noelk27

[quote name='Nibody' timestamp='1338707568' post='1678153']1976 Tokai made Hondo - note sunburst (amount of black) and "Wheel of Fortune" adjuster at heel - sold on US vintage guitars site.[/quote] Except that "Joe" is demonstrating his lack of knowledge of Korean and Japanese guitar production by crediting a Hondo II to Tokai when there is no evidence to suggest that Tokai ever built Hondo II branded instruments. Samick built Hondo and Hondo II branded instruments, in both Korea and Japan. Samick had established a sister company in Japan, also operating under the Samick name, and that's where it produced its IMC/Hondo instruments.

Specifically, 90s examples, focusing on control layout switching options and tone-shaping characteristics. Had both in my possession many years ago, and can't recall why it is, since then, I've always felt the Empathy had a "better" circuit.

There's a "custom options" statement buried in the text of the KOB-JAB version of the "Electric Bass BB Series" catalogue from 02/2010. oddly, the subsequent LEG-CB English language version doesn't contain the same statement. But, with, among others, Glenn Hughes and James Lomenzo both using maple boarded examples you'd have had to wonder. Also worth noting that YMC will build an ebony boarded example if requested.

First thing to consider is that DR strings are pressure wound, unlike the Warwick Reds, so you should consider dropping a gauge to attain compliance closest to that which you're currently used to. As for the specifics of Lo-Riders, this design uses a hex core - Hi-Beams employ a round core. Strings with hex cores will feel less compliant (more stiff) than strings with round cores, and with like for like gauges there is an appreciable difference in feel between Lo-Riders and Hi-Beams. As to why some people experience Lo-Riders "dying" more quickly than other DR designs, such as Hi-Beams, this is a common feature for any string designed around a hex core, and occurs as the ratio of void to metal is higher and as these voids fill with play wear detritus. Simply wiping such strings down after use would significantly extend life cycle. Personally, I don't think there's one right string. You have to match your string choice to your particular instrument - and by that I mean the instrument(s) that you own. Among the Yamaha BB2000 series basses I own, two have serial numbers within ten digits, so manufactured within a few days of each other in the early 80s. One can be set with an exceptionally low action, and works best with DR Sunbeams (a string that works well with many of the 2000s); the other can't be set as low and works best with a stiffer string - and although I tried Lo-Riders, over the course of six months, it now wears R Cocco strings. Similarly, the majority of Aria Pro II SB series basses I own work best with Lo-Rider Nickels, with the exception of an SB900 and an SB-R150, both of which work best with Dean Markley SR2000 strings. But, for consistency and quality, DR is the string I consume in the greatest quantity. Bought in bulk, by the box, you can get some good deals.

As fitted to Michael Anthony's Musicman Sterlings in the very early 90s. Tried one out on an Aria SB. Didn't make any significant improvement over the original high mass brass assembly (which is recessed into the top).

From the DR website you've most likely discovered that Hi-Beams use a round core and Lo-Riders use a hex core. Other than the core, these strings are identical in all other respects, including being finished with a "stainless steel" outer wrap. Sunbeams are the "nickel" outer wrap equivalent of Hi-Beams, and, as the name suggests, Lo-Rider Nickels are the "nickel" equivalent of Lo-Riders. Marcus Millers are, effectively, Hi-Beams under another name. With a string that's a year - or more - old it would be difficult to tell which design it is, so you could either decide based on characteristics - round core has more compliance than hex core; round core has more mass (more output) than hex core; hex core has more "air" (brightness) than round core - or just cut through one of the heavier strings in the set, and look at the profile of the core.

Other than shape the two basses have very little in common. Body of the 1000 series is splined, not glued - to improve transmission/sustain. P pickup now uses the blade design - in theory producing a more even output. J pickup has been redesigned - to increase overall output. Bridge is a different alloy - to improve transmission. Saddles are angled at the contact point with the string - to produce a finer witness point. Fret wire is a harder alloy. Nut material is the same as the fret wire - to make the tone of open and fretted notes the same. Stringing can be through body to improve transmission - at an angle to reduce string stress at the bridge. Not saying that any of those points make the 1000 series "great" though.

