- Feb 10, 2008
- Reaction score
Probably cause of the Braz in 03 and Honduras mahogany in 07?
I have a 2005 R9 and a 2013 R7. Here´s what I gather from that.
Finish: R9 wins (harder, slicker, no VOS).
Colour: R7 wins back colour, also the 2013 gold is nicer than the earlier stuff, but can´t compare gold and burst.
Tuners/hardware: R7 tuners look and feel better, same goes for bridge.
Pickups: R7 wins.
Fretboard: R9 wins.
Acoustic sound: R9 wins.
Neck: can´t compare, two different profiles, both are nice.
Electronics: Both are decent but the pots on the R7 have a slightly better taper.
If you go by numbers the R7 has a slight edge, but on the other hand the stuff that might matter more (ie not so easy to change out), like acoustic sound, fretboard and finish to me is more important.
wondering what are considered the best years for r4's, r6's and r7's?
looking to pick up a beat up player grade example at a good price for playing out.
i know '03 and '07 were considered "good years" for r8/r9/r0's, but don't know anything about the gold tops.
Anywhere from about 92 or whenever the reissues started to present.
One from before this time could feel a bit insubstantial due to their non existence.
This question gets asked over and over again. Maybe we need a sticky or a blatant banner saying 'there are no good years'.
Its one of those myths, where you get 5 or 10 people saying their guitars from x year are good, and by extension therefore the entire years production of thousands must also be gooddespite them never having even laid eyes on them. And then you rely on some stranger's opinion who might have completely different tastes in tone as your judge of the fraction of a percentage of that years output.
Not what I'd call statistically reliable.
If it were true, then it would apply to all 2007 historics, so no, it is not true. You like one particular R9 that happened to be made in 2007. There really nothing more to it.