[kingpinMS3]

Dear Ibanez:

Many of us on this forum are loyal to the name. Myself, along with others, have grown up playing your instruments. Over time, we have developed particular aesthetic tastes that you continue to ignore.

One of your greatest endorsees has this taste. Why can you not translate these aesthetics to just 1 normal looking guitar? Agile, sold by rondomusic.com almost exclusively uses reverse headstocks in their 7 strings. Hell, even you have offered quite a few reverse headstocks in your time, however, with the exception of the Xiphos, you still ignore the beauty of the reverse 7.

please, for the love of crap, offer us a reverse headstock 7 string that isn't a xiphos. Stop fucking around already. how hard can it be? you already have all the tooling in place.

[ralphy1976]

amen!!!

[Lethe]

While you are absolutely correct and I would also like to see something like an RGA7 with reversed headstock, I have a hard time understanding why you would go as far as beg a multinational corporation for something you can just get somewhere else, for less money, with better pickups.

It's not your job as a customer to convince some arrogant corporation of your needs, it's their job to detect and fulfil it. If they don't give a shit, why would you give a shit about having their logo on anything you own?

Don't get me wrong, but threads like this perpetuate the notion that we, the market, have to be active and work hard to get big corporations to provide what we crave. We don't have to do jack shit! Agile does a great job at giving us what we need, which is why they're growing so fast right now. Ibanez, Gibson, Fender and some of the other manufacturers that dictate to us what we're supposed to like can all go up in flames for all I care. And yes, I own an Ibanez and will continue to like it, but it's exactly what I like (27", active pickups, offset dots, creme neck binding), so I don't have to complain.

[Emperoff]

I don't even play Ibanez anymore, but I'm a Reverse Headstock lover for life

[jymellis]

im perfectly happy with my normal headstock 7s

[kingpinMS3]

Originally Posted by Lethe

While you are absolutely correct and I would also like to see something like an RGA7 with reversed headstock, I have a hard time understanding why you would go as far as beg a multinational corporation for something you can just get somewhere else, for less money, with better pickups.

It's not your job as a customer to convince some arrogant corporation of your needs, it's their job to detect and fulfil it. If they don't give a shit, why would you give a shit about having their logo on anything you own?

Don't get me wrong, but threads like this perpetuate the notion that we, the market, have to be active and work hard to get big corporations to provide what we crave. We don't have to do jack shit! Agile does a great job at giving us what we need, which is why they're growing so fast right now. Ibanez, Gibson, Fender and some of the other manufacturers that dictate to us what we're supposed to like can all go up in flames for all I care. And yes, I own an Ibanez and will continue to like it, but it's exactly what I like (27", active pickups, offset dots, creme neck binding), so I don't have to complain.

I just have a strange brand loyalty to ibanez

[7deadlysins666]

As much as I would love a reverse headstock 7 from Ibanez, I am currently playing an Agile and may be switching back to Schecter after hearing the KILLER tone from the new Hellraiser V-7's.

[Fred the Shred]

To put it simply, Ibanez does not give a rat's ass or display any sort of interest in customer suggestions. Don't bother, as it extends to a significant portion of their major endorsers and even product managers.

[jymellis]

Originally Posted by kingpinMS3

I just have a strange brand loyalty to ibanez

only brand of guitar i have personally payed money for since 1991

[mrhankey87]

There are so much important factors that I don't like about Ibanez than the reverse headstock.

[canuck brian]

Originally Posted by Fred the Shred

To put it simply, Ibanez does not give a rat's ass or display any sort of interest in customer suggestions. Don't bother, as it extends to a significant portion of their major endorsers and even product managers.

RGA 8, RGA 7, Long scale 7's....yeah they didnt' listen at all...

You guys need to realize that for Ibanez, there is no real reason to release guitars with reverse headstocks. They'd have to change the CNC programs slightly to have the reversed headstock, but since that costs money, they're not going to do it. Ibanez already sells a pile of non-reverse headstocks so its highly doubtful they're going to listen to a small web forum.

[davidian29]

Originally Posted by kingpinMS3

Dear Ibanez:

please, for the love of crap, offer us a reverse headstock 7 string that isn't a xiphos. Stop fucking around already. how hard can it be? you already have all the tooling in place.

And I believe they discontinued that one this year havn't they?

