GJ2 Corcorde,another Randy Rhoads V

[Zado]

Here some pics of the RR model made by the new Grover Jackson's brand, GJ2 guitars

[i posted links since pics were enormous]

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2203.jpg

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2185.jpg

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2195.jpg

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2194.jpg

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2048.jpg

some of them were given away along with a new book about the great Randy Rhoads

http://gj2guitars.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2053.jpg


What do you think?Considering it will be pretty expensive

 

[MetalDaze]

Now sure how I feel about Grover going back to milk that cow again


However, buy a book and get a free guitar? Sign me up!

 

[Knyas]

Not a fan at all. Way too much body under the bridge for it to look aesthetically pleasing to me. Build quality looks great though at least.

 

[brett8388]

No love for that. Sorry Grover.

 

[Strawberry Man]

Reminds me of the body shape of the original prototype RR, which is pretty sweet. I can't see how this will compete with the RR1 however, seeing as the cheapest GJ2 guitar I've seen still costs $500 more than a new RR1.

 

[Ironbird]

That's hideous.

 

[ittoa666]

Not a fan at all.

 

[Nag]

I see 22 frets. that's a fail IMO. why make a "new" guitar that's still spec'd like they were 30 years ago... that's kinda what I don't like with Jackson and that I believe I won't like with this new brand either... no innovation.

 

[snowblind56]

I see 22 frets. that's a fail IMO. why make a "new" guitar that's still spec'd like they were 30 years ago... that's kinda what I don't like with Jackson and that I believe I won't like with this new brand either... no innovation.

What I see is Grover's take on the original Jackson Concorde, which is the precursor to the RR. He's staying somewhat close to the original but putting his new companies spin on it. While I can't say that I would buy one, I do dig it.

And if you want to get all technical, probably 90% of all guitars are built off of spec's from guitars designed over 60 years ago.

 

[DslDwg]

I don't get it - Does Jackson guitars own all of the iconic pieces of the Concorde? The head stock is weird, the inlays are forgettable and the body shape just looks off.

I am a huge fan of the original Concorde much more so than what became the RR and one day I will own some version of a Jackson Concorde but damn Grover just no.

Here's how it's done Jackson RR 1.5

 

[Nightside]

I just don't get why people sell their company just to come back later and build ugly knockoffs of their own models.

 

[snowblind56]

I just don't get why people sell their company just to come back later and build ugly knockoffs of their own models.

I think most of the time it is financial problems.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

I just don't get why people sell their company just to come back later and build ugly knockoffs of their own models.

Every situation is different, Dean Z. left Dean Guitars twice and recently DBZ because....well, lets not get the rumor mill going here, but the rumor was he just wanted more money/control. Leo Fender left Fender the first time because it was believed he had a terminal illness, and the second time he left he wanted to innovate, hence Music Man, and later G&L.

I wouldn't exactly call anything made by most of these guys "knockoffs" as they're actually being made by the guys who first envisioned them. The difference between a G&L ASAT and an SX TL would be a good example.

I think most of the time it is financial problems.

I agree, and you're probably right in most cases, but sometimes they just want to build guitars again. Leo Fender didn't have to (CBS was quite generous from what I've heard.) start designing again, but he sure wanted to.

 

[Nightside]

I think most of the time it is financial problems.

I can understand that but, I still don't get the part where they make uglier versions of the same things they sold off their rights to make. DBZ for instance. His are more modified but still very obviously based on his Dean designs. G&L is another example. I know that Joe Knaggs didn't own PRS or anything but, his guitars plainly show that he uses the PRS formula. Albeit in a less attractive package.

 

[MaxOfMetal]

I can understand that but, I still don't get the part where they make uglier versions of the same things they sold off their rights to make. DBZ for instance. His are more modified but still very obviously based on his Dean designs. G&L is another example. I know that Joe Knaggs didn't own PRS or anything but, his guitars plainly show that he uses the PRS formula. Albeit in a less attractive package.

They usually don't sell the rights off because they don't want to make those kinds of guitars anymore, but because it's a business decision, hence the sale and losing of their rights to produce exact instruments.

Grover would probably be making exact copies, or close, to Soloists and RRs if it wasn't for the fact that Jackson and FMIC have many of the key design elements on lock. Even G&L ran into various legal issues, they're on their third or fourth headstock at this point.

 

[troyguitar]

I'd rather stick with the RR1 or even Amfisound's copies.