Matt Tuck Signature Rhoads review by Jackson

logo Ultimate Guitar
  • Sound: 7
  • Overall Impression: 9
  • Reliability & Durability: 10
  • Action, Fit & Finish: 7
  • Features: 9
  • Reviewer's score: 8.4 Superb
  • Users' score: 7.7 (117 votes)
Jackson: Matt Tuck Signature Rhoads
10

Price paid: A$ 2600

Purchased from: Bavas Music City

Sound — 7
I bought this guitar with the intention of only using it for drop tuned metal and, well, it has performed flawlessly. I've been using it through my Peavey Vypyr 75 amp without a noise gate or anything of that nature. On a high gain setting, the guitar sounds great. On a clean setting, not so great. It just feels a little weak for my liking. Its pretty clear that this guitar wasnt designed for much other than metal which, like I said before, is ok because that is the soul reason I bought it in the first place.

Overall Impression — 9
I've been playing for about 6 years now and this is definetly one of the best guitars I have played in that time. It suits my style down to a tee and there isn't much I would change about it. The one minor gripe I have with this guitar is that the inlays are a little plain but its not a deal breaker. The thing I love most about this guitar is definetly the finish. I chose the silver sparkle finish which obviously won't be for everyone but it really does look great in the light. If it were stolen I would definetly try and get another one, its just THAT good. All in all, if you play metal music and like the Rhoads body design, definetly consider this next time your in the market for a new guitar.

Reliability & Durability — 10
This guitar feels like it was built to last. The input jack feels good, the strap buttons are surpisingly big and feel strong, and like I said before, the finish is flawless and seems like its going to last a long time. The guitar has a pretty basic setup due to the lack of a Floyd and there isnt really much that could go wrong with it so yeah, I would use it without backup.

Action, Fit & Finish — 7
Out of the box, this guitar had a very low action which resulted in alot of fret buzz. The bridge pickup would also cut in an out while being used exclusivly but like the low action, was easily fixed. Other than these two minor problems the guitar is flawless. Not a single scratch, chip, or spot of rust which is always a good thing.

Features — 9
This guitar, as the name suggests, was made by Jackson in 2009(not 100% positive of the year) in conjunction with Bullet for My Valentine lead singer and guitarist, Matt Tuck. Made in Japan, it has a Rhoads design and neck-thru-body construction. The neck itself is quite thin and has 22 jumbo frets which makes it ideal for playing fast leads. It features active EMG pickups, 81 for the bridge and 85 for the neck, Sperzel locking tuners, a JT390 adjustable bridge with string-thru body, a master tone and volume knob, graphite nut, and a 3 position toggle switch. It should also be noted that it has a reversed headstock which obviously won't be to everyones liking but I personally love the look of it. It also came with a moulded case. This guitar can best be described as an RR1T with the afformentioned reversed headstock and EMG pickups rather than Seymour Duncans. The guitar comes in three finishes. White with black bevels, black with silver sparkle bevels and sivler sparkle with black bevels.

