Guitar of the week #73 - Ibanez DT420 Destroyer
This is a cool Explorer-style guitar you can actually afford.
A little while back I talked about the Schecter E-1 Custom Special Edition, which is an Explorer-style guitar. Very cool axe, but for some a bit too much to spend.
The Ibanez DT420 Destroyer however is lower in price by several hundred dollars, and I strongly suggest that if you want one of these and one is available, buy it now because Ibanez usually keeps this guitar in short supply.
The DT420 features both a bound body and bound neck. Pickups are listed as "Classic Elite Humbuckers". The chrome hardware included is all good stuff from the bridge to the tailpiece to the tuners. There's no cheap crap on this guitar. I'm not saying everything on the Destroyer is top-drawer stuff, but I am saying it's not bargain-bin stuff either.
The best compliment I can give the Destroyer is that it needs no upgrades and is totally a plug-in-and-go type of axe.
Where price point is concerned, it's actually $100 cheaper than a Mexico-made Fender Standard Stratocaster, so it's like I said, if there's one available on the link above, grab it. You won't be disappointed.
Possible future guitar buys
Some possible guitar purchases for 2017 (or possibly this year depending on the generosity of others).
It's been a while since I've entertained the idea of buying a new guitar simply for the reason my second Jazzmaster has been working so well.
Before talking about other guitars, some thoughts on what I have now.
What I've learned by playing a Jazzmaster
The first thing I've learned is that I greatly prefer 2-pickup instead of 3-pickup guitars.
I've owned an Epiphone Les Paul Special I P90, a Schecter C-1 Classic, a Squier Telecaster Thinline, a Squier Affinity Tele and of course the Jazzmaster, all of which are 2-pickup guitars. In other words, I am no stranger to the 2-pickup electric guitar design.
Whenever I pick up a Strat now, as in the traditional 3-single configuration kind, it just doesn't suit me anymore. This isn't to say I don't like Strats because I still do, but they just don't have the magic they used to.
The second thing I've learned is that I really like 2-pickup single-coil electrics. If the guitar has 2 humbuckers, I'm just not interested in it - even if it were a ritzy Gretsch Duo Jet.
The third thing I've learned is that the offset-waist design is just the best thing ever. I really take well to it.
Two models
There are two guitars I'm interested in getting. The Squier Vintage Modified Jaguar and Squier Vintage Modified Mustang. I have played a Squier Jag in person. I have played a Fender Mustang (Japan model) in person but not the Squier version.
I would prefer to get the Mustang for three reasons. It's cheaper, it comes in a color I like that the Jag does not (Vintage White), and I agree with the Mustang controls over the Jag's.
My single biggest complaint about the Jag are the trio of toggle switches on the bottom horn. I'm fully familiar with how to use them but they're just frustrating in operation.
The Mustang has two "phase slider" switches above the pickups that allow for 4 different tones. While true you really can't do on-the-fly pickup switching while playing the Mustang, they are decidedly easier to operate compared to the Jag.
Why am I looking at Jags and Stangs?
Both are short scale electrics. Instead of the 25.5-inch of a Strat or Tele or the 24.75-inch of a Les Paul/SG/Explorer/etc., it's a shorter 24.0-inch.
Playing a short scale is different because the string tension is notably looser, resulting in things sounding different in an interesting way.
I've done the standard scale length thing and I obviously don't want a repeat of something I already own, so the short scale is the next thing to get.
Watches that attract women
I came across not one but three videos specifically on the subject of which watches attract women. All three videos got it wrong.
You can find these videos on YouTube easily just by searching for them; they're not hard to find. But like I said, the advice given is just plain bad.
I'm not claiming to be a master when it comes to what women prefer where men's style choices are concerned, but I know a few things to be true in the "don't" department:
Don't be fat. If you're fat, it doesn't matter whether you're wearing a $10 Casio or a $10,000 Rolex. The first thing a woman will see is the fat. No, your personality won't save you. Lose the weight.
