Why aren't Ken Parker's innovations being used today?

[DanMumm]

I'm new to the forum here. This is a question that has been burning in the back of my mind for years now.

I think most of you will agree with me when I say that Ken Parker's innovations are the most significant for the electric guitar since the electric guitar was first invented.

I've played on a Parker Fly Classic for over 20 years. I usually only have to tune it when I replace the strings. I've taken the guitar on cross country flights and back again, never having to tune it. After first getting the guitar, I set the action and the bridge tension and have never touched them again. I've never had to make a single truss rod adjustment in over 20 years.

The action, the feel of the neck, the weight, the balance... no other guitar I've ever played comes even close and I've looked high and low. I've had custom guitars built exactly to my desired specs and as amazing of guitars as they are, they don't come close to matching the Parker fly in these areas.

I've done research here and elsewhere trying to answer this question and it seems that the answer is not because the fabrication and manufacturing techniques are secret or too expensive or difficult. In fact, the general concept seems easily replicable when you have the tools and knowledge of how to do it.

As far as I'm concerned, every professional electric guitar manufactured after the patents expired should be using and building on these innovations.

Am I missing something?

I'm starting to do some experiments myself with composites and I want to try to create my own guitar using some of the magic of the Parker. I'd love to see examples of others who have done the same and hear about how it turned out.

[mmmguitar]

Long time no see, Dan! Anyone who doesn’t know you should - You’ve always epitomized the need that musicians who play at a high level have for high-performance instruments capable of facilitating whatever needs to be achieved.

My curmudgeonly answer is: Building a Fly-like guitar is a tall order which the industry associates with failure. Most would rather build a “guitar” than a Fly, for the same reason modern Fender factories borrow their production ideas from the 1980s Toyota model and not Delorean’s. It doesn’t help that one of Ken’s best known quotes about his own guitars is [paraphrasing], “If there was a way to make the thing profitable, we would have figured that out.” It’s telling that a mad scientist who eats cantaloupe every day is one of the only people willing to keep the innovations alive, via this site and its mission.

I’d love to see guitar culture show more signs of catching up with Ken’s ideas - But I’m not holding my breath. In some ways, it’s still the same guitar world as twenty years ago; when the closest thing to mainstream appeal these fantastic instruments had was the one guy in everyone’s music scene who showed up one day with some weird Jetsons boomerang guitar acting like he’d finally bought his way out of being a boring player. Except now he also posts Facebook selfies with the dusty thing and gushes about how he’d always wanted one when he was younger, but never had the money. And he hates to part with it - but he’s got two Batman-themed Aristides builds to pay for.

Of those who recognize the brilliance of these instruments on a nuts-and-bolts level, too few of them seem to be in a position to incorporate those innovations to an extent comparable to what Ken managed to make happen through decades of teaching himself how to be a one-man factory. Everyone else is seemingly still afraid to move more than one foot out of the 1950s. As frustrating as it can be to wait for everyone else to come around to what we already recognize as exceptional, I just try to be glad that the Flys I managed to obtain remain to be played while I watch for anything else to appear on the horizon.

[vjmanzo]

It’s telling that a mad scientist who eats cantaloupe every day is one of the only people willing to keep the innovations alive, via this site and its mission.

I think that’s a reference to me, so I’d better chime in!

I think mmmguitar is right on (as usual!), @DanMumm—Ken still is very much focused on advancing the field of instrument-making, but the market seems to prefer tradition, which perhaps makes discourages builders from being exploratory and research-focused.

Ken spends a great deal of time developing and iterating prototypes in a way that is really thoughtful and purposeful. I recently saw another YouTube video where the Fly was referred to as a “carbon fiber guitar”, which is actually untrue: the Fly is a wooden guitar that uses carbon fiber and other composite materials intentionally to compensate for the shortcomings of that particular design—I wonder if Ken’s engineering subtlety is lost on most guitarists who may prefer a traditional design or a guitar made entirely of carbon fiber without much consideration for the reasons why they prefer it.

The general concept seems easily replicable when you have the tools and knowledge of how to do it.

