It had been a long time since we squared off with models from these two great classics of the metal scene. And most importantly, they've rarely let us down. So this month, ISP pays tribute to the most merciless musical headbangers, with the best of what these brands offer in value for the money, from Japan and Korea respectively. One has a design that oozes Superstrat® vibes that will suit the most conservative soloists of the genre, and the other will delight fans of the great Dimebag Darrell.
Savage designs, high-gain active pickups, floating bridges... If setting one up isn't your thing, please don't keep reading.

Unboxing
The packaging of our two guests is quite acceptable. That said, I was a little disappointed when I opened them: neither guitar comes in a case. Considering we're moving in the mid-to-high range, a simple gig bag wouldn't have hurt, given the care these guitars deserve.

Both do include a small set of Allen wrenches for making the necessary adjustments (truss rod, bridge and locking nut), which never hurt (all the more so with floating-bridge guitars, which require tricky and constant adjustments).

Otherwise, no problems. Both guitars arrived intact.

First Contact: Construction, Finish, Hardware and Electronics
At first glance, the guitars are quite eye-catching, especially the Dean. Focusing on the Jackson DKMG Dinky, it has, as mentioned above, a Superstrat® design with a reverse headstock, while the Dean ML features the brand's own design, which is something of a hybrid between the Flying V® and Gibson®'s Explorer® concepts. The headstock is also patented, in the shape of a big "V."

Let's get into the details of each instrument:

Construction: Body and Neck
On the Jackson, the neck is joined to the body with a bolt-on process. The joint is sturdy and long-lasting.

The body is made of alder, and the neck of two pieces of "Hard Rock" maple, very stable and strong. With that, I expect a tone that's rich in mids above all. The fretboard is rosewood, with twenty-four extra-jumbo frets and cream binding. The fretboard inlays are faux pearloid, and I loved their shape, as discreet as it is attractive: two inlays in adjacent corners of each marked fret.

What else? The reverse, pointed headstock, so typical of Jackson, gives it that "rebellious" touch, since the classic "stratospheric" headstock design always faces the opposite way.

As for the ML, the neck and body are both mahogany, which gives us an idea of this guitar's expected low-end tone. Both are well assembled with a glued joint. It has a rosewood fretboard with twenty-two jumbo frets and cream binding running around the whole body. The fretboard inlays are pearl dots. Simple, but without losing a single point in looks.

As for the headstock, it's a great classic patented by Dean. Its large size ensures better wave transmission of the sound throughout the instrument. In short: improved sustain.

All in all, I'm quite satisfied with the build quality of both guitars.

Finish
Here the ML won me over quite a bit more: the whole assembly of body, neck, headstock and headstock face is finished in matte black. It feels very silky to the touch, and has a look that fits the guitar's purpose perfectly, which is to raise hell. On top of that, it has the advantage of resisting fingerprint marks, which makes it easier to clean.

On the Jackson, the neck has a natural satin finish with luster, in cobalt blue (not to be confused with transparent blue, since that type of finish is applied to models with a maple top). It's a very dark, glossy color, which makes it visually appealing from two angles: elegance, and the sinister (where this guitar shows its musical maxim).

Hardware
The stock hardware on both instruments is quite similar. The Jackson has six Jackson-made in-line tuners, string locks at the nut and a licensed Floyd Rose double-locking, two-pivot bridge, with three standard tension springs in the back. This particular bridge deserves special attention for its profile, since it sits lower than most licensed Floyds: the JT580.

On the Dean, the tuners are arranged on the headstock in two rows of three, at the ends of the "V," and they are Grovers, which will guarantee perfect tuning if we choose to lock the licensed Floyd Rose floating bridge it comes with and remove the locks from the nut. Otherwise their effect is nullified.

Finally, on both instruments the truss rod is adjusted through the cavity in the headstock, covered by a plate that must be unscrewed first.

As you can see, these are quite similar hardware packages, and even the finish (black chrome) is the same. We'll soon see whether they share virtues in action too.

Electronics
Here's the funny part: both instruments come loaded with exactly the same pickups: an EMG-81 humbucker in the bridge position and an EMG-85 in the neck position. As you know, these pickups are active and need a 9 V battery to power them. On the Jackson you have to unscrew and remove the protective cover over the pots to seat the battery in the compartment designed for that purpose. The Dean, for its part, has a small separate compartment that's much easier to access: open it, insert the battery and close it.

As for controls, the Jackson has two pots: master tone and volume. The Dean is controlled through two tone pots (one per pickup) and a master volume. Both the Jackson and the Dean have, as expected, a three-way switch (bridge humbucker/both/neck humbucker). On the Jackson, though, it sits between the two pots, while on the Dean it sits next to the cutaway, away from the rest of the controls.

The idea of comparing two guitars with the same electronics strikes me as, to say the least, interesting, because it lets us find out what sets one guitar apart from the other in terms of construction and materials.

Arming Ourselves for War
Now that the physical parameters of the guitars have been defined, we'll sit down and strap them on to carry out the analysis. Once again, as Jack the Ripper said, let's take it one piece at a time:

Playing Unplugged: Feel and Action
As I always say, this phase is essential, to say the least. Everything we find acceptable here will only be more so once we plug the instruments in.

Let's start with the Jackson. The body of the guitar fits the player's body well, except for one small detail that bothered me a little: there is no contour on the body where it rubs against the picking arm. That makes it a bit uncomfortable to play.
As I expected, the setup allows very low action with barely any fret buzz. That makes it well suited to speed and comfortable. Access to the highest frets is somewhat hindered by the lack of a contour at the body joint, but this is offset by deep, well-contoured cutaways that improve ergonomics. That said, it plays very well both standing and sitting, as the guitar is very well balanced and has no neck-dive problems.

