Introducing The New Zachary Ikea Model.

[another doug]

Looks like you guys had a fun weekend!

But if I'm going to spend that kind of money on a guitar, then I'm going to be a lot more demanding.

That is the point I was originally trying to make back on page 2, although when I mentioned the price, I assumed that people remembered the flaws/features that were pointed out in the original Zachary thread.

And threads like these help me out a LOT --they ratchet up my own sense of self-criticism, and my own demands for my own build goals. I got into this with a 'good enough' attitude --I'm now hopeful that I'll one day reach 'good'.

That's a big part of what this forum is for me, too. I am only a basement tinkerer, but I have learned a ton from these forums (including threads like this) about what I *should* be capable of, and what I should be trying to avoid.

[kiem]

hahaha, everyone seems to hate zachary guitars, i actualy like them alot

[WezV]

Well, let's put it this way...if you had just dropped $2000 on a guitar with some obvious problems (not merely a dent, but things like that weird raised bridge), would you go crowing about it? Probably not.

Most of the people i know would definately go on about it. Do you really think that every Zachery guitar is a pile of crap, but ALL the owners are so embarred about the money they spent they will never admit it. The world just doesnt work that way. If you produce crap you get a bad reputation.

I do not like every feature on the Zachery guitars, i do see some of them as comprimising some other feature (Such as the headstock compromising some functionality of the tuners), but i really think 7 pages on this subject is a bit much. There is nothing wrong with these guitars that cannot be found on equilvelent priced instruments in your local guitar shop.

I see a Les Paul as a flawed and imperfect design but i also understand how nice they can play and sound - even fully aware of those structural and aesthetic imperfections. There are lots of things the Gibson factory do that i disagree with. But who am i to argue:

1. I am not in there position

2. I am not buying one of there instruments

I dont see the Zachery debate as being that different

[Supernova9]

I see a Les Paul as a flawed and imperfect design but i also understand how nice they can play and sound - even fully aware of those structural and aesthetic imperfections. There are lots of things the Gibson factory do that i disagree with. But who am i to argue:

I'm interested in your thoughts on the design - by the fact you mention structural, I'm assuming you mean more than personal taste in the aesthetics. If you think it'll start unnecessary Gibson flaming, please PM me instead, but I am curious as to what you mean - is this referring to those good ol' neck tenon cross-section shots?

Edited February 26, 2007 by Supernova9

[Gillactus]

I have nothing nice to say about Zachary guitars so I won't say anything at all, but I would like to take a moment to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. Not only did you provide a very entertaining read but I learned quite a bit and figured out many ways to improve my own designs. I'd hardly consider any of this a waste of time.

[rhoads56]

I see a Les Paul as a flawed and imperfect design but i also understand how nice they can play and sound - even fully aware of those structural and aesthetic imperfections. There are lots of things the Gibson factory do that i disagree with. But who am i to argue:

I'm interested in your thoughts on the design - by the fact you mention structural, I'm assuming you mean more than personal taste in the aesthetics. If you think it'll start unnecessary Gibson flaming, please PM me instead, but I am curious as to what you mean - is this referring to those good ol' neck tenon cross-section shots?

• headstock breakage problems
  
• refretting with binding problems
  
• incorrect fret location problems
  
• tunomatic saddle problems
  
• single action truss rod problems
  
• nut slotting problems
  

On paper, you'd never buy a Les Paul.

[RAI6]

I see nothing massively "wrong" with the guitars that this guy makes. There are some finishing issues, but if his clients don't care......

And any potential buyers can browse all his projects and see for themselves. Now, his general "I'm so clever, I'm patting myself on the back" attitude over items that aren't exactly great revelations to anyone familiar with guitars, is pretty scary. That goes beyond hype, or selling yourself. If he discovered something that has never been done before, then it's a different story. However, I haven't seen anything new on his site. Except for that guitar without cavity covers on the back. That was pretty "groundbreaking".....

Now, I do consider it the lowest of low to title your pages (headers) with names like "Parker Guitars" (particularly when there isn't a single Parker guitar on the page!), simply so that people that type in "Parker Guitars" in Google will end up on his site.

But, whatever.........

