Hey Jeremy, Thanks for your efforts on my behalf! Some things you report are a little erroneous, but the bulk of it is very good! The only things that sting are 1) The idea that I needed help to design the guitar and hardware. Ouch, this is All my design work, every bit of it, wood, carbon, metal, plastic, everything. 2) "Refined" = Dumbed down, de-featured, uglified. Sorry, just how I see it.

@Jack_Plisken

Ай бұрын

Hey Ken, thanks for watching it! I had winged this unscripted (amature) and realized I misspoke on a couple of items after I posted. I added a disclaimer in the description to address this. As for your 2 notes: 1) The one thing I could not find info on is regarding the extent of Larry's involvement in designing the bridge trem system, so I "ass-umed" that piece was a tag team effort. Similar to Steve Dames involvement with the MIDI NiteFly model (I just got one and plan to make a video on that as well here soon) 2) I 100% agree. I tried to be diplomatic with giving my opinion as that is a sensitive topic amongst the Parker forums/Facebook pages... I believe you just started a war with that statement coming from you haha.

@kenparkerarchtoppery9440

Ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken Oops, Didn't mean to, but please try to put yourself In my place! After investing a big chunk of prime years at 124% effort into a labor of love, and then it gets snatched out of your hands and you have no say. Chips will fall where they may, I suppose.

@Jack_Plisken

Ай бұрын

@kenparkerarchtoppery9440 I could only imagine. You made a da** fine tool for musicians that has lasted! I always tell people I prefer the pre-refined models over the refined for the simple fact that they were built the way you (Ken) intended them to be made. All I know, were the pre 2003/04 ones were made right! Cheers

@tato4612

28 күн бұрын

Ken...wow, We love you and know you're one of the great geniuses in guitar history. Much respect!!!!

I'm Mexican, and here I have never heard anyone say that the Parker fly is an ugly looking guitar, among musicians those guitars are still respected and you can see from time to time musicians at bars or at weddings still rocking those instruments. I guess for the us market is ugly. But man, for me it's a work of art, it solves every problem I have with my beloved Fenders, I wish they still make them. And to be honest neither Stranberg, Abasi, etc have gone this far in terms of innovation.

Thanks for the extensive info! I'm a big fan of Ken's work, and would love to still own a Fly one day.

Thanks for the video. I bought a new Nightfly in 1998, after purchasing an album by Phil Keaggy called “On The Fly”. where he plays a Fly deluxe almost exclusively. Later I bought a used 95 Deluxe. I still have both, I’ll likely never sell them. I believe if Ken had come along in the 1980s, say 8 or ten years sooner, his guitars would have been a big hit. I’ll bet lots of big name players would have bought them and made them popular. People also had more cash to spend then also. However, in the 90s, the economy was dragging, and music trends favored more retro designs. Ken didn’t do himself any favors by talking so negatively about other more traditional guitar designs. Though he was right, he should have known those iconic designs were deeply loved and entrenched in the Rock n Roll brand. He should have treaded more delicately, imo. Today stainless steel frets are more common, and solid body acoustics are around also. Ken was ahead of his time, unfortunately and ironically, the timing of the Fly, after the 80s boom, was late.

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

Interesting thought. I've always said that he was ahead of his time and that had it been released 20 years later, it may have been successful. I also think that if he had released it before Ned released his guitar... it would have also been successful. I think the biggest issue with the Fly is that although people thought it looked it weird, they would likely overlook it, had it not been so expensive. The price of the Fly was justifiably high, but it was a lot of money for a guitar that people were not familiar with. At that price point, you start trying to justify reasons why you should not spend that much $$ on a guitar, and the design sticks out like a sore thumb (Personally i love the design).

@greenguitarfish

5 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken Yes, Ken likely had no choice but to sell his Fly at that price point, hoping everyone would quickly understand why, but unfortunately most just didn’t get it. The looks didn’t put me off at all, I didn’t understand why it became such a big issue. I felt like the Fly needed to stand out a bit from the crowd, and its design was exquisite. But Ken harkened back to designs that predate rock n roll, so people just didn’t get it. I’m glad today Ken is doing what he loves, creating hand made high end guitars. I just wish I could afford one ! lol

Makes me miss my Fly Deluxe, I had that guitar for a decade. It had one of the best necks I've ever played, and I've had just about every high end guitar you can imagine. The Fly Deluxe was my first guitar with stainless steel frets, and I've had them on damn near every guitar since. One of the most overlooked aspects of the Fly is the tremolo system, it was a great alternative to the Floyd Rose. The downside of the tremolo systems, was the proprietary flat springs they used (and I broke several). The Fly came with spares, but they were a pain in the ass to get extras. It is hands down the lightest guitar I ever played/owned. You could easily play that thing all day, and not feel the strain on your shoulder/back/neck. I truly miss my Fly.

@robzagar4275

Күн бұрын

How did you break a Parker flat spring ?!

@PistolsPlayground

Күн бұрын

@@robzagar4275 treating it like a Floyd Rose. It can handle it for a bit, but that flat spring fatigues and snaps if you keep doing it.

Excellent video! Well done

Instant sub. I really enjoyed your video!

Wow. Awesome rundown on Parker guitars. The man was a genius. I have a Parker Fly Classic SN 276076bmh 1996, one-of-a-kind red w/black swirl paint job, made specially for the Winter ‘96 NAMM show. Bought new from Rudy’s Music Stop in NYC in June of ‘97. Awesome guitar, always has been. So sweet acoustically with the Fishman pickups, great sounding electric as well. I’d love to meet him and tell him first hand what a wonderful instrument he conceived and delivered. In the same pantheon as Leo Fender and Paul McCarty.

Thx for the video, I didn't know many of the details that you described .

@Jack_Plisken

7 ай бұрын

That was my goal man. I've seen quite a few videos about the Fly, that dont mention some of the key details about its design. There is a lot more to be said as well...