Ken has described the process of making a Fly as “impossible” many times. Building/maintaining the tooling, knowing what to do, and spending the time to ensure that the instrument is built to spec is, perhaps, better-suited for independent instrument-makers more so than large-scale guitar manufacturers. In that video I just linked, Ken shares that Gibson guitars has no specs or standards—they “try to set up every guitar as best as it can be set up”, so then you buy a new Les Paul and it needs a fret job! An independent builder could never get away with that, and Ken ran Parker Guitars with very high standards, so they never needed to get away with that!

@Ken Parker is still putting in the work and coming up with new insights all the time, and for most other builders, I don’t begrudge them for trying to make a living meeting the customers where they are. Many of the #ParkerPrototypes Ken developed through the years took a lot of time, cost a lot of money, and ended up in a box—not every builder can go through that process. For some larger instrument-making companies with greater resources and reach than the typical independent builder, I think it’s a shame that they don’t share Ken’s sensibilities about what constitutes “innovation”, but perhaps they don’t have the aptitude, the capacity, the passion, or the bravery to do so.

Welcome to Fly Clone, Dan!

[jester700]

There ARE still innovations being made, and a few brands make innovation part of their vibe, like Strandberg. There are several makers with multi-scale frets, various reinforcements to counter the peculiarities of wood necks, alternate materials, pickup innovations, and lots of steel frets (even on cheap guitars).

But VJ nailed it; none sell as well as the traditional designs because guitarists are traditionalists as a group. That leaves a small slice of the pie for companies who want to innovate, and so less motivation to start such a company.

[DanMumm]

Thanks everyone! That really answers my question.

Most would rather build a “guitar” than a Fly, for the same reason modern Fender factories borrow their production ideas from the 1980s Toyota model and not Delorean’s.

That is a really good point. I guess in one sense it's inertia and, in another, most guitarists just default to the nostalgia and the time honored classic styles that they grew up seeing. There are those of us who can be easily convinced by the functionality of something and who maybe gravitate to styles that are doing something new but I should realize by now that that puts us in the minority of players.

I guess I'm really asking the age old question about why the best and most original art, music, movies, etc. tend to have a cult following while the most popular works are usually pretty uninteresting, standard or even completely unoriginal.

Ken has described the process of making a Fly as “impossible” many times.

I suppose making such an incredibly precise and quality instrument takes a lot more than having the "recipe" for it. Perhaps my tendency for wishful thinking clouded my thought process a bit haha.

I recently saw another YouTube video where the Fly was referred to as a “carbon fiber guitar”, which is actually untrue: the Fly is a wooden guitar that uses carbon fiber and other composite materials intentionally to compensate for the shortcomings of that particular design—I wonder if Ken’s engineering subtlety is lost on most guitarists who may prefer a traditional design or a guitar made entirely of carbon fiber without much consideration for the reasons why they prefer it.

That's a great point. I've tried to explain that to people with the same misconception more times than I can remember but they tend to lose interest in the subject almost immediately. If a person doesn't have that particular interest or tend towards an engineer's way of thinking, you'll never be able to get their attention long enough for them to fully appreciate something like the Fly. It seems to me that you really have to put the Fly in the hands of a player to get them to understand some degree of what is special about it. Every guitarist that I ever let play my Fly has been blown away by it and almost always says they wanted one. I think it's telling that it was nearly always their first time actually playing one. There seems to be a marketing strategy in there somewhere...

There ARE still innovations being made, and a few brands make innovation part of their vibe, like Strandberg.

That's a great point. I really try to keep an eye on these types of things. I actually had a custom 7 string guitar made earlier this year from a 21 year old luthier from Romania who has some very interesting ideas (Solopsist guitars - which I think is worth keeping an eye on). It's multi-scale with steel frets and a really comfortable and interesting neck unlike anything I've played on before (similar string spacing to the Fly as well). It's a fantastic instrument and up there with the best I've ever played but it kills me that I can't get a guitar like that with all the qualities that put the Fly in a league of its own.

@Ken Parker is still putting in the work and coming up with new insights all the time

Hearing that makes my week!

Long time no see, Dan! Anyone who doesn’t know you should - You’ve always epitomized the need that musicians who play at a high level have for high-performance instruments capable of facilitating whatever needs to be achieved.

