software

If you could go back in time and have the final say on how all your favorite guitars were designed, what changes would you make?

I would have made LP's with pullup tone knobs, to split pickups that are identical to Duncan Seth Lovers. That would be my version of a stock Gibson.

Teles would have the right arm contour and tummy cut. Also some headstock angle. I'd make the 3 way switch exactly like a strat 3 way.

Strats and Teles would have always had a 9.5 radius and medium jumbos, and American Std's would be offered with a C neck that's slightly thicker than std.

PRS would have never used the 5 way rotary switch, and all models would have McCarty wiring. All PRS Customs would have nickel covers.

Gibson LP Customs would have nickel hardware, not gold.

Ibanez guitars would have always had a neck that's as thick as a Fender Am. Std.

Gibson semi hollows would have always had the jack mounted on a plate, on the side like a LP.

Brian Moores would have a thicker body and neck.

Martins would have the same size fret wire as Taylor

Schecter C's would have the same neck profile as Gibson 50's and US Duncans always.

Hamer and Heritage would have a headstock thats more appealing. And, the body shapes would stray further from Gibson.

EDIT: My post was rather rude, so I'm changing it.

I'll use just the four most popular guitars (Strats, Teles, Les Pauls, SGs)

Strats:
Move the knobs down a little bit. I always seem to turn them a tad, wihch reduces the volume, which pisses me off.
Would have never allowed the typical 'black-Strat-with-white-pickguard' to ever be released.

Teles (Nocasters, Broadcasters, Esquires):
Always used a 6-saddle bridge.

Les Pauls:
ALWAYS used an Ebony fingerboard.
String-thru models, along with the Std. models

SGs:
Pretty much the same as the Les Pauls
Moved jack to side of the body, a la Les Pauls

whats the difference between taylor and martin fretwires? i havent played a taylor in a longass time

Martin uses the small vintage fretwire, and Taylors are a tiny bit bigger.
I've always thought Martins had the edge in tone, and Taylor always had the edge in playability. If Martins played a little faster, they'd be about 100% perfect.


Originally Posted by GearjoneserI've always thought Martins had the edge in tone, and Taylor always had the edge in playability.

that's how I see it, too ... Martins are for recording, Taylors are for gigging

LPs and Strats would weigh 6 pounds and have RMC piezos/Roland synth outputs. And they would be free.

Gibson LP's will have a tummy cut, slightly thinner neck profile, volute or scarf joint to minimize headstock breakage, and string through body. Oh, and QC.

This is an odd thread.
-Flatter radius fingerboard on all Fenders.
- Reverse wound middle for strat.
-Teles would have adopted a strat neck pickup in 1954.
-SG’s would have had the sturdier neck and joint from the beginning of production. All SGs fitted with TOM/stop tail and 50’s small headstock.

Oh well, we’ll just have to love them for what they are…

forget everything else...i'll just quot;fixquot; the strat...

radius would be 9.5quot; or 12quot;

frets would be med jumbo or jumbo

there would only be 1 master volume and 1 master tone. spaced away from the bridge pickup so you can play the damn thing and not knock the volume when you get into the music hehe.

that's about it.

-Mike

All I would change would be to make the LP with slightly tighter flamed maple on the top, use ebony for the fingerboards, and have tone chambers.

Oh yeah, spec all the PAF humbuckers to be alnico II, assymetrically wound, and with a sligtly hotter (~9K) bridge unit.

That's it.


Originally Posted by GearjoneserI would have made LP's with pullup tone knobs, to split pickups that are identical to Duncan Seth Lovers. That would be my version of a stock Gibson.

I would make the bottom body cut a bit deeper/longer towards the end so that you could sit and play without it falling down when you let go and cut down on the neck thickness.

The SG would also be modified so it has 24 frets and sits on the body. The body would have less of a tilt and more of a curve at the back and of course, neck-through. It would also come as a tremelo version...well, some did but not enough, lol!

The Explorer would have a slight bevel cut at the top wing so that it would be more comforming to the body but still look badass and string through the body.

The Firebird would be strengthened and come in humbucking versions as well and have 24 frets with a deeper cutaway and pimped as the top-dog like it is haha.

Strat and Teles would have smaller bolt joints so that you can reach up there.

The LP would look like a black beauty and would have a humbucker in the bridge and a P90 in the neck. Oh, and a Bigsby.

I'd make Teles less damn ugly.

I would make them all into PRS!!!!

By more or less chronological order

Hollow Gibsons: indeed, jack on the side. Thats it, really.

Telecaster: Arm and tummy countour, some neck angle, arrange the volume knob position to be able to use it better, get a Jaguar-like plate to provide more switching options (seres parallel). 6-string bridges with piezo's and a p90 in the neck. Treu these later might not be possile at the time but that's what I would have done.

LP: Tummy cut and chambered body including a part of the maple that might be filled with balsa wood.

Strat: indeed 1 master volume and one master tone and either a 2 way switch or a push-pulll in the tone knob to go from series parallel. The hum cancelling positions would be out-of phase (the special switches that are so rare would be produced so they could be used freely).

SG's and DC's: 24 frets and long tenon to prevent them from being instable at the neck joint. I think the pups are actually placed more towards the bridge on these models (haven't been able to do a side by side with an LP tough) to make them more stable, so it wouldn't harm the tone. Vibrato's would never have been called tremolo's and they would be set up better and more reliable and expressionable while not enterring the realm of Floyds and it's copies.

_All_ guitars would have a perfect string line, contoured heels, shielded cavities and pups, quality pots with push-pull abilities and switches, scraved or volute (as an option to the buyer) and waxed (not epoxied) pups.

Much is inspired from what others have said, some things are my own, others are things I believe guitars should never be produced without.

For me, the classic guitars are like classic sports cars. Their imperfections document the evolution of a modern cultural icon and are an inextricable part of their charm. I wouldn't change a thing. Except maybe swap the pickups out for Duncans.

Les Paul - every one of them would come stock with good tuners and a pickguard. Oh yeah, and they'd cost half as much as they do now.

PRS - move the switches to the lower edge like on a Schecter or even in the LP position. Maybe cut the cost by another factor of 1/2.

Strat - they're just not for me. They just feel too ... fragile, complicated, and uncomfortable in my hands. I know that's the opposite of what everyone else experiences, but that's what I feel. I don't know what I could change on them.

Tele - Hotter pickups. A LP-type toggle switch. Vol/Vol/Tone. The end.

strat- reverse headstock would be standerd and the bridge pup would a tone control

lp- neck through version with much better heel

SG- what E-J915 said same w/ firebirds


Originally Posted by Dom LI would make them all into PRS!!!!

That's what Mr. Paul Smith did. Everytime I play my McCarties, I feel like I've got the child of the Les Paul and Telecaster in my hands. It's actually a 3 way cross between a LP, Strat, and Tele.

PRS guitars are nice...except for the heel, and the rediculously retarded rotory switcher...just use mini switches for goodness sake, less likely to fail and way easier to understand and it doesn't confuse you.