# NGD Charvel Govan Baked Ash



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

I understand that many of our fine, registered posters here in the _Epiphone Talk ®_ subforum click threads with a text title, only to be faced with the offensive sight of a post with _more_ text - So let’s get photos out of the way:







The recent NGD Kiesel that was sold the next day inspired me to post this thread several days after selling the titular guitar.

I’ve wanted to try a Charvel Govan since its 2012 teasing, mainly in hope of it being a worthy competitor to my favored superstrat (a Vigier). The opportunity finally presented itself when someone listed a ‘17 Caramalized Ash on Reverb for a “The Cartel Has Begun Mailing Me Toes” price.

My first impression was that the body (supposedly reduced in scale from the standard 22 fret San Dimas shape in order to remain proportionate to the 24 frets) was quite a bit larger than that of my Vigier. To get a sense of the guitar bodies I’m accustomed to, here’s the Charvel pictured next to a Parker and some purple toy guitar my four year-old daughter got at Toys R Us:





The body has a very delicate finish that feels oiled and smells of ignited pixie stix. The neck finish feels like more of a standard satin. The neck carve is more substantial than what most would associate with a “shredder”, but by no means is it a baseball bat. The first detail to disturb me was the factory action:





That may seem nice and low to some, but it was at a height I associate with 9.5” radius American stratocasters. Apparently this is Guthrie’s preference?

In fact, the strings are raised to the necessary height for pulling the trem up to the end of its routed range (More than a major 4th) without the notes choking out. Thankfully, the fretwork is immaculate and, in conjunction with the conical radius, you can indeed lower the action until the strings are effectively sitting on the frets, and they’re not liable to choke while bending.





This is where the “failure to integrate” problems begin to present themselves.

Guthrie, at the end of the day, essentially looked at a 22 fret San Dimas and said “let’s incorporate stuff from my current signature Suhr into this existing design and sell that.” He then spent about two years deciding what he wanted to glow in the dark.

This resulted in a signature guitar that I describe as being a hodgepodge of features that sabotage one another.

Firstly, lowering the strings to the action allowed by the radius and fret leveling just lowers them into the non-adjustable bridge pickup that sits twice as tall in the route as the neck and middle pickups do:





The direct-mounted pickups are routed so that the baseplate rests snugly against the wood - Meaning they’re _very much_ non-adjustable from their factory-set height unless the owner is willing to route the cavities deeper to lower them, or shim them with foam to raise them.

This strictly aesthetic choice undermines the functional choice of the frets and fingerboard radius: The guitar is set up to allow an action lower than what the bridge pickup allows it to be lowered to - The strings just sit against the pole pieces.

So I raised the action back to where it was (to ensure I had the factory-set distance between the strings and pickups), and shimmed the neck. Thankfully, this workaround was as effective as it was embarrassing.

Next, we have a component that isn’t immediately disturbing, but that gradually exposes the fatally-compromised system that’s been established:

The Sperzel locking tuners had multiple string wraps. That detail may elicit a “so what?” reaction from the unacquainted; so I’ll touch on it:

When you pull strings taut through locking tuners, lock them in place, then clip the excess, it removes the wraps that slacken and return out-of-tune following bending or trem use. Having multiple wraps of strings around locking tuner posts defeats their singular purpose. It came as no surprise when light trem use wrecked havoc on the tuning. I remedied this puzzling setup, and photographed the tuners just before clipping the A (to give you an idea of how much excess had been wrapped around the posts):





I’ll come back to adress the nut. For now, I shift attention to the bridge:

The original Floyd Rose bridge was essentially a two-point strat trem with locking saddles - Which is exactly the role being portrayed, here. Guthrie doesn’t like locking nuts or fine tuners, but the saddle radius needs to be much flatter on his signature guitar’s bridge than the ten inch reproductions of the original Floyd Rose are fabricated to. And, so, we arrive at one of the contributions toward why these guitars are so expensive: This Floyd knock-off is proprietary, and produced on a tiny scale. All for the sake of the fixed radius. Apparently, a height-adjustable saddle (such as you’d find on the first prototype of this guitar) wasn’t as ecomically viable as the far more expensive alternative they settled on.

