Gear Discussion Forums > Other Bass Brands
New Guild Starfire with Split P
Pilgrim:
--- Quote from: Basvarken on January 18, 2021, 04:42:06 AM ---I like it!
The chrome casing round the split pickup works great for this bass.
The Tune-o-matic bass bridge looks a bit cheap(ish), but it wouldn't be a deal breaker for me (provided that it's placed correctly)
--- End quote ---
This is my response as well. I have no problem with a single pickup variation on this very attractive bass, and the chrome accent appeals to me.
The bridge puts me in mind of the Gretsch basses, and I'm a fan of them - So I would expect it to work very well.
Granny Gremlin:
--- Quote from: Alanko on January 18, 2021, 03:57:35 AM ---I'm wondering if Guild are trying to break into the corner of the market the Jack Casady basses occupy? Double cutaway hollow-type bass with single pickup in the 'sweet spot'?
The regrettable thing is that they could have used a standard P pickup, which would make these a potentially versatile modding platform. A Dimarzio Model P is going to sound nothing like a Bartolini in the same position on that bass, which would draw a wider audience to this model. As it stands you're hamstrung with those proprietary pickups unless you can get Curtis Novak to wind a drop-in replacement. The harp tailpiece and separate bridge remind me of those Hagstrom Viking basses, and the binding on the neck isn't true to the original Starfires either.
--- End quote ---
Is it not standard size - are we sure; I don't see any dimensions/specs for it? I admit that the metal frame makes the pup look really skinny/long, but it probably is standard (it would be sooooo stupid if not, totally agree).
They are obviously not trying to be a true to the original reissue with this (P pup) so the binding doesn't bother me. Its an attempt to bling it up a little. What's a turn off to me is that scarf joined headstock (money badly spent - give me no scarf joint and hold the binding is a better choice IMHO). We've debated those before and though most people aren't bothered, that is literally the worst place to put it in terms of robustness/stability. At least when it's down the neck at the 2nd-4th fret it is stronger. I had to fix one like that on a friend's acoustic.
D.M.N.:
--- Quote from: Granny Gremlin on January 18, 2021, 11:37:00 AM ---Is it not standard size - are we sure; I don't see any dimensions/specs for it? I admit that the metal frame makes the pup look really skinny/long, but it probably is standard (it would be sooooo stupid if not, totally agree).
They are obviously not trying to be a true to the original reissue with this (P pup) so the binding doesn't bother me. Its an attempt to bling it up a little. What's a turn off to me is that scarf joined headstock (money badly spent - give me no scarf joint and hold the binding is a better choice IMHO). We've debated those before and though most people aren't bothered, that is literally the worst place to put it in terms of robustness/stability. At least when it's down the neck at the 2nd-4th fret it is stronger. I had to fix one like that on a friend's acoustic.
--- End quote ---
I was just about to say I don't like the look of that scarf joint on the back. The headstock also appears to be a different shape, the 12th fret markers are also more tightly spaced, you can see another seam at the base of the neck where it joins the body, and also seems like that connection is now flush instead of slightly stair-stepped. Weird to have so many changes in the basic build for what should just equate to a pickup swap. Can't make a comment about them being good or bad either way, but seems odd.
Dave W:
BTL:
I really like it.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version