• TGP is giving away a Strat, Tele, and Jazzmaster. Click Here for full details.
    Click Here to upgrade your account and enter today!

What do you think of Jaguars?

eigentone

Gold Supporting Member
Messages
7,349
I've played Jaguars since the 90s. I really like them. Though they are not my main Fender (that would be the Jazzmaster), they have a distinct voice and are really fun.
 

PorkChop

Member
Messages
129
I had a thin skin I really liked. I have thought about building a non fender one. I’m 6’ 1”. I have hands that fit my body size. But, my fingers are only a smidge longer than my 5’ 6” ex-wife. There is just too much palm to fill that almost all Fenders can’t do.
 

AA864

Member
Messages
3,430
I’m not a fan, but I do enjoy your vids, keep ‘em coming Keith.

Short scale, weird bridge and too many switches for me. Teles and Strats suit me fine.
 
Messages
347
I’m not a fan, but I do enjoy your vids, keep ‘em coming Keith.

Short scale, weird bridge and too many switches for me. Teles and Strats suit me fine.
I agree with this.

I will say however that they are very good looking instruments. Probably the reason I never even picked one up is no one I ever admired played one when I was young. I've been playing since the '60's. I'll admit that Frusciante got a good tone out of them though.

 

Artie Fisk

Member
Messages
1,548
I love them, but not quite as much as Jazzmasters. The short scale length has never felt "right" to me. If they made one with a 25.5" scale, I'd be all over it.
 

HH1978

Member
Messages
279
I have a 1965, dots and binding neck.

It has been my main gigging guitar for a couple of years, but that changed when I got my Danocaster Strat.
I still play the Jaguar, though, and I think it's a very versatile instrument to play with dirt and/or fuzz. I'm not totally convinced with the clean tone. I find the Jazzmaster is better for that, in the offset realm.

I'm not a fan of slide switches on guitars, whatever cool the may look. Too fragile... But the vintage ones tend to resist better than modern ones, and only one of them had to be replaced on my 55 yo guitar.
 

Timtam

Member
Messages
2,152
Loved them ever since Tom Verlaine and Rowland Howard, circa late 1970s. Easy to set up with stock bridge or Mustang-style bridge once you know how. Unfortunately that setup knowledge took a long time to become common knowledge, and prompted some unnecessary/inappropriate "solutions" along the way (TOMs, buzzstop). And that knowledge is still not as widespread as it should be (even Fender's current instructions have a significant error - lubricating the string-saddle points). So you can't entrust setup to just anybody. But it's mostly all there in Leo's 1961 trem patent (high string-saddle friction for the rocking bridge), the original 60s manual (higher gauge strings, plus a Freudian slip - one bridge pic is a Mustang bridge), the 70's manual (trem spring screw setup), and the way vintage jags often came from the factory (with neck shim).
 
Last edited:

ned7flat5

Member
Messages
4,551
I always thought the Jag and the Jazzmaster look like the Strat/Tele’s odd looking cousins from out of town.

As for the Starcaster, there are no words ....
 

Mr Fingers

Member
Messages
2,543
They're mostly a fad and a fashion. Some players, Likje Kurt Vile, can get a signature sound out of them (lo fi, jangly) and in some contexts, they get used great for rhythm, but though I've lusted after the looks fro the day they were released, and hve gone into stores with the cash and intent to buy, like the general playing public and professionals, when I finally am trying one on, I pass. Always have, probably always will. The shorter scale is really limiting sonically, with those PUs. These were a spectacular dud when released, even though they wouyld have seemed a direct hit for the style/vibe of the time. That tells you something. It's as though Leo released a Tele, and everyone said "meh" and "pass." I can only speak for myself, but the market has benaved in this way, too. For good reasons.
 

blaster

Member
Messages
1,193
When I was starting to play in the early 60s the Jaguars were the guitar everyone wanted, but couldn’t afford. Years later I didn’t care for them but recently picked a Squier Vintage Modified and it’s been fun to play. Of course, I shimmed the neck and replaced the 1 Meg pots on the lead circuit to mellow the highs out.
 

Highnumbers

Member
Messages
754
They're mostly a fad and a fashion. Some players, Likje Kurt Vile, can get a signature sound out of them (lo fi, jangly) and in some contexts, they get used great for rhythm, but though I've lusted after the looks fro the day they were released, and hve gone into stores with the cash and intent to buy, like the general playing public and professionals, when I finally am trying one on, I pass. Always have, probably always will. The shorter scale is really limiting sonically, with those PUs. These were a spectacular dud when released, even though they wouyld have seemed a direct hit for the style/vibe of the time. That tells you something. It's as though Leo released a Tele, and everyone said "meh" and "pass." I can only speak for myself, but the market has benaved in this way, too. For good reasons.
LOL, tell that to Johnny Marr....

The Jaguar is unlikely to appeal to people whose sonic palette never progressed beyond blues rock. There’s a few limiting tones in these guitars, but plenty of other great sounds and a lot of players have built their entire sound on a Jaguar.
 

Timtam

Member
Messages
2,152
When I was starting to play in the early 60s the Jaguars were the guitar everyone wanted, but couldn’t afford.
Their relative cost isn't always mentioned when discussing the jag's lack of original success. As Keith's video reminds us, they were over 30% more expensive than a strat. His estimate is that their price was more than a month's average salary at the time. Of course had they been an obviously superior instrument I guess more people would have found a way to acquire one.

And then ironically, their decline by the 1970s and subsequent lack of cost was a big reason for the resurrection of jags and jazzmasters by punks and post-punks from the late 1970s onwards, who couldn't afford much else. And many of them were looking for anything other than a sunburst strat or a LP, that would have associated them with the music they hated. And the fact that jags and JMs weren't exactly shred machines was a point greatly in their favour. ;)
 

Chris Scott

Member
Messages
9,062
I've tried to bond with Jaguars...they look cool as hell, and they can sound good in the right hands but I've never been able to get past that abysmal pos of a bridge...every Jag, JM and Bigsby Tele breathed a sigh of relief once the Mastery bridge came on the scene, as now you can actually hit one hard without the strings bouncing all over the place.

The electronics are too distracting, at least for me...call me a traditionalist, or maybe I'm just a bit thick but like I said, I've tried to like 'em but so far no luck.

Jeff Senn's managed to produce a Jaguar that's actually playable, and it sounds wicked as all get-out...if I get a hankerin' to try my luck with one it'll probably be with one of his creations.
 

jogogonne

Member
Messages
437
I think that I have played one in my life, but honestly I cannot say for sure.

For whatever reason, they have just had no appeal for me.
 

Mr Fingers

Member
Messages
2,543
The Jaguar is unlikely to appeal to people whose sonic palette never progressed beyond blues rock.
?? Not sure where this insult comes from, but, well, no. Look at all the accomplished players in all genbres and you will see hardly any Jaguars because it's a more limited instrument. Good for those who like it, not good for most. Explaining this by insulting all non-Jag players as rudimentary blooz-rockers is not going to fly. How many progressive Jazz guys play Jags? It's the Jaguar, not the players, with "limited sonic appeal." I lusted after a Jaguar... until I played one.
 




Trending Topics

Top