Thank you for taking the time to go in depth all in on this Fly review. I own a '98 / %0 hype Playability can't be overstated. Thanks for letting me know about the #9 on my bridge spring. I wish every fretboard would play like OG Parker

I can only imagine what the tooling was like in the heyday of Fly manufacture. I worked for Phil Kubiki in Santa Barbara back in '82 on the early runs of the 'Kubiki X-Factor" Bass. A lot of it was Fender-like, but there was some very special tooling for some things.

I couldn't agree more. I myself don't care how my guitar appears. I'm more concerned with tone and playability. I played the first Parker Fly in Knoxville TN at the Knoxville Guitar Center. It was Hunter green and I fell in love immediately. It felt like it melted into my body when I sat down with it. Then,......I plugged into a simple Fender Deluxe. I was immediately hooked. If you've never played one??? You owe to yourself to try one. Quickly before you can't find one easily.

Parker Fly is spaceship of electric guitars no doubt!

I think the Fly is up there with the strat in terms of design and functionality…….still ahead of its time!

my man, I’m loving this so far, you’ve got yourself a sub!

I've always wanted one.

I always wanted a real fly. I remember seeing them in stores in the 90's. A salesman once told me they had a hard time selling them.

@Jack_Plisken

7 ай бұрын

I never even saw one in real life until I was almost 30 years old. There were no dealers anywhere near me.

Great video. Always loved those guitars back in the day, but as a kid never had the money to buy one. Hopefully I can correct that as an adult.

I miss my Fly Classic, but it was already getting hard to find replacement parts around 2016. I decided to sell mine before anything broke that I couldn’t fix.

Great summary. My only issue is the misinformation about tone wood. That only matters in acoustics.

@Jack_Plisken

7 ай бұрын

What was incorrect exactly with how tone woods relates to acoustics? Im not sure what part your talking about... i think i only mentioned tone woods when discussing the type of woods he used. * im not saying you're wrong as I am not a luthier and may have genuinely misspoke on that. I tried to relate it to my work in acoustics for an analagous view, and just paraphrasing what I read in articles with Ken. Thanks for watching it and paying attention ha!

@BusyAir

7 ай бұрын

Big difference between a poplar body deluxe and mahogany body classic. Hint: it's more than just weight.

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

​@BusyAir absolutely. Ken has a video on this topic where he explains in detail, the differences in the wood he uses. Similar to acoustics, a denser/heavier wood will transfer low frequencies more efficiently throughout the body, where as a more porus material that is lighter weight, can absorb LF (hence why resiliant channels are added in wall construction, creating 'air gaps', which reduces transmission of LF)... however a lighter, more porus wood, if constructed in a thinner profile (like the face of an archtop guitar), can then allow the LF to be more pronounced in an acoustic guitar. So my understanding is that using tone woods, with less mass, is the ideal scenario when building an electric, however in doing so, luthiers end up having to add more mass to preserve the structural integrity of the neck joint. So it was always... either use great tone woods for the job, but end up adding more mass making a clunky guitar... or use not so great tone woods, that will allow for a more ergonomic design... By adding the composite exoskeleton, Ken was able to use the "great" tone woods, while maintaining less mass and thus providing an ergonomic design.

I had the pleasure of a deep metallic green Parker Fly deluxe and it was by far the best instrument i ever owned, I stupidly sold it to buy a Gibson Les Paul Custome, which I ended selling after about 9 months, but could never find another Fly to replace the one i sold. The only guitar thats came close to my Fly deluxe is my EDMM L3 in blueberry burst, but i still miss my Fly even to this day! I really wish they would re issue them in the original state (no new rebrand)

I AM JUST NOW SEEING YOUR VIDEO'S..I ABSOLUTELY LOVE PARKER GUITAR'S..I OWNED A PARKER MOJO SNAKESKIN GRAPHICS.. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED THAT GUITAR.. THE PIEZO PICKUP WAS SO PHENOMENAL.. I LOVED THAT GUITAR.. IT WAS STOLEN FROM OUR HOME..

I owned a Parker Fly Classic Cherry Red back in the 80’s,and loved it!It was dropped,and the neck got cracked;sold it to a friend!I sure do miss it!

@robzagar4275

Күн бұрын

“Back in the 80’s”…?

Was looking for resources on Parker fret wire to fit on a non Parker, but it seems like a challenging project.. I got my ‘07 mojo more than a decade ago for a great price, not knowing the full story of the business side. But the guitar really is that good, and I plan to keep it no matter what the values do. I only play it a couple times a year but it’s always perfectly tuned out of the case

I own both original Parker Fly Deluxe & Steinberger GL TransTrem, admittedly more a fan of the latter. Both do have their pros (mainly innovative features) and also cons (mainly proprietary parts availability), I just love the looks of both to not let the cons outweigh the pros and try for various ways to get by. Fly's pros = Very lightweight and no neck dive due to overall thinness. Slick playability due to stainless steel frets. Versatile sound due to piezo capability. Lockable trem. Fly's cons (and the normal fix) = Chestpoke horn when sitting (use strap or sit in classical position). Ribbon cables (rewire point to point). Frets lifting (reapply glue and never use fretboard conditioner ever again). The need for matching gauge spring (use one main gauge that your existing spring is meant for or compensate with different tunings). GL's pros = Compact mobility despite weight - they're not at all light - and no neck dive due to headless. Durability due to composites. Unique less woody sound due to material and construction. Transposing and locking capability due to transtrem. GL's cons (and the normal fix) = Awkward feel when sitting (use strap @ existing legrest). The need for double ball end strings (use aftermarket string adapters and adjust the string lengths as close as you can to the original calibration of double ball @ replace the headpiece with aftermarket one that accepts both standard and double ball strings). Too many moving parts for the trem (use the transtrem as either locked or regular trem @ replace the transtrem with aftermarket standard trem or fixed hardtail).

