely

ilia

[RCB]

I guess I wouldn be here talking about it. I was always atracted to Ibanez guitars from day one because of the S540 and the RG770DX. What brough my attention to Ibanez was:

The pointy desing of the RG (I never liked the Jackson shape that much because the horns werent pointy enough and the angle was too "open"). the unbelievable design of the S series (the thin body, the jack, the knobs) and the edge.... OH, and the Dimarzio/IBZ pups.

YOu could also add taht the cosmo black paint just looked incredible at the time, and the sharktooth inlays were SO much cooler than the regular jackson sharktooth inlays.

I couldnt care less for Vai at the time (1986/1987). The first time Vai blew my mind was with PAW and with his whitesnike work.

I never cared about the jem that much until the early 90s.

So, if Vai went with Jackson, and the jem turned out to be nothing more than a Fluo DK2 with a lion claw and a monkey grip equiped with a regular Floyd Rose, and on the other hand Ibanez still developed the RG just as we know it (as we all seem to agree), then I (and a lot of dicerning players that dont care that much for endorsers) would be on RGsite.

Again, you seem to downplay de importance of the details in the design, the exact messures that make all the difference, and you also downplay the importance of other Ibanez innovations at the time.

When you bought an RG or a Jem you were buying an Ibanez, the comnay that was blowing everybodys mind with the edge, the inlays, the pups, the designs, etc, etc, etc. The brand was building a great reputation. All the succesfull models benefited from this, and also contributed to it.

[parker_fly]

Originally Posted by dex

It seems to me that we all agree on pretty much everything but there is a missunderstanding on who thinks what.
What I think in easy chunks.
1. in 1986 Ibanez are strugling coming up with a superstrat that's apealing to players - Pro Line and Roadstar DX
2. In 1987 Ibanez redesign the Roadstar to incorporate Pro Line's sharper headstock and diferent body radiusing to try and get more sales
3. At the same time Ibanez copy the Green Meanie and it proves an overnight success
4. The fact that Steve Vai - the hottest player in 86,87,88,89 and 90 (apart from Yngwie) is playing Jems makes the RG what it is - a huge hit.
5. Conclusion - Steve Vai is 95% responcible for the success of the Jem/RG (we are arguing over this here on the Jemsite ) and Ibanez were just lucky to have Steve.
6. Had Steve gone to ANY other company at the time - we would have been on that company message board right now bigging them up..........ESP/Hamer/Kramer/Peavey/Jackson...you name it
7. Abso-explicive-lutely

ilia

couldnt have said it better myself

[GuitarAkuma]

I agree in principal to the arguments waged here. True if Steve Vai had stuck to playing Tom Anderson guitars the RG as we know it would probably never have existed.

It can also be argued that Steve Vai redesigned the electric guitar for a new genre of guitar players, making a guitar that did'nt look like a modified strat but looked like a rock guitar.

So it would appear we kinda agree that the JEM came about from a combination of Vai's creative drive and Ibanez's "copy the competition" approach, so the key question is (which only Vai can answer):

Did mr Vai have the Jackson Soloist in mind when he designed the neck/body for the JEM as NOTHING in that time had the Soloists body/neck dimensions.....but strangely the JEM did and does!

[Phillip]

Originally Posted by GuitarAkuma

making a guitar that did'nt look like a modified strat but looked like a rock guitar.

Yeah, definetely! If you look on Jackson, Kramer and similar guitars of that age, they were very fenderlike looking (only deeper cutaways, but the body was high on vertical and short on horizontal from the front view-neck right, bridge left) but Ibanez was different. It was very cool looking, thinner, "younger" modern shape (thinner on vertical and longer on horizontal, longer horns or much deeper cutaways). I like more the superstrat shape of RG (Ibanez) or RGX (Yamaha) body than Kramer or Jackson. The last two always reminds me Fender, the same ugly old shape of the body IMHO. RG shape is very unique, even if you look on S, P and R series they are more fender looking, but RG is different.

[RCB]

Originally Posted by Phillip

Yeah, definetely! If you look on Jackson, Kramer and similar guitars of that age, they were very fenderlike looking (only deeper cutaways, but the body was high on vertical and short on horizontal from the front view-neck right, bridge left) but Ibanez was different. It was very cool looking, thinner, "younger" modern shape (thinner on vertical and longer on horizontal, longer horns or much deeper cutaways). I like more the superstrat shape of RG (Ibanez) or RGX (Yamaha) body than Kramer or Jackson. The last two always reminds me Fender, the same ugly old shape of the body IMHO. RG shape is very unique, even if you look on S, P and R series they are more fender looking, but RG is different.

Rich Lasner also created the RGX.

[Phillip]

I have noticed, but thanks! This factor points me to suggestion, that it wasn't only Vai's idea of the JEM-RG body (cause RG and RGX are very similar). That Rich Lasner has got his fingers in it as well. That JEM_RG was result of Vai's & Ibanez ideas.

[ronsws6]

My 2 cents:
I've owned both. They play very similarly, Very similarly. One time when I met Steve he asked me what I played and I sound proudly "Soloist" and he grinned from ear to ear and said "Great guitars aren't they." He told me he still had a couple and that he loved the quality. I am very confident that had Jackson been willing to deal with him he would have played jacksons forever. And Jackson's would be THE guitar everyone has or wants. I always said if I ever got an endorsment deal jackson would be who I would go to first.
The quality of my soloist is better in all respects than the VWH I used to have. (better ebony= more even color tighter grain pattern) I played 7-10 VWH's before I found one that had no flaws (inlay, fret buzz, etc).
But My VWH could glissen where my Soloist can't. Ibanez edge feels better than a floyd IMO though. My soloist has a compound radius and is a little easier to chord.
But Alas I am selling my Soloist, I'm getting older and the ghost flame paint scheme looks out of place on me. I will use the money to build me another guitar that is essentially a soloist with an Ibanez edge instead of a floyd.

[sniperfrommars1]

The issue your seeing with the ebony is only that jackson dyes their ebony a little more, as quality ebony is getting more difficult to find. Hence the reason for change with the 7vwh to rosewood as well as vai's request for this change. The jackson tremolo design has never been close to the quality of the edge and for the most part theyve always used a kahler or original floyd rose design. I dont doubt that their are alot of people who would worship vai just as much had he been using charvel. But i started using ibanez guitars before i even knew anything about steve vai so i dont see how any of that matters. Ive NEVER like the jackson headstock design the things crack like crazy, and the tremolos just dont match the ibanez design.

[jem7vwh]

This all kinda seems like pure logic on behalf of Ibanez. Put yourself in their shoes.

1. You are trying to earn the endorsement of a hugely popular new guitar player
2. He does not currently play a guitar that you make, or one that resembles one you make
3. He clearly likes his current guitar a lot

Should you:

A. Try to convince him to play an existing design you already make
B. Try to create a guitar that improves upon his current guitar and makes him want to switch?

Of course the JEM has similar design to the soloist or the dinky or a kramer or any other guitar of the moment back then.

It had to replace Steve's existing guitar. I will also say for my own part that I much prefer the RG/JEM body lines to Jacksons- I think they're much sharper and less strat-looking.

[red5]

Originally Posted by rguser

fender seems to be more interested in charvel line.

Charvel was originally the high end company and are starting to become the high end guitars again!

[sniperfrommars1]

As compared to jackson at least yes. They still need to improve upon their tremolo design, neck joints, look, consistency, etc.