Don't have dirty fingernails. Women notice this a lot. If your nails are grubby, discolored and/or not filed properly, that makes a woman go "Eww!" in a heartbeat. If you have a bunch of dead skin around your nails, yeah, they notice that too. No watch will excuse ugly nails.
Don't dress like a kid. There are a lot of men that dress like they're 20 when they're 35 or older. Don't do that. Dress your age.
Don't dress like a slob. Self-explanatory.
Don't wear ill-fitting clothes. If you wear clothes that are too loose, too tight, too short or too long, you'll look like a clown. Wear clothes that fit.
Basically put, just look presentable. Get in shape, get those damned nails clipped, learn how to use a nail file, wear age-appropriate clean clothes that aren't falling apart and make sure they fit right.
What do women notice when it comes to a watch?
Take the Casio A158WEA. As cheap as that watch is, it does look better compared to what most other men wear for these simple reasons:
- It's shiny but not ridiculously shiny.
- It shows a little bit of gold in the face.
- It's smaller.
- It's not round.
Reason #4 is actually why the watch gets noticed. Wearing something decidedly angular gets noticed more than something round would, because after all, nothing on the human body is completely squared off.
Presuming you're not doing anything in the "don't" list above, all you really need to get attention is a rectangle-shaped analog watch.
The Casio A158WEA I wear is obviously digital and inexpensive. Looks nice enough, but the analog timepieces - even for the ones just as inexpensive as the Casio - look far more expensive.
Here are 6 examples of analog watches with rectangle-shaped cases. They start at under $30 and end at just under $125 at the time I write this.
Starting with the cheapest first, anyone can afford this watch. When you want something that looks rectangular and ritzy but can be had for cheap, this totally works.
With this Casio we've got some two-tone goodness going on with the stainless steel and gold. Very minimalist look.
This one is guaranteed to attract attention for the right reasons. Very square, thick hands and blocky indices - but it carries it well.
Peugeot Vintage Rectangular 14K Gold Plated
The be-all/end-all king of fashion watches when it comes to the rectangle shape is the Cartier Tank. This watch copies that look, and for a lot less than what the Tank sells for.
This dual-time watch just looks cool. Two dials, two crowns. Very simple to understand, but what a cool look it has. And it does it without being pretentious.
Last but certainly not least is this little Citizen model. Don't let its size fool you as it has received many positive reviews. Simple design and well-appointed.
Why do women notice rectangle-shaped watches more?
It's for simple reasons that most men miss.
You'll notice that for every watch model above, each design concentrates on form over function. More attention is given to style, and you'll notice a bit of art deco hints here and there (as in styling cues from the '20s, '30s and '40s).
When you wear a rectangle on your wrist that has a bit of art deco flair to it, yes this does get noticed.
Does the movement matter? No. Does the time accuracy matter? No. What matters is how the timepiece looks, and if the look creates an emotional connection or not.
I'll put it this way. If you're wearing a casual button-down shirt in a muted color (like gray or brown), Dockers pants (again, gray or brown), black shoes, black belt and put a little shiny rectangular thing on your wrist with some art deco niceties to it, then OH YES, the ladies will notice.
You don't need to dress up in a 3-piece suit every time you go out. But if you coordinate your appearance to look like "The Casual Man About Town" and complement that with one of the watches above, yes it totally works and women will notice in a good way.
Am I saying to throw out the watch you wear now?
No, of course not. (It's not like I'm going to stop wearing my Casio because I love that little thing.)
What I am saying is that if you want something specifically to attract the females, put more emphasis on style instead of function and/or brand. If you already have the shirt, pants, belt, socks and shoes in check, put a shiny rectangle on your wrist as the finishing touch.
Which would I pick?
The Peugeot because it looks like a Tank watch, and I do intend to get a Tank-like timepiece in my collection someday. Not the actual Cartier Tank because that's way too expensive, but there are plenty of Tank-like options out there such as the Peugeot above, Seiko SUP880 and several others.
Guitar of the week #72 - Ibanez Artstar Series AM153
This guitar shows how gorgeous bubinga wood can be.
The Ibanez Artstar AM153 is cheaper than a Fender American Stratocaster, and wow does it look nice.