@encikharith

6 ай бұрын

The thing is most of the cons can be remedied or fixed in many various ways, whereas you just cannot attain the pros as easily with other guitars. The closest manufacturer to either right now is probably Aristides - they have both regular and headless composite models with either plastic or wood options for the fretboard and also choice of hardtail@trem. Strandberg meanwhile combines the pros of either and also mixes them with other modern features but just without too much of the composite elements. Koloss too is growing. I believe that the main issues with Parker/Steinberger are only the previously scarceness of replacement parts and knowledge needed to handle their unique features. The great thing now is the abundance of online expertise being shared by experienced users plus there are replacement parts being produced or commissioned by the fans of either and as they regain their popularity hopefully even more aftermarket solutions are bound to come up -> Floyd Rose and their many many choices of third party parts being an example of what more popularity can bring about to even the most complex of innovations. Standard stuff like different frets and replacement pickups can later be changed of course, maybe a little planning and work needed to install those in the original Fly but still very much possible to do. Plus, there's just something so fulfilling about merely just looking at both the Fly & GL!

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

Thanks for the comparison. Ive played a stienberger bass but not a guitar with a transtrem. But I hear your point. I feel like I did not do a good job at explaining how the cons of one are not as big of a deal as the other... i.e. the plates springs on the fly, versus the dual ball end strings on the trans trem. I would argue that the plate is a better 'con' as its typically something that does not get changed often and is built to last a lifetime while providing more accurate trem and less noise. The transtrem dual ball end strings are something that a person will have to deal with, everytime they change strings. Or the glued on frets... with the series of flys I am talking about in this video (pre-refined era), that typically does not happen... but if it does... there are simple instructions for reapplying them to the fret board. I would rather have to reglue a fret once every 20 years if that, then to have to have all the frets repaired/replaced every 3 to 5 years. I am in the market for a stienberger with transtrem though.

I've got two Fly Deluxes, '94 and a '04. I think you undersell the refined a little bit here. The pre-refined came with an off the shelf Tone Zone/Air Norton set and that's my favorite pickup combo but they sound kind of shrill in that guitar. The refined version has a custom voices Dimarzio based on the same set but they're a little darker and end up sounding more balanced. On a lot of guitars the stock pickups don't matter but on a guitar with proprietary routes, I think it's a big deal and the refined sound better that wasn't just a cost cutting measure. The trem arm is debatable. I like the feel of the hex arm but objectively, the smooth arm is easier to replace, just as stable and I like the foam end on it. The electronics, I think the pre-refines has the edge as far as versatility yes but the extent to which it gets utilized eh idk. Most of the key stuff is still there in the refined (piezo blend, stereo, coil tapping). I think the fit and finish between the two is almost indistinguishable. It might be the age difference but my pre-refined has more peeling/chipping paint than the refined. Also could be age related but the pre-refined has had the lifting frets, no issues with the refined one (yet). I think the pre vs refined debate is kind of a nothingburger gatekeeping corknsniffer thing. I think the only thing about the pre-refined model that I like better (besides the value) is the thumb wheel with no tool. Everything else is even or I'd even give the edge to the refined, just my 2 cents. Great video and I appreciate seeing more talk about these out there, thanks for sharing.

@robzagar4275

Күн бұрын

I read that the refined ones have the fret issue. Not the original.

@jcedricguitars

Күн бұрын

@@robzagar4275 my '94 actually developed lifting frets recently (thankfully just the edges of the first two), so I'd say anecdotally it's more of a flaw in the overall design, not year specific.

I love Parker guitars. I only had one that I gave away. It was one of their level guitars and it came in three colors. I got a cream white one for like 300 bucks. At least they gave it to my son-in-law! Lol.

Pretty hard to find to try them, I got to play one of the more standard Parker Fly's in 2013ish. Sounded worse than my Indonesian Squier, still open to trying another IF I can find one

Have a 1997 Parker Fly Deluxe as well as many of the "must have" guitars and the Parker is exceptional and I play by far more when gigging. I am an engineer also and appreciate the design of the Parker for its feel and playability. I won't sell it or give it away.

Thank you so much for putting this together. I should try Mr. Parker himself, but I am curious about the pinnacle year of Fly for the pre-refined models. I understand about the pickups 2nd generation but what else might one consider when purchasing between a '93 - 2003 or first quarter 2004 model? I.E I've read that '98's had a bad batch of adhesive regarding frets. I ask this because as a Fly fanatic owning just one Fly with NO back up (mine is a beloved Feb.16 2004 Mojo...7th guitar made on that day) I am saving to purchase a more legitimate Ken Parker era Fly. If I could own one from each year, one of each model...I would haha, but since I can only choose one for now, is there a specific year to watch for? I love each of the models with their varying tonewoods and neck/body combinations so this is less of a concern for me, but I wonder which year Ken himself would choose between 1993 and 2003 and perhaps which he'd avoid if any.I'll post this question on a FaceBook Parker FLy group as well. Thank you again and instant subscribe!

@Jack_Plisken

25 күн бұрын

Yeah, you should get some good responses from the Facebook group called "Parker Guitars". I believe it was the 2008 (not 1998) run that had the glue issue, but I could be wrong... might also check www.flyclone.com for info on that. I have heard that the 1999-2001 models (specifically the 'Artist' line) are the ones to get... but I've had nothing but good luck from all pre refined flys I've owned.... the Nite Fly on the other hand, did not go well for me. I bought 3 and all were in excellent shape but had too much relief in the neck and the truss system was either broke, or did nothing to fix the buzz when strings were set to factory height. I just got a 1999 MidiFly though and that thing is AWESOME. My 2001 classic fly is my favorite too. So maybe the 1999 to 2001 thing is true...?

Any idea how rare my 94 fly deluxe hard tail is? I think it’s most likely the first one in Canada as it came from namm , local store owners went to show and talked Ken into taking the one from the show back here and I got a call to come look at it and wait take it home for a week ,well I still have it and is my main guitar still to this day.

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

Flyclone.com is a good resource. I would check there. Depending on condition, finish/color, case, and case candy... in great condition, I'd say it would currently sell on Reverb for anywhere between $2,500 to $3,500. High end would be if you have a Parker hardshell case and accessories.

