Has anyone taken the time to really look at this?

[ShredAstaire]

Yeah - if someone bought this for me, i'd take it and play the crap out of it. I just don't have that kinda dough to spend on a fancy guitar!

[freak show]

If I had wanted a guitar with built-in effects, I suppose I would have bought the XGuitar from Alesis. However, that sort of stuff doesn't interest me in the least.

 

And evidently I'm not alone: Vox brought out a guitar with built-in effects back in 1967. They stopped production in 1968.

[Jantha]

It's too complex for ME. I can see some people putting it to good use though.

 

Even if I had the money to spend and I wanted the features, it's just sinfully ugly. The Dusk Tiger was too come to think of it.

[Flight959]

I don't know but "Keep It Simple, Son!" would fit.

P.

 

Keep It Simple Stupid..

 

Obviously not you Phil....

[Riverside]

I looked, I don't care.

 

Check out a million threads in re: "Mods to effects pedals" and see where it might end up.

 

I'm currently ciphering about how to ressurect an old amp - I can't imagine how to figure out the "open-source-ness" of this thing.

 

Someone will love it, no doubt.

 

I just wish the factory would ship the shlt they hyped six months ago.

[Silenced Fred]

What sort of Knight would serve a fabric such as satin?! ;)

 

Juuuuust playin!

 

And Fred, he was talking about the band.

 

I never liked Kiss (the band) so yeah, I had no idea

[HeadCase]

Wow, 20 pages and alot goin' on with

that thing... but,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's Fugly!

[milod]

Okay freak show...

 

You wrote: "And evidently I'm not alone: Vox brought out a guitar with built-in effects back in 1967. They stopped production in 1968."

 

I know where you're coming from, but I think there are quite a few differences here to be considered. That's not to say all, or even some features in this new guitar will succeed. I kinda like the "concept car" analogy. Some stuff tends to become "traditional standard equipment," other stuff is seen as oddball that never catches on.

 

Back in the late '60s the so-called "effects" were pretty lame. Ditto even into and through the 1970s. The transistor, then the IC, didn't really do all that much until you got into the 80s.

 

I'm not saying that this new guitar really "works," nor that it will be "the" pattern for the future in terms of the technology. On the other hand, my bag cell phone or 20 years ago is a far cry from the cute little thing I carry in my shirt pocket. I quit wearing a watch, too. Why bother when you're back to carrying a pocket watch that doubles as a telephone? OTOH, I don't text much 'cuz to my generation a cutesey carry phone is neat tech, but it's faster to make a voice call; to the younger generation texting is part of what's done... like breathing.

 

I get a big kick out of folks whose perspective quite properly is that most Gibson and Fender offerings are "wonderful traditional designs" - but those designs were new and neat to us around at the time - even if we couldn't afford them. Sound familiar? At the same era "we" techie nuts were reading magazines "popular mechanics" and at some point "popular electronics" that taught such stuff as how to build your own home hi fi system. Note I said "hi fi," not "stereo."

 

I built my own 8-bit computers and learned to program 'cuz I couldn't afford storebought 30 years ago.

 

The trick to innovation is to have the guts to stick your neck out on occasion, and to win more than you lose. Period. Some innovations work exceptionally well but are before their time; some are a good idea but lack the tech to really work well; some are a bad idea by any measure. Some last "forever" like some Gibson acoustic instrument designs; some work very well for some years, then more or less disappear like the vcr.

 

The video cassette recorder went from, "Who's willing to buy one of those?" to a "must have" in almost every home. Now? Who really buys the things since you have 180 channels anyway and you're on your computer more than watching tv anyway? That's the nature of "innovation."

 

As has been mentioned in the guitar world, Les Paul production stopped because nobody wanted the thing.

 

m

[Riverside]

 

 

As has been mentioned in the guitar world, Les Paul production stopped because nobody wanted the thing.

 

 

I often wonder if it was about nobody wanting them, or the factory's inability to sell them.

 

Two different things, in light of the current topic, and the current market for "limited editions"...

