# Multiscale Schecter?



## Zado (Jun 4, 2014)

Keep calm everyone,there's nothing official or for certain,just some interest shown by the brand,it seems.But sounds good enough to me









If you want to add opinions about this,here's the facebook page.Maybe with enough positive comments....who knows

https://www.facebook.com/schectergu..._id=885401628143316&offset=0&total_comments=2


----------



## Musiscience (Jun 4, 2014)

While I am not a fan of Schecter, a budget, well built multi scale guitar with great hardware would be really awesome. Colour me curious and excited


----------



## Stuck_in_a_dream (Jun 4, 2014)

I wasn't a fan of Schecter either, until I tried and bought my Hellraiser C-7 , and now I am saving for at least 2 of their 2014 offerings. 

As for multiscale, I do believe there should be more demand for a fanned fret 8-string than 9-string standard guitars, which Schecter (and Ibanez) already done. Personally I would find a 26.5-28" or a 25.5-28" 8-string very hard to resist.


----------



## Cam (Jun 4, 2014)

This would be pretty cool. Can't wait to see what happens.


----------



## Zhysick (Jun 4, 2014)

Added a few "likes" and a comment on that facebook page... Really want a Banshee 8... I bought an Agile Pendulum just because there aren't more options apart of +2500&#8364; custom guitars...


----------



## HurrDurr (Jun 4, 2014)

Honestly, a multi-scale instrument doesn't even have to be _'well-built'_ or above $1K. It's not at all difficult to do. You mark for two scales on each side of the fretboard, then slot and fret as usual. Adjust the bridge to accommodate the fan _(which can be done with several single-saddle systems that most OEM's are tooled for, ie. look at Rondo)_ and there you have it. Sure, the upper tier models can have their fanned/slanted pickups, but for a standard .5"~1" fan, it isn't necessary to slant the pickups and in most cases the low end sounds a bit _too harsh_ when not done ideally anyway.

EDIT: No reason why there can't be $800 multi-scale guitars, IMO.


----------



## Zado (Jun 4, 2014)

HurrDurr said:


> EDIT: No reason why there can't be $800 multi-scale guitars, IMO.


I totally agree on that,but except Agile noone is offering them I guess


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jun 4, 2014)

HurrDurr said:


> Honestly, a multi-scale instrument doesn't even have to be _'well-built'_ or above $1K. It's not at all difficult to do. You mark for two scales on each side of the fretboard, then slot and fret as usual. Adjust the bridge to accommodate the fan _(which can be done with several single-saddle systems that most OEM's are tooled for, ie. look at Rondo)_ and there you have it. Sure, the upper tier models can have their fanned/slanted pickups, but for a standard .5"~1" fan, it isn't necessary to slant the pickups and in most cases the low end sounds a bit _too harsh_ when not done ideally anyway.
> 
> EDIT: No reason why there can't be $800 multi-scale guitars, IMO.



Large guitar factories, the places that churn out guitars in the price range, are tooled up a certain way. While they certainly can retool, it's not cheap. While a single builder can work out rather easily how to make fanned fret instruments, on a production scale things simply aren't as easy. 

Here's an example, I'm in manufacturing and not too long ago we had to change the diameter of one end of one of our products by roughly 2mm. Now, if it was just a couple guys who needed to start making things 2mm smaller, it wouldn't have been a big deal, but because we churn out thousands of them a minute on specialized equipment we had to do some reworking, re-training, and tons of testing. That cost my company millions of dollars. The benefit in the long run was worth it, but it's not as easy as telling Jim to just slide two scales together and get it done. 

Though, you're also missing out on economy of scale. The fewer of something that sells, the higher the unit cost. If you sell 1000 of guitar "a" you can sell them for $500, but if you're only going to sell 100 of guitar "b" you'll need to adjust the pricing in order to make the production worth it. You know what I'm saying? 

Agile is an anomaly. They do things quite differently and with certain restraints that allows them the ability to make certain niche instruments with very little risk.


----------



## Zinter (Jun 4, 2014)

I would order one instantly...


----------



## notasian (Jun 6, 2014)

HurrDurr said:


> Honestly, a multi-scale instrument doesn't even have to be _'well-built'_ or above $1K. It's not at all difficult to do. You mark for two scales on each side of the fretboard, then slot and fret as usual. Adjust the bridge to accommodate the fan _(which can be done with several single-saddle systems that most OEM's are tooled for, ie. look at Rondo)_ and there you have it. Sure, the upper tier models can have their fanned/slanted pickups, but for a standard .5"~1" fan, it isn't necessary to slant the pickups and in most cases the low end sounds a bit _too harsh_ when not done ideally anyway.
> 
> EDIT: No reason why there can't be $800 multi-scale guitars, IMO.



whats the point of a 1 inch fan??!! wouldnt even be worth the time imo.

i really hope they dont make one because it will make my agile less and less special  next thing you know every 14 year old at gc will have a multiscale. i will have to keep getting crazier with my guitar like multiscale temperate fret headless kahler


----------



## celticelk (Jun 6, 2014)

notasian said:


> whats the point of a 1 inch fan??!! wouldnt even be worth the time imo.



