Sounds like JP and EB/MM know their guitar ain't worth the $ - Page 3

Scott Smith · #31 02-09-2001, 01:32 PM

I never played one either. There was one at my local pawn shop, a red one. Looked kinda cool, kind of an offset Strat body shape...

utopia · #32 02-09-2001, 02:13 PM

What's more ridiculous:

EB JP prices or the prices for a Le$ Paul?

Mike

DTSteve · #33 02-09-2001, 08:14 PM

Hey
I don't post much, just like reading usually.
In my opinion, everyone talking about guitars being overpriced, especially the EBJPM is way off the mark. First of all, I spoke to JP after the Roseland show in August, and asked him specifically why he switched. I had told him that I thought Ibanez was lacking in quality control in the past few years. He agreed with me. He said that he wanted to get away from the picasso paint and that they were unwilling to issue his model with piezos and in 7 string version.

As far as pricing goes, I am an advocate of beautiful woods. I would pay $200 more in a second for a guitar that has a figured maple neck. That's the first things I look for in a guitar...the wood quality and appearance.

I think the EB will be better quality and more solid than the Ibanez and I pay for that too.

I really like the way the guitar looks. I was not planning on buying more guitars because I an starting to build my own...but now that they're out, I'm going to buy a black 6 string with piezos and no shield and then I'll buy a Mystic 7 string with piezos, the shield, and any other option they throw at me.

I don't really think the EB is overpriced when you look at the DNA....3 grand for a jem with a swirl?? you have to be kidding me. Those things are so ugly I'd rather look at my UV7BK. Plain-Jane woods on the neck, too.
Just my opinion, sorry that I'm offending everyones pride and joy here.

John Petrucci is a technical-guitar icon. There isn't anything that can change that. While DT's music may not get too much critical acclaim because it is so eccentric, I have to applaud them for sticking by their guns and not being influenced by the masses and selling out...although Falling into Infinity could almost be that... *I'm glad to see that JP has what he wants. He deserves the opportunity to get it without selling out and sticking a TRS in his axe.

Oh yeah....
$1705 doesn't mean $1705, just like $1599 didn't mean $1599, it meant $999.

...Till next time,
DTSteve

jem7vwh · #34 02-09-2001, 10:56 PM

There are a number of problems with this argument. *First, the comparisons with the JEM2KDNA are irrelevant. * First, the DNA is a limited edition model. *The JP is a production model of which untold numbers will be pumped out.

I was not there and have no way of knowing what JP may have told you, but from all reports Ibanez bent over backward trying to find ways to appease John's taste. *I'm pretty confident they would have introduced the double edge on JPM models if he asked. *Hell, he may be the reason they began working on it.

I have no problem with demanding a guitar with good looks, but for nearly two grand, the guitar should do more than look pretty. *By the same token, I (and others who have stated above) find the guitar pretty damn boring and ugly. *It's your money, you can give it to anybody you want to.

j i m · #35 02-10-2001, 11:02 AM

*Ya know, I just don't understand all of the complaining about the list price on the EB/JPM. Is the list price on a VWH not $2500? I don't here too many complaints about that....
*You can say all you want about the looks of the EB/MM, I happen to think its a beautiful guitar, but If you don't like it you do not have to buy it. It seems If the guitar is not an Ibanez everyone is all over it. I tend to beleive that quality and construction of the EB will likely be better then the Ibanez JPM(or JEM). Don't get me wrong I love Ibanez, but Ernie Ball is a great company too. Just my opinion.

joebalama · #36 02-10-2001, 11:59 AM

Since we're all just stating our "opinions"....why not talk about the King of ugly overpriced axes...the Parker Flys!

Joe

jem7vwh · #37 02-10-2001, 08:15 PM

The list price on a JEM7VWH, even with last year's increase is NOT $2500.00. *Seems to me it's 2199.99. *And with great dealers around like Rich, we all can find one at a far better price. *And besides, it's a hell of a lot more guitar for your money.

I don't have a problem with the price of the Parker Fly, I just hate how the top horn punctures my lung everytime I play. *It's too square.

Rich · #38 02-10-2001, 08:39 PM

Actually the current list on the 7v is $2399 + $169 for the case, that's $2568. I'm cutting deal on the EBMM's too of course, but I've only sold 1 so far

jem7vwh · #39 02-10-2001, 10:13 PM

well I honestly didn't take the case into account, and neither did list on the EB/MM did it? *Anyhow, the point remains, it's a lot of money for a drab Silhouette.

Rich · #40 02-10-2001, 10:50 PM

From what I'm told the EBMM price includes case.

jem7vwh · #41 02-11-2001, 01:38 AM

thanks for the numerical assistance Rich

stephen6 · #42 02-11-2001, 04:42 PM

I think breaking out the new JPM features is a good thing. *The JP "shield" was ugly IMO and I'm glad I dont have to pay for it now.

The config I am considering is 7 string piezo, mystic paint and matching headstock. *List for that is 2705US. *If I can get a x.65 multipler on pricing my cost becomes 1759US including case. *Thats about 350US more than I paid for my UV777BK. *The extra bucks buys me a figured maple neck, a finish I get to choose and piezo electronics, not bad IMO.

So what if the new JPM is a derivitave of a different EB/MM guitar. *Jems are derivitives of the RG; they added some special options and Vai's blessing and it became a Jem. *You guys just seem to be complaining.

As a long time user of the Lo-Pro, the new JPM trem still bugs me. *Its good to hear Paul thinks its acceptable. *It would be nice to get a stable tremolo system that isnt a dual-locking design.

I would like to get another 7, and Ibanez has always been my first choice. *Its sad that Ibanez continually limits our choices by not upgrading the UV and instead releases the korn model. *If the CST was to be re-issued then I would have to re-evaluate my decision. *Till then the JPM looks like the best choice.

Steve C

jem7vwh · #43 02-11-2001, 09:55 PM

FWIW, the JEM was the father of the RG. The JPM is a copy of a preexisting (not to mention unimpressive model) model.

Todd Crawford · #44 02-12-2001, 01:27 AM

I'm with Steve in saying that its a little ridiculous to argue the fact of the body of the guitar being a issue
What is a PGM- a RG
What is a FGM- a Saber
What is a Clapton Strat- a strat
What is a Zakk Wylde LP- a LP
What is a Slash LP- a LP
What is a K-7- a RG 7
Need I go on??

vaijem777 · #45 02-14-2001, 02:16 PM

I think that what's really being overshadowed here is the fact that the new JPM is a great quality guitar with some very interesting inovations. *I mean, if you get right down to it, the RG maybe be based on the JEM, but in the grand scheme of things, the JEM is just a pointy, hot rodded super-Strat! *The JPM is a very solid, extremely playable, great sounding guitar. *These are features which should take precidence over the fact that the bodystyle is nothing that stellar or original. *Honestly, I wasn't attracted to JEM's because they had a handle and nice inlays. *In fact, the first time I saw a JEM, I laughed at the monkey grip and said I wouldn't be caught dead with one! *But...20-odd JEMs later, I've got 10 or so different ones. *Bottom line: *I was attracted to the JEM due solely to it's superior playability and excellent features. *The EXACT same reason that I am attracted to the new EB/MM JPM. *It's a great guitar with some very practical features. *And it's different....kinda like the JEM. *

*Of course, that's just one hack's opinion!