Another quirk is that the flange of each trem post is wider than the space routed behind the baseplate. The consequence of this is that you have no room to perform the Floyd trick of pulling the trem out of the guitar for setups while the strings remain attached to the tuners - In fact, you couldnt anyway; due to the strings being pulled taut and locked into the tuners as a condition of their operation resulting in not having the slack necessary to lift the bridge off the posts. Apparently, this is why the strings were wound around the posts of the locking tuners.

To reiterate:
_
The tuning stability of the proprietary bridge design chosen for tuning stability was compromised with improper string installation into the tuners chosen for tuning stability, for the sake of ease in adjusting the bridge and *non-adjustable *pickups. If you want to restore tuning stability, you have to remove the ease of adjustment, necessitating detuning the strings entirely and/or unscrewing the trem posts any time you need to remove the bridge.
_
In case it isn’t clear: Such considerations are not present, much less necessary, when dealing with a standard, double-locking trem.

Basically, a non-Floyd user sabotaged every positive effect and biproduct Floyd users take for granted in order to make a guitar with a Floyd Rose more palatable to someone who doesn’t like Floyds, mainly through the effort of reinstating every downside and cause for frustration that the standard Floyd design eliminates:

-Strings requiring sufficient headstock angle to exert necessary downward force at the nut
-Strings binding or breaking at the tuner post
-Strings binding at the nut
-The absence of fine-tuners necessitating the frustration of having to tune the strings in increments once the trem is balanced to float
-The string length behind the nut creating enough slack for the strings to come out of the saddle-slots when depressing the bar and, finally,
-The combination of all the preceding factors necessitating the old stratocaster trick of compensating for detuning by pulling up on the trem to forcibly reseat the strings to their “zero point.”

And this is largely accomplished with an expensive, proprietary bridge that is fabricated exclusively for this guitar.

Drink in the beauty of it, folks: This is a modern sculpture exploring the concept of fixing something until it’s broke.


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

Back to the nut: It’s bone. Fine. It’s a sig guitar, and the guy prefers a bone nut. With a Floyd Rose.

Long story short, this guitar was a tuning nightmare. Not only does the nut require regular lubrication to function only as well as previously described, but *the slots weren’t cut right at the factory.
*
The guitar ships with a 10-46 set, and even a 9-42 set was binding in the slots. Quick fix with a file, I know - But at this price? Govan supposedly settled on bone after he toured with a graphite nut and found that the strings that moved the most with trem activity gradually sawed through it - But he also settled on an oil body finish that scrapes off as soon as you forget to clip your penis toenail; so I don’t see why forcing owners of the production model to pit a Floyd Rose against a bone nut needed to be conceded in the name of authenticity.

I owned the guitar for a little over a month. Much of the time spent with the guitar in that span was spent missing the Floyd Rose fine tuners with every fiber of my being while I calibrated the trem to return to zero with a pull-up. Every session of sitting down with the guitar got off to that sour start. Then, the next day, I’d pick up the guitar and find it out-of-tune.

Once I got to the point of picking up literally any other guitar over the one I knew would require such intensive foreplay, it was easy to leave the thing in its case.

Most of the time spent with the guitar was not spent playing, but rather struggling to overcome its shortcomings. Not just tuning stability, but its electronic quirks:

The guitar has EVH frictionless pots. Meaning that, if you happen to be accustomed to turning guitar knobs possessing more friction than none, the Charvel knobs have a tendency to spin to the end of their travel and rebound back. 

I was really looking forward to the Michael Frank Braun-designed pickups. I have a set of his Eric Johnson pickups in one of my toys; and was curious to hear how they compared: The neck humbucker is surprisingly tame, I found the middle single coil unremarkable, and the bridge humbucker had a horrible midrange squawk that I couldn’t dial out. I spent most of the month fighting an uphill battle of turning the mid knob of different amps all the way down just to compensate for the SQUAAAAAWK that shone through every note like the derangement behind Tom Cruise’s eyes. Then I’d plug a different guitar in, and a good sound would just be there, already.