Thank you so much! That really means a lot to me, especially hearing that here! It's really true that trying to push the envelope of technique requires an instrument that is not only capable of facilitating higher levels of precision playing but that's also consistent both across the fretboard and across time.

For that style of playing, especially for performance, a guitar that requires regular adjustments or with frets that might wear out or a neck that might start to twist could be disastrous. Who knows when it will happen? When I tried doing a signature guitar with an independent builder it led to so many problems for me that it started to burn me out on playing. After playing the Parker exclusively for so long, I reached a point where I thought I was just losing my ability to play because I didn't realize how much the custom guitar was changing and wearing out. I'd set the Parker aside to play the custom because I needed to get used to playing on a regular guitar again and it took me too long to realize that it wasn't me that was losing my touch, it was the guitar. And while that may sound like a lame excuse haha, as I'm sure you know, to get clean articulation in certain techniques at certain speeds, the guitar does have to be set up in a particular way and this custom had reached a point where it was no longer possible (and, in this case, would unfortunately require a new neck to get it back to that setup). Picking up the Fly again and suddenly I was back in business. I did only one live performance with that custom and it was the worst I'd ever played live, putting me off live performance for several years. That performance was pure stress and zero fun. Thankfully, in the last few years I've done some live jams with the Fly and it reminded me of how much I need to be out there.

Now I've got a few great guitars that I feel confident in for performance in that style (including that Solopsist custom and a Gary Kramer Turbulence) but even those guitars would be that much better if they'd been constructed using the Parker innovations.

I've never actually built a guitar before, but one of my main side hobby's for the last 17 years or so has been designing and building RC airplanes from scratch (usually out of some combination of foam, balsa, basswood and prefabricated carbon fiber). Of course, it's all about weight, CG and rigidity and every plane I ever came up with was always trying something new to achieve better results in those areas. So I got to thinking about how I might build a guitar using a similar approach and taking major inspirations from the Fly. I've just done a foam mock-up at 70% percent scale to test the construction idea and it seems like it could work. I've only been sketching out the steps and trying to work everything out but I hope to get the woods and other materials this week and start building one in the next week or so. I'd love to share that process with you guys when I start working on it to see what you think or if you have any suggestions. If I can take any lesson from building the planes, my first attempt at the guitar will be both a disaster and a great learning experience haha.

[mmmguitar]

I'd love to share that process with you guys when I start working on it to see what you think or if you have any suggestions. If I can take any lesson from building the planes, my first attempt at the guitar will be both a disaster and a great learning experience haha.

I look forward to seeing such a project and anything else you’re willing to share, Dan. Though I’m nowhere near your level of proficiency on the instrument, I sympathize with the pitfall sentiments of your guitar search a great deal.

[vjmanzo]

Every guitarist that I ever let play my Fly has been blown away by it and almost always says they wanted one.

Yes, that’s been my experience as well! One thing that I think may be a strike against the Fly, however, is that even though they’re in many ways easier to play than most guitars, they also facilitate a larger dynamic range than your average Telecaster or Les Paul, and I think, respectfully, that feature may be unflattering for most players’ technique/abilities; I do hear myself sounding a little bit like a snob right now, but it’s true that a Tele/Strat/LP/SG, for example, does a certain kind of dynamic range compression that translates well for most non-Mumm-ish repertoire, ya know? But, with a Fly, the responsiveness of the instrument can be more revealing and therefore less “forgiving” than a typical electric guitar.

And then there’s dialing in a good sound on a Fly, which—all those blending options seems desirable to my friends at first when I hand them my Fly through my rig—but, practically, it’s the same problem: I don’t think people know what to do with all of that firepower! I mean, a Tele through an AC-30 just kinda works for a lot of music.

I got to thinking about how I might build a guitar using a similar approach and taking major inspirations from the Fly.

Hell yeah!! I love this!! Ken’s Archtoppery project does hint at many of the techniques Ken used to make the Fly including composite materials and, lately, tool-making.

+1 for mmmguitar’s comments as I’m sure many of us would love to be a part of your process, so please keep us posted!

