Nothing serious, just random thoughts.
I just always think about how Parker guitars could make a comeback, and how the world at large is missing out not knowing about Parker guitars haha. It's still superior to so many brands out there.
My latest thought is how about if Aristides bought the rights, and instead of carbon wrapping, used their Arium production tech https://aristidesinstruments.com/story/ ... imensions. to produce the next gen of Parker Fly guitars. What do you guys think?
If this happened would you be happy/upset? Does this make logical sense, or does it fly in the face of everything a Parker Fly is?
Could Parker guitars return?
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Good food for thought, @ahmadimran! Glad you posted this; many of us have kicked around this idea, but it’s always nice to discuss!
I’ll share a few quick thoughts: in instrument-making, it turns out the notion of using a composite/different material around wood is hundreds of years old. Part of the novelty of the Fly is this balance/combination of those materials; getting it right is what took time and the right sensibilities, and it’s what’s fundamentally different from guitars made entirely of composite/novel materials or guitars that wrap the entirety of whatever with whatever.
The other major novelty of the Fly is the fretboard and stainless steel frets. Not all stainless is equal, and our frets are harder than anything else out there; this, unfortunately, made making the fretboards/frets very very challenging.
Ken and others have said ad nauseum that making the Fly was “nearly impossible”, so, with no surviving tooling, I can’t imagine any company reviving the brand or actually copying those concepts; Ken and his team struggled to do so and they were never profitable. The Fly is incredible, but making it “like it was” was a Herculean effort.
I’d love to see another Fly-like guitar come out, but, in my mind, “Fly-like” means “was built with Ken-like sensibilities” and that’s much more difficult to pull off! FWIW—Ken’s archtops are very Fly-like, but they are obviously not solidbody electrics.
Have you played an Aristides? I haven’t, but they look interesting!
I’ll share a few quick thoughts: in instrument-making, it turns out the notion of using a composite/different material around wood is hundreds of years old. Part of the novelty of the Fly is this balance/combination of those materials; getting it right is what took time and the right sensibilities, and it’s what’s fundamentally different from guitars made entirely of composite/novel materials or guitars that wrap the entirety of whatever with whatever.
The other major novelty of the Fly is the fretboard and stainless steel frets. Not all stainless is equal, and our frets are harder than anything else out there; this, unfortunately, made making the fretboards/frets very very challenging.
Ken and others have said ad nauseum that making the Fly was “nearly impossible”, so, with no surviving tooling, I can’t imagine any company reviving the brand or actually copying those concepts; Ken and his team struggled to do so and they were never profitable. The Fly is incredible, but making it “like it was” was a Herculean effort.
I’d love to see another Fly-like guitar come out, but, in my mind, “Fly-like” means “was built with Ken-like sensibilities” and that’s much more difficult to pull off! FWIW—Ken’s archtops are very Fly-like, but they are obviously not solidbody electrics.
Have you played an Aristides? I haven’t, but they look interesting!
-
ahmadimran
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:34 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Hey VJ thanks for the reply.
Yes exactly, one would have to think hard about what aspects to carry forward, to balance between carrying the vision forward while also making it economically viable.
The reason I bring up Aristides is purely the fact that they also seem to be forward thinking, quite innovative, trying to achieve lighter weight while maintaining structural rigidity and not compromising on versatility and tone. So while the methods differ, one could argue that at least certain aims align.
I recently learnt about the hardened stainless steel frets used (I never cease to be amazed by Parker Flys), which made me realise why the frets still look so good after so much time. Agree with you here, it is very unlikely to be carried out. Again, perhaps the richlite necks may be the answer, which even Strandberg introduced recently on one of their latest models, the Boden DR Titanium.
I haven't played with an Aristides and I didn't really pay much attention to them until recently with the introduction of their headless models, which is the first time a guitar company has actually got me excited after a long time. Hence, the birth of this post.
Yes exactly, one would have to think hard about what aspects to carry forward, to balance between carrying the vision forward while also making it economically viable.
The reason I bring up Aristides is purely the fact that they also seem to be forward thinking, quite innovative, trying to achieve lighter weight while maintaining structural rigidity and not compromising on versatility and tone. So while the methods differ, one could argue that at least certain aims align.