[thegarehanman]

However, I haven't seen anything new on his site. Except for that guitar without cavity covers on the back. That was pretty "groundbreaking".....

I take it you've never seen a jazz box before...or a good chunk of the guitars made by members here for that matter. Done to death, unfortunately.

Edited February 27, 2007 by thegarehanman

[RAI6]

You take my comment out of context...

Maybe people make the same guitars over, and over again.

But when was the last time someone posted a pic of their Strat project, claiming it's like nothing you've seen before?

I haven't seen him specifically say that, but the over-all attitude and approach has that angle to it.

Good for him.

I'm not losing any sleep over it, and I'm pretty darn sure he isn't either.

[WezV]

I see a Les Paul as a flawed and imperfect design but i also understand how nice they can play and sound - even fully aware of those structural and aesthetic imperfections. There are lots of things the Gibson factory do that i disagree with. But who am i to argue:

I'm interested in your thoughts on the design - by the fact you mention structural, I'm assuming you mean more than personal taste in the aesthetics. If you think it'll start unnecessary Gibson flaming, please PM me instead, but I am curious as to what you mean - is this referring to those good ol' neck tenon cross-section shots?

• headstock breakage problems
  
• refretting with binding problems
  
• incorrect fret location problems
  
• tunomatic saddle problems
  
• single action truss rod problems
  
• nut slotting problems
  

On paper, you'd never buy a Les Paul.

Thats pretty much what I was talking about, thanks perry.

Although we missed out the weight and lack of any comfort considerations.

I am not flaming Gibson, i have played some nice Les Paul's, but they are nice examples of a flawed design. Thats mainly becasue the perfect guitar does not exist and not any fault of Gibson, or Zachery. Most of the things me and Perry listed about Gibson are due to the fact thats what people actually want when they buy a Les Paul. Gibson is fully aware of the issues,and also fully aware if they alter the design less people will buy it.

[rhoads56]

Now, I do consider it the lowest of low to title your pages (headers) with names like "Parker Guitars" (particularly when there isn't a single Parker guitar on the page!), simply so that people that type in "Parker Guitars" in Google will end up on his site.

Absolutely no different to PRS using Ted McCarty and an out of focus single cutaway guitar, to advertise their product, or telling their dealers that unless they sold more US made PRS than US made Gibsons, they'd lose PRS for good, or Gibson using Slash and his 'built by max' guitar in advertising, or almost all guitar companies who use google adwords, etc etc

[Chris H]

I know I'm dragging up an old topic but I came across his latest creation and I thought I'd post some of his comments:

I may disappoint some people in not knowing what woods I use. What the hell does it matter? Its a Z!

For this guitar I forget what the top wood is and I am also unaware what the dark stripes of the neck are. These dark stripes are from hardwood flooring boards that was given to me by a handyman who was installing my kitchen tiles. He also does hardwood flooring and after finding out what I do, mentioned that he had some spare floorboards he could give me. I never did find out what type of wood it is. This is super hard and heavy exotic wood which makes a very stiff and stable neck. This is the type of thing I want to use for a 5 or 6 string bass.

I just realized how much wood I have that I have no idea what it is.

So he wants to sell this guitar for $2700 and he doesn't know what the wood is???

The blowboys who write for guitar magazines would not even know what to do with this instrument. They are used to the same old crap perpetually and have to write about it, trying to make it appealing. Can you imagine that disgusting job? This instrument would make their fraudulent magazines obsolete. No other guitar can exists after a Z, except through insincerity and deception, which the blowboys are so talented at.. They will blow anyone who pays for advertising. Everyone needs to make a living.

Hehehehe...I can see where he's coming from there but it does smack of ego a bit! Sounds like he might have had a few rejection letters

[Racer X]

The guy's an arrogant idiot. He over-compensates by dissing those that don't pay attention to his over-priced crap, and, let's face, that's EXACTLY what it is. Unfortunately, there ARE people who equate price with quality. Oh well, a fool and their money....

[aidlook]

The guy's an arrogant idiot. He over-compensates by dissing those that don't pay attention to his over-priced crap, and, let's face, that's EXACTLY what it is. Unfortunately, there ARE people who equate price with quality. Oh well, a fool and their money....