[DanMumm]

I'm sorry for the delay. I've been multi-tasking working on this project, a new guitar composition that's kind of pushing me to my limit and a new guitar course haha. It's getting a little ridiculous.

and I think, respectfully, that feature may be unflattering for most players’ technique/abilities

Oh no! You're absolutely right. That really explains why it's so difficult to find guitars that work well for precision playing. In the grand scheme of things, it's really kind of a micro-niche in itself.

I look forward to seeing such a project and anything else you’re willing to share, Dan.

I really appreciate it! Both of you. I don't know how interesting my weird experimental build will be to you guys, but I hope you'll enjoy seeing it come together at least. Any ideas would be much appreciated!

So this is a totally experimental build and, like I said, I've never actually tried to build a guitar before. I've been trying to work on it slowly to prevent making any fatal mistakes on the first go-around. If this guitar works and it actually sounds good, it will be a good point in favor of the argument that an electric guitar's tone comes largely from the pickups and strings haha. I don't know enough about it to have an opinion one way or the other though.

The whole design is based off of the idea of using methods that I'm already familiar with and eliminating any parts of the carving process that would require me to buy expensive new tools or learn entirely new techniques. So the bulk of the build is made using pre-cut sheets of wood (which proved to be quite a limitation on what materials I could use) a scroll saw, orbital sander, files, hand sanding, drilling, etc.

Essentially, it's going to be a router-less build haha.

The idea was to imagine a 3 dimensional guitar being sliced into layers, like the layers of plywood. Then creating each one of those layers with all cavities and everything built into it. Then compositing it all together and sanding it into the final shape.

Here are some pictures of an extremely rough and incomplete mock-up I made in foam board.

Here's a picture of the top 3 layers (I still have to finish cutting the cavities, the truss channel and fixing the carbon fiber reinforcement channel that I only realized later is in the way of the tuners haha). The layer on the far right has been serving the purpose of a template but will have the neck cut off with an opening made for the fretboard when it gets here and also cut down from the full shape to fit the contours of the final design. The topmost slice is 1/4 inch and the fretboard will be 5/16ths which I think will be perfect but I need to get it in hand before I make any final decision on that.

Following the overall composite theme, I ordered a Richlite fretboard that should be here Monday. The truss rod should be here tomorrow. Also, this will be a 7-string guitar, which is why the neck is so wide. It will be shaped down a bit from how it looks here though once it's all assembled.

And then here's a picture of all the pieces I've made so far, stacked up from the back. The Fly influence should be pretty obvious here I think.

After it's all assembled and sanded into shape, I plan to apply a layer of fiberglass and resin to the back at a 45 degree angle to the string direction as I read Ken Parker discussing as part of how the Fly's exoskeleton was made. Does that sound right?

I won't be using high temperature resin because I don't have access to an oven to do it. So it probably won't be nearly as durable or rigid as on the Fly. But it may prove to be overkill as the composited layers and carbon fiber reinforcement seem like it's going to make the neck too rigid already.

[mmmguitar]

I'm certainly interested. The sandwich construction is similar to Artistides' (theirs includes an injection mold with a substantial rear cavity space) and Ola Strandberg's Varberg body, in which I recall either the production model or a prototype being produced with three wood layers CNC'd with the cavities routed out prior to gluing them into a stacked final body shape.

[DanMumm]

I'm certainly interested. The sandwich construction is similar to Artistides' (theirs includes an injection mold with a substantial rear cavity space) and Ola Strandberg's Varberg body, in which I recall either the production model or a prototype being produced with three wood layers CNC'd with the cavities routed out prior to gluing them into a stacked final body shape.

Oh wow, that's awesome! I just looked them up and that gives me some added confidence that it will really work. The Aristedes method appears to be many times more sophisticated but it's really cool that they're using single piece layers for both the neck and body. I'd really like to try out an Aristedes guitar now.

Anyway, if this ends up being successful enough for me to do a second one, I think I'll look into trying some different materials for the sandwich and maybe borrow some ideas from Aristedes if it's possible for me to do. I realized that if I can find a local workshop with an industrial planer, I could use whatever type of wood I want. But it might also be interesting to try some other materials as well. It looks like injection molding is actually available as a service somewhat locally, so I'll certainly be imagining the possibilities with that.

