I apologize if I am being a bit wordy here, but in doing so attempting to be thorough.
I can't find it now but I have an article somewhere here about Matsumoku's factory. It clearly shows a CNC machine making a body, another shot of one of the workers painting guitars with a rack of bodies hanging next to him, and another working on fretboards and frets. Each person did what they were best at and were experts at what they did. That was one of the things that made Matsumoku and other Japanese manufacturers good at what they did. Each employee was a specialist at what they did. Henry Ford proved that an assembly line was not only more efficient and faster but also produced better quality as each worker had their own area of expertise. The Japanese were no different.
A bolt-neck may have had as many as 5 or more people build it on an assembly line. The neck may have been the 135th made whereas the body the 96th, and the fretboard came from the 3rd batch of rosewood even if the production number indicates the 34th made. The serial can indicate only one thing. The umpteenth neck plate was used to fasten that neck to that body. Nothing more. Again, a serial number stamped it the back of the headstock was an entirely different creature altogether but could have also been composed of parts made at different times. Even Fender Custom Shop guitars that come with a certificate of authenticity in no way indicates all the components were the umpteenth made. It simply assigns a unique ID to the guitar as a whole. This applies to any bolt neck guitar.
Models such as the Neal Schon or Gerry Cott PEs may have been very limited runs but even with those there is no way to know whether the body or the neck were the umpteenth made and whether they have matching birthdays. This is a common misconception. Only if a guitar is a one off hand made by a single luthier can one be sure all of it was made at once.
A bolt neck serial number can only loosely indicate when the components were made and in no way indicates it was the umpteenth one off the line.
The point being it was an assembly line. Bolt neck guitars are on the economical shelf with neck-thru and custom models such as the Neal Schon occupying the top. There were other signature guitars as well that were limited in production, primarily due to additional costs and as a marketing strategy. It would make no sense to give an economical model any extra undue attention. Their production was as inexpensive and efficient as possible as they were intended to fill that niche. Inexpensive. My CS350s were priced far lower than other models such as the PE-R80s I have had. A CS350 took far less time and labor to manufacture.
Shiro Arai was no dim wit. If a color didn't sell, it was abandoned. If he and Arai Co. felt a color would sell it was added. In reality Shiro Arai was a marketing genius. If it sold he had it made, if it didn't it was goodbye model. It is well known Arai Co. distributed different models for different markets such as the US, Japan (domestic), or Europe for example. It is well documented that colors, appointments, and features often change from model year to model year.
My PE-R60 is a good example of this. The PE-R60 was intended to be the little brother to the PE-R80 but apparently did not sell well. Enter the PE-60. Goodbye PE-R60. But, it was not a limited run. The CSB450 Black 'N' Gold I have however WAS a limited edition and the slick confirms it as they clearly indicate limited edition.
http://www.matsumoku.org/models/ariapro ... s/pg3.htmlOne of the gripes we've had here was the fact that some Vantage models were schizophrenic and were subject to "change without notice". This makes it much harder to nail down any concrete information. Concrete being the key word. We have so little information on some of the Vantage models it is hard to make any assumptions at all. The owners and distributors of the Vantage label would sometimes change their minds with regards to specs seemingly on a whim. The FV575 is probably a good candidate for inclusion in this confusion. In all the models we have information on not one was a limited edition or limited run.
Also, if it was a short lived run it doesn't mean it was intended to be. It could very well have been a complete and total flop and abandoned. Manufacturers and distributors sell what sells, and drops what doesn't like a hot potato. Businesses are in the business to make money.
I doubt anyone will go the eBay route with regards to this guitar. At least I am leery of that anyway. Because a guitar is not well covered or documented cannot indicate it's rarity at all. The Skylark WAS a limited run but hardly intentional. Not that it was indicated as such in documentation, but in the fact there was only one run. Even then, it won't make a $340 2588 a $3,400 guitar at all. Lack of documentation in no way means a guitar was limited, rare, or custom. It just means there is little info on it. In fact, the less information information available the more difficult it is to ascertain it's rarity.
I see time and time again on eBay "I've never seen another like this", "one off" or "custom" because the available information differs from the one they are selling or little information is available at all. I've even written an article about this and add a link to every one of my eBay listings. It pretty much covers this phenomenon. I guess you could call it a sore spot with me as the article will illustrate.
http://www.therathole.org/ebaypics/ebay ... words.htmlIn no way am I shooting you down at all. I'm saying there is no way I can go the route of limited run or rare. The complete lack of evidence or proof pretty much solidifies my position. I'm not sure where this other information is coming from. We could sure use it here. None of the Vantage catalogs covers the FV575 and we have only one guitar pictured. That is only one guitar. If we had dozens to compare I'm sure the story would be different. Alas, even after 15 years we are still at a loss and likely will never make it any farther. Compared to the documentation on the Aria Pro II lines the Vantage information is but a drop in the bucket.
I fully respect your opinion and I firmly believe everyone has a right to theirs. It's one of the things that makes each one of us "us". I'm not being argumentative but rather impartially analytical. I have nothing to gain by disagreeing with you or to gain by agreeing. The one concrete fact we have is
obscure is obscure, nothing more. Lack of information is not proof, however a
preponderance of information can be.