Curtis P Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 Warlock 1 Warlock 2 - plans which is which?? and is that plan correct? Curtis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truerussian558 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 i beleive that one of the expert members said that the second plan was wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis P Posted June 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 ok Thanks But, which one looks cooler?? The plans or the real one? both would have the real one finish, minus black binding Curtis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truerussian558 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 i like the one in the photo, but do a different color scheme, and it might be a bad picture but it looks like the binding was done in paint, or sloppily done im not sure if the plans are wrong by shape, bu i think they're wrong by measurments and such Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis P Posted June 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 ohh, i was talking shape and it does look like paint, but i thought it was binding, hmm, my mistake Whats wrong with colour scheme? Curtis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truerussian558 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 well the combination of black and white, and the painted on black make it look like a painting to me, and not a heavy metal rock guitar. maybe try the vice versa, black with white binding Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MKGBass Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 i like the color scheme. The first pick is definatley not a warlock, but very cool. The second one looks like a warlock, but i have no idea bout dimensions. I'd take the first over the second, any day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curtis P Posted June 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 maybe we should get wes the bug crusher mann in here and tell us what the first one it Curtis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Jabsco Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I think thier both ugly and over-done, but kinnda sweet looking. I like practical guitars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MzI Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 the first one is a bc rich beast i think not totally sure they are huge tho i saw one at a guitar show once they look cool tho much better then a regular warlock MzI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 jesus christ man!the pic is a beast,not a warlock! how many times have i posted pics of just that very same guitar? and what kills me is it took 9 posts for someone to identify it the warlock plans are wrong.....they are a japanese version of it which you could use to get the outline of the body but not much else...the headstock is a travesty and o is the "bridge routing" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I think thier both ugly and over-done, but kinnda sweet looking. I like practical guitars. and the beast is an awesome guitar....hangs perfectly and plays comfortably look at the actual "playing parts" of the guitar...the forearm rest and the upper fret access for example...this guitar is more comfortable to play than the ever popular rg or jem will ever be Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAI6 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 the warlock plans are wrong.....they are a japanese version of it which you could use to get the outline of the body but not much else...the headstock is a travesty and o is the "bridge routing" The headstock is an 80's BC Rich, and the bridge routing is for a Kahler... The good ol' days....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 a kahler 60 mm wide and 45 mm front to back?is that correct?(i have never installed a kahler...it just seems small) i have never seen that headstock shape Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGM Guitars Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I think thier both ugly and over-done, but kinnda sweet looking. I like practical guitars. and the beast is an awesome guitar....hangs perfectly and plays comfortably look at the actual "playing parts" of the guitar...the forearm rest and the upper fret access for example...this guitar is more comfortable to play than the ever popular rg or jem will ever be Just goes to show different strokes for different folks, I had a beast for about a month, it wasn't comfortable to me to play standing or sitting (especially sitting) I got rid of it very quickly. I also found upper fret access sucked on it, huge body with lots of sustain though, just way to uncomfortable to play for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren wilson Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 i have never seen that headstock shape I hate sending anyone to Mr. Roman's site, but he does have a lot of useful photographs of a lot of guitars. http://www.edromanguitars.com/guitar/bcric...adstock_bcr.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truerussian558 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 what do people have against ed roman.... edit: ah must be his rants in the "tech articles" section edit again: just read a few only one turned out to be a rant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGM Guitars Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 for me it's got nothing to do with his rants, it has to do with the fact that he will rob you blind, rape you without lube, and tell EVERYONE that his guitars are better than anything out there. THEN, if you're a luthier building nice guitars, he'll try to get you to do work for him for next to nothing. He not only rips off his customers, but he tries to rip off the people that do the work for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truerussian558 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 so what he has s too expensive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 i have never seen that headstock shape I hate sending anyone to Mr. Roman's site, but he does have a lot of useful photographs of a lot of guitars. http://www.edromanguitars.com/guitar/bcric...adstock_bcr.htm ah well then...there you go. i prefer the new headstock shapes I had a beast for about a month, it wasn't comfortable to me to play standing or sitting oh,well i never sit down to play that beast shown is a neckthrough...upper fret access is nice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RAI6 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 a kahler 60 mm wide and 45 mm front to back?is that correct?(i have never installed a kahler...it just seems small) i have never seen that headstock shape I don't know about the Kahler dimensions, but the shape looks right. This is not a "traditional" trem, but rather the one with the "internal" springs, that didn't require a thru-body route. Cannot remember the model. As for the headstock, it used to be one of their standards, but it's only available on a few models now... http://www.bcrich.com/techinfo/specs/headstocks/index.html Party on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 a kahler 60 mm wide and 45 mm front to back?is that correct?(i have never installed a kahler...it just seems small) i have never seen that headstock shape I don't know about the Kahler dimensions, but the shape looks right. This is not a "traditional" trem, but rather the one with the "internal" springs, that didn't require a thru-body route. Cannot remember the model. As for the headstock, it used to be one of their standards, but it's only available on a few models now... http://www.bcrich.com/techinfo/specs/headstocks/index.html Party on! yeah kahler flatmount 2300 pro...i am familiar with the trem...i just thought the rout was bigger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowser Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 see if we can get rhoads in here, he sells them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhoads56 Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 for me it's got nothing to do with his rants, it has to do with the fact that he will rob you blind, rape you without lube, and tell EVERYONE that his guitars are better than anything out there. THEN, if you're a luthier building nice guitars, he'll try to get you to do work for him for next to nothing. He not only rips off his customers, but he tries to rip off the people that do the work for him. Jeremy, i dont think there is any problem with a guy being proud of his work or stock. Thats business. So far, ive not come across a single person that can say THEY THEMSELVES have ever been ripped off by him. However, there are lots of people that know a mate of a mate of a dude that was on a forum once.... And no luthier will ever work for less than they agree to. If they have a problem with his rates, they are quite welcome to take their wares elsewhere, as you and i would do also. The Kahler trem rout looks correct, although i dont have my template handy. I just measured my Jackson (with kahler fitted over the rout), and the sizes seem to be perfect (unconfirmed though). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westhemann Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 The Kahler trem rout looks correct, although i dont have my template handy. I just measured my Jackson (with kahler fitted over the rout), and the sizes seem to be perfect (unconfirmed though). well good then...that makes it quite the useful drawing i wish it was a different headstock though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.