To put it in perspective, right now the main parts of the "sandwich" will be made up of Oak plywood, Pine and hardboard. The hardboard was a last resort because I needed something in 1/8th of an inch and it was the only thing I could find on short notice with the other dimensions I needed. It will work pretty well as part of the overall composite, but it's going to add unnecessary weight to it. I would have much preferred basswood but I didn't want to glue together a bunch of different pieces, though I found a place I could order larger sheets if I was a little bit more patient heh heh.

Hell yeah!! I love this!! Ken’s Archtoppery project does hint at many of the techniques Ken used to make the Fly including composite materials and, lately, tool-making.

I checked out the site and that is mindblowing! I would absolutely love to try one of those guitars! I'm definitely going to check out the videos when I have some extra time.

[jb63]

I love this thread and all the implications, but I have to also point out that the history of Rock & Roll is that most guitars are cheap and the admission price of getting a band together was more sweat than $. This will likely remain the purpose of the guitar until the collapse is upon us, so what? 20 more years and then its just drum machines poached from the rubble?

Pete Townshend has some pretty solid rants about this.

[vjmanzo]

Pete Townshend has some pretty solid rants about this.

Who?

[DanMumm]

I love this thread and all the implications, but I have to also point out that the history of Rock & Roll is that most guitars are cheap and the admission price of getting a band together was more sweat than $. This will likely remain the purpose of the guitar until the collapse is upon us, so what? 20 more years and then its just drum machines poached from the rubble?

That's a solid point and it's definitely true that the bulk of investment will go to the "safest bets" and the highest profit margins (especially in the current standard business model of sacrificing the future for the present). It's a tough sell to get a manufacturer to step into the niche of producing something cutting edge or making something for the sake of making things better instead of focusing purely on actual and immediate profit.

It seems to me that with all the modern manufacturing tools, materials and automation, a strategy that could kill all those poor birds with one stone would be to solve the problem of creating a cutting edge guitar that could be manufactured easily and cheaply and then find a way to resist the temptation of charging 100x the cost to build it.

But as you pointed out about the rubble, either the DIY guys called it and that will be our only option or (if enough time passes before the collapse) we'll just need to dig up a molecular synthesizing 3d printer, toss the rubble into it and get our guitars that way heh heh.

[vjmanzo]

It seems to me that with all the modern manufacturing tools, materials and automation, a strategy that could kill all those poor birds with one stone would be to solve the problem of creating a cutting edge guitar that could be manufactured easily and cheaply and then find a way to resist the temptation of charging 100x the cost to build it.

I had this thought as well. I was misunderstanding that even with modern manufacturing tools, materials and automation, making an instrument is still a lot of hand-work. They had CNCs at Parker Guitars along with the latest and greatest technology—Ken designed a few tools that were closer to aerospace tech than anything else: the workflow of diamond-cutting the frets on the fretboard, for example, was such a huge time-saver, and still the time-sink was always that even with automatic processes, you need a person (or a “Geppetto” as Ken would say!) to shepherd each guitar through the process ensuring that things are correct.

In my mind, I made the mistake of thinking that cutting the wood in the shape of a Fly was the tough part when it’s actually one of the simpler/straightforward parts once the CAD/CAM files are in place—but that's not where the time-sink occurs. The trick to manufacturing a Fly easily would be to change all of the features that Ken implemented that made it “impossible” like the super-hard stainless steel frets (way harder than other ss frets, btw), the composite fretboard, the other composite materials, the vibrato bridge (which is routed and installed at a 2.75 degree angle—ever notice that?!) or to float that vibrato bridge on a unique balanced spring, and so on.

Essentially, you’d need a “Fly Lite” model that removed many of the “impossible-ness” features—that would make it easy to make, but maybe not as desirable to own or play as an OG Fly.

So this is a totally experimental build...

Love it, Dan! Congrats and thanks for sharing this!

[jester700]

Essentially, you’d need a “Fly Lite” model that removed many of the “impossible-ness” features—that would make it easy to make, but maybe not as desirable to own or play as an OG Fly.

This is basically the USA-made bolt-on MaxxFly guitars - DF524, 624, 724. They're my favorite guitars of all time, even though they leave out some of Ken's tech. I really don't get why they weren't a success, but then - I don't get why Teles and Les Pauls ARE!

