May 25, 2012 6:24 AM
Headstock Logo
Can anyone identify the headstock below? Definately not what's currently on the JTV models... either a fake or some kind of prototype?
-
Like (0)
1453 Views
46 Replies
Latest reply:
Jun 1, 2012 12:15 PM by
Xestenz 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
player99 wrote:
Well judging by his logos and headstocks he is not a sculpter or a fine artist- or at least not in the classical sense. He does have a reputation for building technically fantastic guitars. The "mechanics" of them. To me though, he does not have the classical design sense that one would have if they where a fine artist in the conventional sense. This is of course subjective. I have visited his site and I really am not thrilled with his asthetics. But I would bet the guitars all play wonderfully. Again the mechanics are superior. Just my observation.
Very well put my brother.
He is a designer. In fact, he was on track to be an architect and he is a killer photographer. There are people who immediately and without caveat, love his headstock. I am with you, at first, I didn't like it. It grew on me. I am a bass player and for a long time, played a 5-string out live and that was way bigger than the guitar headstock. The whole design of the guitar headstock grew from the logo. He wasn't trying to be proud of his name, he was going for an art deco kind of thing with rub on letters. He did that on a few strat style guitars when he was doing the super strat modifications for Dann Huff, Landau, David Williams, etc. Then before Fender won their trademark for their headstock, he wanted to do his own headstock and designed it based on the logo.
Good stuff, so another couple questions for you. Thank you for dialoging with me. I appreciate it.
What guitar luthier is also a artist in the sculptor, fin artist type of sense? And/or what luthier didn't get their start working on guitars doing guitar modifications and repairs?
-
-
-
-
-
I made mention of this headstock situation with the JTV-89 to Rich and he thought I was crazy. Nothing new about that, but funny thing is that the production models are much better looking than the prototype I was given and gave back. The guitar itself played terrific, but I could not deal with the headstock on the prototype. It looked like a banana haning on the end of the neck with the crazy priinting like you show in an authentic Tyler Guitar.
What I thought was also very interesting the JTV-59 headstock is the exact same headstock as on the Variax Model 700. Which was brought up by someone else a little while back asking if James Tyler even did the design for the model 59 as he is not known for any other style of guitars than hot-rodded Fender styles. I have no idea, but I'd hope he had something to do with it's design as it bears his name. And I love the guitar no matter who designed it. Just wished it had more of a real 60s Les Paul style neck than it's identical PRS single cutaway neck that it does have. Yep - identical as I have a bandmate who has an older PRS single cutaway which looks very Les Paul-like. The neck on his guitar is identical in every way to the neck on the JTV-59 guitar or at least on my prototype JTV-59US guitar. Rich also thought this statement was comepletely untrue even after I sent him photos and measurements to prove my statement. He's left the company and I will miss him dearly. A truly good person no matter whether we agreed on a topic or not.
-
-
-
I think the only reverse headstock I ever liked was the Gibson Firebird with banjo tuners, having six regular tuners upside-down isn't that practical I suppose. I don't want to go too deeply in what I think of BC Rich guitar shapes, but there's a market for such guitars so they must be doing something right for some people.
You're right about the black Variax protoype, that repeating "James Tyler" text really makes that worse. Of the three that black one is actually the best, and if I was given it as a prototype I would still get plenty of use out of it whatever the headstock.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Not sure which headstock you are referring to with your question.
If you are asking about my photo - those are the headstock of real Line 6 guitars. The JTV-59 and the Variax 700.
I had a prototype JTV-89 and hated the headstock. Let me see if I have a close up photo ofit before I finsh typing...
I did have one. I remeber now, I was sending this to Rich to show what my 1985 BC Rich Mockingbird headstock looked like and how it compared to the 89 headstock I hated. Rich said the BC Rich headstock looked like a hockey stick. Not sure what kind of hockey Rich might play, but I thought that reply was silly.
