So, how DID the Majesty work out? Enquiring minds want to know...
My guess is it totally fit the bill, you've sold the Ibby, and are posting on the EBMM site regularly...
Not a Parker
-
Laughinglarry
- Forum Veteran
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 1:09 pm
Re: Not a Parker
Well, had some life things come up, and had to cancel the order for that Enchanted Forest Majesty before it even shipped.
Fast forward a few months, things have settled back down, but no 7 string Parkers have come up for sale.
I was however in need of a pack of strings "right now" one day and stopped at a guitar center while on the road. In their "platinum vault" they had a red 7 string Majesty for a ridiculously high price, so I asked to see it, sat down and spent the next hour giving her what for.
My initial thought was very favorable. Right away the neck felt very comfortable and familiar. The guitar was fairly light weight (not quite Parker light, but better than my Ibby) but more importantly, balanced very well (which my Ibanez does NOT, it's great sitting, but when you stand you have to fight to keep the neck in playing position, basically holding it in place the whole time). Upper fret access might even actually be better than Parkers, though I have no issues with it on my Parker. The fretwork was perfect, well rounded fret ends, fingerboard edge nicely softened (another area where honestly it beat the Parker out. If I could change one thing about my Parker, it would be a slightly softer radius on the edge of the fingerboard). The guitar played very well, snappy and vibrant. Not quite as "alive" as my Parker, but not far off. New strings and a proper setup who knows what would happen?
The trem is a two point floating, with traditional springs and a claw. Totally traditional compared to the Parker trem, but I found their feel and range overall very similar. It flutters and bottoms out, so I'm good! Can't comment on tuning stability, but I abuse the hell out of my trem on the Parker, and basically never have to tune that guitar but maybe three times per set of strings. I did find it to be a rather noisy bridge acoustically, both from the springs, and the bridge cover. How much of that can be mitigated remains to be seen.
The piezo sounded great, and the switching was indeed silent and instantaneous. The electronics in this guitar are proprietary and expensive, which is one of my major gripes about it, hence my not learning my lesson comment earlier in the thread.
Still, I've been on the hunt a long time now, played all sorts of high end guitfiddles, and VJ was right, the closest thing your gonna get available today is an EBMM Majesty. It's not the same as the Parker, but it's definitely not worse, just different. There are some aspects that are VERY Parkeresque, and I could even imagine someone referencing a Fly when they were designing this thing.
I left, and went back a month or so later and played it again, same impressions still held up, the wife liked it, and still no Parkers up for grabs.
So I've added Majesties to my daily reverb and eBay searches, and a Purple Monarchy Majesty 7 popped up on Reverb for an "affordable" price. I didn't hesitate, paid for the damn thing and it should be here Thursday.
Now watch a nice 7 string Parker become available next week... Lol
Fast forward a few months, things have settled back down, but no 7 string Parkers have come up for sale.
I was however in need of a pack of strings "right now" one day and stopped at a guitar center while on the road. In their "platinum vault" they had a red 7 string Majesty for a ridiculously high price, so I asked to see it, sat down and spent the next hour giving her what for.
My initial thought was very favorable. Right away the neck felt very comfortable and familiar. The guitar was fairly light weight (not quite Parker light, but better than my Ibby) but more importantly, balanced very well (which my Ibanez does NOT, it's great sitting, but when you stand you have to fight to keep the neck in playing position, basically holding it in place the whole time). Upper fret access might even actually be better than Parkers, though I have no issues with it on my Parker. The fretwork was perfect, well rounded fret ends, fingerboard edge nicely softened (another area where honestly it beat the Parker out. If I could change one thing about my Parker, it would be a slightly softer radius on the edge of the fingerboard). The guitar played very well, snappy and vibrant. Not quite as "alive" as my Parker, but not far off. New strings and a proper setup who knows what would happen?
The trem is a two point floating, with traditional springs and a claw. Totally traditional compared to the Parker trem, but I found their feel and range overall very similar. It flutters and bottoms out, so I'm good! Can't comment on tuning stability, but I abuse the hell out of my trem on the Parker, and basically never have to tune that guitar but maybe three times per set of strings. I did find it to be a rather noisy bridge acoustically, both from the springs, and the bridge cover. How much of that can be mitigated remains to be seen.
The piezo sounded great, and the switching was indeed silent and instantaneous. The electronics in this guitar are proprietary and expensive, which is one of my major gripes about it, hence my not learning my lesson comment earlier in the thread.
Still, I've been on the hunt a long time now, played all sorts of high end guitfiddles, and VJ was right, the closest thing your gonna get available today is an EBMM Majesty. It's not the same as the Parker, but it's definitely not worse, just different. There are some aspects that are VERY Parkeresque, and I could even imagine someone referencing a Fly when they were designing this thing.
I left, and went back a month or so later and played it again, same impressions still held up, the wife liked it, and still no Parkers up for grabs.