I recently learnt about the hardened stainless steel frets used (I never cease to be amazed by Parker Flys), which made me realise why the frets still look so good after so much time. Agree with you here, it is very unlikely to be carried out. Again, perhaps the richlite necks may be the answer, which even Strandberg introduced recently on one of their latest models, the Boden DR Titanium.
I haven't played with an Aristides and I didn't really pay much attention to them until recently with the introduction of their headless models, which is the first time a guitar company has actually got me excited after a long time. Hence, the birth of this post.
- Attachments
-
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
I’ve been following Aristides since 2011 or so, when they seemed to be producing only 22 fret guitars with strat trems. At that point, they were the spiritual successor to Switch Guitars’ injection-molded shapes made with whatever the Vibracell poly resin mixture was (I remember people joking that it was sawdust and bubble gum).
My two cents of speculation is that trying to produce a Fly, even on a made-to-order basis, would cause Aristides to go out of business.
Aristides’ resin composite Arium, though porous, is not conducive to featherweight guitar building due to the sandwich reinforcement of fiberglass and wear-resistant composite layers their completed guitars require. You could mold a Fly out of it, but the body would need to largely be hollowed out (as is done on modern Aristides guitars) to get the weight under 6-7lbs, and the thin body shape would result in a neck-heavy instrument requiring counterbalance from heavier body hardware (which is very much the opposite of the Fly approach).
Aristides’ labor-intensive sandwich construction of built-up layers is sufficiently different from using a pizza oven to laminate a millimeter of exoskeletal reinforcement onto poplar and basswood paired according to counterbalance weight tolerances that Aristides would essentially be changing the assembly line of their whole shop just for one SKU - And that’s just in producing a Fly-shaped guitar. Hence, a body shape as heavily carved as the Fly is likely not in the cards for Aristides. However, a Nitefly-inspired SKU would be far more doable.
The H series seems like a worthy attempt to supercede Strandberg’s standing in the market, even if Aristides can’t compete on the featherweight front. I’ve been waiting for an H/06 with trem to pop up on Reverb since 2020, and will likely pick up an 060 Floyd Rose model now that the Vigier I had my eyes on was scooped up by someone else. If I can find either, I’ll bump the thread with an in-depth comparison between the apple and the orange.
My two cents of speculation is that trying to produce a Fly, even on a made-to-order basis, would cause Aristides to go out of business.
Aristides’ resin composite Arium, though porous, is not conducive to featherweight guitar building due to the sandwich reinforcement of fiberglass and wear-resistant composite layers their completed guitars require. You could mold a Fly out of it, but the body would need to largely be hollowed out (as is done on modern Aristides guitars) to get the weight under 6-7lbs, and the thin body shape would result in a neck-heavy instrument requiring counterbalance from heavier body hardware (which is very much the opposite of the Fly approach).
The H series seems like a worthy attempt to supercede Strandberg’s standing in the market, even if Aristides can’t compete on the featherweight front. I’ve been waiting for an H/06 with trem to pop up on Reverb since 2020, and will likely pick up an 060 Floyd Rose model now that the Vigier I had my eyes on was scooped up by someone else. If I can find either, I’ll bump the thread with an in-depth comparison between the apple and the orange.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
I agree with your assessment, Marc:
It sounds good, has incredible sustain, and, overall, I think they did a great job making an instrument and making a new material! If I was to be critical, it falls short, for me, in all of the areas that take a ton of time to get right: balance of the instrument, weight of the instrument, fretwork, setup, etc.; these are all areas where you'd need a talented craftsman to sink a lot of time. The "feel" aspects of it (preference for neck shape, scale length, etc.) aren't as important to me as the "playability" aspects of it. I use the Switch for outdoor gigs where it may rain.
Ken certainly had his hitlist of priorities with the Fly, but the bottom is line is that the Fly was his passion project, and if "the market demand" wasn't a factor, he'd probably still be making them! I'm not sure that other builders would fully embrace Ken's priorities as their own (understandably). I think Marc is right in suggesting that even with the Fly tooling, building a Fly that is truly "like a Fly" would be a tall order.
FWIW--I do own a Switch Vibracell:
Ken certainly had his hitlist of priorities with the Fly, but the bottom is line is that the Fly was his passion project, and if "the market demand" wasn't a factor, he'd probably still be making them! I'm not sure that other builders would fully embrace Ken's priorities as their own (understandably). I think Marc is right in suggesting that even with the Fly tooling, building a Fly that is truly "like a Fly" would be a tall order.