That's more than the difference between Gibson's 24.75" scale and Fender's 25.5", which many guitarists will tell you has a real impact on the tone of the outside strings.


----------



## stevexc (Jun 6, 2014)

Even a 1.5" fan - 27" to 25.5" - wouldn't be too excessive (as in wacky and unconventional) and would probably be desirable enough to drive sales. 26.5" to 25.5" may be fairly popular as well.


----------



## MFB (Jun 6, 2014)

stevexc said:


> Even a 1.5" fan - 27" to 25.5" - wouldn't be too excessive (as in wacky and unconventional) and would probably be desirable enough to drive sales. 26.5" to 25.5" may be fairly popular as well.



Exactly.

If I were to do a fan, it'd be something simple like 25.5-27" or even 24.75 to 26.5", neither of which are super drastic but they've got their merits as to why they'd be useful


----------



## Zhysick (Jun 6, 2014)

I think 25.5-27" or 24.75-26.5" for a 7 string and 26.5" to 28" for or 27-30" for an 8 string would be the perfect way to do it. My Pendulum 82728 is not "long enough" for a drop E1 with less than a .086", maybe with 30"...

Anyway, waiting for a Multiscale Banshee 8!!!


----------



## 7stg (Jun 6, 2014)

This would be awesome. Long multi-scale 7, 8, 9 and 10 string guitars and 7 to 9 string basses and I would be buying. Also, a very short starting scale to hit a high A4, 24 inches is the max and 23.5 offers a bit more flexibility. I would go with 1/3 inch per string for guitars 1/4 inch per string minimum, and Dingwall does 3/4 inch per string for basses and that sounds good.

Guitars
7 string 25.5 - 27.833
8 string 28 - 30.667
9 string 30 - 33
10 string 30-34 this needs to be very long on the low end for a good low G#0 but still be able to support a high E4.

Bass
7 string 34 - 37.75


----------



## celticelk (Jun 6, 2014)

And this is one reason that no one's making multiscales on a large production scale: the potential market is small, and its members can't agree on what they want.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 7, 2014)

As Max said, retooling for a 1 inch fan or 3 inches fan.
So it's not like if they do 1 inch fan they spend less for retooling than if they made 3 inches fan.


----------



## vansinn (Jun 7, 2014)

I fully agree with what Max said on re-tooling. While I've 'only' been into electronics production, the same applies to both this and mechanics: Re- engineering, re-tooling and testing..

It's said further up that a mere 1" fan wouldn''t do much, but I disagree in part, and will as such sat that a 1½" fan makes a whole lot of sense; however, it depends on over how many strings, and how the instrument is tuned with which string gauges and is used.

A 1" fan on a 7-stringer makes much sense.
A 1.5" fan on a 8-stringer makes much sense.
Both fanns are very easy go get used to, and, for players not yet into the benefits of multi-scaling, should be fairly to 'sell' to the market, using the right strategy.

On my Riot 8, I would dearly love even just a 1" fan from 26"-27".
I have the mid-six strings tuned to C#, with additional low G and high F#.
On the low end, this still require a too fat gauge, and for the high F" I need a 0075 - because I need them semi-slinky for bending and vibrato.
A top 26" scale would allow using a 008, which better takes the pain from deep bends, and likewise a thinner gauge on the low at 27" does improve clarity.

The super approach would be a 1½" fan, 25.75"-27.25". This would allow tuning up to G4, and also be just long enough for tuning standard E, with a low F", using a thinner gauge, resulting in a decently improved crispy low end.

On the selling-point side of things, I believe going for 25.5"-27" would appeal to many guitarists, who might not yet be too much into what we are in here on ss.org, as those are more familiar/traditional scales.

As a market-tester for Schecter, they could convert the Riot 8 to my aforementioned suggested 26"-27" fanning, which could be done with minimal re-engineering.
As said above, just this minimal fan will be decently helpful for standard tuning, as well a moderate up-tunings.
The reason for doing it on the Riot is that it's already a design-wise somewhat atypical instrument (not because I happen to have one).