So I've added Majesties to my daily reverb and eBay searches, and a Purple Monarchy Majesty 7 popped up on Reverb for an "affordable" price. I didn't hesitate, paid for the damn thing and it should be here Thursday.
Now watch a nice 7 string Parker become available next week... Lol
Re: Not a Parker
Well, the guitar got here, but UPS did a number on it. Going to need a new trem before I can really put it's through its paces... 
Re: Not a Parker
Oh, man! What a disappointment!! 
I’m very much looking forward to your assessment, and congrats!!! Very cool to see this working out!!
I’m very much looking forward to your assessment, and congrats!!! Very cool to see this working out!!
Re: Not a Parker
Disappointed is an understatement.
The guitar was crushed in transit. The body and neck are fine, but the Majesty is designed to fit in the case with the trem bar installed. This meant when the crushing force was applied to the box and case, it pressed down on the trem arm at 90° to the top, knocking the bearing edge of the trem plate down out of the post groove it is supposed to ride in and onto the shoulders of the post. This damaged both the post and bridge plate, so that it never returns to zero, and you can feel the little flat spot, definitely doesn't flutter ATM. Lol
EBMM will sell me a replacement bridge at a not insignificant cost, providing I send the damaged one in first. So it looks like I'll have at least two more weeks before I can really dig into this guitar. And it looks like my barely affordable price point has now been kicked out the door. Oh well, u only live once, and in the grand scheme of things $500 isn't going to ruin my life or anything, but I'm not exactly over the moon with the whole prospect.
The guitar was crushed in transit. The body and neck are fine, but the Majesty is designed to fit in the case with the trem bar installed. This meant when the crushing force was applied to the box and case, it pressed down on the trem arm at 90° to the top, knocking the bearing edge of the trem plate down out of the post groove it is supposed to ride in and onto the shoulders of the post. This damaged both the post and bridge plate, so that it never returns to zero, and you can feel the little flat spot, definitely doesn't flutter ATM. Lol
EBMM will sell me a replacement bridge at a not insignificant cost, providing I send the damaged one in first. So it looks like I'll have at least two more weeks before I can really dig into this guitar. And it looks like my barely affordable price point has now been kicked out the door. Oh well, u only live once, and in the grand scheme of things $500 isn't going to ruin my life or anything, but I'm not exactly over the moon with the whole prospect.
Re: Not a Parker
Are you saying EBMM typically ships the guitar with the bar in, or that the Reverb seller simply left the bar in during packing just because the case closes over it? In either case, the situation caused by it is ridiculous; and I’m sorry to read of your experience.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory
Re: Not a Parker
File a claim.
If the guitar was damaged I. Transit, they should cough up at least the repair costs. (Assuming the instrument was insured)
If the guitar was damaged I. Transit, they should cough up at least the repair costs. (Assuming the instrument was insured)
Re: Not a Parker
I've gone down this path many times with both UPS and FedEX for guitars they've damaged, and it's always been a slow-moving, frustrating, process. The burden to resolve the matter is mostly on you, and you have to use their terrible "portals" for communicating and uploading images, which, I suspect, are structured to make you give up—but don't give up!
They will almost always begin their defense with "the way it was packed it was insufficient", but there's no denying that something happened during their transit that caused the problem and that's not something that should happen with a professional shipping service. The bottom line that has seemed to work for me is to state and restate: "the instrument was not broken when it was initially placed in your care, so something you did caused it to break." Eventually, someone will (hopefully) see this as reasonable—it's, of course, the truth: GC didn't ship you a broken guitar, you paid for a professional-level shipping service, and there should not be a scenario where normal operation of the transportation equipment (a FedEx/UPS truck, dolly, etc.) causes a package to become damaged.
Rage, rage, my friends!
Re: Not a Parker
Absolutely!
I’ve had 2 guitars and a computer destroyed by shipping services. In all three cases, I was fully reimbursed for the full insurance amount.
It took some time, but I never gave up and was vindicated.
Stay the course.
I’ve had 2 guitars and a computer destroyed by shipping services. In all three cases, I was fully reimbursed for the full insurance amount.
It took some time, but I never gave up and was vindicated.
Stay the course.
Re: Not a Parker
I bought this used from Reverb.mmmguitar wrote: ↑Wed Aug 17, 2022 2:16 pm Are you saying EBMM typically ships the guitar with the bar in, or that the Reverb seller simply left the bar in during packing just because the case closes over it? In either case, the situation caused by it is ridiculous; and I’m sorry to read of your experience.
Music Man designed the case to fit the guitar while the trem arm is installed, and that's how the seller sent it. UPS sat a fat lady on it and the rest is history.
Re: Not a Parker
Ah. Hopefully the seller uses this as a reminder to not ship guitars with the bar in just because they “can.” It’s the same reasoning my grandmother used to rationalize cramming every leftover and scrap of refuse within a square mile of her house down her garbage disposal.
Summary of the Parker Guitars speculator market from 2020 onward: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory