-------------------
DISCLAIMER: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THOMANN, ALL RESPONSIBILITY AND ALL ERRORS AND SHORTCOMINGS LIE SOLELY WITH JACKSON GUITARS.
--------------------
As a guitarist with more than 15 years dedicated almost exclusively to Jackson guitars, I thought I had seen it all—until I saw this guitar.
I've owned, played, and maintained various Jacksons made in the USA, Japan, Indonesia, China—you name it. I've handled their budget models, professional series, brand-new instruments, and heavily used ones. Through all these guitars and basses, I have never encountered quality control failures this catastrophic. What I received isn't just a flawed instrument; it's an insult to the brand and to players everywhere. The guitar I received appears to have completely bypassed any quality control measures. Despite being brand new, it exhibits numerous manufacturing defects and finish issues that would be unacceptable even on a budget instrument.
FAULTS:
1. Neck Misalignment
The neck isn't properly aligned with the body at the bolt-on joint. This is a fundamental structural issue that could (and probably will) affect playability, intonation, and overall performance.
2.Poor Wiring/Soldering
The soldering reveals wiring that looks like a first attempt at electronics work. The connections are messy, with wires haphazardly connected and poorly secured. For a new instrument, this level of craftsmanship is inexcusable—it wouldn’t pass muster in a high school shop class, let alone a professional instrument workshop.
3.Bridge Defect
The bridge has a glaring defect on the rear side, around the mounting hole on the side where the lighter-gauge strings go. The surface shows coarse, parallel striations characteristic of an abrasive cutting wheel—not the clean, controlled cuts expected in precision instrument manufacturing. The rough-cut surface still has sharp burrs and an inconsistent texture, indicating no effort was made to smooth the edge with progressive grit abrasives. The raw, exposed metal lacks paint, powder coating, or corrosion treatment. The cut is uneven, with visible deviation from the bridge’s intended contour, suggesting freehand machining without jigs or guides—something truly hard to believe in 2025. Additionally, on the saddles (front side), there are visible spots where some dirt (possibly residue from the manufacturing process—heat, a bad mixture, etc.) was left behind before coating.
4. Cosmetic and Structural Defects
Poor and damaged binding, visible scratches, and blemishes around the binding, neck, and headstock (including a node) would be embarrassing on a €50 starter guitar, but the nut installation is where things really become unforgivable. It’s poorly cut and glued on—as if by a child or by someone completely disinterested in their work and the end result.
5. Loose Hardware
Most of the screws on the guitar were loose—some more than others.
PROS:
1. Setup:
The guitar arrived with a surprisingly decent setup. It holds tuning well, and the octaves were spot on.
2. Fretwork
The fretwork is excellent—perfectly crowned and leveled, smooth, polished, with no sharp edges.
3. Neck & Balance
The neck feels great, like most of Jackson’s compound-radius necks, and the guitar is nicely balanced—no neck dive whatsoever.
4. Pickups
The pickups are great for the price—actually amazing compared to some of Jackson’s other high-output models I’ve owned.
5. Aesthetic Appeal (from a distance):
Visually, from afar, the guitar looks very nice, and the satin finish doesn’t stain as easily as I feared.
Even though the guitar has so many serious cosmetic and mechanical faults, I’m probably not going to return it. This is my second Kelly, and I never truly "healed" from selling my first one 12 years ago. I’ll play it a bit more and decide in the meantime. I have the proper tools, I have the knowledge, and I enjoy working on guitars—so I may take this on as a project and nurture it until it shines as it should have from day one.
I strongly advise potential buyers to inspect any new Jackson purchase with extreme scrutiny. This guitar represents a complete failure in quality control.
Hopefully, this is just a 1-in-10,000 case and others are receiving properly manufactured and inspected instruments, from what I've seen in other reviews.
But if this is the new standard, then Jackson has, unfortunately, lost a dedicated customer after all these years.