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
I briefly owned one of the Switch strats for the sake of comparing to the partscaster I favored at the time. All I can say for the Switch is that, of the guitars I’ve owned, it was one of them. Though I do now feel like I missed an opportunity to play it in the rain.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
-
ahmadimran
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:34 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Thank you so much Marc. Illuminating and also helped me understand the difference in Aristides’ approach.
Look forward to your review/comparison when you receive your H0 guitar.
Look forward to your review/comparison when you receive your H0 guitar.
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Just rambling, @ahmadrimran - For all we know, Brandon with Aristides could announce a Fly-shaped guitar tomorrow. Thanks for the kind words, all the same.
Another builder who could do something Fly-like is https://detroitsound.co/ - They’re a company that seems to fabricate carbon racing parts as their main business, but also builds guitars to-order. It’s too bad their body and headstock shapes are generic -Something Parker-inspired could get them some sales to the four or five guys in the Facebook groups driving Fly prices above three grand.
Another builder who could do something Fly-like is https://detroitsound.co/ - They’re a company that seems to fabricate carbon racing parts as their main business, but also builds guitars to-order. It’s too bad their body and headstock shapes are generic -Something Parker-inspired could get them some sales to the four or five guys in the Facebook groups driving Fly prices above three grand.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
-
Notes_Norton
- DragonFly Veteran
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
I'd love to see Parker guitars come back, but alas, I don't see that happening (yet).
It seems they were ahead of their time and people just didn't appreciate what great guitars they are. Perhaps if a big name like Gibson, Ibanez, or Fender would make something like that, people would have been more receptive. IMO, too many people don't look past the major brand names.
I have 2 DF guitars and my wife has one. We'll probably use them for the foreseeable future. Even though we gig with them, there seems to be zero fret wear. Plus the balance, weight, fit and tuning stability are just right.
If Parker rose from the ashes like the phoenix, I too would be a happy camper.
Insights and incites by Notes
It seems they were ahead of their time and people just didn't appreciate what great guitars they are. Perhaps if a big name like Gibson, Ibanez, or Fender would make something like that, people would have been more receptive. IMO, too many people don't look past the major brand names.
I have 2 DF guitars and my wife has one. We'll probably use them for the foreseeable future. Even though we gig with them, there seems to be zero fret wear. Plus the balance, weight, fit and tuning stability are just right.
If Parker rose from the ashes like the phoenix, I too would be a happy camper.
Insights and incites by Notes
Bob "Notes" Norton
Norton Music: http://www.nortonmusic.com Band-in-a-Box power user style software
Also The Sophisticats: http://www.s-cats.com
Norton Music: http://www.nortonmusic.com Band-in-a-Box power user style software
Also The Sophisticats: http://www.s-cats.com
-
ahmadimran
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:34 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
I agree @Notes_Norton, and I feel the same way. It’s more wishful thinking on my part, yet I do observe more acceptance of innovative or non-traditional guitars such as Abasi, Aristides, Strandbergs, which also go for premium prices, and I wonder if Parker Flys would be more readily accepted today, compared to the 90s and early 2000s.Notes_Norton wrote: ↑Wed Aug 11, 2021 5:28 pm I'd love to see Parker guitars come back, but alas, I don't see that happening (yet).
If Parker rose from the ashes like the phoenix, I too would be a happy camper.
Insights and incites by Notes
-
jamiecrain
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Mon May 20, 2019 10:32 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Perhaps a controversial view but I think one of the best features of Parker is the bridge. It is perfectly comfortable to play with, the palm never feels any ridges or sharp edges, only perfect roundness. Yet I see brand after brand releasing "innovative" guitars with the same old fixed bridges, saddles springs all exposed as if they have some purpose other than the rare intonation tweak, or threaded grub screws poking straight up digging into your hand once you lower the action a couple of millimetres. I find it plain weird that manufacturers think this is remotely ergonomic or aesthetically pleasing. And to charge what they charge...
Even if the Parker brand never comes back, I'd love to see someone apply the same bridge design principles to other guitars. (But, to be clear, without the flat spring trem. I hated that, just normal springs like the NF
)
Even if the Parker brand never comes back, I'd love to see someone apply the same bridge design principles to other guitars. (But, to be clear, without the flat spring trem. I hated that, just normal springs like the NF
)
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
This!jamiecrain wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:22 am Perhaps a controversial view but I think one of the best features of Parker is the bridge. It is perfectly comfortable to play with, the palm never feels any ridges or sharp edges, only perfect roundness.
