Anyone know what this is?

[Whitestrat]

Stumbled across this at a local guitar store here in Singapore. The guitar was brought in for reworking because it just wouldn't intonate right. Reason for that? The bridge was mounted wrongly. The construction of this guitar was really nothing special (quite bad, infact), but the body design and the contouring is something I really like. I thought it was an agile at first, but I'm quite wrong about that, I think.

So, anyone have a clue?

 

[littlephil]

Most likely a home-made guitar. The headstock is a reversed copy of a Ken Lawrence headstock. Not having any markings means its pretty likely that its home-made.

 

[MooseJuice]

It was built by Guitar Logistics: Guitar Logistics LLC - RedStar

 

[Whitestrat]

It was built by Guitar Logistics: Guitar Logistics LLC - RedStar

That's IT! Thanks. Sadly, it was so badly made, I really wouldn't buy from this guy personally. But that body was really nicely sculpted. This is odd. If the body can be done so well, then why was the construction so poor?

 

[daniboy]

how do you define badly made and poor construction? is it based on just a "wrongly" mounted bridge?

from the picture, the saddles are in the wrong places for proper intonation. what is the distance measured from nut to saddles?

no affiliation with the builder. but would like to hear what made the guitar that bad in your opinion.

maybe the builder will chime in soon? two sides of the story is always good.

 

[SirMyghin]

That's IT! Thanks. Sadly, it was so badly made, I really wouldn't buy from this guy personally. But that body was really nicely sculpted. This is odd. If the body can be done so well, then why was the construction so poor?

The aesthetic points of a guitar are the easy part than any monkey can do. It is fretwork, good nuts, and proper mounting of hardware alongside a good neck carve that are the parts that require the most skill. Especially nowadays with the existance of CNC machines.

 

[gunshow86de]

That neck joint looks a little suspect.

 

[Razzy]

That neck joint looks a little suspect.

+1

I think everything about that guitar looks disgusting, right down to what looks suspiciously like a plywood body.

 

[Neil]

Thats not a plywood body.

 

[Razzy]

Thats not a plywood body.

It's just that side pic of it looks like layers of laminated wood.

 

[Alberto7]

^ That actually just looks like regular ash cut at that angle (forgot the name of that type of cut lulz).

It actually looks good, in my opinion. The neck heel is really not my cup of tea, and neither is the headstock, but I wouldn't say, judging solely on what I can see, that it's a bad guitar. It looks pretty unique, to be perfectly honest.

 

[poopyalligator]

I kind of like the guitar to be honest. If the heel didnt look weird as hell, and if the bridge was put on there correctly it seems like it would be cool.

 

[Alberto7]

I gotta ask... What do you guys see in the bridge that's so off? I can't see anything wrong at first sight... At least not without some help. I'm such a newb

 

[poopyalligator]

I gotta ask... What do you guys see in the bridge that's so off? I can't see anything wrong at first sight... At least not without some help. I'm such a newb

Honestly I cant either, the OP was the one checking it out and said there was something wrong with it, so i am just going off of that information.

 

[Razzy]

Honestly I cant either, the OP was the one checking it out and said there was something wrong with it, so i am just going off of that information.

Well, the saddles all being in a straight line certainly isn't helping anything.

 

[Alberto7]

Then again, to me, the saddles seem fine. Look at the height-adjustment screws; they're not right next to each other forming a straight line, but rather follow the typical "down-up" pattern for optimal intonation. I might be wrong.

 

[Whitestrat]

how do you define badly made and poor construction? is it based on just a "wrongly" mounted bridge?

No, though that's one bit of it.

1. The headstock. Look at the tuners. They are "sunken in" to the point the string hits the headstock at an angle, and just a few tunings later, you'd have gashes in the wood.

2. The fretboard. Look how it ends at the headstock. Instead of relieving it nicely, it's left as a block, and slotted so the strings can go through. Not necessarily a bad thing, but the idea of doing so is very crude, especially if you don't sand down the corders and edges and at least round it a bit.

3. The frets were not well done. The edges weren't smooth, and there were plenty of gaps in the fretboard.

4. The neck joint where the body meets the neck on the sides. Too much excess wood in that aspect. If you're going to have a neck joint like that, might as well make a bolt-on. It's pooly thought through for a set neck.

5. Screw angle of the upper horn strap pin. Too close to the inner wall. Might not be too much of an issue, but the angle of the pin doesn't grip very well on a strap, unless a straplock is used.

6. Poorly mounted bridge angle, as you can see. This is a MAJOR boo boo. What's the problem you say? The low B end is mounted TOO CLOSE to the neck, not allowing enough travel of the saddle backwards, which doesn't allow the B string to intonate properly. It will NEVER intonate properly at this length. The E was affected too. So how would one expect to play this thing when it can't even get in tune?

The best example to refer to would be a Les Paul:

See how the bridge is angled? The lower the tuning, the longer the playable string string length you'd need, and therefore, the further back the saddle needs to travel. Standard 25.5" scale length would be fine for a 6 string, but when building a 7 string, you'd want a bit more room to move backwards. (Thus the sheer GENIUS of the Ibanez ZR7 Trem design!)

So if the fact that this builder let this guitar out of his shop like this, I'm not sure I'd want to buy from him ever.

7. Lastly, that "binding" striping at the heel? Bery badly done. I didn't take more detailed pics on that, but it's really bad. Overruns, not enough filler, basically a very messy job.

 

[Alberto7]

^ That actually sucks ... It could've been an awesome instrument if properly built.

 

[adrock]

No, though that's one bit of it.

1. The headstock. Look at the tuners. They are "sunken in" to the point the string hits the headstock at an angle, and just a few tunings later, you'd have gashes in the wood.

2. The fretboard. Look how it ends at the headstock. Instead of relieving it nicely, it's left as a block, and slotted so the strings can go through. Not necessarily a bad thing, but the idea of doing so is very crude......

this is an interesting situation, as the builder is a member here. and from what I've seen, does very good work...

I agree with most of what you said, though I wouldn't say this is a "badly made" or "poorly constructed" guitar by any means. I think what's most important, like you said, is it's mostly just design issues. or your personal opinion. the only real problem I see is the bridge. those saddles are far back. everything else is just design issues which don't affect the quality, or playability of the guitar. file the wood a bit for the string on the headstock and fretboard end so they don't bind. otherwise it looks like a quality instrument to me.

 

[Mukersman]

am I the only one who thinks the whole thing is butt ugly? that body color is only a few shades off from my shit after eating some Taco Hell.