For things like double-drop (EAEA) tunings, the end scale should be at least 28", so 26.5"-28" would be neat.
Real high tunings, like our mythical A4, would require much much shorter top-scale, and until someone engineers strings with a suitable alloy, I believe volume-production manufacturers are better served staying off this path, and focus on bringing the concept and benefits of available multi-scaled instruments for more regular tunings out to the gazing masses


----------



## Zhysick (Jun 7, 2014)

vansinn said:


> Real high tunings, like our mythical A4, would require much much shorter top-scale, and until someone engineers strings with a suitable alloy, I believe volume-production manufacturers are better served staying off this path, and focus on bringing the concept and benefits of available multi-scaled instruments for more regular tunings out to the gazing masses



Yes. I can understand that not too much people will want an 8string guitar to tune higher than E on the first string... there you have Conklins, just pay it. But every brand can see Agile sending their pendulums "82527" and "82728" very good. For sure Schecter will sell A LOT MORE than Agile. I mean... I have a Pendulum 82728. If Schecter had for sell at the moment I bought the Agile a 82527 (for example), even if that's not the multiscale I want, I would bought the Schecter instead of the Agile... mainly because warranty and confidence in the brand. Buying Agile overseas is... risky. I can understand Schecter not selling too much multiscale guitars in the USA on low range models because of Agile but outside USA would be a very very very different thing.


----------



## DaddleCecapitation (Jun 7, 2014)

The problem I see with a production fan-fret Schecter is how they are going to get the components to mass-produce such guitars. If they want to use parts from other brands, then they'll need to decide what scales to use, which fret will be the perpendicular fret and re-tool for these new standards. It'll be a fan-fret consortium.

EDIT: Thinking about it, I'm actually kinda surprised that no one has initiated a fan-fret consortium. I say we band together to patent the idea and then, when it's brought into existence through a partnership of popular brands, sue for lots of money.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jun 7, 2014)

celticelk said:


> And this is one reason that no one's making multiscales on a large production scale: the potential market is small, and its members can't agree on what they want.


 
I don't think most of these mainstream companies are too worried about catering to a niche, at least based on the size itself. It has more to due with seeing any profit from exploring what will take a pretty large investment of both time and energy ($$$$$$). 

I totally agree though, especially on the last part.



DaddleCecapitation said:


> The problem I see with a production fan-fret Schecter is how they are going to get the components to mass-produce such guitars. If they want to use parts from other brands, then they'll need to decide what scales to use, which fret will be the perpendicular fret and re-tool for these new standards. It'll be a fan-fret consortium.


 
The components are already out there. Schecter has no problem outsourcing pickups and hardware, they already do it large scale with EMG and SD as well as Floyd Rose and TonePros. 

They wouldn't really have to switch suppliers for pickups thanks to EMG having 9-string bars now. 

Bridge wise, ABM and Hipshot both have individual string bridges. Though, having a Korean or Chinese OEM make them wouldn't be a stretch. 



> EDIT: Thinking about it, I'm actually kinda surprised that no one has initiated a fan-fret consortium. I say we band together to patent the idea and then, when it's brought into existence through a partnership of popular brands, sue for lots of money.


 
Whatever you say Novax.


----------



## porknchili (Jun 7, 2014)

If Schecter did a multiscale I'd be interested in what pickups they'd use or if they'd slant them or just have them normal. Also, if they did make multiscales, I have a feeling they'd have it like 28"-26.5 or something like that.


----------



## vansinn (Jun 7, 2014)

> EDIT: Thinking about it, I'm actually kinda surprised that no one has initiated a fan-fret consortium. I say we band together to patent the idea and then, when it's brought into existence through a partnership of popular brands, sue for lots of money.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Agreed. While Novax did to a certain fashion sortof reintroduce the concept of multi-scaling (really a very old idea), taking out the patent effectively prevented any widespread use of this technology.

I'd say that it would be a much better idea to Open Source concept and technologies - which can be done not just with software, but also with hardware and ideas and concepts.
The OHL - Open Hardware License - is one such mechanism.


----------



## 7stg (Jun 7, 2014)

Ralph Novax has been the biggest hindrance to the acceptance and use of the multiscale design. With the patent he was awarded in 1989 for a design that has existed for centuries https://www.google.com/patents/US4852450 and then he proceeded to do very little with it but sit on it and collect royalties on a per guitar basis. Thankfully, that patient has expired, and now we can see more manufactures begin to use the multiscale format which will really benefit extended range instruments.


----------



## littledoc (Jun 8, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I don't think most of these mainstream companies are too worried about catering to a niche, at least based on the size itself. It has more to due with seeing any profit from exploring what will take a pretty large investment of both time and energy ($$$$$$).




