The compact hatchback is the best Florida car
After driving the same vehicle for over 10 years, I'm now finally driving something else that's much better suited for Tampa Bay Florida.
Be gone, truck
Up until very recently I was driving a pickup truck. I won't say what brand it was other than it was a GM vehicle made in the mid-2000s. There was nothing major on the truck that was broken mechanically, but it had over 130K miles and GMs really don't last much beyond that point.
Could I have made my GM truck go all the way to 175K or even 200K miles and beyond? Sure. But the time was right to part ways and get something else, so I did.
What I ended up getting was an early-2010s 5-door compact hatchback from a Japanese brand. It's used and has 70K miles on it, which for Florida is low miles. I've not even owned it a week and like it much better than the pickup. I'll talk more about it in a moment.
The pickup I had was a 4x4 and was bought back when I lived up north specifically to deal with northern winters. Had I known I would be moving to Florida less than a year after purchasing the truck, I never would have bought it, because driving a 4x4 pickup in Tampa Bay Florida is just plain dumb when you don't drive on dirt (and I don't).
By the time I got rid of the truck, I really hated it. Sure, it ran fine, but I was at the point where I wanted to distance myself from trucks as much as I could.
Things I hated about the truck
I hated the fact that on average it could only achieve 17 MPG. It was possible to eke out 21, but only if I drove very slowly and barely touched the gas pedal whenever I took off from a stop.
I hated that the the truck always felt "floaty" when driving, even when it was brand new. New tires didn't help and neither did new shocks. The truck just felt weird by design, almost as if you weren't connected to the road. And there was nothing that could be done about that.
I hated all the useless cargo space. Uncovered unsecured cargo storage in a steel bed to a guitar player such as myself is absolutely worthless. Anything put back there is open to the elements. Unless bungee cords are used, the cargo will slide all over, hit the bed walls hard and bounce harshly even when small bumps are taken at slow speeds. Said another way, you can't put guitars or amps in a pickup without them getting seriously damaged or destroyed.
I hated the hip point. This refers to seat ergonomics. Trucks have higher hip points, which on long trips makes the back ache. No matter how much cushion or support the seat has, if the hip point is high, pain happens after a while. My truck was no different. They weren't the worst seats, ergonomically speaking, but they definitely weren't the best either.
Things that make a small hatchback the best Florida car
My first car back in my teens was a 1984 Honda Civic 1500 S, which was a 2-door with rear glass that opened. Technically not a hatchback, but close enough. Great car. The 5-door (4 doors and rear hatch for the 5th door) I have now is the closest thing to what my first car was, looks-wise and size-wise.
I had forgotten how much I loved small hatchback cars. And for Florida use, it's pretty much perfect.
All the cargo space in the compact is usable. The gas mileage is fantastic, as I went from an average 17 MPG in the truck to an average of 24 with the compact and a highway MPG of 32, which I can get up to 35 easily just by driving with a light foot. The power curve of the compact is better, the handling is better, it launches better, stops better, rides better, the seats are better and heck, even the steering wheel feels better in the hand...
...yeah, pretty much everything is better.
The compact hatchback is also by far the best car to zip around the city with. Whether I'm in Tampa or Brandon or St. Petersburg or Clearwater or wherever I am in Tampa Bay, the compact handles it well.
My driver confidence is also much higher. It's not that I'm afraid to drive (far from it), but as said above, the truck always felt floaty, and that doesn't exactly inspire bring about driving confidence. The compact feels much more planted to the road, and that absolutely does give me more confidence when driving.
Small car stigma?
The car I drive now is 38 inches shorter than the truck I had.
Do I feel embarrassed to drive a small car?
Not in the slightest.
I've owned pickup trucks, SUVs, sport coupes, compact sedans, midsize sedans and compact hatchbacks. My favorite is the compact hatchback. The car feels right and just makes the most sense for Florida living.
I'm also 42 years old and have enough wisdom to know that nobody truly gives a crap about what you drive.
In addition to all the positives I've said about driving a compact hatchback, there is one more. Now I have a car that's totally correct for transporting guitar gear. And that's a big deal to me.
Does that mean I'll finally be able start a band? Maybe. There are a few things I have to do before I start seeking out other people to form a band with. But if I do get one together, of course I will write about it here.
Squier Bullet Strat Hardtail
One wonders why Squier didn't do this sooner?
At the time I write this in June 2017, Squier just released a selection of hardtail Stratocaster guitars, both in SSS and HSS configurations.
The colors I've seen offered are black, two-tone sunburst, arctic white and fiesta red.
Price? Cheap. As in under $200 cheap.
The first question to anyone who likes the hardtail (which by the way means "no whammy bar") is this: Do the strings mount through the body or is it a top loader?
Answer: It's a top loader.