Kay Parker now she deserves a hour and a half video

I had a 1998 Nitefly and it was absolutely incredible. I had a early 2010s US music owned Parker Mojo fly and it was literally the worst guitar I’ve ever owned. So much broke on that thing and our local music store ended up having to send so many of them back for repairs that they ended up dropping Parker as a brand. I think Strandberg is pioneering the new wave of mainstream industry (not boutique or one of a kind) guitars that fix a lot of traditional guitars problems and are somewhat affordable. My Boden standard is an incredible instrument but my Tokai, Les Paul, and super strats still put a huge smile on my face despite being giant lumps of obsolescence.

Lots to like but surprised that I haven’t been able to set up the trem for bending down without the guitar going way out of tune. I have the pre-refined model. So I tightened the wheel and am but using the trem bar but wish I could.

@Jack_Plisken

2 ай бұрын

That's interesting, as that is one of the biggest selling points for the Fly (it stays in tune better than any guitar)... and the reason locking tuners and spring plates were used. If it's not staying in tune, it makes me think that the spring could be going bad and is deforming with each bend, so no memory to go back to its original shape...could be a number of things. But my first guess is that one of those components have failed or are failing and need replaced.

@22lucky

2 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken yeah, not sure why I can’t use the trem. I wonder if the strings are getting caught in the nut, not returning.

Try going stereo, into an electric guitar amp plus an acoustic amp. That is the sound that is mind blowing! The best sounding guitar I’ve ever ! Nothing will come close. Ken Parker is one of the great modern luthiers! Mr Fishmans piezo is the secret. Thank you Mr Parker !

@Jack_Plisken

Күн бұрын

I concur! I actually made a video (on instagram) that explained why it's important to use the stereo y cable/adapter. Night and day difference when you run the piezos through an acoustic amp or PA versus an elec guitar amp.

Pretty good video! I definitely love my Parker guitars. One major issue... Shadow guitars out of Germany had a great piezo system in most of their guitars with a fixed Schaller bridge. Amazing guitars as well. Currently I have three Parker guitars left.. 10th anniversary fly hardtail. Fly MOJO Single cut. Nitefly M. Had a couple others, but regrettably sold them. Part of the reason for moving from the original design to the refined design was problems with the ribbon cables and the wiring in the original fly. The earlier refined guitars were part of Ken's plan, I believe. The electronics were definitely Superior in the later versions without the ribbon cable. Thats my view on it, anyway.

@jamesw5763

5 күн бұрын

I had spoken with an employee at Parker several years ago when purchasing my 10th anniversary edition from him. He advised they used to take reject guitars and place them between dumpsters and bounce on the guitar... and they wouldn't break unless they really tried. Imagine the headstock on one side and the body resting on the other side with a person standing on top of the guitar.. Waiting for it to crack.. Crazy!

@Jack_Plisken

4 күн бұрын

@@jamesw5763 yep. I have a youtube short where I do this...

@Jack_Plisken

4 күн бұрын

Well as Ken said in his comment below... the refined = dumbed down, defeatured and uglified haha.

@jamesw5763

Күн бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken It wasnt you I bought my 10th anniversary Fly from, was it? It was an ex-employee, I know. I love that guitar. Makes me wonder.. It has the newer (refined) control layout, but is made in 03, I believe. Transparent black finish over mahogany it looks like. Is that what Ken would consider one of the good ones? Was Ken invoilved in those anniversary edition guitars? @kenparkerarchtoppery9440 Its truly the best playing guitar and best playing of the Parkers Ive owned. Ive had an older fly deluxe that this one slays, in my opinion. My buddy has one of the stealth versions. Working on maybe getting that guitar as well. That has the original layout, but is hardtail.

gone the times where i missed a pre refined deluxe on eBay for 900… ah get the next one… had a nitefly, 2, slapped 3 p 90s in it , had a boat rout. bug issue: those little ball bearings of the piezos would pop out when changing strings, gone forever. when it happened on tour ended up cutting a piece of a coathanger and filing it down to fit in there… stayed that way until years later could get a spare one from a smashed fly. hat a one of green-black one of a kind finish. local shop had reduced it from 3200 € to 1500€ and then making it 20€ cheaper every day. got it for 1100… quit smoking two fund it. two packa per day… healthiest guitar ever. miss that low mid growl…

There has been a lot of concern about the glue giving up and the neck starting to see the frets rising and becoming loose. What's your response to that? Luv and Peace.

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

I address this a bit towards the end of the, video but in a nut shell, by changing the form of the fret (to a wire with no tangs) he was able to improve the function by using a hardened steel that can NOT be used when making traditional frets with tangs, which in turn improved the lifespan, thus eliminating the need for fret maintenance on the Fly (no more need to refret or recrown, etc..). In doing so though it added the possibility of the frets to fall off...however, this tends to happen more on the refined era flys (post 2003) as they changed the way in which the guitars are manufactured once USM bought em. My opinion... It's wayyyy less work and easier to re-glue a fret or two IF they fall off, versus HAVING to recrown/polish every couple years and eventuallu replacing entirely... I've had around 7 parkers with the glued on frets, and not one has ever fallen off.

@gtibruce

2 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken Are the 2003 and later models better and more reliable and dont the signature ones have more multiple sounds to choose from and which model has the best acoustic sound? thanks

@Jack_Plisken

2 ай бұрын

@gtibruce That's a loaded question. I'm actually making a video right now about shopping for Parkers and what to look for, etc. To answer your questions... "Better and more reliable?" I'd say definitely not more reliable as from what I have read and seen, the issue with frets and fretboards lifting is far more prevalent in the post 2003 models. However, I have also owned about 4 pre-2003 Niteflys, all of which had defective truss rods and were unable to reduce relief. The necks were permanently stuck in their position, which required action to be higher than factory recommended levels. So the post 2003 Niteflys MAY have fixed that... I've never looked into (I stopped buying Niteflys unless I can see it first). As for "better" that's subjective. They are similar in shape and playability, but changes were made to the mags and other components which did alter the sound. They also created a slew of new models with different types of wood. My argument to the 2003 and later models is that Ken was building them exactly how he envisioned, disregarding manufacturing costs and typical business practices so that he could produce a quality guitar, when a cooperation like USM took over, they did what any business does and finds a CHEAPER way to manufacture the same guitar. So in my opinion, they are NOT as great of guitars. Yes they have signature models like the Adrian Belew series which come with a variax. But you can always add a midi system to any fly and achieve the same sounds. The acoustic sound is also subjective. Of all my Parkers with Fishman piezos, my favorite sound is from my P38 with a Fishman VS-50P bridge. My least favorite is my 2007 P36 (not sure on bridge type). I will add, that they all sound "meh" if you just run them through your guitar amp... run the acoustics through a separate PA system or an acoustic amp like the Fishman box. HUGE difference, and it sounds like an acoustic. USE THE Y CABLE!