I agree, with the caveat that it's really difficult if not impossible to get a pulse on the demand for a product until it actually exists. Apple banked on exactly that with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. If large-scale manufacturers make a push for affordable multiscale guitars, they could catch on. 

Or, they could totally bomb... I mean, one thing that multiscales have against them is that the benefit isn't immediately obvious. They look like they'd be harder to play (even if they're generally not), and people aren't just going to look at a multiscale and go, "Oh, I bet the lower strings have a bit more snap to them!" Large-scale production would have to be accompanied by a marketing campaign that made it look cool and educated people at the same time.


----------



## rockskate4x (Jun 8, 2014)

This seems like the most sensible way schechter could go about things, because they already use these scales in current production models, and they would have a subtle fan that increases gradually as you add strings. 

6: 24.75-25.5 0.15" scale increase from string to string
7: 25.5-26.5 0.1667" scale increase from string to string
8: 26.5-28 0.2143" scale increase from string to string

I think the keys to fanned frets making it in normal production is working with existing tooling, and making the fans themselves friendly enough not to intimidate the general population. People need to see them in a guitar center and pick them up and go "oh i get it " when they play, but first they need to have the courage to pick it up.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 8, 2014)

I'm not holding my breath. I think "we are indeed looking into this" is Latin for "we are not looking into this." My guess is Schecter will make a multi scale, but it will happen waaaay after any of us on here are interested. They're going to wait to see a market develop first.


----------



## Stuck_in_a_dream (Jun 8, 2014)

littledoc said:


> I agree, with the caveat that it's really difficult if not impossible to get a pulse on the demand for a product until it actually exists. Apple banked on exactly that with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. If large-scale manufacturers make a push for affordable multiscale guitars, they could catch on.
> 
> Or, they could totally bomb... I mean, one thing that multiscales have against them is that the benefit isn't immediately obvious. They look like they'd be harder to play (even if they're generally not), and people aren't just going to look at a multiscale and go, "Oh, I bet the lower strings have a bit more snap to them!" Large-scale production would have to be accompanied by a marketing campaign that made it look cool and educated people at the same time.



Of course it'll bomb, I don't think anyone is talking about the Schecter multiscale model overtaking the Fender Strat in sales  It'll be a niche product even for ERG guitarists. What I do believe is that a multiscale 8 should be more successful than a standard 9-string, which Schecter has already made.

As far as getting a pulse on the demand, ask Chappers! I think Chapman guitars are a representation of what a lot of guitarists want, and it seems to me that polling your prospective customers for the features they want is the way to go at this day and age.


----------



## Hollowway (Jun 8, 2014)

The other thing is, while I respect Schecter for making ERGs, they need to pay attention to what people want. Like you were saying about the Chapmans. Schecter has a history of releasing a version of their new guitars that no one is asking for, then giving them what they want after a couple of years. They released an 8 string in 26.5, then later increased the scale length. Now they've got a 9 string at too short of a scale length again. And not fanned. Perhaps there are loads of people that want these, and are conspicuously absent from the internet, but I don't think so.


----------



## Chokey Chicken (Jun 8, 2014)

It's not too out there to think they'd at least do a small run. Schecter fairly commonly makes one off guitars, and they're not afraid of getting into untouched markets. (though multiscale is much more difficult than different colors/hardware) I mean, there's an insanely small market for 8 strings. They made a nine string, which has an even smaller market. They're already catering to several different niche markets, what's one more? And there IS a market for affordable multi scale guitars. Right now, you can buy an Agile, or drop lots of cash. 

I don't really have any strong feelings one way or the other if they make one or not, but so long as they don't produce too many at a time, I think it'd be a decent idea to make one. (so long as they make it affordable.)

edit: Not everyone is keen on the tightest strings ever. I find what a lot of people are using is laughably high in gauge. Even just now I googled "strings for D standard/drop C" and it led me to a thread where tons people are recommending things between 50 and 60, when I find that a 48 is perfect. I really aught to try and record a song with stupid high gauge strings to see how it sounds.

edit edit: Then again, I have an 26.5 omen 8 with a 74 in drop E and I'm perfectly content with that too. Perhaps I'm just an oddball.