The “single coil simulation” is serviceable - Just a standard variation on a coil split in which the series connection of each humbucker is shunted to ground through a .1uf capacitor.

I wanted to like the guitar, but it’s made for Guthrie Govan and no one else. We’ll see if the new owner experiences a similar honeymoon period. 

...

I’ll gladly answer questions to do with components, the tremel-no, weight, quality of wood figuring, etc - It’s just that that stuff is really boring.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Feb 28, 2018)

that guitar sounds like a nightmare. between the weird proprietary trem and the non-adjustable bridge pickup (and your description of said pickup) I'm already shaking my head. The non-locking tuners and bone nut, which are unbelievably stupid to pair up with any trem, makes it cross into facepalm territory.


----------



## prlgmnr (Feb 28, 2018)

Thanks for that, I can now put to rest that little part of me that considers buying one of these every time I see a used one come up for sale (which is quite a lot of times, for some reason....)


----------



## TheTrooper (Feb 28, 2018)

Those Sperzels are locking, How could they not be?
Always wondered about the pickups, if they were adjustable or not (They gave that impression all the time, which isn't a dealbreaker for me, but since You can't adjust the action....)
Exactly what wasn't right about the action/neck angle?
Any idea in mm about the action at 12th fret? 
The strings seem to be right on the frets all across the fretboard, I would actually think they need to be raised and/or that the neck angle is wrong/needs adjustment.

Bone nuts, the nightmare of Floating Trems....Guthrie mentioned the self lubricating ones a lot (about the D string sawing thru the nut) but badly cut bone nuts (like the one You got) are a real pain to deal with.

That's actually a very detailed review of the Charvel, and I've been waiting for an honest one A LOT.


----------



## TheTrooper (Feb 28, 2018)

prlgmnr said:


> Thanks for that, I can now put to rest that little part of me that considers buying one of these every time I see a used one come up for sale (which is quite a lot of times, for some reason....)


Ditto.

Same here, Always wanted to try one, but seeing them pop up a little too much just didn't click with me.
Also I'm broke AF.


----------



## Ben Pinkus (Feb 28, 2018)

I have one of his spec'd Suhr Models, and haven't come across any of these issues (except the bridge pickup is abit honky and the split sounds have a small volume drop). 

Sorry to hear about your troubles with this version!


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

The Suhr Govans are different beasts; with few components in common and only a few overlapping specs.



TheTrooper said:


> Those Sperzels are locking, How could they not be?



They’re locking, but the guitar came with the strings wrapped around the posts as if they weren’t locking. It reinforced the overall impression that the guitar was going “DUH!”

There was nothing “wrong” with the action - It’s just that you can’t lower it without hitting the bridge pickup; so I shimmed the neck to compensate for the silly pickup mounting.


----------



## Lemonbaby (Feb 28, 2018)

Happy NGD - you're confirming what I expected when reading through the specs...


----------



## gunch (Feb 28, 2018)

Your write-ups are so hilarious 

You should probably stick with the Vigier and Parker seems like anything else turns out to be disastrous to you


----------



## r3tr0sp3ct1v3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Was it I who inspired you? Became your muse of obscene spending?
You must join me and @Hollowway in our quest to own every guitar.


----------



## r3tr0sp3ct1v3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Nope read it over. You and I just did the same thing with our Kiesels


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

I just like to try new guitars when the price is right. I’m currently bidding on a Strandberg Classic (the model you can find in the As Seen On TV section of most Walgreens) because the owner seems to want to lose hundreds of dollars on a brand-new guitar as soon as possible. He probably posts here.


----------



## Mathemagician (Feb 28, 2018)

So it sounds/looks like they ended up on a very bad Ernie Ball style system. IE: A floating bridge relying on locking tuners. Only with none of the energy put into ensuring it “does what intended”. 

The non-adjustable bridge pickup baffles me the most (as annoying as everything else admittedly sounds). Just...why? There’s no net benefit to that for a consumer. It’s cool if that’s what Guthrie likes, but IMO the point of a sig is to sell units. 