The main selling point of the guitar is that it has bubinga top, back and sides.
This Ibanez is a guaranteed head-turner and one you would be very proud to have sitting on your guitar stand. And fortunately, this guitar is not all looks as it does have premium hardware to back up its appearance.
The knobs are all Sure Grip III style, extra attention has been given to the fret ends for smoothness, all the metal hardware is top drawer stuff, the tuners are super-smooth and the pickups are the "Super 58" model, which you can find in several other semi-hollow body Ibanez model guitars. It's a particular pickup set Ibanez uses that works well in several of their semi-hollow series guitars.
If you've been wanting something in bubinga that is not a super-exotic custom order, this guitar is pretty much the only game in town. Again, remember, the cost of this is less than an American Strat. For a guitar with as much exotic treatment in it, it's a steal for what it's selling for.
Ukulele vs. Mandolin - which should you get?
If you play guitar now and are considering the ukulele or mandolin as your next stringed instrument, one choice is better than the other.
Take the Fender Ukulele '52. It's called a '52 because the thing is supposed to look sorta/kinda like a '52 Telecaster, but eh... not really. I think Fender calls it a '52 as more of a joke than anything. You could buy one and brag that you own a "real" Fender '52 and you technically wouldn't be lying.
I show the Ukulele '52 for a reason which I'll explain in a moment.
Example mandolin: Ibanez M510DVS.
Tip on mandolins: If you decide to get a mandolin and it has a bridge that isn't permanently mounted (meaning it comes loose when you take the strings off), the general rule of thumb is to line it up either at or close to the middle of the f-holes. Why? Intonation. If the bridge is set too far forward or too far back, you'll never get the thing in tune correctly.
If you look at each f-hole, you'll see the middle has a "pointer" of sorts. If you've no idea where to set a bridge when installing new strings on a mandolin, you use those f-hole midpoints as a guide.
Does the bridge need to sit exactly where the f-hole midpoints are? No. It just needs to sit wherever the intonation of the strings sounds best to your ears. Most of the time the correct position will be just slightly behind the f-hole midpoints.
If case you're wondering, yes this also applies to acoustic 6-string guitars with non-permanent mount bridges, violins and pretty much any other stringed instrument that has f-holes on it. When you want to know where to set the bridge, the f-hole midpoints are your guide.
Four things against the mandolin
First, it's usually more expensive than a uke. And that includes the cost it takes to restring one.
Second, it's not all that good as a songwriting instrument.
Third, it's a more difficult instrument to play that requires more finger strength.
Fourth, there's not nearly as much choice with mandolins as there is with ukes.
You can totally buy a mandolin if you want, but don't be surprised if you rarely take it out to actually play the thing. Once the novelty of a mandolin wears off, you may find it difficult if not impossible to use it for songwriting.
One thing (a big thing) in favor of the mandolin
One big advantage the mandolin has over the uke is that it's a far better instrument for live performances. A mandolin is acoustically much louder and from that can be picked up by microphones much easier. You can also do simple street performances with one whereas with a uke that would be difficult just for the fact you really can't hear one.
The entire reason the mandolin is louder is because it's more resonant, uses double the strings of a uke and also uses steel strings.
Which should you get?
If you like the idea of busking (i.e. live street performance), the mandolin is the winner, no question.
If you want something that's better as a songwriting instrument for recording at home, the ukulele is the clear winner.
See a whole bunch of ukes right here.
See a whole bunch of mandolins right here.
I especially recommend the ukulele to guitar players who feel they're in a rut and want something that sparks songwriting creativity for cheap. Ukes are fun little things that remind you why you play guitar to begin with.
Can't decide which to get?
Start with the uke first. It's cheaper, easier to play, easier to string up, lighter in weight and arguably more fun to play than the mandolin is.
And again, there are way more ukulele choices compared to mandolins. From the link above you can easily spend hours going through them all.
If you want the choice made real easy for you, get a Kala brand uke. Nearly every single model gets glowingly positive reviews. There's a reason for that. They're built right.