JS2PRM headstock

[Jemmm]

Looking at following pic, I noticed that chrome/mirror acrylic sheet on headstock, doesn't go all the way to top lock nut......but stops before spring retainer. Seem like silver paint is covering the other part.

Is this real....or just the pic. Can't really believe this on 60 series, collectors item.

[JTM45]

Yeah,i noticed that too when the pictures from NAMM were posted originally.

I think it looks terrible!!!!!!!! As well as that the two screws just look as if they were a last minute thought and they're not even countersunk flat-headed.

If this is what the final version will look like it's pretty poor really!

It's not like many of us are going to buy one anyway. Even if I did have that sorta' cash to spend on a guitar I wouldn't spend it on that,lol.

[Flobanez]

Agreed. That's odd. Hey, It's still a nice guitar.

[jemsite]

Rich - you ship any of those out yet... is that in the production models?

[Rich]

That headstock looks damn stupid, I said so here, but not in the NAMM section of my site. It looked fine on the PLT's because it was the black light clear and you just saw the silver paint behind it. On these the mirror next to silver just looks dumb and unfinished. But, they would have had to do 3 years of R&D to get the mirror overlay to bend there like on the BRMR JEM's

None have come in, no ETA on them either. I'm sold out until after they come in and I can possibly start picking up preowned profit takers.

[Jemmm]

I still can't believe how Ibanez can justify this $5300 price tag. Did the JS10th, and the original chrome boys have this same headstock cover???

I never noticed it like this. Does anyone have decent headstock pic of Chrome boy??? Aha......JS10th's lack the mirror acrylic cover.

[- Eric-]

Originally Posted by Jemmm

I never noticed it like this. Does anyone have decent headstock pic of Chrome boy???

found a pic of my JS10th, not completely sharp, but it'll do And ehh, sorry bout the size!

http://kubnw11.kub.nl/~s992147/DSC02792.JPG

(edit - link to large image)

[fettouhi]

Sweet , now cut those balls off .

Regards

André

[jemsite]

Originally Posted by Jemmm

I still can't believe how Ibanez can justify this $5300 price tag.

Ibanez charges what people will pay. Direct your disbelief at "ibanez buyers" not "Ibanez" ...glen

[Jemmm]

Ibanez charges what people will pay. Direct your disbelief at "ibanez buyers" not "Ibanez" ...glen

Yeah, you are right. Betya if they had put $7500 price tag on guitar it would have sold just the same. There are always 60 people out there with more money then brains.

That headstock is still bugging me. It looks so dorky.

Just as easily they could used vacuum forming process to get a clear acrylic sheet to match headstock shape completely, and with vacuum aluminizing process they could have matched the refective finish on the body. Heck that's the way they make flashlight lenses and so........

[jemsite]

If it looks "dorky" or not is irrelevant to the two most important parties... ibanez & the paying customer in it's captive audience.

You just surmised they could raise it's price 25% and likely sell them. At that time you must realize the small details are irrelevant. .. glen

[Jemmm]

But isn't Ibanez building these guitars like show off.....Limited run guitars that show off there best work.......so this will rub off to rest of line.

JS guitars aren't the best selling guitars in the Ibanez stable to begin with. This won't help much either.

[moro]

They wouldn't have this problem if the headstock was angled...why does Joe like the straight headstock anyway? It doesn't make a bit of difference in playability with a locking nut, does it?

[Flobanez]

Couldn't they just make the headstock similar to the 10th in some aspects?

[Jemmm]

Thin sheet of highly polish aluminum would have looked da business. Give it layer of clear and it would have look stunning.

I guess with making that new mirror plate Jem they had some cut off pieces of that mirror acrylic left.

Gotta watch the pennies.....those Japanese men the boardroom.