Sorry man, hopefully you enjoy the next one more.


----------



## TheTrooper (Feb 28, 2018)

Andrew Lloyd Webber said:


> The Suhr Govans are different beasts; with few components in common and only a few overlapping specs.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ah, sorry, read it wrong.

It sucks about the nut, that's they're catch: If Locking, you can always shim/use any gauge, but you need to screw/unscrew them; when bone/whatever else they're a pain if cut wrong.
If only they changed the nut with a graphite one, it would be much easier.
Had a chance to see Govan and The Aristocrats live and that guitar sounded out of this world.

BTW, any comments on the Tremol-No?
Had one and hated the living shit out of it.


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

TheTrooper said:


> BTW, any comments on the Tremol-No?
> Had one and hated the living shit out of it.



It essentially has two purposes: Facillitating double-stop bends, and not screwing down enough when you want it to. It doesn’t block the trem; so you’re still tuning a floating bridge. And if you have it in a guitar just to have it (but never really use it), then you run the risk of it making a weird noise when you don’t want it to.

I’m spoiled by Parker and Steinberger trem-stoppers; and knew going in that the tremel-no would underwhelm me. Being as it came with the guitar, I was indifferent.


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Feb 28, 2018)

These thoughts probably belong in the original post:

1. What Guthrie and Charvel could do to fix the guitar:

- Deeper routes, pickups mounted on foam.
- Roller nut. Fender has them just laying around. Use them. Otherwise, use a self-lubricating nut with a zero fret, like Vigier and Strandberg do.
- Stop pretending the crippled Floyd Rose bridge was a good idea. You don’t have to stop using it, just stop bullshitting people about the fact that you’re trying to get rid of the minimum order amount your OEM insisted on for that hardware revision.
- Sell the MFB Govan pickup set separate from the guitar. That way, those of us who own the guitar and aren’t in love with the pickups won’t feel like we’re in an “all or nothing” obligation with hardware that can never be replaced; and we end up just selling the whole fucking guitar.
-Make the guitar in Mexico. You’ll sell more of them at a lower price point, and use up those retarded bridges faster.

2. My real-life interactions with Guthrie Govan:

-2012 NAMM.
Guthrie was my favorite guitarist at the time, and happened to be waiting in line near me. My friend coyly got his attention and said “Excuse me, but my friend here says you’re his favorite player - Would it be cool if I pointed you out to him?”

He seemed confused at the prospect that a fan standing directly next to him had not only failed to see him, but didn’t overhear this conversation. He shrugged, and my friend said to me, “Hey, it’s your favorite guitar player: Mr. Erotic Cakes, himself.”

I looked at Guthrie with a quizzical expression, frowned, and stated “What? He’s not my favorite guitar player - Fuck that guy.”

-2013 NAMM, Vigier private party.
I convinced several drunks to walk up to Guthrie, one after the other, and ask if they could photograph his pedalboard. He grew very annoyed at this.

Following the Aristocrats’ blistering set (Which Guthrie played on a Surfreter with flawless intonation), I said that, being a Shawn Lane fan, I could say with certainty that Guthrie was playing much better than Shawn had lately.

Nice guy.


----------



## prlgmnr (Feb 28, 2018)

I don't understand how you keep getting allowed to go to NAMM


----------



## TheTrooper (Feb 28, 2018)

Andrew Lloyd Webber said:


> It essentially has two purposes: Facillitating double-stop bends, and not screwing down enough when you want it to. It doesn’t block the trem; so you’re still tuning a floating bridge. And if you have it in a guitar just to have it (but never really use it), then you run the risk of it making a weird noise when you don’t want it to.
> 
> I’m spoiled by Parker and Steinberger trem-stoppers; and knew going in that the tremel-no would underwhelm me. Being as it came with the guitar, I was indifferent.


Yep, exactly how I remembered the Tremol- No hahahaha
Glad It wasn't just me.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Feb 28, 2018)

lmao, trolling guthrie like that. regardless if you actually did that or are embellishing parts of you meeting him, you got me to laugh.