[vjmanzo]

This is basically the USA-made bolt-on MaxxFly guitars - DF524, 624, 724.

Ya know, I hadn’t look at them that way, but I think you’re right on, @jester700 Thanks for that.

I’m not familiar with those models, so I think I need to educate myself (V.J. said to himself sneakily in order to justify his compulsive guitar-buying/trying).

[jester700]

This is basically the USA-made bolt-on MaxxFly guitars - DF524, 624, 724.

I’m not familiar with those models, so I think I need to educate myself (V.J. said to himself sneakily in order to justify his compulsive guitar-buying/trying).

Like all else Parker, they're getting hard to find. I have one of each, and "til death do we part"

Not quite as smooth as the carbon wrapped one piece models, but I love the wood neck feel.

[mmmguitar]

I always wanted to try the non-flagship models, but my preference for 24 frets has long kept my admiration for other Parker SKUs at a distance safer for my wallet. I've been the same way with Godin, ever since they abandoned the Exit 24 and Redline models.

[DanMumm]

I can't believe another 5 days or so has passed since I posted last. But I got tons of work done on it.

I had this thought as well. I was misunderstanding that even with modern manufacturing tools, materials and automation, making an instrument is still a lot of hand-work. They had CNCs at Parker Guitars along with the latest and greatest technology—Ken designed a few tools that were closer to aerospace tech than anything else: the workflow of diamond-cutting the frets on the fretboard, for example, was such a huge time-saver, and still the time-sink was always that even with automatic processes, you need a person (or a “Geppetto” as Ken would say!) to shepherd each guitar through the process ensuring that things are correct.

Yeah this makes a lot of sense and it's something that I've been learning firsthand working on this build. I could see myself doing more and more of these builds for my own purposes or enjoyment, but I can't imagine doing this as a full time job. If I did, even after refining the process, these things would necessarily become pretty expensive - regardless of whether they turn out any good or not haha. I mean, the time investment alone is pretty brutal and then you have the cost of materials, hardware and electronics to consider. This whole experience is really opening up my eyes.

So, I had intended to make this a "routerless build" as kind of a fun parameter to have to work within but, after receiving the actual truss rod, I discovered my measurements for the layers of wood was off and I had to go and get a router and learn how to do it. I didn't want to have to buy all the tools and everything I needed to then make a jig and so forth, so my router jig was a total gambiarra. If I do this again, I'll build a proper jig because that was pretty lousy.

Okay I think I hit the maximum number of photos. I have a few more to attach that I'll put in the next message.

[DanMumm]

Okay I think I hit the maximum number of photos. I have a few more to attach that I'll put in the next message.

As you'll notice in the image of the truss rod in the previous message, I screwed up the truss channel a bit. It was my first time using a router and, well, my jury-rig jig was not quite up to the challenge. But I was able to add some shims that got it pretty close to perfect by the time I glued on the fretboard.

As of now, the entire thing is glued together and I'll begin really shaping it today. There is a lot of material I need to remove and a lot of it will need to be done by hand. I got a start on the neck last night and I can absolutely see how it will come together.


Okay so here's a few more.

So when I had it all assembled, I discovered some divots in the wood that needed to be filled. Since I live on a mountain and I didn't want to drive all the way back down again to hit a home depot for putty, I created a cement with sawdust I'd been collecting (containing all the materials of the build so far: oak, pine, hardboard, resin, Richlite and carbon fiber) and I mixed it up with wood glue until the consistency was just so. Then I compressed it into the gaps and let it dry. It seems like that will work perfectly and it's totally sandable. That whole section will be covered in fiberglass/resin when it's done, so it shouldn't cause any issues.

Anyway, it should really begin to take shape today. I'm super excited to see how it turns out and I'm amazed at how doable and enjoyable this turned out to be. I'm thinking that this will replace my RC plane hobby haha.

All the hardware is on its way to me along with a wood stain/dye kit. I don't think it will be too much longer before it's actually ready to play. I honestly didn't believe I could produce a playable and functioning guitar on this first go around, but I'm beginning to be pretty confident that it's going to work well. But, we'll see.