About the a Steinberger, there was a net gain. You see, for 20 bucks you can buy an adapter and use single ball strings. I have 2 Steinbergers, and immediately bought adapters for both, I’ve never bought a double ball string. I love my 2 Parker guitars more, but I also love my Steinbergers. Both Ned and Garry are amazing innovators.

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

That's fair! I was unaware of that attachment. I wonder if it was available when it was first realsed. I plan to buy a Stienberger at some point just because I like innovation in design. But i still believe going with the "Steinberger blend" instead of using wood puts this guitar in its own category. Funny thing, though, is people like to argue how a fully composite guitar does not sound as good as a wood guitar, yet players like Alan Holdsworth seemed to have no issue producing quality, guitar-centric music with em. That's why I avoided tone in my video. It's too subjective.

@greenguitarfish

5 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken I don’t know for sure, but It’s likely the string adapter was not available until years after the release of Ned’s design. So, it would have been a drag to shell out for those expensive double ball strings. Yea, Garry was really into “tone wood”. He gave an interview where he talked at length about checking out old violins and cello’s from a certain era that supposedly sound sweeter than any newer ones. He theorized the trees may have produced superior tone due to just the right weather conditions. I was intrigued, however I tend to believe tone is mostly in the fingers. if a great violin player was to play both a good quality new one and one of these golden era ones I’m not sure if I could honestly tell the difference. Ned started making a line of electric violins, viola’s and improved basses, mostly solid bodied, but some what hollowed out to reduce weight. I get the feeling he doesn’t put too much stock in tone wood, but focuses on ergonomics. Here are some links. Thanks again. thinkns.com/ kzread.info/dash/bejne/l4yqyraJksq0m8o.htmlsi=ALr0nuxjkegyXfQu

Does anyone know of a shop that works on issues with neck and fret issues on Parker fly deluxe guitars?

@Jack_Plisken

Ай бұрын

Depends on location. If it's just a delamination issue (frets falling off or lifting) most techs could fix it... they just need to be shown the proper steps. If you go to www.flyclone.com you will find step by step instructions on how to fix just about any piece of your guitar, including fret replacement. If your neck is needing adjusted due to too much relief (typically due to someone already messing with the truss rod when they shouldn't have)... that could be a problem. You should never need to adjust the truss rod on a true Fly series guitar Is your guitar a 2004 model or later? without the wheel below the bridge?

@simpgamer1

Ай бұрын

Hi, thank you for responding. N.Y. It is an earlier model probably off the first run or so around 93/94 This issue started happening before 2000’s. I had frets lifting and sent it to local shops to try and be repaired very earlier on with them telling me that this was something they did not know how to fix. Unknowingly to myself, did they mess with the truss rod? unfortunately I believe they did due to some dead sounding frets around the neck . It’s very disheartening to have this guitar sit in its case all these years and not be able to play it. It’s a one piece neck and body, makes it so that it’s not like I could just replace the neck. With no one to go to for a fix there are times when I am so sad about this guitar that I wonder if I can even have someone remove the neck to make something like a “Frankenstein meets the Fly” guitar. Lol, just to be able to play it again. Any assistance would be great! Maybe someone knows of a creative KZread channel that would like to make some great content and help me bringing this guitar back to life. If anyone knows of any please sent this thread their way. Thankyou . 🙏 🎸 ❤️

The 1980s was a huge time in revolutionizing the strat with tons of different super Strats. It’s kind of hard to say no one updated the Strat until Parker when there’s companies like Charvel and even Jackson. We got thinner necks profiles, flatter radiuses, closed tremolo systems. The guitar was optimized in the 1980s, and I really don’t think that Parker is all that more advanced

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

That's my point! (kinda)... Everyone was (and has been) just refining the strat with a mostly "form over function" approach... fixing a few things here and there that they felt they could do better but keeping it a 'strat stylr guitar'. Others that were trying to "re-imagine" the electric guitar were primarily making plastic midi style instruments, which imo, are not comparable. All of those manufacturers you listed made small changes here and there, but in essence, were making a strat (aka super strat). Not one made the number of drastic changes that Parker made. The parker Fly is NOT even in the same category as the strat. Most luthiers did not believe Ken made such a strong guitar... but check out my short i just posted where I actually stand on the neck of one and it does not budge. Insane engineering in the Parker

@Augrills

5 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken hell, if I’m a rock star the last thing I want is a guitar that I can’t break lol. I don’t think it makes sense to make all these practical adjustments but then use proprietary hardware for like everything. Most hobbyists won’t know how to work on it and techs wouldn’t even have the materials to work on it. I think that’s a huge functional flaw when you look at the logistics on successful guitars. The Fender strat is the most popular guitar of all time because it’s incredibly modular. That’s form and function

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

@Augrills 💯! That's why the Fender Strat is considered the greatest guitar of all time. Imo, it is at least... However there are still many flaws in its design that Ken saw as being "fixable". Again, the arguement is not that he made the best guitar ever, but rather he created something new when everyone else is just make copies of the strat/tele/LP. In order to fix some of the issues that musicians were asking for, it required doing something new. Which of course would result in proprietary parts. I.g. to make a more accurate and quieter tremolo system, you cant use springs, you need to use something more durable and solid in form... Proprietary parts come with the teritory when creating anything new. Ken was tired of all the common flaws and made a guitar that is still traditional in its basis of design (using wood, etc), but improved functional aspects of almost every component as it relates to life expectancy, consistency, durability, accuracy, etc etc. Its a perfect guitar to use in the studio and for others, live. Its not for everyone. But its undoubtly a remarkable piece in engineering and manufacturing. Ken knew the risks he was taking when making such a Proprietary instrument. He believed that people would want it due to how well it played and sounded... but he found out that musicians want something trusted and proven. MOST musicans are not typically open to new technology.

