[darren]

Maybe the optical care in the UK is as good as the dental care. (I kid!)

Brice Defiant8 concept

Proposed Specifications:

• Body
  • Alder body, bubinga top
• Neck
  • 5 piece maple/rosewood laminate
  • Bubinga laminate on headstock face
• Fretboard
  • Ebony, 16" radius
  • 2 1/16" at the nut
  • No face inlays (side dots only)
• Scale length
  • 28 5/8"
• Frets
  • Jumbo
• Electronics
  • Active humbuckers neck/bridge (EMG 45DC or similar)
  • Three-way toggle
  • Master volume, concentric treble/bass EQ (active)
• Hardware
  • Hipshot 8-string fixed
  • Strings through body
  • Sealed 18:1 tuners
  • GraphTech nut
• Strings
  • .009 to .070 (based on low F# tuning)

Somebody asked about a GraphTech nut, and i don't think it's much of an issue... if they make them wide enough for 6-string basses, that same size should work for an 8-string guitar.

[metalfiend666]

Thank you Darren.

Originally Posted by Scott

You sir, need some fucking glasses

Must be my screen. I had my eyes tested a couple of months back and apart from one eye being fractionally (and I mean only very slightly) longsighted I have 20/20 vision.

[Cancer]

Interesting specs.....looks like 2007 is going to be the year of the 8. Get the design under 750$, and I'm in.

[Elysian]

yeah you can buy 2.5" graphtech nut blanks...

[urklvt]

I guess my 10 will have two nuts...

Oh, on a serious note, I would consider a 20" radius rather than 16", but now I'm splitting hairs (as well as nuts)...

[Drew]

Hell, if Agile makes that, I'm in. 28.5" is seriously long, but you need that sort of length for F# tuning, I gather. 27-28.5 would be the range I'd consider ideal.

Also, I seriously like the looks of that. With a bubinga top, however, this almost HAS to come in a natural oil finish.

I think expecting a $400 set of lundgrens on a guitar that's targeted as a budget 8 and will probably list between $500-600 is probably a little extreme. EMG's as it is would be pushing it, but might be cheaper than developing anything in-house.

Also, while I'd love a maple board, I could probably live with ebony - compromise is the spirit of something-or-other, fellas.

[Nik]

Well, I suppose maybe a poll, like for the SS.ORG Agile 7, to determine specs might be best.

Let me just say that, while right now I'm seriously interested, a 28 5/8" will make me NOT buy one. I'd end up getting a Schecter C-7 instead. I'm sorry, but IMO, seeing as how not everyone will be tuning to F#, 27" seems to me like a nice compromise scale between 25.5" and 28 5/8", and it can hold both a low F# and a high-A, while not being too over-the-top for the average guitar player.

My 2 cents.

[Roundhouse_Kick]

^Completely agreed

I am very interested in an 8 string in the near future but would almost certainly be going with the high A. Low F# would be fun for a bit, but it doesn't suit my style of rhythm playing (tight and fast), and I thinkthe novelty (for me) would wear off fast. I'd rather have the A as a natural extension of lead playing.

If the scale length is kept reasonable there will be a lot more takers including myself!

[urklvt]

I'm sure it would be possible to have two versions of the guitar, but it would not necessarily be economical. If it comes down to a vote, I'd say a poll would be in order, but I agree wholeheartedly with Darren on this one: 28 5/8" is the right scale for a new instrument not just a 7 or a 6 with one or two strings added for effect.

The fact remains that even on the longer scale you can tune up to A. I may do that anyway, but the open string would not be A, the 2nd fret would. Low A to high G. Why not tune it one whole step down so that it would be standard at the 25.5" 2nd fret position? Why not? Who says a guitar has to be tuned a certain way anyway? This is the same philosophy of approach for 9 strings and up. Tune it however you want but get the range you need to play ANYTHING that comes to mind, any time.

No arguing, mind you, just offering more useless opinions....

[Nik]

Originally Posted by urklvt

I'm sure it would be possible to have two versions of the guitar, but it would not necessarily be economical. If it comes down to a vote, I'd say a poll would be in order, but I agree wholeheartedly with Darren on this one: 28 5/8" is the right scale for a new instrument not just a 7 or a 6 with one or two strings added for effect.

The fact remains that even on the longer scale you can tune up to A. I may do that anyway, but the open string would not be A, the 2nd fret would. Low A to high G. Why not tune it one whole step down so that it would be standard at the 25.5" 2nd fret position? Why not? Who says a guitar has to be tuned a certain way anyway? This is the same philosophy of approach for 9 strings and up. Tune it however you want but get the range you need to play ANYTHING that comes to mind, any time.

No arguing, mind you, just offering more useless opinions....

I see your points dude, and I see where you're coming from 100%, and I see why you would want the longer scale. All I'm saying is that apart from some of you fellas on this forum, a lot of average players like me would be put off

A capo would confuse me I like having those nice dots to help me instantly jump from one part of the fretboard to another, so I don't want to make amends with a capo (and end up having less frets). And I doubt that we'd be able to convince Kurt to make more than one type of 8. I mean, making just one model 8-string is already quite an undertaking.

I don't like going lower than A--that's just bass territory. As someone said, it might be fun to go to F# for a little bit, but I personally would tune mine like:

A D G C F A D G thus expanding both my lower range and higher range and coming close to the range of a piano