In this case I actually believe more all the bullshit is just about sales hype. I don't think he actually believes half of the bullshit he spews about his genious inventions, but he doesn't have to. The thing is that some people are gonna like the arrogant ego, and the black and white world view where his guitars are supreme compared to anything. These people are being told exactly what they want to hear and that's why the guy sells the guitars -he's found his own part of the market.

Also I think the guitars are quite nice, and unique in a lot of aspects...but not always in a good way. But anyway, diversity is always good.

Edited November 14, 2007 by aidlook

[thegarehanman]

Looking at that guitar, his work has gotten much cleaner than it was about a year ago, so that's certainly commendable. I'm not crazy about the way he carves the heel of the neck (looks like it goes from a round profile to an almost square one at the joint), but that doesn't mean it's "wrong". I'm still not crazy about the attitude he has, but if it's just marketing and people are buying it, then I respect that he's playing off of certain personalities to sell guitars...that's marketing for ya.

peace,

russ

[Xanthus]

Yeah, you'd think that with the amount that he countersinks the neck screws he could shave a bit of wood off that heel, no?

[thegarehanman]

Well, I was actually referring to the shape of the neck, not the joint at the body. Really, the area directly around the neck bolts is seeing a different type of stress (shear) than the majority of the neck joint (bending), so countersinking the screws doesn't mean that the joint will necessarily become weaker altogether, but then again, that's probably not something that crosses most guitar builder's minds, especially since bolt on neck joints are typically overbuilt anyhow.

peace,

russ

[jmrentis]

Maple and Jatoba neck.

Maple body with Canary top?

Those are my guesses, lol.

Decent rig, ridiculous price. Not fond of the arrogance either. Arrogance usually equates to very little in my book.

[GregP]

The work does look marginally improved. And I've always said I love the "humbucker in a soapbar housing" look.

[Mickguard]

At least this guy actually builds guitars.

And I've never seen anyone in this forum --hell, on the internet in general-- who is willing to post so many high-resolution, highly detailed photos of the guitars they've built.

He's pursuing his own ideas, his own designs. Pushing the envelope. And having a great time getting you guys all wet over his silly rantings.

[westhemann]

I actually like that guitar.It looks well balanced,well built,and comfortable.I also think it is more aesthetically pleasing than his usual fare.

i would pay up to $800 for a guitar like that,probably...If it was more my style...but I do think $2700 is pretty steep.

By the way,hard maple is plenty strong to countersink screws in like that,and the heel looks like you could reach all of the frets easily,so how much more shaved do you want it,Xanthus?Never take away more wood than it takes to reach all frets.

[RGman]

I enjoyed looking at all of zacharies guitars, they don't look half bad and look fairly comfortable to play.

I don't really agree with his marketing strategies, but he obviously gets them sold at the end of the day.

I agree that $2700 is too much, thats more a price that you would pay for a custom guitar rather than a handmade guitar with features of the builders choosing.

[crafty]

That is, without a doubt, a stunningly beautiful guitar. My question is, why?

It seems to be a contradiction of all the vitriolic BS he's been spewing on his website for years. It's a guitar that has no tool marks, no glue lines, and doesn't have that rough, "hand-made" look at all. It is probably worth every bit of $2700 if the attention to detail is as accurate as those pictures describe.

[rhoads56]

At least this guy actually builds guitars.

And I've never seen anyone in this forum --hell, on the internet in general-- who is willing to post so many high-resolution, highly detailed photos of the guitars they've built.

He's pursuing his own ideas, his own designs. Pushing the envelope. And having a great time getting you guys all wet over his silly rantings.

exactly.

[ihocky2]

I actually like the design of that one. As always, I hate the headstock design. And as usual his pricing and attitude are way over the top. But I do like this one. Even if he doesn't know what the woods are, he used nice hardwoods, and it looks better than a lot of his other work. Espcailly the IKEA guitar. And even though I hate his arrogance, he is correct about the writers for the guitar rags. They will push the big names and sing their praises no matter how bad the guitar is. Simply because they get paid well to do it, and if they write a bad review, they will not get anymore toys to play with in the future.