@Augrills

5 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken I feel like the musicians who are open to new tech are kids who can’t afford the thing. I do think it’s an interesting guitar, and your video on the history is very cool. But I just see so many flaws in this thing. One thing Ken didn’t think about is how rock musicians treat their instruments and the techniques and showmanship they use. As a tool, the Parker Fly is a 10/10. As an instrument, it seems very rigid and sterile to most electric guitarists. I think his talent and philosophy is much more appropriate for the market he’s in now making archtops

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

@@Augrills "as a tool, the parker fly is a 10/10" Exactly!

they're the same to me, both of the hypothetical options.

I thought the Nitefly was more to attract the strat buyer rather than to save money. I heard the Nitefly necks were still a lot of work/expense to make, but they were obliged to sell it cheaper as it's a bolt on and didn't have all the features of a fly.

@Piplodocus

4 ай бұрын

First fly I played was a pre-refined deluxe. Got me kinda hooked on the idea and feel, but I didn't actually want to buy one til they made the Mojo (refined) - got seymour duncans, very slightly thicker and also can't complain about that gorgeous flame maple top! Some of the simplifications were improvements and otherwise the same: it still has exactly the same trem, just the tension wheel is smaller and hidden inside. Later the refined ones got a few more changes and supposedly the neck changed when the headstock shape changed, which I don't think were improvements, and they had more quality issues later. So I definitely agree some eras may be better than others, but I'll take an early refined over a pre-refined and a late pre-refined over a late-refined. But ironically I play my modded Niteflies from around 2000-2001 the most these days! I use my neck single coil for too much funky stuff

@Jack_Plisken

4 ай бұрын

Thats correct. It was to attract buyers that were not willing to stray far from their comfort zone, but my understanding is that there was no plan originally to create a NiteFly, but that in doing so it allowed the company to be a bit more profitable as the Fly was not a "money maker".

I never got to try one because I have never seen a lefty in a store. A right handed friend tried one and his feedback was "Why don't they make all guitars like this?"

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

I never even saw any in a store. No dealers anywhere near me. Never saw one in person until I was in my 30s. They only made 30,000 of the pre refined era Flys over the 10 year span Ken owned the company. Sounds like a lot but not when you compare it to the 10,000 that Fender pumps out in a week.

Ken Parker’s Archtoppery series of videos are some of the greatest lutherie videos ever created IMO. Look them up.

@bluglass7819

2 ай бұрын

I thought the Transtrem would stay in tune while you use the bar so you could bend whole chords?

@bluglass7819

2 ай бұрын

Have you seen any of the videos about the Fly prototype? It is even cooler and more innovative.

@Jack_Plisken

2 ай бұрын

I've watched every episode. Very informative series. The neck journey has been really insightful.

@bluglass7819

2 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken you are not kidding. He makes me realize how hard it is to innovate. I’ve been contemplating ordering titanium rod… he already did it. I’m still going to do it. I’m definitely going back to single action truss rods for the weight relief.

@Jack_Plisken

2 ай бұрын

@bluglass7819 The unique feature of the Transtrem was that it would transpose your tuning. Same thing a capo does, but without a capo. And yes I talk about and show the prototype later on in my video. He has the black one (the potato chip) and the original Fly prototype which is natural wood and has the sticker on the face of a 🪰

I remember seriously considering buying Parker Fly, but I ultimately bought an Ed Roman Quicksilver.... Cue ip the haters!! 🤣🤣🤣 Still love the Parkers!

i had 2 of them, when they worked they were amazing but when they started giving problems they couldnt be fixed, the trem spring shattered in both of them, the piezo saddles quit but worst of all the frets started falling off, later guitars like the dragon fly fixed some issues but by that point the company was basically gone

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

The trem spring shattering twice is very rare and is typically caused by the tension wheel being over tightended and then dive bombing. I will admit that I do not like how they advertised the bridge as being able to be set to a 'fixed' position... they achieve that by adding more tension to the plate with the step stop switch set to the down position. Tight enough so that when you bend a string, it does not adjust the pitch of others. Youre then supposed to take the trem bar out so you dont try to depress it. If you do, you could snap the plate. So most of the time, its due to not being properly setup. As for the frets. As i mention in the video, that primarily is an issue with post 2003 (refined) models. But it can happen to any of em... but ask yourself this. Would you rather have to MAYBE, reglue a fret once every 20 years or so, or have to repair/replace EVERY fret, once every 3 to 5 years? Like i mention, they're not perfect by any means, but they are revolutionary.

@darkestfugue

6 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken no i would rather have regular stainless steel frets like both ibanez's have, then i know they will last without them falling off the fret board in the middle of a gig lol, like i said they used this method later on the dragon fly but it was very late in the game, ive never been much of a trem user i used to use them for a bit of light wobble, the spring on my old supreme ended up with a clean break, but the spring in my revised mojo literally shattered into pieces like glass and i wasnt even using it at the time, i had both of them set up so you could have the switch in the back floating or notched up for bend down only mode, they werent over tightened, but thats just the start of it, the pickup selector on my supreme stopped working, so did the little light inside, the bridge pickup had to be replaced, the piezo saddles on the mojo didnt last very long and when i replaced them with the after market ghost saddles they didnt even last a year before they quit as well, i gigged both of these guitars extensively so of course they will be more prone to problems than if you just played them at home, when the boss gt 1000 arrived on the scene i was able to programme it to have the acoustic sim working in conjuction with the electric signal, which is the reason i bought the fly in the first place, i retired both guitars and bought an ibanez AZ prestige, with its perfect ss frets all access neck joint and 10 pickup tones, its the perfect live guitar, the only thing it doesnt have is the flys wonderful looks which many hate but i loved, i ended up selling both flys to a local guy who was obsessed with them, even with my transparency of all the problems they had, he left my place like he had won the lottery, having said that i did sell them cheap but i was just relieved to get rid of them

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

@@darkestfugue fair enough. Id be apt to guessing that you had post 2003 models. But again, neither are perfect... they just revolutionized guitar manufacturing.