----------



## vansinn (Jun 8, 2014)

rockskate4x said:


> This seems like the most sensible way schechter could go about things, because they already use these scales in current production models, and they would have a subtle fan that increases gradually as you add strings.
> 
> 6: 24.75-25.5 0.15" scale increase from string to string
> 7: 25.5-26.5 0.1667" scale increase from string to string
> 8: 26.5-28 0.2143" scale increase from string to string



I have to mostly disagree. Only the 26.5"-28" will speak to a certain majority, because it allows down tuning.
I'm pretty sure noone will bother about 24.75"-25.5", as it doesn't work too well with even a standard E tuning, on an eight stringer, that is; will be less useful even on a seven stringer, and most won't bother with a fanned sixer.
The 25.5"-26.5" might speak to some on a seven stringer, but I think not too many.
And none of those will speak to up-tuners.


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Jun 8, 2014)

I don't see Schecter going for the fanned guitars before Ibanez and ESP


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jun 8, 2014)

OmegaSlayer said:


> I don't see Schecter going for the fanned guitars before Ibanez and ESP



Even though Schecter released a 9-string at the same time as Ibanez?

I don't even see ESP releasing a 9-string, even though I love them. Hell, they only recently started making non-signature baritone 8-strings.


----------



## rockskate4x (Jun 9, 2014)

vansinn said:


> I have to mostly disagree. Only the 26.5"-28" will speak to a certain majority, because it allows down tuning.
> I'm pretty sure noone will bother about 24.75"-25.5", as it doesn't work too well with even a standard E tuning, on an eight stringer, that is; will be less useful even on a seven stringer, and most won't bother with a fanned sixer.
> The 25.5"-26.5" might speak to some on a seven stringer, but I think not too many.
> And none of those will speak to up-tuners.



Given that those bass scales are ALREADY the scales they use for 6 7 and 8 string banshees, I wouldn't be too worried about that. The main purpose of a fan in the case of a six is comfort... because most six players don't want a massive baritone, and alot of people prefer 25.5 over 24.75 for tunings like drop C and such. They don't need a baritone for that. This is not to call anyone idiotic for something like that, i'm just trying to express what i think would be most likely to fill demand at present (even if i or others on this forum might want something different)


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 9, 2014)

OmegaSlayer said:


> I don't see Schecter going for the fanned guitars before Ibanez and ESP



Well Ibanez has that fanned bass now...


----------



## MikeH (Jun 9, 2014)

celticelk said:


> And this is one reason that no one's making multiscales on a large production scale: the potential market is small, and its members can't agree on what they want.



Ibanez makes 9 strings. I doubt brands like them are too concerned about making niche instruments.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jun 9, 2014)

MikeH said:


> Ibanez makes 9 strings. I doubt brands like them are too concerned about making niche instruments.



The prices say otherwise. 

The RG8 is $400, the RG9 is $800, while the RG852 is $1300 and the RG90 is about $2800. 

That shows they know that MUCH fewer 9-strings are going to ship. 

They might have more cash to throw around than some smaller brands, but that doesn't mean they don't worry about market risk.


----------



## HaloHat (Jun 10, 2014)

Hollowway said:


> I'm not holding my breath. I think "we are indeed looking into this" is Latin for "we are not looking into this." My guess is Schecter will make a multi scale, but it will happen waaaay after any of us on here are interested. They're going to wait to see a market develop first.



I wouldn't say that about Schecter. I'll bet you a taco that Schecter has Fanned Frets by this coming winter NAMM at the latest [carnitas for me please ha]

I would about Carvin. Perhaps not as long as in the past with Jeff now leading the company. If that is what people want, your time would be best spent telling him on his Facebook page rather than here or the Carvin forum [though here and the Carvin forum will get a message to him ha]


----------



## celticelk (Jun 10, 2014)

HaloHat said:


> I wouldn't say that about Schecter. I'll bet you a taco that Schecter has Fanned Frets by this coming winter NAMM at the latest [carnitas for me please ha]
> 
> I would about Carvin. Perhaps not as long as in the past with Jeff now leading the company. If that is what people want, your time would be best spent telling him on his Facebook page rather than here or the Carvin forum [though here and the Carvin forum will get a message to him ha]



Summer NAMM or Winter? Custom shop or production? I might not be too surprised if there's a CS multiscale from Schecter next Jan, but that's as far as I'd go. And I don't see why you're bringing Carvin into this.


----------



## celticelk (Jun 10, 2014)

MikeH said:


> Ibanez makes 9 strings. I doubt brands like them are too concerned about making niche instruments.



Ibanez also has a 30" 6-string bass out, and 7- and 8-string nylon acoustics coming this summer. If a niche can be profitable, I think they'll be perfectly happy to make niche instruments. "Profitable" is the crucial element there.