Some guitarists think that top loader guitars are junk. Well, Jaguars and Jazzmasters traditionally all top-load unless it's a modernized model, and they're certainly not junk. Squier's Affinity Telecaster is also a top-load guitar as well, and that guitar is a solid bargain and great to play. And of course, every Les Paul and SG is a top-loader too as far as I'm aware, so that whole "top load sucks" argument is totally invalid.
What makes this hardtail worth getting?
This is the absolute cheapest officially licensed Fender Stratocaster design in hardtail form.
What "licensed" means in this context is headstock shape. You'll notice that when other companies copy the Strat - of which there are many - it's the headstock where the design differs most because according to the law, that place more than anywhere else is what identifies one guitar brand from another.
Anyway, the point is that prior to this hardtail Strat from Squier, you had to go with another brand to get a Stratocaster-ish guitar in the hardtail configuration. Now you don't have to. You can get the Squier and get it for cheap, and that's good.
Is a hardtail Strat better for the player?
Most people never use the Stratocaster tremolo system and either "deck" or "block" it. Decking is when the claw screws in the back are tightened so the tremolo system won't move, and blocking is when a piece of wood is inserted between the tremolo block and the body to prevent the system from moving.
If you're the type that decks or blocks a Strat tremolo system and would just rather skip the whole thing, then you want a hardtail.
It's also 100% true that changing strings on a top-loader is far easier compared to through-body. You never have to deal with the ball end of the string getting stuck in the block during string changes, which is something every Stratocaster owner is aware of.
In addition, there are no springs in the back to ring accidentally, which is jokingly called "Stratocaster reverb". Many Strat players purposely wrap electric tape around the tremolo claw springs just to stop the stupid things from ringing and causing unwanted noises.
So yes, there are advantages to the hardtail, and as said above, now you can get it real cheap. I mean, yeah, you could order up a Robert Cray Stratocaster signature guitar which is also a hardtail, but seriously, just go cheap and get the Squier if you want a Strat without the tremolo system.
Never post guitar tutorial videos
Posting guitar tutorial videos to YouTube is a complete waste of time.
Why? Before I answer that, what I mean by "guitar tutorial" is actually song tutorial where you, the instructor, post a video on how to play a song written by another band or artist on guitar to the YouTube audience.
There are 5 main reasons why posting guitar tutorial videos to YouTube is a stupid idea.
1. The likelihood of your video getting banned is very high
In order to teach a song, you actually have to play it on the video. But uh-oh, if you do that you get flagged for a "content match", and you know what that means. Disabled video, then deleted automatically. Do this enough times, and your channel will be terminated for "repeated violations". This is something that's happened to many, many guitar players that used to post tutorial videos on YouTube.
It is so bad now that even if you just play a riff of a song with no backing track whatsoever, the YouTube system will detect it and ban your video. Yes, really.
2. Unless you sound exactly like the original recording, morons will say you're "doing it wrong"
But let's say you do make your guitar tutorial of a song sound exactly like the original studio recording of the song you're covering/teaching. Guess what? BANNED for "content match". You can't win.
3. Guitar teachers don't become millionaires. Ever.
I've never known any guitar teacher to ever bring in six figures a year, never mind millions. You won't make any real money from guitar teaching. And by real money I mean something you can actually live off of.
4. You're 7 years too late
The majority of guitar tutorial videos that have millions of views are 5 to 7 years old on average. None of the newer videos ever make it up through the ranks and never will.
Are you seriously willing to wait 5 years for a million-view tutorial video that could be flagged by the content matching system at any time? I didn't think so.
5. Guitar tutorial videos do not bring in subscribers
Those that use YouTube to make a living know that a channel lives and dies by its subscribers. Channels that do not continually grow the subscriber count die off quick.
Those channels that have these several-million-view tutorial videos? I've only seen one that has over a million YouTube subscribers. Then there are a few that have 500K to 700K subs. Then after that it dives down hard.
Just from a quick YouTube search, I found channels with tutorial videos with 4M to over 5M views but less than 200K subscribers to show for it. Some have even less than 100K subscribers. That's pathetic.
In other words, high views don't guarantee subscribers. And without subscribers, you go nowhere fast on YouTube.
Is there a way to teach guitar via video without getting banned by YouTube?
Simply put, no there isn't.
But if you're intent on teaching guitar online anyway, there is an alternative to YouTube.
I suggest publishing an eBook and then using video to help sell it instead of teaching just by video alone.
For example, there is Amazon KDP (Kindle Direct Publishing) which anyone can use. You could write and publish a book through that system. When browsing all the guitar tutorial books on Amazon, you'll notice over 2,000 of them are published on Kindle. And with a little extra effort, the KDP system can even make a paperback print version for you.
As for where to publish your videos to tell people about your book, use Facebook and Twitter for that, and purposely keep your videos under 2 minutes in length. Posting small videos is easy for people to digest, and if they like your stuff, yes they will buy your book.