130 comments sorted by best / new / date

    plunkett
    you guys wanting to argue are ****ing tools. insulting someone cause they like a certain band/artist/guitar manufacturer. grow up, man. :/ I, personally, dig it, as all sig guitars you're paying for the name on it, too, but i love the Rhoads' guitars and a reverse headstock is just badass IMO. just my $0.02
    jesusismyr0ck
    EpiExplorer wrote: . Christ.. may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much) but Matt Tuck is a wanker.
    says the man that has epiphone explorer in his name.. granted matt tuck is a wanker, but jackson guitars are pretty decent, in my experience much better than epiphone
    Skinny91
    I'm not a big Matt Tuck/BFMV fan ether, but I really like the look of this guitar. Just a nice looking Rhoads, and not plastered with BFMV logos.
    niejel
    SOADriff wrote: i love the look of it but i would never buy a guitar with matt tucks name on it.
    I would. They're my main influence when it comes to music.
    richso
    niejel wrote: SOADriff wrote: i love the look of it but i would never buy a guitar with matt tucks name on it. I would. They're my main influence when it comes to music.
    niejel i agree with u 100%
    Arystar
    may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much)
    dude..jackson guitars are good. especially the Rhoads series. they're great guitars and at least jackson keeps its pricing true to the axe you get, I like jackson and ESP guitars but just like gibson ESP is very commercial and asks alot of money for guitar that aren't worth that money.
    Tld22341
    Who cares whose name is on it. Neck thru, Emg 81 and 85 pickups, quality wood, and a bad shape. If you don't like BFMV, the black one looks like Kirk Hammett's old Rhoads guitar.
    Mazz211
    BloodRedSkies wrote: this guitar has the looks, but that's about it
    Have you played the guitar? I Highly doubt it.
    Amuro Jay
    mlukeroberts222 wrote: I thought BFMV played ESP'S??
    Padge does. His signature is with them, it's basically a remake of the DV8 with his graphics on it and EMGs. Matt Tuck signature or not, this is a great guitar. It's pretty much an RR1T with a different paintjob.
    jon.peebles
    goatermeister wrote: Kinda gay, a signature guitar of an already signature guitar. A Matt Tuck Randy Rhoads Jackson V. Silly.
    Yea. Almost as silly as a signature les paul. Wait...
    SynCity
    Hm, you people insult Matt, BFMV, and Matt's signature guitar, which is strange considering that Matt Tuck is more than likely way more talented than of you--same goes for the rest of the band--and I'd be willing to bet that this guitar is probably better than anything you guys have as well.
    EpiExplorer
    jesusismyr0ck wrote: EpiExplorer wrote: . Christ.. may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much) but Matt Tuck is a wanker. says the man that has epiphone explorer in his name.. granted matt tuck is a wanker, but jackson guitars are pretty decent, in my experience much better than epiphone
    Good fer you, but its down to individual experience.
    bfmvmaddyk
    BFMV rules!!!!!One of d best guitarists but still Padge is the man who jst rocks d whole song wid his awsum solos.. This is one of d most awesome looking nd sexiest guitars Ive ever seen.....
    rob904
    Tapping_Ninja wrote: rob904 wrote: r0ckth3d34n wrote: EpiExplorer wrote: jesusismyr0ck wrote: EpiExplorer wrote: . Christ.. may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much) but Matt Tuck is a wanker. says the man that has epiphone explorer in his name.. granted matt tuck is a wanker, but jackson guitars are pretty decent, in my experience much better than epiphone Good fer you, but its down to individual experience. No, it's down to being an ignorant opinionated dolt. High end Jackson > Epiphone. You can say you liked playing it more than a Jackson, but there's no way you can call an Epiphone Explorer "better" than a Jackson Rhoads. Anyway, this would be the only signature guitar I would ever consider buying. I really like the inlays and the white with black bevels finish. I've got a squire that kicks most of the japanese made jacksons in the balls, you never know his explorer could have been one from a kickass production year. that said a jackson USA custom shop will destroy any epiphone no matter. what There is no way you have a squire that kicks any Jackson guitar in the balls... Let alone the ones made in Japan. Pictures or it didn't happen.
    93-94 squire guitars were made by the fuji string company (which i'm pretty sure is making all of BC Rich's current imports, but I could be wrong on that), which is based in japan, but the factories are in korea, they're pretty popular, google it. pictures wouldn't do it justice because my girlfriend's covered it in stickers unfortunately
    Amaseng
    Matt Tuck played his silver version when I saw them, they put on a great show.
    Viotto
    I could guess that it is a good guitar, I play a lot of BFMV songs and I own a Jackson Rhoads RR24M. I love that guitar and BMFV is one of my favourite bands :and the RR24M + Peavey Vypyr 30W I own are almost perfect to play Bullet for my Valentine
    nda228
    umm. you guys do realize its 2.6k in australian dollars. hence the A$
    mikeiff
    katz_ug wrote: I'd rather get myself a PRS but anyways, that's just a personal opinion. Good Review though.
    +1!
    guitarninjaruy
    Should have a floyd rose on it! And well its many Jackson RR signatures out there. It is just a common shape.
    MeLodicDethMTL
    Wow the price... I know the price is like double at Australia but it'll be better to get something from bmusic for 2.6 grands
    dean8993
    i would get this but i already have a Dean Dave Mustaine Series but i love the look of this.
    Galfadez
    henkka_potku wrote: I hate BFMV, Matt Tuck, metalcore and V-shaped guitars. Sounds like the perfect instrument for me.
    I disagree
    Ali-b912
    I don't care who's name is on it. Nobody should get a signature Randy Rhoads model guitar, that's ****ing stupid. It's Randy's signature model; I thought that's why they didn't give Alexi Laiho one. And Laiho has hundreds of times more talent then Matt Tuck.
    DJ2109
    To anyone complaining about the price he paid, here in Australia it costs generally around twice the price for a guitar, I know cus I was pricing an LTD that was $1200 in America and $2500 at an Aus music shop, its rubbish
    knifeline98