One of the reasons I sent back my Strandberg. Nice guitar, but my right hand could not get used to the weird bridge!
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Completely agree!jamiecrain wrote: ↑Thu Aug 26, 2021 4:22 am I think one of the best features of Parker is the bridge.
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Bump. I finally own an Aristides H/06. Here were the initial impressions:
-Weighs in at just under 6 lbs, with denser instrument and hardware materials than my Flys or Strandbergs (though nothing on it feels like aluminum, the tuner barrels and knobs likely are).
-Better upper fret access than either (a consequence of having big hands is that my palm hits the cutaway on my Flys),
-It's similarly resonant to my Flys and Strandbergs; in keeping with my finding that lighter instruments resonate more dramatically. Acoustically, it’s the loudest guitar I've owned.
-Whole instrument feels like no expense was spared (superior to production Strandbergs, in this respect).
-Most expensive electric guitar I’ve owned (a used Fly or neck-thru Strandberg in the $2k range would be a better value).
You can see how the neck “joints” and total lengths of the instruments from the point of the strap button differ between the Fly, H/06, and neck-thru Boden.
-Weighs in at just under 6 lbs, with denser instrument and hardware materials than my Flys or Strandbergs (though nothing on it feels like aluminum, the tuner barrels and knobs likely are).
-Better upper fret access than either (a consequence of having big hands is that my palm hits the cutaway on my Flys),
-It's similarly resonant to my Flys and Strandbergs; in keeping with my finding that lighter instruments resonate more dramatically. Acoustically, it’s the loudest guitar I've owned.
-Whole instrument feels like no expense was spared (superior to production Strandbergs, in this respect).
-Most expensive electric guitar I’ve owned (a used Fly or neck-thru Strandberg in the $2k range would be a better value).
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Very cool! Congrats! Very great to hear your excitement about this!
I’m on my way over to try it out!
I’m on my way over to try it out!
-
Notes_Norton
- DragonFly Veteran
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2019 6:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Congratulations. I'm looking forward to the pictures and a thorough review.
Bob "Notes" Norton
Norton Music: http://www.nortonmusic.com Band-in-a-Box power user style software
Also The Sophisticats: http://www.s-cats.com
Norton Music: http://www.nortonmusic.com Band-in-a-Box power user style software
Also The Sophisticats: http://www.s-cats.com
-
ahmadimran
- Jr. Member
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:34 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Congrats @mmmguitar Like the others, looking forward to seeing photos and further insights into your H0. Hoping to get one myself sometime in the future.
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
Bump. Added photos to the earlier post.
Though I received the H/06 on the 28th, I’ve had no time to set aside for the thing until today (I still need to set it up for 10s and spend time comparing it to my other guitars).
The 25-26.1” fan of the Aristides’ scale lengths will take some getting used to (the 25-25.5” one on the Boden is more a gimmick than a feature - though I do find it comfortable). That and the more metal-voiced Lundgren pickups in the H/06 put the Aristides at a bit of a disadvantage in comparing it to the comfort zone of all my PAF-y guitars. In all fairness, this is an evaluatory guitar to see whether I want to spec a proper one to be built, or just stick with the Strandberg I’m already accustomed to.
Supposedly, this was one of the first H/06s made, and the control cavity is signed by all the Aristides staff. Though I don’t know if any changes to the model’s production have been made in the meantime, I doubt it; due to most specs needing to be locked in prior to the SKU's molds being fabricated.
Update: After several hours futzing and wailing, I have some thoughts:
1. The Hantug trem was a bit of a nightmare to set up. It's a double-locking derivative of the Floyd Rose, and requires strings be cut to a length slightly greater than the distance from the bridge saddle to the headpiece behind the nut (so you'll have enough slack to secure one side at a time). But because the set screws locking each end of the string are merely set screws (and not pressure pads, or blocks), there's insufficient surface area to make contact with the string and secure it in place. This necessitates cranking the set screw down until the gripped portion of the string is effectively deformed and flattened enough to be crushed. Some simple metal washers placed between the set screws and strings would fix these issues entirely. In fact, Ola Strandberg's trem design already does just this, whereas the Floyd Rose solution is square saddle blocks and pressure plates at the nut. I briefly owned a Charvel Guthrie Govan with a similar headscratcher issue (in its case, a Floyd-derivative bridge utilizing locking string blocks at the saddle which were round - again, minimizing the surface area distributing the force necessary to secure the string). I refer to this engineering phenomenon as "reinventing the square wheel" (i.e. "Let's appropriate the basic concepts of an existing product for our competing one, but be sure to utilize none of the original's refinements").