[Jeff-7]

One problem I see with all the effects is going to be subject to the personal taste of the player. For example, just take a look at how many different fuzz pedals people use on this forum, or any other pedal. People want different things when it comes to effects and a lot of it has to do with how the pedal is built and the materials used. I'm anxious to see if the effects will be a jack of all trades (master of none) situation. I'm sure it can get "close" to a variety of pedals depending on settings but I guess we will have to see.

 

Also, taking bets on how many pages the user's manual will have.

[Jantha]

It's Fugly!

 

That's what I'm sayin'...

[cookieman15061]

Knights In the Service of Satin?

 

Wouldn't that be KITSOS?

[milod]

Riverside...

 

AS I recall, the complaint was a combination of them being too @#$%#$2 heavy and too @$#%@#$% expensive.

 

The lighter SG was the "Les Paul" for a cupla years - I'm no official historian - until as I recall some artist used the LP and suddenly it appeared there was a market for it. Personally I still prefer the SG, but then, that's just a grouchy old man who has worn too many heavy guitars in his youth while playing long rock gigs. <grin> The advantage of getting gray hair is you can get away with a chair or stool like BB - and nobody sez much about it.

 

Again, the LP came out in an age of experimentation and might perhaps be a perfect example that sometimes corporate marketing works and sometimes it doesn't. But other factors do play into a product's popularity or lack thereof and that factor resulted in the guitar being an ongoing staple of the Gibson company.

 

m

[cookieman15061]

What sort of Knight would serve a fabric such as satin?! ;)

 

Juuuuust playin!

 

And Fred, he was talking about the band.

 

Well Knights in White Satin of course.

[Riverside]

Riverside...

 

AS I recall, the complaint was a combination of them being too @#$%#$2 heavy and too @$#%@#$% expensive.

 

 

 

Not so much different than too @#$%#$2 ridiculous and too @$#%@#$% expensive.

 

But they'll sell more of these (because they know how) than they did the LP bursts in the last three years they made them. Maybe they're getting better at what they do.

 

I wonder how many "reissues" of all stripes have been sold?

[milod]

Riverside...

 

I'd argue with the "ridiculous." Heck, I'd take one in a minit if I could afford one - but after that, ditto a 335, a 175 and and Hummingbird and...

 

I remember when it was considered ridiculous to have any sort of a pickup on an acoustic flat top. You can't believe the badmouthing I heard from the late 1950s into the 1970s. Now? Sheesh, it's a pretty big marketplace, but it didn't get going for some number of years.

 

I didn't get one at all until the mid 1970s when Ovation came out with the first rig that looked to make sense with a bridge piezo of some sort. I got an "electric legend" and the nylon version, the 14-fret "country artist" when I actually had a cupla guitar bucks in the pocket 'cuz even catching crap for "one of those plastic stupid pretend electric guitars," they did make good sense for where and how I was playing.

 

RE: those old Ovation A-E guitars, the placement of the battery was ridiculous. Almost everybody handles that far better today - but at the time... hey, you've gotta try and folks will pick up weaknesses pretty quickly.

 

As for folks who figure the new fire-whatever is ugly ... sheesh, no uglier than the Jaguar with its 25-cent horizontal switches that looked silly to me even in the 1960s. Or the strat that I think is ugly as anything around. "Ugly" is pretty subjective. In guitars, I think lotza times it means "it doesn't look like I think a guitar should." Frankly the firefox isn't my cuppa tea for pretty, but what the heck, it's practical. I'd have preferred personally a more SG-like shape, but since I can't afford one, I guess it's a pretty moot question.

 

m

[Riverside]

It's only ridiculous in that there is so much variation in what effects folks seem to want - It seems a little presumptuous to think that one piece would do it all.

 

But that's not what this is about.

 

It's about a limited edition collector's piece.

 

There is absolutely nothing new about the idea of building effects into a guitar, even if today's technology allows for many more combinations than were possible in the past.

 

What's next, an amplifier in the case?

[jnastynebr]

It looks like a fun toy. I would have loads of fun screwing around with it, but....

-the body is too small. I am a big guy, and I need a git with a big body. The big guy in the demo looks silly, and so will I.

-Players are accustomed to controlling effects with their feet, so it seems only natural that the guitar would come with a footswitch.

-what kind of amp would I use with this thing? A 57 Champ? A Line 6 that models 30 combos and cabinets, so I can have thousands of pup combinations and thousands of models, too?