[Decipher]

Originally Posted by canuck brian

RGA 8, RGA 7, Long scale 7's....yeah they didnt' listen at all...

You guys need to realize that for Ibanez, there is no real reason to release guitars with reverse headstocks. They'd have to change the CNC programs slightly to have the reversed headstock, but since that costs money, they're not going to do it. Ibanez already sells a pile of non-reverse headstocks so its highly doubtful they're going to listen to a small web forum.

This. In the grand scope of the consumer market (internationally) I'm sure there are just as many who don't like reverse headstocks as there are people who do. It's said perfectly above, the costs to do a reverse headstock for a few guitars compared to the thousands that don't just don't compute.

[djpharoah]

In the grand scheme of thing I'd say I'd rather have more options in wood/scale/trems etc compared to just a reverse headstock.

That being said I reverse headstock.

[kingpinMS3]

Originally Posted by canuck brian

RGA 8, RGA 7, Long scale 7's....yeah they didnt' listen at all...

You guys need to realize that for Ibanez, there is no real reason to release guitars with reverse headstocks. They'd have to change the CNC programs slightly to have the reversed headstock, but since that costs money, they're not going to do it. Ibanez already sells a pile of non-reverse headstocks so its highly doubtful they're going to listen to a small web forum.

they already offer a reverse headstock 7, it's just that it's the tragic looking Xiphos(my opinion, of course)

how hard can it be to take Xiphos necks and mate them to a RGA body?

[Fred the Shred]

Originally Posted by canuck brian

RGA 8, RGA 7, Long scale 7's....yeah they didnt' listen at all...

You guys need to realize that for Ibanez, there is no real reason to release guitars with reverse headstocks. They'd have to change the CNC programs slightly to have the reversed headstock, but since that costs money, they're not going to do it. Ibanez already sells a pile of non-reverse headstocks so its highly doubtful they're going to listen to a small web forum.

They didn't, Brian. There was a market for the 8's already, and they explored it, much like the appearance of the RG7620 back when K0rn revitalized the UV in the public eyes.

The current range comes from the success of their RG2228 and the competition's success using longer scales, which means there is a market. Do explain where is their feedback in their forums, or expressed anywhere in their site. Nowhere. Ibby has bold market moves, such as launching the very first production rock oriented 7-string, and more recently the RG2228, so it is a company that does deserve respect for taking chances, but they are (as expected) calculated and somewhat increasingly conservative ones over the years.

What I posted stands - one must not confuse "address a previously market within certain safety parameters" with "addressing customer requests". Agile addresses customer requests by introducing new features. Ibanez does not, and their customer support policy remains quite subpar in my eyes. They do make quality instruments, however, and I wish the introductory models available when I started playing had half the quality of theirs, which is saying a lot.

EDIT: to make it clearer, what I'm on about is their response to customer requests, not the market studies they perform to release new instruments.

EDIT 2: thanks to whomever inaugurated my neg rep for having a specific opinion. A fine display of argumentation.

[Customisbetter]

I feel that Reverse headstocks are silly and would impede kids from buying htem in the store. They pick it up and try to downtune like all their favorite girl-jeans wearing heroes and realize, "hey , this is annoying reach under the headstock to tune", and Ibanez loses a sale.

just my opinion.

[6o66er]

Originally Posted by Customisbetter

I feel that Reverse headstocks are silly and would impede kids from buying htem in the store. They pick it up and try to downtune like all their favorite girl-jeans wearing heroes and realize, "hey , this is annoying reach under the headstock to tune", and Ibanez loses a sale.

just my opinion.

I can see this being the main reason for them not doing it. I DO agree I'd like at least one or two models with it, I don't think we'll see them any time soon.

[Cheesebuiscut]

Uh, I'm accustomed to reverse headstocks especially since my first guitar had one. I insantly wen't *that looks badassier* and picked it up... It took me a while to get used to the standard headstock on my newest guitar and I found it quite uncomfortable to reach over instead of under.

Whats pathetic is they have never made a reverse headstock S series in all these years. It took them this long to actually make one 24 fret S series to test the market before they realized people want 24 frets on everything and slapped them on the rest of the S series.

I wonder how long It'll take them to realize people want the ZR on rg's and not the edge zero.

Ibanez doesn't cater to customer requests they cater to the current market in their best interest.