----------



## Rawkmann (Feb 28, 2018)

Andrew Lloyd Webber said:


> The body has a very delicate finish that feels oiled and smells of ignited pixie stix. The neck finish feels like more of a standard satin. The neck carve is more substantial than what most would associate with a “shredder”, but by no means is it a baseball bat. The first detail to disturb me was the factory action:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In the first pic the action looks pretty dang low already but I've honestly never gotten action like what's in the second pic. Even my best playing Ibanez's and the one Vigier I had couldn't go that low without seriously affecting the tone. Definitely hats off if the Govan can go that low without buzzing and rattling all over the neck.


----------



## groverj3 (Feb 28, 2018)

I once built a parts guitar with locking tuners, a roller nut, and a wilkinson bridge. It was a pretty sweet setup. It wasn't capable of making the strings completely flop around like a standard locking nut + floyd would, but I imagine that a roller nut here would be an immediate improvement.

Otherwise, when it comes to bridge setup I think this can be described as "not the guitar for you." Nor I, for that matter. This is for those that inexplicably don't like Floyds but still want a tremolo on their guitar.

As far as the action is concerned, it looks great! The pickup height is an annoyance, but I think the expectation here is to shim the neck as you did.

It looks beautiful, but I wouldn't buy one myself. Certainly not for the prices they retail for. However, Guthrie is a magician with it and I guess he can play what he likes. I'm sure there are many out there that would think this thing is the best. Hell, maybe I'd even like it. I think my local shop has one. I'll see about taking it for a test drive, haha.


----------



## Possessed (Feb 28, 2018)

I had a GG charvel basswood version. No issue at all. Action is very low, sounds great and play great. I think many users will agree with me. So no idea what happened to your guitar.
As for tuning stability goes, I did dive bomb on both my gg charvel and suhr modern and both were out of the tune. So if you want perfect tuning, go fix or locking nut.


----------



## Possessed (Feb 28, 2018)

Double post, sorry


----------



## ArtDecade (Feb 28, 2018)

The guitar has the same idiosyncrasies as her designer. 
What works for Guthrie probably won't work for me, but it certainly works for him. Brilliant player and musician.


----------



## MatthewK (Feb 28, 2018)

Yikes. Non-adjustable pickups? That's whacky.


----------



## xzacx (Feb 28, 2018)

Possessed said:


> I had a GG charvel basswood version. No issue at all. Action is very low, sounds great and play great. I think many users will agree with me. So no idea what happened to your guitar.
> As for tuning stability goes, I did dive bomb on both my gg charvel and suhr modern and both were out of the tune. So if you want perfect tuning, go fix or locking nut.



Guess I had a lot different experience with mine too - one of the best bolt-ons I've ever played, second only to Tylers (which, to be fair, are twice as expensive).


----------



## Curt (Feb 28, 2018)

Major WTF on the bridge pickup rout. Also, as far as that trem goes, there are 3 questions I have for Guthrie and Charvel. 

1. Why would you make an OEM version of a more or less already existing bridge when you can just get the actual Floyd Rose version?
2. Why would you choose the gimped Floyd Rose as a model for said bridge if you aren't really going to change most of the specs that matter?
3. Why would you not just use the Gotoh 510? An excellent non-locking trem to begin with. Guthries Suhrs all had them, right?


----------



## Possessed (Feb 28, 2018)

Curt said:


> Major WTF on the bridge pickup rout. Also, as far as that trem goes, there are 3 questions I have for Guthrie and Charvel.
> 
> 1. Why would you make an OEM version of a more or less already existing bridge when you can just get the actual Floyd Rose version?
> 2. Why would you choose the gimped Floyd Rose as a model for said bridge if you aren't really going to change most of the specs that matter?
> 3. Why would you not just use the Gotoh 510? An excellent non-locking trem to begin with. Guthries Suhrs all had them, right?




1 FR radius doesnt match fingerboard
2 Same as 1
3 less friction because no 90 degree bend of the string

GG has explained many times in the video


----------



## Curt (Feb 28, 2018)

Possessed said:


> 1 FR radius doesnt match fingerboard
> 2 Same as 1
> 3 less friction because no 90 degree bend of the string
> 
> GG has explained many times in the video


By OP's wording, I assumed the radius of the bridge was 10" just like the normal floyd rose variant. Fair enough.