-I would insist on a whammy effect, and a wah, too.

[Jantha]

-I would insist on a whammy effect, and a wah, too.

 

There's an app for that.

[milod]

Sometimes I wonder - and I'm not kidding on this - if my gut responses to this aren't a factor of age and changes I've seen in guitars over the years.

 

The lead guitar player in my first rock band actually did use a Silvertone guitar with the amp in the case. It was horrid, but not really as bad as you might imagine because it got the speaker above the floor level and "loud" simply didn't happen where we were playing anyway - it was more small jazz club size venues. We actually switched out the guitars and added piano to trumpet and sax for more jazz-type sets, back to rock, etc., etc. Besides, almost nobody in those days had all that great amplification anyway.

 

Think about it: What if they actually got back to the predicted popularity of truly flat speakers. Imagine just unfolding something from a 15-pound cardboard box-type setup and voila, pounding sound.

 

There's actually nothing terribly new under the sun. If one wishes, one can point to all kinds of bits to prove this or that isn't new.

 

Personally I'm looking more and more to use a small pa rig and just guitar and mike for most future solo gigs anyway. Maybe add a laptop. Why? First, it cuts a bit of how much to haul in a single piece. Secondly I'll be plenty loud and there's less stuff to haul.

 

The little acoustic amp technically is loud enough "on stage," but there's a huge dropoff in perceived volume the farther you get from the "stage" even lifting the thing well above stage level. The big tube jobbie was built for that kinda job as well as a reeeeeally loud rock gig but I really don't care for a one-piece 90 pound suitcase to haul around if I ain't gotta. Even it has just a single position on stage.

 

Whazzat got to do with the guitar?

 

Simple: It'd let me change tunings for more old folkie stuff, change tone instantly 50s and 60s rock stuff, etc., etc. - and I'd only need one guitar for a broader repertoire played on one neck. And through one amplification system. Heck, why carry an amp too if you've got the PA other than mostly habit? If you insist on emulating a Fender DR, you can do so without adding another 45 pounds or so to haul.

 

I still think there should be a bypass of all the active stuff even if it only runs one magnetic pickup without any controls at all, but that's just my own cowardice.

 

.... Guitar size? We're all a bit different. Frankly I think we get used to what we get used to. When I weighed around 145 in my younger rock days, I used to play a big single cutaway Rick that, I swear, I could be nude and nobody could tell. Meanwhile a friend who was around 6-3 played a Jag.

 

I've gotta admit that personally I tend to like the 175 size because it's pretty close to a classical guitar size that I played for years. Standing or sitting, it's comfy. But a 335 shape ain't at all uncomfortable and I get along fine with an SG or a dreadnaught 12. A friend who's a pretty big guy plays mostly a Strat and a smaller Taylor A-E for money.

 

But yeah, in a way we are talking about a limited edition collector piece but it's a big enough run so that as a "concept car" it's gonna get some folks using it who'll wring it out and offer feedback.

 

m

[Riverside]

Sounds like you need an original robot. Those came out years ago.

 

They were kind of new-techy, too.

 

They were way expensive, and then came down such that you could pass up one for under a grand.

 

How's that for an $800 upgrade?

[Silenced Fred]

Sounds like you need an original robot. Those came out years ago.

 

They were kind of new-techy, too.

 

They were way expensive, and then came down such that you could pass up one for under a grand.

 

How's that for an $800 upgrade?

 

I saw a Robot SG for like 700 in my local Geetar Center. If I had the cash, I would have bought it

[Riverside]

I saw a Robot SG for like 700 in my local Geetar Center. If I had the cash, I would have bought it

 

I do, and I didn't.

 

Neck dive?

 

Golly.

[Silenced Fred]

I do, and I didn't.

 

Neck dive?

 

Golly.

 

Screw on a lead weight

[Tman5293]

Wow, 20 pages and alot goin' on with

that thing... but,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's Fugly!

 

100% agree with you on that one!

 

I looked through all 20 pages and the only thing I saw that I liked was the bada$$ case it comes with and the wireless pedals. The case is damn sexy and I love the idea of being able to connect to all your pedals wirelessly. They need to invent a box or something that connects to your amp and works this way with all pedals.