The result of these choices is that, rather than a "set and forget" ease of use, tuning each string up to pitch invariably consisted of frustrating slippage, and tedious trial-and-error. Each bit of slippage required completely slackening the tuner and starting over from step 1: Seat the string end under a set screw, tighten the screw as much as you can stand, pull out the slack and tighten the other set screw, and then resume attempting to tune up until one side slips again. This process was a sigh-filled reminder of how much I appreciate the relative ease of string changes afforded by Gary Kahler, Ned Steinberger, Ken Parker, Patrice Vigier, and Ola Strandberg's trem designs.
The next problem with the trem is courtesy of Aristides cutting a bit of a corner in implementing a spring claw-balanced strat trem derivative: The distance from the trem block to the spring claw is shorter than in most guitars; due to the body of the guitar tapering down in thickness toward the neck-body joint. This was really wild for me to wrap my head around; because it marked the first time in my life I couldn't get a strat-style spring claw with three springs to exert enough tension to counterbalance a set of 10s in standard tuning. I screwed the claw in as far as it would go, and it simply did not exert enough tension on the springs - So I had to put on a fourth spring (which was included with the guitar). For as much of a pain as the Parker "rated spring" system has proven to be in the aftermarket, I again would have preferred something similar, here.
With four springs now balancing the trem and the strings finally staying put, I have to say that (as one would expect) the double-locking design holds tuning better than the single-locking Parker, Vigier, and Strandberg designs on my other guitars; with stability on par with the Floyd Rose, Kahler, and Steinberger designs - All while being inferior in execution and ease of use to every design I just mentioned. I may just be spoiled by great trems when I say that the Aristides Hantug needs to go back to the drawing board.
2. The guitar is extremely easy-playing, in spite of the Aristides neck shape being the least remarkable and comfortable of all my guitars (not uncomfortable - merely "good enough"). I recently sold two "shredder" guitars with necks in the style of the 80s Ibanez Wizard, and the H/06 makes me feel like I just got them back from being plek'd: The factory nut height, slotting, and fretwork are the best I've seen for the super-low action I prefer. I only wish there were rolled fretboard edges, for more of a "played in" feel - but that's just me.
In terms of resonance and character when plugged in, the guitar succeeds in reminding me of one of my Flys (albeit with a thicker body and weirder trem). Yet the total package of the Fly still feels ahead of its time, whereas the Aristides very much represents the "now" of guitar manufacturing having finally arrived at the horizon Switch was shooting for with its Vibracell guitars. I wish I could have played more tonight - But my fingers are sore from turning the headless tuners for the first two hours! Ola Strandberg's design has addressed that issue, as well (you can spare your fingertips by turning the tuning knobs with an allen key).
Now that the hard part's over, I just need to spend more time with the guitar.
Though I received the H/06 on the 28th, I’ve had no time to set aside for the thing until today (I still need to set it up for 10s and spend time comparing it to my other guitars).
The 25-26.1” fan of the Aristides’ scale lengths will take some getting used to (the 25-25.5” one on the Boden is more a gimmick than a feature - though I do find it comfortable). That and the more metal-voiced Lundgren pickups in the H/06 put the Aristides at a bit of a disadvantage in comparing it to the comfort zone of all my PAF-y guitars. In all fairness, this is an evaluatory guitar to see whether I want to spec a proper one to be built, or just stick with the Strandberg I’m already accustomed to.
Supposedly, this was one of the first H/06s made, and the control cavity is signed by all the Aristides staff. Though I don’t know if any changes to the model’s production have been made in the meantime, I doubt it; due to most specs needing to be locked in prior to the SKU's molds being fabricated.