----------



## Possessed (Feb 28, 2018)

MatthewK said:


> Yikes. Non-adjustable pickups? That's whacky.


At least I can lower middle pu A LOT in GG Charvel. Not like suhr, almost no adjustment on middle pu.


----------



## aceinet (Feb 28, 2018)

I just have to say bravo to the write up. Way over the top, in a good way. Thank You for the insight.


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Mar 1, 2018)

Rawkmann said:


> In the first pic the action looks pretty dang low already but I've honestly never gotten action like what's in the second pic. Even my best playing Ibanez's and the one Vigier I had couldn't go that low without seriously affecting the tone. Definitely hats off if the Govan can go that low without buzzing and rattling all over the neck.



It’s strictly my own technique and setup preference - Most would consider the factory height low, but my preferring it lower served to highlight the odd choice to have the frets leveled to a QC standard greater than what the protruding bridge humbucker allows. If anything, it speaks highly of Charvel’s US-line fretwork, in general. For the record, other people buzz all over the place when they play my guitars, and I tend to spot-level frets until the fingerboard radius dictates how low I can set the strings (If I can bend a major 2nd without fretting out, I’m good - If a song requires a bend of a minor 3rd or more, I either raise the action or use a flat-fingerboard guitar).

I generally don’t complain about fretwork in a review unless the factory QC action spec is for the sake of passing uneven frets on a guitar specced or advertised as having “low” action (such as one with a conical or 20” radius board). That frothing Possessed guy should be happy to know I still consider Charvel’s fretwork among the best I’ve seen, even if it’s squandered on this particular model.



aceinet said:


> I just have to say bravo to the write up. Way over the top, in a good way. Thank You for the insight.



Speaking as someone whose whole gimmick is being a semianonymous reactive asshole, I don’t know what to say to a compliment.


----------



## 7 Strings of Hate (Mar 1, 2018)

Govan Schmovan, lets talk about that Parker


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Mar 1, 2018)

Not much to say: It used to be yours. I sold the original components, put a Gravity Storm set in there with a coil split and Graphtech 13 pin-setup, and let a bunch of Laffy Taffys melt on it.


----------



## mastapimp (Mar 1, 2018)

Possessed said:


> I had a GG charvel basswood version. No issue at all. Action is very low, sounds great and play great. I think many users will agree with me. So no idea what happened to your guitar.
> As for tuning stability goes, I did dive bomb on both my gg charvel and suhr modern and both were out of the tune. So if you want perfect tuning, go fix or locking nut.



I also have the basswood w/ birdseye top and don't have most of the issues brought up with this ash model.

I have moderately low action and my humbuckers are sitting lower in the routing than what's shown in the photos. I don't think the height of my bridge is that far off from what i'm seeing in the pics, and the top bobbin is about flush with the bottom of the cap screws meets chrome that set the intonation.

As for the nut, it's the set up great for 10's, and I haven't had any tuning/trem issues. I do lubricate the string contacts with "nut sauce" every time I change the strings, so maybe that's the missing ingredient. While not quite as stable as a real Floyd, it takes some abuse before going ever so slightly out of tune. 

I will agree that the pickups, especially the bridge, are an acquired taste. Took me a while to get some profiles that gelled with the electronics on my Kemper. 

Too bad this guitar is such a headache...I still enjoy my first generation charvel GG sig model.


----------



## Lemons (Mar 1, 2018)

Andrew Lloyd Webber said:


> (More than a major 4th)



Wow I was really with you there for a while, it seemed like an entertaining and informed review but this really let the whole thing down. The proper term would be an augmented 4th, buy another expensive guitar and try harder next time.

0/10


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Mar 1, 2018)

It’s true - I had a brain fart and wrote “major” where nothing was needed. I don’t recall if the pull-up maxed out at a TT or P5 on the G.



mastapimp said:


> Too bad this guitar is such a headache...I still enjoy my first generation charvel GG sig model.