Could you use YouTube to promote your book? Yes, but the likelihood of your video getting banned is so high just from playing a riff that it's not even worth it.
If you watch popular guitar YouTube channels at all, you've probably noticed that when the guitarist play riffs to known songs, he will intentionally change around the riffs and/or keep the sample of the song to under 30 seconds in length. That's because he is very aware of the YouTube content matching system and understands that if the system identifies any sort of audio match with a copyrighted work, that means a banned video, so he doesn't take the risk.
Don't expect to become a millionaire with guitar tutorial videos. If you're okay with that and just want to make a few bucks on the side, that's fine. But don't do it on YouTube. Write a book and promote the book with video on other platforms. It will save you a lot of headaches.
Disastrous experience with a G-SHOCK DW5600E
The experience with this model of G-SHOCK was actually worse than the G9100.
If you're not aware of my experience with the G9100, you can read up on that and find out why I think that watch sucks.
Before I get into why I think the G-SHOCK DW5600, know that one of my favorite watches is the DW9052. That is a fantastic watch. I'm telling you this so you know there are in fact G-SHOCK watches I really like...
...but the DW5600E is definitely not one of them.
Recently, I decided to pull the trigger and bought one. But I didn't even own it a day before returning it because of three very annoying problems.
First is the LCD contrast. Unbelievably bad. The display washes out very easily even with just a slight tilt of the display.
Second, the EL nightlight was poor. I have EL on both my DW9052 and my A168WEC and both perform fine. But the DW5600 nightlight just wasn't up to par. It should have at least been as good as the A168, but wasn't.
Third - and this one floored me - the watch wasn't comfortable to wear. The strap is spaced in such a way where the notch that fits my wrist is slightly too tight, the next notch is too loose, and a "just right" notch just doesn't exist on the strap.
If the LCD contrast was at least decent and the EL light good, then I would have kept the watch, bought some strap adapters and installed a fabric strap on the DW5600. But the display and the nightlight were both crap.
What does good LCD contrast look like?
I'll start with bad contrast.
For my AE1000W, the regular view looks fine, but when you tilt the display back, the display washes right out and becomes unreadable. That's bad LCD contrast.
Where the DW5600E is concerned, its display would wash out even with the slightest tilt angle.
For my F-91W, the regular view is fine. When tilted back, it's still still readable, and the display doesn't wash out. Time and date can still be read fairly easily.
The F-91W is an example of fantastic LCD contrast; it is the gold standard for LCD legibility on a wristwatch. Try to find a digital wristwatch with a non-backlit screen that reads as well as the F-91W. You won't find one.
Now consider the fact the F-91W is 80% less than the cost of a DW5600E. This means a 9 dollar watch not only outperforms but obliterates the G-SHOCK in legibility. That's just plain sad.
Did I receive a dud DW5600E?
Yes. It had to be. I purposely went looking for complaints about the watch, and as far as I can tell, nobody has ever complained about bad screen contrast. Mine must have been one of the rare and few that had a bad screen on it.
The screen contrast was just as bad as a crappy no-name digital watch. Walmart sells those. The next time you see one of those in a Walmart, pick it up and examine how fast the display washes out when you tilt it back even a little bit. It's ridiculous. That's how bad my DW5600E was with its display.
If you happen to be a DW5600E owner with the same LCD washout problem, send it back and get a refund if the watch is new.
Gibson Modern Double Cut Standard
This is really expensive, but looks fantastic.
Usually whenever Gibson tries something new, different or reimagined, they fail and fail hard. That's not the case here. The limited run Modern Double Cut Standard, while expensive, is something new that actually might be great.
This guitar comes in several finishes, but it's the Bullion Gold that caught my eye (I'm a sucker for a goldtop Gibson).
The Modern Double Cut Standard has a solid mahogany body with 2-piece maple top, nitro lacquer finish, medium jumbo frets, 24.75" scale length, rosewood fingerboard with 12" radius, pearloid trapezoid inlays (I'm also a sucker for those on a Gibson)...
...which is all good, except for one thing I don't like. The guitar has 24 frets. On a 24.75" scale, that's pretty much useless. If you want to know what that feels like, play an Epiphone Tony Iommi SG. That guitar also has 24 frets on a 24.75" scale. You run out of room real fast after the 21st fret. Once you experience that, you'll understand why it is an absolute requirement that if you have a guitar with 24 frets on it, it must be at least a 25.5" scale for that extra space up there.
Am I saying the Modern Double Cut Standard would have been better as a 22-fret? Yes. I've no issue with the styling of the guitar as it looks fantastic, but 2 frets need to go away because not even soloists would be able to get along with it.
My only other complaint? Price tag. Way too expensive.
Keep your fingers crossed that an Epiphone version of this guitar is released. I could see this thing selling real fast if a version of it came out for the same price as the Tony Iommi SG.