As I said previously, this headstock looks like a banana with all that confusing lettering on it. I couldn't stand looking at it. This is not what the production models look like from Korean as I have an 89 in black from Korea I bought because I really liked the feel of the neck style. The 89 neck was very similar to the custom neck I have on my BC Rich, but with a satin finish instead of a glossy one. Oh and the neck specs and feel on the 89 match very closely, but not exactly to an Ibanez Jem guitar.
I hope I've answered you questions. And just to be clear...nothing I've ever seen looks like the photo you posted at the top of this thread which was confirmed by a Line 6 rep as not something ever done by Line 6.
-
-
-
-
-
There ya go - even the guys at Line 6 don't know what products have or have not been produced with the company's name on it. Go figure?
Don't worry Perry - I doubt anyone will get on your case about being incorrect. Although I think fs63 should be able to give himself the correct answer points for finding these videos.
And to quote Perry - he never actually said this was not a Line 6 guitar, just the following which leaves room for loopholes...
"Never seen anything like that here at the company..."
Another reason why I'm going to miss Rich Renken...he would have known as he was in charge of this project in it's early stages.
I remember seeing this video about 2 years ago, but never gave the headstock a second glance as I was more interested in what it sounded like and the overall appearance.
I can only presume from this and the other facts I have and shared that line 6 went through several versions or changes in the cosmetics of these guitars before making it final. Could be one of the many possible reasons for why it took so long for these guitars to get out to everyone last year?
Which also brings me back to your initial question - I guess this would be a "collectible" of a sort. It certainly can't have too many "brothers/sisters" with the same appearance. I would also presume all these guitars were handmade in the US in various locations throughout California.
My JTV-59 does not have a serial number because it is a prototype. This one shown in the video should not have any ID number either unless that one was done differently than the one I was given?
-
**Hi David - addressing you first. Interesting you liked the final 59 headstock as in my photo it clearly shows that the headstock was the same headstock used on the Variax model 700. Not much thinking for that one. I wish the JTV-89 had the same headstock. I'm not a fan of reverse headstocks - never have been. But you said it right - it's up the the owner, which is not you. However, in this case - if you want a terrific playing JTV-89, you really have to get it the way it's designed. Perhaps the neck could be swapped out, but I'm not one of those swap parts kinda guys beyond pick-ups and simple hardware like tuners, knobs, etc.
**Mr_Arkadin - as already said by several - no one has t like anything someone else likes. What anyone thinks of the BC Rich guitars are probably not familiar with the original models that came out when Bernie Rico moved out to LA and started his guitar business. He's originally from the NYC area and lucky for me I knew him from the club scene as a player/tech. The headstock you see is from a custom modified within the walls of BC Rich which was a 25th birthday present to myself. Everything about that guitar except the basic body style is unique to that one of a kind guitars. Even the paint was a formula I had created back in NJ where I'm originally from. It's also the very first headstock ever produced by BC Rich that had matching paint with the body as well as the angled headstock. Bernie asked me if I want standard or reverse, and the photos shows which I chose. And the original models by BC Rich were played by Neil Geraldo of Pat Benetar. They were not very "exotic" in shape and had 3x3 headstocks with a simple "R" logo pearl inlay.
** Zap - No worries from me about your dislike of my BC Rich. As said many time already - everyone likes what they like. I have also previously stated I've been a Les Paul player most of my life until I got into Line 6 guitars, and that 1985 BC Rich was a very different type of guitar for me, but I'm very happy with it and it plays terrifically as the neck was made to my specs.
And in conclusion - I really don't like the headstock on the 89, but I wanted an 89 so I bought a Korean model that I had to return the first one to get one without the frets hanging off the edge of the neck. I'm just very glad it's not like the one I returned and that it was toned down and I can ignore it until I have to tune up.
-
About
-
Follow
Subscribe
Latest offers, special deals and insider updates.
Line 6 Story
News
Press
Jobs
Support
Contact Us