Clearly - This followed an essay about how great it is.


----------



## Sogradde (Mar 1, 2018)

Where are the pumpkins?


----------



## beerandbeards (Mar 1, 2018)

You want a toe? I can get you a toe, believe me. There are ways, Dude. You don't wanna know about it, believe me.


----------



## PBGas (Mar 1, 2018)

Thx for the review. You took a lot of time to detail things that didn't work for you and it is appreciated! There are some things with the guitar that makes me think yours was built on an off day and other things that I say...yup. I have 2 of them....one from 2015 with Birdseye and a 2017 with the carmelized ash. Both are fabulous. I've had them now for a couple of months. No tuning issues with either that are glaring problems. In any case, one of the most beautiful feeling necks out there.

This guitar for you was doomed from the start, it would seem and sometimes that happens. I had a similar issue with a Les Paul Axcess modern that I purchased back in Sept and had to return.

There are several things that I do agree with on your review. One of those being the nut. I really think Charvel could do much better job on the finish of that part. I had to run some Mitchel cord through the nut a few times that I got from StewMac to clean the area up. It wasn't very well done on either guitar. On a guitar that costs this much, you would at least think they would do a better job on it. I completely agree on a roller nut for this guitar and would do it in a heartbeat but I don't think that one would work due to the 12-16" radius on the neck. The roller nuts are designed for 9.5 radius guitars, no? If it can be done, then I am going to do that but I have to check into this a bit more.

I had a similar issue like you had with the pickup height but the problem was that my pickups were too low on my birdseye version. To me, this means the neck wasn't shimmed back enough. Playability was perfect so my solution was to drop a couple of tiny washers under the pickup legs and that effectively lifted them up to the perfect spot. I could have used some foam but wanted to keep the pickup more connected to the body as designed.

Like you, I would have just preferred the real non-fine tuner Floyd and if it is the case that they needed a minimum order to do so then what a crock. I do like this inhouse built bar a lot. However, I dislike the rounded locking pads. They can sometimes be a pain when changing strings. The flat pads that the real Floyds use are much better. The trem does the job. Wild and crazy bending will put it out of tune slightly when I am using it, but for those songs when playing live, I use a double locking Floyd guitar for that.

The routing? Does not bother me nor is an issue for me.

The control knobs?....they are low resistance. Would probably be a bit nicer if they had a tiny bit of resistance on them but really, a non-issue for me.

The finish? Yup. Thin and will scratch or dent easily. If you want something different, get a strat with 5 inches of poly on it. This doesn't bother me. If anything both guitars feel far more resonant to me.

The neck? Absolutely incredible feel and very fast. The stainless frets are amazing. The neck is extremely stable and when I pick up my guitar off of the wall it is in tune. Same guitar goes into case to go to rehearsal or live, it is still in tune. Love the feel of it and how it plays. It is very, very comfortable.

Tremolo-no? Absolutely hate the thing. I literally took it out of both, ordered a couple of closed Jackson metal backplates and brass claws which fit perfectly. The unit itself is very well built but the intended purpose for me, was what not I wanted it to do. What I did was install some noiseless springs and an ESP arming adjuster in both guitars. Much better stability with the back spring set a bit tighter and when or if (hasn't happened yet) break a string, it will stay in tune so I can finish the tune. For whatever reason, my tuning stability instantly improved when I installed this.

The pickups? I actually like them. They are alnico5 and thus I am used to that. I use a BE-50 with mine so I don't notice the honk. What I do notice is that they are crystal clear when playing live and my leads are heard nicely through the mix. I love the treble mod as well on the guitar and it keeps nice and clear when I back down the volume.

This guitar was made for Guthrie, not me. I accept any shortcomings and adjust as needed based on what I have. For me, I buy the guitar for the neck and how it feels. This is what I loved about my guitars. The stainless frets are amazing and the feel and look of the neck is second to none. I've had 4 live gigs with both thus far and they have performed perfectly for me.


----------



## mastapimp (Mar 1, 2018)

KnightBrolaire said:


> lmao, trolling guthrie like that. regardless if you actually did that or are embellishing parts of you meeting him, you got me to laugh.