@darkestfugue

6 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken no the supreme was a 2000 model and the mojo at the time was the new model that introduced the revised models around 2005 or 6 is when i got mine, the older supreme was the better guitar, it felt better, felt like it was built better and generally i just liked it more, the mojo had a narrow fretboard if you werent careful the high e could often slip off, i didnt like that, it wasnt finished as well either with a few rough spots in the lacquer and the electronics felt very cheap, it felt like it was being built to a price where as the old supreme felt like no expense was being spared, which is kinda true since it cost over 3000 dollars at the time which was insane, at the time i think it was more expensive than a core PRS custom 24

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

@@darkestfugue exactly! As i mentioned in the video, during kens ownership he said "we were making $10,000 guitars for $2500"... when USM took over they tried to flip that and build $2000 guitars and sell em for $3000. Ken has stated in multiple interviews that itbwas impossible to make the Fly the way he wanted, and make it profitable. They looked for every way possible to reduce overhead in production to increase margins but could not find a way... the only way to make money on em was to sell in bulk and push as many units as possible. Thats another reason I think the pre-refined era was the best. You were getting a guitar that cost more to manufacture then what they were asking... no other guitar manufacturer in history has ever done that to my knowledge. Because it does not make business sense.

I heard that Ken Parker made a new company, and makes archtop guitars now.

@Jack_Plisken

Ай бұрын

Yes. I mention it in the video but I noticed I provided the wrong web address lol. It's kenparkerarchtops.com Not, kenparkerarchOtops.com like I showed in the video. Oops If you have $40,000 they are a good investment!

10/10 vid… always loved this guitar after seeing Deron Miller of CKY use it for so long

Function over form? Not totally. The Upper horn was designed to match the headstock more than for any functional improvement. The upper horn is renowned for stabbing some players in the Sternum whilst playing in the sitting position. The Dragonfly/Maxxfly models addressed this and didn't unbalance the guitar in any way. KP is a genius or a bit of a 'mad professor' depending on how you care to view him. I prefer to think the former but there is no doubt that he added unecessary complexity in the OG/pre-refined Fly. Too many bespoke components too. The routed battery compartment and cover are a perfect example. Ribbon cable 'wirng' and plate trem springs are another. Owners are now suffering from a lack of parts as a result. Gen.1 Dimarzios were basically a Tone Zone and Air Norton with bespoke fixings. The Gen.2s are (I believe) bespoke to Parker. Interesting that you think they sound 'bassy'. They were always criticised for being 'sterile' sounding but took pedals incredibly well as a result. I own Gen.1, Gen.2 and Seymour Duncan (JB/Jazz in the Fly Mojo) equipped Fly models. The Dimarzios are very 'bright' and thin sounding to me. I definitely prefer the warmth of the SDs. Each to their own though. I love my Parker Fly guitars but fear of parts failure and long term maintenance difficulties always loom in the background... 🙅‍♂

@Jack_Plisken

7 ай бұрын

If i had to guess, id say you did not watch the whole video or missed my overall point. The argument was that he approached the design with a BALANCE of form and function. I mentioned function over form at the beginning, explaining that in most designs (specifically architectural), form follows function. This was also approached by excluding subjectivity out of the argument as much as possible. I am very familiar with the horn poking people in the sternum, however that is subjective. It does not poke me when i play either standing or sitting. However I play with a classical hold when sitting. I clearly state that the FORM of the horns design, was for continuity between the headstock, and that the FUNCTION of the horns design allowed for the guitar to hang, in a balanced playing position. Therefore, there was a balance of form and function in the design. I then explain how and why the headstock is shaped the way it is. As for the dragonfly, I would ask... why was the design of the 'horn' for the DF shaped the way it is? How did that design come to be? Was it just some designer sketching away, thinking of what he or she thinks looks good? Kens design was not very "out there" in reality... example: the body shape has a greater historical relevance to musical instruments than even the stratocastor. The whole point is that every guitar manufacturer since the strat, just copies the strat, tele, or les paul... where as Ken went farther back in history in his design... look past the surface... As for the pickups, you bring up again, a subjective argument... i mentioned how it sounds in the video as my personal opinion and was very brief. I would say sterile is another adjective that could be used. But again. Sound is subjective. As long as i can hear every string, i can alter the tone more, down the chain via amp and pedals. Those have a bigger impact on tone imo. As for your fear... i believe its un justified... sure, parkers CAN have issues, primarily frets falling off. But the whole purpose of the design was to eliminate common issues... as stated in the video, nobody believed that he fixed the issues for all the common problems as he stated... "they need something proven"...only time would tell... and again, 30 years later, we are seeing Flys in better condition than ANY mass produced guitar in history. Show me any 30 year old guitar model that has been played heavily, and does not have a single bit of oxidization on the hardware, or the truss rod has never needed adjusted, etc. etc. I would rather have to re-glue a single fret that may fall off once every 15 years, then to refret, crown, polish, etc. An entire neck every few years. And as for the bridge and plate... i feel i covered the benefits of that pretty well AND the drawbacks. Thanks for the comment!

@Jack_Plisken

7 ай бұрын

Oh and people are suffering from a lack of parts because the company no longer exists... this is a whole other discussin. The parker does have proprietary parts but again, the arguement falls back to "you should not need additional parts so long as you know what youre doing". Luckily thanks to the Fly Clone project, you can get the ribbon cables etc. But yes if my power chip goes out, I will have find an alternative... but this is completely different argument from the point of my video.

@ThePedroDB

5 ай бұрын

@@Jack_Plisken you should perhaps stop making guesses and asumptions about others. I did watch your video completely. My comments were directed at the Parker guitar rather than your video specifically. However, I did add some additional information which was not covered in your content. It was meant to provide a counter-perspective from a fellow Fly owner and fan, rather than be seen as criticism of you or your video - but you do seem to have taken it as such. That's unfortunate but beyond my control..