Some of what you're asking requires making qualitative judgments, a significant factor in which is personal preference, so, may go unanswered. For instance, does Takamine make a better acoustic guitar than, say, Yamaha. If you asked me to compare the top of the range from both makers, in the late '70s, I'd almost certainly have said that Yamaha was the leader of these two makers. Where Takamine's range topped out at circa Y200,000 you'd have had to find another Y180,000 to get close to the top of Yamaha's range (the likes of an L53 costing Y380,000). Of course, bare numbers don't tell any kind of story, and you'd have to wonder how many people went to the trouble of sourcing a made to order L series Yamaha, instead opting for the readymade FG or CJ or N series guitars. Takamine, though, as a comparator, or benchmark, causes me a few issues. Yes, Kaman, the North American representation for the brand, did an amazing job of creating a history and sense of legacy for a mark that came into existence in the mid '60s, although Ohsone had been formed in '59, but the early reliance on purchased endorsement skews the overall picture, in my opinion. As for Yamaki, and its range of steel-strung guitars, the eventual use of the Joodee mark to replace the Yamaki mark would have been to differentiate the traditionalist Yamaki designs from the modernist Daion ones. If anything, the creation of the Daion range was an attempt to attain a larger share of the market, given that the time was characterised by innovation, from makers such as Ovation, and in addition to the styling Daion guitars featured some innovation approaches to construction and electronics. Unfortunately, for Yamaki, the downturn in the world economy and the uncompetitive nature of the Yen against other currencies made its products comparatively expensive, and relatively unsuccessful. For some context, generally speaking, we'd also have to turn our attention to other Japanese brands, some of which have declined in significance, such as Suzuki, and others that have grown, such as Yairi. Those two names share a history, in that brothers Sadao and Giichi Yairi both apprenticed at Suzuki Violin Co, before establishing their own marks at the start of the '30s, Sada and Yairi respectively. While Giichi started making classical guitars alongside violins from the inception of his mark, Sadao spent his early years making violins before turning to making steel-strung guitars in the late '30s (mostly copies of Martin designs). Giichi was subsequently joined by his son, Kazuo, while Sadao was joined by his son, Hiroshi. In the '40s Sadao and Giichi merged their respective companies, creating Yairi and Sons, which became Yairi Gakki after Giichi had retired. Subsequently Kazuo left Yairi Gakki in the early '50s, and an agreement was reached to retire that name, uncle and nephew agreeing to trade as S Yairi and K Yairi respectively; names, no doubt, now familiar to many of today's acoustic guitar players. Saying that, more players may be aware of the K Yairi mark through the Alvarez Yairi name. Would it be fair to say that the Yairi family has had a greater impact, say, than the Teradaira family, I'd suggest it's impossible to say. The Teradaira family attempted to cover multiple price/quality points, following the Yamaha example, whereas the Yairi family operated closer to the Takamine example (although predating that brand) and concentrating on high-end products and certain geographies. But as to whether the Yairi or Teradaira family (as designers and manufacturers), or Yojiro Takabayashi or Nobuaki Hayashi (as designers and engineers), or Ryoji Matsuoka or Shiro Arai (as manufactures and distributors) has been more important to the history of guitar design, production and distribution in and outside of Japan would be impossible to say.

[quote name='leftybassman392' timestamp='1336227826' post='1642830']Just out of interest (and because I spent a couple of hours chasing my tail around the internet), is there somewhere more details can be found?[/quote] No one specific site. There are some good sources out there, but the best ones for Daion and Yamaki are domestic Japanese, with no English language translations. Saying that, my comments would best be characterised as accumulated knowledge. Which is why I misstated that Kazuyuki and Hirotsuga Teradaira set up Yamaki. It was, in fact, Kazuyuki and Yasuyuki Teradaira (Hirotsuga joining much later, as designer). Kazuyuki and Yasuyuki had previously worked together, at Hayashi Gakki, before Yasuyuki struck out in '62 to set up his own holding company, Daion (primarily carrying on business as a musical instrument distributor and wholesaler). In '67 Kazuyuki left Hayashi and joined Yasuyuki to head up Daion's attempt to enter the guitar manufacturing market, in the process creating the Yamaki mark. initially, Yamaki was a division of Daion, but would later be spun off as Yamaki Gakki. This is perhaps where the confusion arises, people believing that the Daion guitar brand owned and operated Yamaki, although the Daion mark would not be created for almost a decade. With Kazuyuki onboard Daion started exporting ranges of nylon- and steel-strung Yamaki-branded guitars outside of Asia. Although well-respected, Daion failed to secure significant market share with these guitars, and in the late '70s redesigned and rebranding its ranges under the Daion mark. These Daion mark steel-strung guitars, as well as the electric guitars, were designed by Hirotsuga. For those unfamiliar with Hirotsuga's work, he was also heavily involved in delivering the "Wing" series for Washburn in the late '70s. By this point in time Yamaki Gakki had its own full manufacturing facilities and a growing reputation for producing high-quality instruments, often being engaged by other Japanese manufacturers to build on their behalf.