----------



## HurrDurr (Jun 10, 2014)

I think it can. I believe multi-scales are the evolution of guitar. They're easier to play, less stress on your forearm, better tension all-around. I know folks in the _'traditional'_ camp tend to wanna stay away from anything that isn't a 12 lb. Les Paul, but this is the age of players not afraid to push past those traditions. This is the age where fanned-frets, ergonomics, and headless designs are becoming _'cool' _amongst the underground and with bands like AAL and others in the limelight sporting instruments that continue to push that envelope, brands are gonna start delivering.

EDIT: BTW, it's totally cool if you're into traditional guitars, I am as well. I just wanna see how far we can go with the guitar in the long run.


----------



## HanSulu (Dec 2, 2014)

I just posted in this thread >>> http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/se...-models-leaks-less-abalone-more-hipshots.html <<<<

and Zado suggested to post here as well so it can be seen properly so here it is.

Original post: 



> Hey guys
> 
> So I don't know if this has been figured out and I'm just behind or maybe I've actually got something significant. Pretty sure this is something worth putting in here though.
> 
> ...


----------



## Zinter (Dec 2, 2014)

YES PLEASE!


----------



## Forkface (Dec 2, 2014)

Im sad that probably they're going to apply it to an 8 string, and I want a fan on a 7 string 
First world (extended-range-guitarist) problem, i know 

Either way, Im glad someone is grabbing the bull by the horns.

What we need now is someone like f*cking synyster gates using a multiscale so they start selling like pancakes, and jumpstart the design and production of different models


----------



## AngstRiddenDreams (Dec 2, 2014)

I would kill for a 6 string FF Schecter so long as it's a Banshee or Tempest.


----------



## ovlott (Dec 2, 2014)

If its a seven and around the $1k mark, and has the same quality as other Schecters these days, then I would for sure look into one! Maybe an 8 too but my band hasn't justified the use of 8's yet. Very curious about this now... 

Have had the FF itch for a while but cant find any to try locally and I'm not a huge fan of Agiles.


----------



## HanSulu (Dec 2, 2014)

ovlott said:


> If its a seven and around the $1k mark, and has the same quality as other Schecters these days, then I would for sure look into one! Maybe an 8 too but my band hasn't justified the use of 8's yet. Very curious about this now...
> 
> Have had the FF itch for a while but cant find any to try locally and I'm not a huge fan of Agiles.




knowing Schecter it will probably be a Hellraiser FF at first then MAYBE a damien (if they follow the same pattern as the 9 string) with possibly more models coming later if it does well (blackjack, banshee, etc)


----------



## 7stg (Dec 3, 2014)

Ultra long multiscale 9 around 30-33 please!


----------



## Roland777 (Dec 3, 2014)

Heading into the FF-market with a production model would be suicide if you're putting too much stock into consumer opinion - zero concensus, highly subjective specs, continuously changing preferences.... I feel bad for the companies honestly.

"I WANT A DOUBLE 9-STRING "29.55-"32.69 FANNED FRET WITH HSS-PICKUP CONFIG AND PUSH-PULL COIL-TAP ON THE VOLUME KNOB AND A KAHLER TREMOLO"


----------



## mnemonic (Dec 3, 2014)

Regarding tooling costs: strandberg is now making their fanned fret Boden in Korea, and since everyone seems to use the same factory over there, they should have some experience in retooling at this point. 

Furthermore, strandberg is a much smaller company and afforded to do this. Hopefully they pave the way for Ibanez/schecter/etc to get involved. By all accounts the Korean strandberg has all but sold out in Japan already. 

I see it playing out like this: Ibanez and/or Schecter have a fanned fret prototype at the next NAMM, and if it gets a positive response, it will move to production. That's what they did with the RG9, and I think a few models before that also.


----------



## schwiz (Dec 3, 2014)

HurrDurr said:


> Honestly, a multi-scale instrument doesn't even have to be _'well-built'_ or above $1K. It's not at all difficult to do. You mark for two scales on each side of the fretboard, then slot and fret as usual. Adjust the bridge to accommodate the fan _(which can be done with several single-saddle systems that most OEM's are tooled for, ie. look at Rondo)_ and there you have it. Sure, the upper tier models can have their fanned/slanted pickups, but for a standard .5"~1" fan, it isn't necessary to slant the pickups and in most cases the low end sounds a bit _too harsh_ when not done ideally anyway.
> 
> EDIT: No reason why there can't be $800 multi-scale guitars, IMO.



I somewhat disagree with this. You can't just build a normal guitar and put a fan on the fretboard and call it good. Multi-scale guitars require the neck to be twisted. Ask any luthier that's built a multi-scale or knows anything about them. The neck isn't straight and true. So yes, it is more difficult to do.

It's companies like Agile that we are all lucky to have around that are taking chances on ERG's and multi-scales.