Karma at work. Troll Guthrie, receive a lemon.


----------



## Andrew Lloyd Webber (Mar 2, 2018)

Though the lemon comment was made in zest, I feel I should make clear my judgment of the guitar Guthrie asked Fender to make resemble an autographed cabbage turd:

Many of the same problems I observed are common to much cheaper guitars, and I am capable of compensating for or eliminating them with minimal fuss. But, because FMIC markets this as a very expensive guitar (I “only” paid slightly more than the cost of a Suhr Modern - Close to half of what the model was MAP’d at upon initial release), I judged a guitar I only liked and did not love to be unworthy of the additional fuss - Hence, I resold it. If I didn’t have guitars that made this redundant and handicapped in comparison, I would have evaluated it with more generosity.

And I agree with the above gripe against the round string retainer blocks - They tend to force the strings to either side of the saddle.

Hopefully this thread doesn’t jinx me to have the thing returned; otherwise I’ll have to eat crow and give it a makeover.

You know when you’re playing with a new puppy, and your old dog is incensed and jealous; so they retrieve one of their toys and make a show of enjoying it in the middle of the room, while pretending to ignore the puppy? That’s what all the glowing reviews of the guitar posted rhetorically in my review thread come off as being.


----------



## Robotechnology (Mar 2, 2018)

ALW, I must say I enjoyed reading your review! It made me laugh HARD I have both the Suhr and the Charvel GG models. Bought my Suhr used and the Charvel new. Love the feel of the Charvel. Hate the smell of it. The body doesn’t feel small like they say it is. Mine did come well set up though and it’s still in tune 2 months later and I love its tone. Had no idea the pickups weren’t height adjustable until reading your review. I can definitely see how that would suck if the Guitar doesn’t come just the way you like it (like it did in my case). I don’t really have much of an opinion on the tremel-no. They’re installed in both but not utilized much. On my Suhr It’s locked and it does work as a fixed bridge but, I must admit that was by mistake  I’ve looked at the model in advertisements and videos for the past few years and thought it looked cool. Actually got to play my 1st one in Japan last spring. Played 3 more back here and then decided it was time for me to get one as I loved its tones (the pickups rock for me). Really was close to getting the ash body version that sounded phenomenal but, just couldn’t do it. My eyes couldn’t get over thinking it looked ugly in conjunction with the pickup’s colors. So got a maple/basswood one. I have lots of Floyd guitars and never did the keep the strings on, loosen at the tuners and pull bridge of the post to setup trick except for one time—when I turned the block around on an ESP because a spring kept popping out. So that is a complete no issue for me. I’m very used to doing it the “hard” way for 20 years now. Anyways, I hope you get a ton more guitars so I can read more of your reviews


----------



## Vyn (Mar 4, 2018)

Fuck. I need to replace the monitor at work now as it's covered in this morning's coffee  Excellent review!


----------



## cip 123 (Mar 4, 2018)

I read this in Andrew Lloyd Webber's voice. Please do more reviews/NGDs.


----------



## JoeyBTL (Mar 4, 2018)

I had some of these same issues on my Charvel GG. I actually had 2 of them because the first had quite a lot of dead spots in the higher register and the second was much better but still lacking there. Both guitars also had nut issues which were solved by a slight filling and refilling. In addition to that they both had some slight finish flaws. It didn't have the pickup height issue but all of that is more an unacceptable for an instrument of that price and IMO certainly one bearing Guthrie Govan's name. I wouldn't expect an immaculate guitar coming from WMI, but is it too much to ask that a lower production, US made, $3k guitar be perfect from the start?


----------



## Overtone (Mar 6, 2018)

And here I was thinking that the only issue with this guitar was it having 24 frets instead of 22. For the money I'd rather mod the living fuck out of three mexi-strats.


----------



## narad (Mar 6, 2018)

Andrew Lloyd Webber said:


> I said that, being a Shawn Lane fan, I could say with certainty that Guthrie was playing much better than Shawn had lately.



A joke that's almost as good as marcwormjim's latest posts.


----------