    dynastywest69 wrote: BFMV ****ing rule!!! Matt Tuck is one the best guitarists out there atm! I'm guessing everyone that hates him out there are probably jealous of his rise to fame as he is a genius plus your probably all American knuckle shufflers too... And this guitar is sexy, well worth it IMO Randy would probably be proud to know Matt shares the same passion for the RR guitar's
    So, i'm a big Bullet fan myself, my best friend and band are too, but I wouldnt say Matt is one of the best, he's still the rhythm..singing, yeah, he's pretty versatile (Tears Dont Fall acoustic for you doubters), but i give credit to Padge for solos, and if you want to talk about a great vocalist/guitarist, I think that Gabriel Garcia deserves a mention..the KID from Black Tide. He can shred with the best of em and can sing pretty decent. Like I said, love Bullet, but overzealousness is unnecessary.
    Single Foo
    TheDefected wrote: Single Foo wrote: slipknot_420 wrote: Hmm sounds good through my peavey vyper?? Doubt it dude, stfu VYPYR r thine shizz, if you dissagree go ****ing get one, and see the ****ing light Not meaning to double post here, but... Emg's through a solid state modeling amp? That would sound so sterile and digital >.< btw, lrn2tubeamp.
    yes well "would" eh? I've got qute a few axes with EMG's and have played them through every ACTUAL peavey amp that the VYPYR models, it does not sound "sterile" or "digital" it wounds pretty freaking sexy if you ask me :p
    death_asylum_5
    nice body. u can easily wrap ur arms around it 2 play w/out hurting ur armpits or anything... yeah, i know that sounded wrong, but still. nice guitar.
    niejel
    ozzieosborm15 wrote: haha ill buy this when i get enough money, bfmv is amazing. hearts burst into fire anybody
    my wallet would burst into fire.
    kaosxrocker
    I know this is probably a stupid question that's been asked before, by why is there a signature version of a signature guitar?
    theogonia777
    i have to say, the silver one looks awesome, but i'm highly against buying signature models, and i don't care for BFMV.
    theblackwell
    How about you stfu and get a real amp. Maybe something with some tubes. A solid state wannabe modeling amp is crap. ESPECIALLY running active electronics through it.
    Single Foo wrote: dude, stfu VYPYR r thine shizz, if you dissagree go ****ing get one, and see the ****ing light
    Single Foo wrote: slipknot_420 wrote: Hmm sounds good through my peavey vyper?? Doubt it dude, stfu VYPYR r thine shizz, if you dissagree go ****ing get one, and see the ****ing light
    Hells.Mascot
    Signature instruments are almost always a marketing means of making more money. It says nothing about the quality of the instrument, but if it's what you want, no one should have anything against anyone else for wanting to spend the extra money.
    Good_Lord
    I hate BFMV, Matt Tuck, metalcore and V-shaped guitars. Sounds like the perfect instrument for me.
    I bet most users on this website don't even know how to differentiate metalcore from what they call '' real metal '' ... And don't flame me , I'm into all the stuff between The Black Dahlia Murder and Threat Signal , all going by Ensiferum , Amon Amarth and Turmion Ktilt .
    corrda00
    beau05 wrote: personally i like the rhoads style guitars, but having silver sparkle make it look like is should be used for trance metal, and thin necks arnt really my style
    Alpha_Wolf wrote: ^+1 I use a ESP F series bass for my jazz band. Ive also used a semi hollow BC Rich Warlock acoustic for Jazz. beau05 wrote: personally i like the rhoads style guitars, but having silver sparkle make it look like is should be used for trance metal, and thin necks arnt really my style ... Since when does a guitar's finish determine what genre of music it plays?
    bass-boy-garith
    SynCity wrote: Hm, you people insult Matt, BFMV, and Matt's signature guitar, which is strange considering that Matt Tuck is more than likely way more talented than of you--same goes for the rest of the band--and I'd be willing to bet that this guitar is probably better than anything you guys have as well.
    How were you able to type that when you were on your knees servicing Matt?
    ciadude2
    I like a few BFMV songs, and I'm a big fan of Jacksons in general. I probably wouldn't pay that much for this guitar though. I might pay like $600 for this but signature guitars are mostly like a ploy for cash.
    theblackwell
    Why would Matt Tuck put a floyd rose on his signature model when he plays rhythm?
    guitarninjaruy wrote: Should have a floyd rose on it! And well its many Jackson RR signatures out there. It is just a common shape.
    EpiExplorer
    . Christ.. may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much) but Matt Tuck is a wanker.
    Kostas(IbaneZ)
    that guitar is discontinued imo,havent seen on the jackson's page.and that doesnt cost 2600$,i payed only 1244euros which is rougly 1800usd.and for people bitching about names,the only place you see matt's name,is his signature and figure at the back of the headstock.now stfu
    megadethfan 666
    EpiExplorer wrote: . Christ.. may be a nice guitar (for a jackson, which aint saying much) but Matt Tuck is a wanker.
    jesusismyr0ck wrote: says the man that has epiphone explorer in his name.. granted matt tuck is a wanker, but jackson guitars are pretty decent, in my experience much better than epiphone
    thats exactly what i was thinking on the first part i think all gibson products are overpriced crud, but jackson guitars are one of the better guitar brands. And to the explorer guy COME ON your probably some kid who needs to get a life and a new guitar(perhaps this rhoades you will like it allot more that an epiphone i can tell you that)
    Single Foo
    slipknot_420 wrote: Hmm sounds good through my peavey vyper?? Doubt it
    dude, stfu VYPYR r thine shizz, if you dissagree go ****ing get one, and see the ****ing light
    Rocks ur Life
    Looks like an awesome guitar, but I wouldnt shell out 2.6k for it. Rather go for an RR5 with duncans for half the price and change to EMGs if I want to plus it has an extra volume knob. A guitarists name doesnt make a guitar better.
    my thoughts exactly, almost to the word. BFMV isn't exactly the greatest band ever, but i do admit its a nice looking guitar, but it's much more cost effective, and probably better quality, if you go out and buy the cheaper RR5 w/ duncans, or even build a guitar in the style of the RR and drop in some EMG's
    bustapr
    Looks like an awesome guitar, but I wouldnt shell out 2.6k for it. Rather go for an RR5 with duncans for half the price and change to EMGs if I want to plus it has an extra volume knob. A guitarists name doesnt make a guitar better.