I really hope Schecter comes out with a production FF guitar. I love both of my Schecters, and they've always supported lefties so I'm excited what they will release in 2015.


----------



## Pikka Bird (Dec 4, 2014)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Large guitar factories, the places that churn out guitars in the price range, are tooled up a certain way. While they certainly can retool, it's not cheap. While a single builder can work out rather easily how to make fanned fret instruments, on a production scale things simply aren't as easy.



This is the whole dealio in a nutshell, and the main reason why very factory can't offer all options. 

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but consider this: If you watch a bunch of factory tours on Youtube you might have seen a certain fret slotting tool which is basically a spinning rod with circular saw blades and spacers in an alternating stack. The fretboard is attached to a sled and they just zoom it right across this spinning contraption, slotting the whole thing in one movement. 

This obviously can't be done with multiscale, so for each fret slot there's gonna be one movement of whichever tool they'd be using (CNC?). Multiply that by the amount of frets and you now have a fretboard that takes _atleast_ 22-24 times as long to slot, and that kinda adds up if you're running a speedy production line. If you've already got a stable thing going then there's no reason for you to gamble by adding that kind of potentially wasted time to your operation.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 4, 2014)

schwiz said:


> Multi-scale guitars require the neck to be twisted. Ask any luthier that's built a multi-scale or knows anything about them. The neck isn't straight and true. So yes, it is more difficult to do.
> 
> .









Multiscale necks are just as straight as single scale necks. There _is_ a company called Torzal that makes twisted necks, but the twist is completely independent of whether the frets are single or multiscale.


----------



## schwiz (Dec 4, 2014)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Multiscale necks are just as straight as single scale necks. There _is_ a company called Torzal that makes twisted necks, but the twist is completely independent of whether the frets are single or multiscale.



Take a look at how this scarf joint is cut and tell me that doesn't resemble a slight "twist".


----------



## Zado (Dec 4, 2014)




----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 4, 2014)

schwiz said:


> Take a look at how this scarf joint is cut and tell me that doesn't resemble a slight "twist".



Doesn't matter. Multiscales don't have twisted necks. Period. If the neck in that picture has a slight twist, it's because it was made poorly, not because it's for a multiscale.


----------



## drmosh (Dec 4, 2014)

schwiz said:


> I somewhat disagree with this. You can't just build a normal guitar and put a fan on the fretboard and call it good. Multi-scale guitars require the neck to be twisted. Ask any luthier that's built a multi-scale or knows anything about them. The neck isn't straight and true. So yes, it is more difficult to do.



er, what?
No it doesn't. It does however require better fretwork as taking into account the curvature of the fretboard and the angle of the frets will result in a little twist of the frets.


----------



## schwiz (Dec 4, 2014)

That picture was directly from pondman's build.
http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/lu...s/260864-multiscale-guitars-harder-build.html

Edit: http://www.luthiertalk.com/forums/guitar-building/203-headstocks-fanned-fret-guitars.html


----------



## sehnomatic (Dec 4, 2014)

schwiz said:


> Take a look at how this scarf joint is cut and tell me that doesn't resemble a slight "twist".



That's a compound headstock.

The primary two ways you make a multiscale headstocks are with an angled nut, square fretboard, and flat headstock angle  or with the headstock at the same angle as the nut. Compound headstock


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 4, 2014)

schwiz said:


> That picture was directly from pondman's build.
> http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/lu...s/260864-multiscale-guitars-harder-build.html
> 
> Edit: Headstocks on fanned fret guitars? - LuthierTalk.com



Still doesn't matter. Like I said, _if_ it has a twisted neck, it's because it's poorly built. More likely, since Pondman seems to be a decent luthier, is that it looks twisted in that pic because of a trick of perspective and/or lighting. I promise you, multiscales do _not_ have twisted necks. I'm honestly surprised this conversation is even taking place. I've never heard anyone else claim they did. Are you basing this all on that one picture?


----------



## stuglue (Dec 5, 2014)

I'dI'dcertainly be interested in a multi scale 7 string. 26.5-24" so I could get up to high A.


----------



## Kittenflower (Dec 9, 2014)

Roland777 said:


> "I WANT A DOUBLE 9-STRING "29.55-"32.69 FANNED FRET WITH HSS-PICKUP CONFIG AND PUSH-PULL COIL-TAP ON THE VOLUME KNOB AND A KAHLER TREMOLO"



I'd like that


----------



## jahosy (Dec 11, 2014)

schwiz said:


> That picture was directly from pondman's build.
> http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/lu...s/260864-multiscale-guitars-harder-build.html
> 
> Edit: Headstocks on fanned fret guitars? - LuthierTalk.com



Think the poster meant a 'twisted headstock' rather than neck. It seems like there's two methods of building 

1) the headstock to follow thru the nut's angle;

2) the regular way, with the fretboard excess beyond the angled nut.