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

@@ThePedroDB cool man! Thanks for watching!

Hello there!! Greetings from Northern Ireland. 👋🏻👋🏻👋🏻

I tried a (used) O.G. Fly back circa 2010-2011, and while I LOVE his ethos as an industrial designer/design engineer (especially in the mindset of neck/fingerboard stability), I just didn't like the guitar itself no matter how much I wanted to. The neck profile is bizarre. It goes from waaaaaay too fat and C-shaped at the nut to awesomely flat and thin at the body joint. Why not do it flat the whole way? It's like he assumed players all wanted to play just cowboy chords and have a "vintage feel" at the nut, and ONLY wanted to shred as they went up the fretboard. I kinda feel the same way about multi-radius fretboards. The second egregious decision he made was to sticky-ass gloss the back of the neck. I started off with raw wood maple necks sanded smooth as babe's bottom, and have played Ibanezes with their magic smooth neck finishes, and even have a Steinberger that's smooth matte all-over. Gloss back necks are an affront to the cosmos and I think more guitar players would agree with me than those who like gloss ones. Finally, that jank upper horn dug into my chest like heart disease in America. I don't even like it on Strats/superstrats (preferring singlecuts actually), and the effect is really exasperated on the Fly. It was downright painful to play sitting down. No bueno. Finally, you will never, ever, ever convince me that anything this side of an Evertune-equipped guitar will be as stable as a proper double-locking system, ESPECIALLY if you're going to opt for a vibrato bridge! I know they're fiddly to set up and restring (however, on the contrary, they are simple as store bought pie if you block/fix them), but what's the point of a dead stable neck through the use of composites and then have an open nut that's not going to stay stable under vibrato use? I absolutely agree he was an innovator and should be a benchmark moving forward (Aristides comes to mind), though. I love the history of this guitar. Thanks for making such an involved video on it, Jeremy.

finding parkers ugly seems to be an american thing. the backmindedness too. almost wvery guitarist here had his stints with piezos… selftuning… teuffel, but hey, that les paul over there just does something right. had a nitefly2 heavey as f… had to tune my floyds the nitefly never. fly supreme where are you?

if you have a lathe and a degree in manufacturing, engineering, and design, finding replacement parts for your Parker (notably the proprietary bridge) becomes less of a headache

Mark Farner!

*Promo SM* ✔️

I’ve learned to love the telecaster but compared to the Les Paul or Strat or heck even the Jazzmaster it’s a pretty ugly shape.

@Jack_Plisken

6 күн бұрын

That's subjective. I disagree. But that's why I also did not try and argue whether this looks good or bad (I just shared my opinion). I think they look amazing. Curious if you actually have ever seen one up close or played one. Beautiful guitars

I have to say i dont like guitars that are the same. That's the reason i hate PRS. How are you going to find the guitar right for you if their all identical. Every car or truck isnt just like the other. We everyone to their own obviously has different tastes you may love the sound the weight the feel of the guitar i walked away from.i know parkers and paul reed smiths are extremely well built guitars. But for me and many others how can you bond with a specific instrument when they all are practically the same. You cant. If the one today sounds like the one built 25 years ago how will my tone stand out from the other parker players. I can certainly hear page play or gary Rossington and easily identify who's who

@Jack_Plisken

6 ай бұрын

Sounds like youre talking tone. And that, of course is subjective... i personally feel I can alter the tone of a guitar way more down the chain (pedals and amps) then I can with the guitar alone. As long as I have a guitar that can accurately represent each note, with clarity and sustain, ill buy an amp that colors it the way I want... the rest is mostly placebos and marketing. What feels comfortable to play and what players like, are all unique... not all players will like a parker fly. But if you did like it, Ken assured that all future ones you play. You will as well... whether thats a good or bad thing... It's definitely extremly hard to achieve in guitar manufacturing. Again, the parker fly is not the BEST guitar ever... but revolutionary and innovative that changed/influenced guitar manufacturing going forward, juat like the strat.

@podfuk

5 ай бұрын

It was Paul's main goal, to make high quality guitar that sound the same all time every time. So you could grab PRS and immediately play live venue, or start recording in the studio without compromise. Its not design for everyone and like Joe Bonamassa said, from 10 Les Pauls you will find 6 are mediocre, 3 are ok sounding and 1 will sound fantastic and searching for that one is what he's love the most. If that's for you, great, to each its own. ;)

if you play guitar while seated, the body shape verymuch is "function" and not "form". ergonomics are function. to this day teles and strats cannot be beaten function-wise, and it helps that they still look amazing too. Fender was so far ahead of his time that it blows my mind and always will.

@Jack_Plisken

5 ай бұрын

I still believe the design of the body was approached with a "balance of form and function" like the rest of the guitar. Part of the design of the body was for ergonomics (primarily to be light weight, and balance), the other changes were for looks and historical relevance to the arch top and the lute. As mentioned in the video, the addition of the recurve on the face of the trebel side was added solely as a shoutout to archtops (I confirmed this through Ken). Ken's original ideal was for it to be the same thickness all the way through so the added surface area for comfort was just an added benefit rather than the purpose for the recurve. I believe the Fender was more function over form. And yes, it is one of the greatest guitar ever invented. My argument is that the Parker Fly, from a engineering/design point of view, is just as great as the first fender strat, les paul, tele, and frying pan... i wouls not say its a better guitar. And as for your claim of fender teles and strats being un beaten in function... there are many other guitars that take Fenders strat and tele designs to the next level. But OBJECTIVELY, the Parker fly has the best piezo transducers, stays in tune better, has longer lasting frets via the hardened stainless steel (which Fender and others will never be able to replicate unless they go with tangless frets), the parker is lighter weight with just as much sustain, and it will not warp or need truss rod adjustments. the hardware wont corrode or need replaced, the trem system is more stable and quieter, the list goes on. So although I disagree with your last statment, all those improvements do not mean the Parker is a better guitar! .