Update: After several hours futzing and wailing, I have some thoughts:
1. The Hantug trem was a bit of a nightmare to set up. It's a double-locking derivative of the Floyd Rose, and requires strings be cut to a length slightly greater than the distance from the bridge saddle to the headpiece behind the nut (so you'll have enough slack to secure one side at a time). But because the set screws locking each end of the string are merely set screws (and not pressure pads, or blocks), there's insufficient surface area to make contact with the string and secure it in place. This necessitates cranking the set screw down until the gripped portion of the string is effectively deformed and flattened enough to be crushed. Some simple metal washers placed between the set screws and strings would fix these issues entirely. In fact, Ola Strandberg's trem design already does just this, whereas the Floyd Rose solution is square saddle blocks and pressure plates at the nut. I briefly owned a Charvel Guthrie Govan with a similar headscratcher issue (in its case, a Floyd-derivative bridge utilizing locking string blocks at the saddle which were round - again, minimizing the surface area distributing the force necessary to secure the string). I refer to this engineering phenomenon as "reinventing the square wheel" (i.e. "Let's appropriate the basic concepts of an existing product for our competing one, but be sure to utilize none of the original's refinements").
The result of these choices is that, rather than a "set and forget" ease of use, tuning each string up to pitch invariably consisted of frustrating slippage, and tedious trial-and-error. Each bit of slippage required completely slackening the tuner and starting over from step 1: Seat the string end under a set screw, tighten the screw as much as you can stand, pull out the slack and tighten the other set screw, and then resume attempting to tune up until one side slips again. This process was a sigh-filled reminder of how much I appreciate the relative ease of string changes afforded by Gary Kahler, Ned Steinberger, Ken Parker, Patrice Vigier, and Ola Strandberg's trem designs.
The next problem with the trem is courtesy of Aristides cutting a bit of a corner in implementing a spring claw-balanced strat trem derivative: The distance from the trem block to the spring claw is shorter than in most guitars; due to the body of the guitar tapering down in thickness toward the neck-body joint. This was really wild for me to wrap my head around; because it marked the first time in my life I couldn't get a strat-style spring claw with three springs to exert enough tension to counterbalance a set of 10s in standard tuning. I screwed the claw in as far as it would go, and it simply did not exert enough tension on the springs - So I had to put on a fourth spring (which was included with the guitar). For as much of a pain as the Parker "rated spring" system has proven to be in the aftermarket, I again would have preferred something similar, here.
With four springs now balancing the trem and the strings finally staying put, I have to say that (as one would expect) the double-locking design holds tuning better than the single-locking Parker, Vigier, and Strandberg designs on my other guitars; with stability on par with the Floyd Rose, Kahler, and Steinberger designs - All while being inferior in execution and ease of use to every design I just mentioned. I may just be spoiled by great trems when I say that the Aristides Hantug needs to go back to the drawing board.
2. The guitar is extremely easy-playing, in spite of the Aristides neck shape being the least remarkable and comfortable of all my guitars (not uncomfortable - merely "good enough"). I recently sold two "shredder" guitars with necks in the style of the 80s Ibanez Wizard, and the H/06 makes me feel like I just got them back from being plek'd: The factory nut height, slotting, and fretwork are the best I've seen for the super-low action I prefer. I only wish there were rolled fretboard edges, for more of a "played in" feel - but that's just me.
In terms of resonance and character when plugged in, the guitar succeeds in reminding me of one of my Flys (albeit with a thicker body and weirder trem). Yet the total package of the Fly still feels ahead of its time, whereas the Aristides very much represents the "now" of guitar manufacturing having finally arrived at the horizon Switch was shooting for with its Vibracell guitars. I wish I could have played more tonight - But my fingers are sore from turning the headless tuners for the first two hours! Ola Strandberg's design has addressed that issue, as well (you can spare your fingertips by turning the tuning knobs with an allen key).
Now that the hard part's over, I just need to spend more time with the guitar.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
-
NailCommunication
- New Member
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2021 10:29 pm
Re: Could Parker guitars return?
@mmmguitar I have a question for you: Have you ever played a Manne Guitar? Since you are giving a comprehensive description of your experiences with your Aristides H/06 guitar, that made me think of Manne Guitars and if you have ever tried any of their guitars, particularly the Taos model. If so then I would greatly appreciate if you would share your perspective and opinion on those guitars, because they are regarded as finely built instruments by most people who have tried them. I have a Manne Taos myself but it is not in working condition.