| Author | Message | ||
| crgaston
Advanced Member Username: crgaston Post Number: 215 Registered: 11-2005 |
Don't see these very often... exploiter | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 3879 Registered: 5-2002 |
Especially a "brand new" '84. <g> | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 437 Registered: 12-2003 |
I don't know. That headstock just doesn't work for me on an Explorer style body. Otherwise, it's a beautiful instrument. | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 3881 Registered: 5-2002 |
I just noticed the nut and bridge. I don't recall seeing these on an Alembic before; but then I have an unreliable memory. | ||
| tom_z
Senior Member Username: tom_z Post Number: 402 Registered: 7-2004 |
Dave, the California Special has a similar nut and bridge. | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 439 Registered: 12-2003 |
It's a Kahler. They fell off the face of the planet after Floyd Rose basically cornered the market during the hair metal invasion. My '82 Charvel had a Kahler trem, though. I know they've been trying to make a bit of a comeback of late with Kerry King as their poster child. | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 3894 Registered: 5-2002 |
Tom; when I first saw it I thought of the California Special, but then what threw me off was that, if I recall correctly, California Specials have a large cavity cover on the back to access the springs. The second thing that caught my eye was that on this particular guitar the nut is not brass. So this must have been a special order guitar. | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 440 Registered: 12-2003 |
Dave, If you notice, there's no hole for the tremolo arm. This is one of Kahler's fixed bridges. Hence, no need for any springs in the back. Regards, Jonathan | ||
| davehouck
Moderator Username: davehouck Post Number: 3895 Registered: 5-2002 |
Yes, I was wondering how you attached the arm! So the advantage here is the locking tuning? | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 441 Registered: 12-2003 |
Yes, though with locking tuners available, I never understood why someone would disfigure a guitar with a large fixed, bridge like this. Other than the ability to fine tune, I don't see any advantage. | ||
| bluplirst
Junior Username: bluplirst Post Number: 15 Registered: 12-2004 |
Actually, the hole for the tremelo arm is right behind the saddle for the high E string. I had one of these on a guitar for a while. It really worked great and was very adjustable. I wish I had the cash for this guitar. Dan | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 442 Registered: 12-2003 |
I stand corrected. | ||
| trekster
Member Username: trekster Post Number: 98 Registered: 7-2004 |
Jalevinemd -- those type of Kahler trems never had standard back springs -- it's a top mount unit the has a route underneath the bridge that doesnt go thru the whole body. The springs (which are very short) are attached from the cam arm (where the strings are attached) to a claw on the underside of the bridge. You could adjust the tension of the springs via a allen screw on the cam arm. Just before Kahler went out, they did make a Floyd-style trem that used the trem cavity we all know..but it was just an attempt to recapture the market. Didn't work. | ||
| jalevinemd
Senior Member Username: jalevinemd Post Number: 443 Registered: 12-2003 |
You're right. Now that I think about it, my old Charvel didn't have springs in the back body. It's been a long time since I owned that guitar. | ||
| phylo
New Username: phylo Post Number: 7 Registered: 10-2005 |
Speaking of Charvel... I recently had my model 6 resurrected, replaced the jackson active pickups with DiMarzios and now that baby cooks! I can't believe I left it in the case for 10+ years. I think it plays better than my friends custom PRS! The tremelo system works great - once you get it in tune, it stays there. Totally under rated. | ||
| phylo
New Username: phylo Post Number: 8 Registered: 10-2005 |
BTW - it is a Floyd Rose tremelo on the Model 6 | ||
| kmh364
Senior Member Username: kmh364 Post Number: 1910 Registered: 9-2003 |
I have two model 4's (bolt-on version of the 6) with the Jackson/Floyd. The compound radius necks witht fat frets on those models play great! Even David Gilmour has converted his std. black (non-EMG) strat to a Charvel compound radius neck. Those locking whammy's frustrate me to no end! Lot's of tweeking to try and get the thing to stay in tune. My guitar guy hates 'em. I know a lot of guys hate 'em, but I like the active Jacskon electronics. | ||
| kmh364
Senior Member Username: kmh364 Post Number: 1912 Registered: 9-2003 |
Getting back to this beaut, I'd love to have it, but I really don't need another whammy bar guitar to fuss around with. The search for the perfect Alembic guitar (perfect for me) continues....LOL! | ||
| u14steelgtr
Junior Username: u14steelgtr Post Number: 19 Registered: 7-2003 |
What do you think is wrong with with this guitar? The description does not explain why this guitar was "never used." This omission is a big RED FLAG to me. | ||
| u14steelgtr
Junior Username: u14steelgtr Post Number: 20 Registered: 7-2003 |
My 83 vintage Electrum has this same bridge and nut-lock assembly except mine is all black. I have never had a problem with it staying in tune. Though using the bridge-mounted knobs to tune it takes some getting used to. My complaint is that it requires an allen wrench to unlock the nut so that you can use the standard tuners. | ||
| kmh364
Senior Member Username: kmh364 Post Number: 1914 Registered: 9-2003 |
Who knows? IMHO, an explorer-type guitar is not suitable for all types of music and playing situations, more so for a whammy-equipped guitar. This one'd be great for a collection, but the body style and whammy would preclude me from playing it often. I simply have too many under-utilized whammy-equipped guitars as it is. Just my $0.02 and no intended comment/critcism on anyone else's gig. |