[quote name='leftybassman392' timestamp='1336220919' post='1642674']Yamaki and Joodee were brand names for the Dyna Gakki company in Japan [/quote] [quote name='clarkpegasus4001' timestamp='1336221655' post='1642690']Joodee/Yamaki were owned by Daion guitars[/quote] This version of the Joodee mark, as well as the Daion mark, were owned by Yamaki. Yamaki was founded by Kazuyuki and Hirotsuga Teradaira in the 60s, with the Joodee and Daion marks debuting in the 70s. Yamaki engaged Dyna and Terada, as well as Matsumoku, to build for it, as well as establishing its own factory facility. Originally under the Yamaki mark, later under the Joodee mark, Yamaki offered an extensive range of acoustic guitars. Ranges included YW, YM, YB in the Year, Mugen and Max variants. The top of the range YM2000-12 would have set you back Y200,000, whereas your YW-30M-12 was the bottom of the YW range, retailing for Y30,000. (The top of the range YW-100M-12 retailed for Y100,000.) The YW-30M-12 featured nataoh laminate timbers back and sides, and a laminate top. As for your Joodee branded YW series acoustic, this is a later version of the Yamaki YW series carcass. The switch from branding the carcass as Yamaki to Joodee occurred when production switched from Dyna to one of Yamaki's other suppliers, in the early 80s. That the label also features the Daion "tuning fork" logo, I'd place your acoustic between '82 and '84, but if you forward a note of the serial this can be dated more accurately.

D'addario was my weapon of choice for around 15 years, but shifting to DR was the best move I've ever made with strings. A good friend thought I'd had my '62 Strat rewound first time he played it after the change, until I assured him all I'd done was switch strings. The switch has even allowed me to go from 11's to 10's without any lose of performance. As an aside, best strings you can put on your acoustic, Infeld Spectrum. Initially, you might not think these are as bright as other makes, such as Martin or Markley, but the tone live and recorded is fantastic.

I'd say save up, and buy a G&L Tribute L2000. There will be some who disagree, particularly those who say "too many tone options", but has to be the best one-stop-shop in the entry/mid level market available.

Lovely indeed. The one I'm looking at has walnut facings. In fact, my preference is for an Empathy from the same period, but one hasn't come along any time recently.

Looking at a '90s S2, with original fitted case, in good condition, and wondered what the going rate for these is.

Taylor started as guitarist, although not sure that has much to do with how "busy" his lines were on the early Duran albums. In the first version of Duran, however, before Simon le Bon and Andy Taylor joined, the sound was made up of drum machine, synths, bass and vocals (although original vocalist Stephen Duffy contributed some guitar), which may have something to do with things.

The Talbo wasn't designed by Hayashi San.

It's a Kay, but it' the top of the range "K" series. It would originally have had a brass plate with a black embossed "K" as the truss rod cover. Have a guitar - also finished in natural - from the same series. These are solid and well finished, but the original pickups aren't great. Performance wise, falls between Westone and Vantage.

Gauged like for like, there's considerably more mass in a flatwound string than in a roundwound string, which is why more pounds/square inch is required to bring any string to pitch. With the lighter gauged strings it's often the final wrap that is flattened only, but for some heavier gauge strings it can be the penultimate and final wraps that are flattened. This is why it's not always an even curve, differentiating gauge through a set. When using D'addario, Pro Steels v Chromes, I'd use a 45/65/85/105 set of Pro Steels and a 40/60/75/95 set of Chromes, to get, approximately, the same compliance.

[quote name='Gust0o' timestamp='1331890408' post='1580352']It looks an expensive and rather uninspiring indulgence for $1000+ as a genuine - but that's my subjective take, based on only what I've seen and heard on the internet, and I imagine it's well worth it as an oddity or talking piece.[/quote] You have to view it in the context of the Asian/Japanese tradition of stringed instruments.