Quote:
Originally Posted by gitnoob
FWIW, I play my Cargo with low action and medium strings. The strength of the neck is more than sufficient to maintain relief when switching from lights to mediums. The saddle height is perfectly sufficient to drive the top.
|
For you, not for me.
The relief changed noticeably in going from lights to mediums with the two Cargos that I owned. Not to an unplayable condition, but a change was easily noticed....and a changed that made the guitar that much less playable.
I am not attacking you or anyone that is happy with the CA product.
I am pointing out that there is room for improvement, and hoping for them to make an even better guitar.
...but this being a guitar-forum and all, I know that folks take things rather personally at times. I know I do, and sometimes I'm wrong in this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gitnoob
What problem are we trying to fix?
|
Well, it's my understanding that CA's production manager came from the auto-industry. No guitar background.
I believe that Peavy may be in a position to improve the product, from a guitarists standpoint.
You are correct in pointing out that the CA product is made with a mold, and that a neck re-set is not possible....but they did choose a certain neck-to-body (angle or neck set) relationship when the mold was created...and IMO the relationship they choose was an incorrect one.
The question *I* have is whether or not Peavey will recognize the need for a slightly better angle, and if they want to discard some *very* expensive molds to improve things. If memory serves, the aluminum molds may be in the range of $20K per.
Some folks are perfectly happy with what is...but not me. I see where a better, more versatile product could be created.
Give me a better neck angle, and give me relief choice. Even C.F. Martin gave up on non-adjustable truss-rods in 1981...