[BenInKY]

I assume that when big guitar companies come up with their models they do it with the hopes of selling as many as possible. I have to think they're appealing to the lowest common denominator. Whatever combination of features they come up with for a particular model of guitar, they have to make a shit-load of that guitar to make it cost-effective. It's all about the numbers.

But I wish Ibanez would make their USA custom shop accessible for amateur, as in not signed, musicians. I'd pay quite a premium because I really like the RG body shapes and necks.

And it may not be popular here but I like the regular headstock

[Fred the Shred]

Edit: this was a response to whomever was saying they liked the Ibby headstock in reverse configuration, yet I was ninja'd in every way!

Oh, I'd love it as well, although I find it quite more likely to appear (assuming a more "immediate" timeline) on one of their limited collections. It is actually one of my favorite headstock designs when reversed.

Originally Posted by Cheesebuiscut

Uh, I'm accustomed to reverse headstocks especially since my first guitar had one. I insantly wen't *that looks badassier* and picked it up... It took me a while to get used to the standard headstock on my newest guitar and I found it quite uncomfortable to reach over instead of under.

Whats pathetic is they have never made a reverse headstock S series in all these years. It took them this long to actually make one 24 fret S series to test the market before they realized people want 24 frets on everything and slapped them on the rest of the S series.

I wonder how long It'll take them to realize people want the ZR on rg's and not the edge zero.

Ibanez doesn't cater to customer requests they cater to the current market in their best interest.

Thank you - this is what I'm trying to convey. I'm not dissing them (although I feel their customer support is indeed quite lackluster for reasons beyond me), as they make quality instruments, like I've posted before - it is the size of their operation that puts them in a more strategic market orientation. I'd just like them to tell us what could or could not be a possibility in the near future when asked by a significant amount of people.

[Dickicker]

Originally Posted by Customisbetter

I feel that Reverse headstocks are silly and would impede kids from buying htem in the store. They pick it up and try to downtune like all their favorite girl-jeans wearing heroes and realize, "hey , this is annoying reach under the headstock to tune", and Ibanez loses a sale.

just my opinion.

LMAO!!!!

Like you said, it is just your opinion. I love IBANEZ reverse headstocks. I think a lot of other brands look dumb. But what you said about the girl pants queers is true. Since they suck, 1 because their poor since of fashion, 2. because there crying about reverse headstocks, they wont buy a guitar with a reverse headstock. But what about les pauls, sg's other 3 on 3 style headstocks? You have to reach over and under and such on those. No different to me. Just Ibanez looks cooler and kills babies. lolz That is opinions also!!!

[loktide]

Originally Posted by Fred the Shred

To put it simply, Ibanez does not give a rat's ass or display any sort of interest in customer suggestions. Don't bother, as it extends to a significant portion of their major endorsers and even product managers.

this.

[fretninjadave]

also how about a different color for a change Their is plenty of black and white 7 strings out their .

[Louis Cypher]

IMO just have to look at the fact that Ibanez is a large business and they are doing what large scale business does, if their market research said that the next big thing was a twist on the Spongebob Square pants starter with 18 frets & cheesewire string guitars then every RG or whatever would be Yellow with fake "cheese" holes and have Patrick or Mr Crabs on the headstock! Pisses me off totally that there aren't any decent reverse ibanez guitars let alone their 7 stings coz I got a 6string one and I love them!! Same way I am p1ssed that you can't get hold of the locking fixed edge III unless you by a fcuking Mick Thompson guitar! should be a 7 version of that (apologies if I am incorrect on that btw, coz ain't there an 8 strign one on the RG8?? anyway hopefully you get my point! haha!)

totally sucks balls but can't see them (or any other large manufacturer) changing their lines of 7 & 8 strings, read in a cpl of interviews with Dino he ain't offered a signature coz he don;t sell enough records for them to be happy to make him one, but he sticks with them coz they make the best guitars iho... it will take some pop punk rock emo group of angst ridden vampire wannabe tweeagers to become huge playing 7 & 8 string Agiles for Ibanez to re evaulate the current trend(s)

Just had a look and Hoshino Gakki site, the parent company of Ibanez, they had an annual turn over last year of 12,858,000,000yen thats nearly $145million in whats supposed to be a world wide recession....! When your bank rolled by a company that big and your a brand as big as Ibanez is then your not lead or dictated to by consumers etc, its you that sets the new market trends.... why they do the ORM1WH instead of a Dino808!! Haha!!