Ormsby's multiscale headstock

Photo16-04-1255615PM.jpg Photo by capoeiraesp | Photobucket

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-dTolyQ4oH...00/1497695_10153582348445618_1172648427_n.jpg

vs. 

Mayones / Conklin regular headstock

http://www.destroyallguitars.com/im...s-2-14/Mayones-Regius-7-V-F-Multiscale-03.jpg

http://www.conklinguitars.com/custo...ring_guitar_walnut_birdseye_maple_1_large.jpg

Pondman did mention that he does a regular scarf joint for his FF neck, and use a sander to create the 'angle' on the face of the headstock to meet the nut. 

On the regular ones, notice how the extended 'fretboard' is filed down to meet the flat headstock? 

Try folding a piece of paper (with the folding edge being the nut) and you'll see the difference. 

IMHO is a much cleaner detail but tedious.


----------



## Forkface (Dec 11, 2014)

lol twisted necks.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Dec 12, 2014)

Twisted necks ARE a thing:







...but it has nothing to do with being multiscale.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Dec 12, 2014)

Someone left their bass out in the sun too long.


----------



## Forkface (Dec 12, 2014)

i stand corrected.


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Jan 7, 2015)

Would be a neat experience to try building a Torzal Neck like that.
Maybe even a Fanned Torzal? 

...and multiscale is not twisted, it's a simple scarf joint (or one-piece) cut at a slightly different angle to allow space between the higher strings (nut is farther from the tuner) so they do not rest against the face of the headstock. The treble side is angled lower than the bass, there is no twist. It's all flat faces and angles. All my multiscales have this built into the design.

Etherial is a great example of why this is necessary for most multiscales (because they didn't integrate this into their "designs").


----------



## Kittenflower (Sep 8, 2016)

Confirmed.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 8, 2016)

For the record, that's a prototype. Schecter tends to do some prototypes that never make it to the shelves. 

I mean, theres a REALLY good chance it'll happen since Ibby and Jackson are getting into the FF market, but I'm just saying don't get your hopes up. And IF it happens, there's a good chance it'll look much better than that, since it's a prototype.


----------



## ericguitar48 (Sep 8, 2016)

Legator 350 series are like 1000-1500


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Sep 8, 2016)

Jackson has one for even cheaper at $849. 

Plus they're a more reliable brand.


----------



## Hollowway (Sep 8, 2016)

Roland777 said:


> Heading into the FF-market with a production model would be suicide if you're putting too much stock into consumer opinion - zero concensus, highly subjective specs, continuously changing preferences.... I feel bad for the companies honestly.
> 
> "I WANT A DOUBLE 9-STRING "29.55-"32.69 FANNED FRET WITH HSS-PICKUP CONFIG AND PUSH-PULL COIL-TAP ON THE VOLUME KNOB AND A KAHLER TREMOLO"



Eh, I don't know about that. There is some pretty good consensus on what people want. 9 strings should have a long low end (27-30") for the way most people will tune. And the pickup selection is pretty much two humbuckers on the fan. Most want the parallel fret such that the fan at the first and 24th fret is the same angle. You just don't see much variation with that. If Carvin and the independent luthiers can all have relatively similar specs, I think we could move forward with that being the accepted consensus. The main reason, as has been pointed out, is that it's really hard to retool for a completely different instrument that won't sell much.


----------



## cip 123 (Sep 11, 2016)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Jackson has one for even cheaper at $849.
> 
> Plus they're a more reliable brand.



Maybe where you are. Every Schecter I've played and owned has been good.

Only played 1 good Jackson, the rest have had terrible fret ends so bad that strings get caught under then and a host of other problems.


----------



## Pablo (Sep 11, 2016)

schwiz said:


> I somewhat disagree with this. You can't just build a normal guitar and put a fan on the fretboard and call it good. Multi-scale guitars require the neck to be twisted. Ask any luthier that's built a multi-scale or knows anything about them. The neck isn't straight and true.


I think you got something decidedly backwards: If the neck isn't straight and true, _something is wrong_!!! Fanned frets _only_ involves changing the scale length from string to string. There is absolutely no twisting of necks, voodoo or black magic involved with fanned frets, it actually IS just a question of building a regular guitar, glueing a fanned fretboard to the neck and placing the bridges accordingly. I think you may be thinking of torsional twist necks, which are, indeed, much more involved to build.

Cheers

Eske


----------