One thing caught my attention, and that is the thickness of the neck. I've tried the analogous Dinky model from the PRO series and, although I liked them less than our guest, they had a thinner neck, though with the same profile. I don't consider it better or worse, just a matter of whether it fits the hand well. In my case, I've been delighted with the neck at hand, and I see it as suitable for soloists in any metal style.

I try some open chords and notice more than decent resonance. The frets feel solid and well built, and the feel along the neck is really smooth thanks to its thin natural finish.

On the factory setup, I have to say I expected it to be somewhat less refined, perhaps with the action too low, as well as the pickup height. But companies sensibly assume that each player chooses their own configuration, right?
The guitar took a bit of work to adjust, but what Floyd Rose-equipped guitar doesn't come with that problem? With the tools that come with the instrument, no trouble. The factory strings, .009 to .042, stand out for being smooth and fast to the touch, since, as we'll see, this guitar is aimed at the soloist.

Finally, I opened the rear compartments and unscrewed the pickups to check the state of the wiring. The truth is that the "guts" of this instrument, and its interior finish, are as clean as it gets, and the pickups are properly soldered. No problem here.

As for the Dean, there's more to chew on because of its design. To start, I tried two positions for playing seated. The first, resting the angled area of the body where the pots and the switch are located on the right leg (right-handed mode). Contrary to my expectations, it's considerably comfortable, because the angled area keeps the instrument from sliding (and that's with a fairly slippery finish!). The second, placing the right leg between the two lower horns of the guitar and resting the aforementioned angle on the left leg. I think this is the winning combination. Incredibly stable and comfortable given its strange design, and with unbeatable access to the highest frets.

Now, with the guitar on a strap, besides not being uncomfortable, heavy or unbalanced at all, you feel like looking in the mirror and shouting "You're all going to die!" Picture it.

The neck can be a pain if you try to play very fast. It's very thick, but its "U" profile (a bit "squared-off") lets those of us with long fingers arch them without difficulty.

I try some open chords and the resonance reaches my bones. Truly excellent. It spreads vigorously from the tips of the headstock to the lower horns. This is what attracted me most, no doubt. In fact, it's a goal Dean pursued with this model: its tendency to "spread out" the mass of the instrument so that the wood "breathes," and the vibration has paid off.

The frets, for their part, are well installed and feel sturdy and durable to the touch.

As for the setup, same story. Though the factory one isn't too good, with excessively high action, and it took more attention. But I insist on the subjective element that always goes with this matter.

Finally, we'll poke around in this little one's internal organs. I was extremely pleased with the layout: clean, well finished and properly soldered. Nothing more to add.

b) PLUGGED IN: STRAIGHT INTO THE SOUND
Now comes the moment of truth. We have two metal guitars, so what better than to test them on a hard-hitting amp? Let's get to it without delay:

JACKSON DKMG DINKY
Let's start again with the Jackson. We set the preamp to clean with a flat EQ. The sound is clean, pure, with volume, and without the slightest distortion or noise. I liked the balance of the sound, with especially emphasized mids, a low-end finish, and that touch of treble you need to make the sound crisp (supported, I suppose, by the brightness of the maple neck).

I check again with chromatic scales that there's no fret buzz, and I play some arpeggios. A round tone with good sustain. The bridge pickup (EMG-81) sounds really bright with strong mids and, as I said, a balanced low-end finish. The neck one (EMG-85) gives a velvety sound. It's cut in the mids to avoid saturating the sound, and it combines perfectly with the 81, which is more of a soloist's pickup. That gives the instrument versatility, within limits, since it's aimed at extreme styles.

Even so, and despite the nature of the EMGs, I think this sound can adapt without trouble to blues, especially in the middle switch position, with a bell-like, colorful, percussive and enveloping sound.

Now comes the interesting part: distortion. I start with a lead-type tone, since this instrument is aimed especially at the lead guitarist; that's my impression. Crushing, explosive; lots of gain and body. This is where this guitar really puts everything on the line. I progressively vary the EQ parameters, and the truth is that this little monster is a delight for playing solos, as I said. High-gain riffs sound perfect without the sound getting "muddy." The harmonics didn't lag behind; in fact, they're what I liked most. A real wild squeal. Here the tone pot should always be, in my view, at maximum.

I think combining these pickups with the alder body was a smart choice. For a metal soloist, things usually live in the mid and high frequencies. And they got it: an alder body and an EMG-81 in the bridge. Add an 85 in the neck, and you're ready for any style of metal. I think it adapts very well to the '80s sound, old school, the classic stuff.

But what about the bridge? Working it in both directions is no problem at all, as long as you don't do violent dive-bombs (it's a licensed model). Even so, it holds its tuning without any problem, and the fine tuners work properly.

DEAN ML KNIGHT
Now the Dean's turn. After plugging in, I notice a considerably thicker, more opaque sound than the one we just tested. You can tell the mahogany is there, and by the way, it's of more than acceptable quality. I found the bridge pickup's sound more balanced than on the previous guitar, and the punch it delivers is also impressive: high gain and low end put this guitar ahead of the other in riff playing.

On a clean tone, I play open chords, and the guitar responds with a thick, dense, sustained tone. Compared with the Jackson, I think what that one gains in brightness, the Dean gains in sustain and low end. A particularly smooth sound on the neck pickup, though I was more taken by the one in the bridge position. Of course, high volume and no distortion whatsoever.

And let's not even talk about distortion: I turn the gain up almost all the way (it's not good to max it out on a tube amp), and I get a dark, heavy, hammering sound, very well suited, as I said, to extreme metal styles (death, thrash, black...). If the question is "Do I want to sound like Pantera?" the answer is undoubtedly "yes." That translates into little versatility, but every tiger in its own jungle, right? We're talking about extreme guitar styles. That led me to another topic: alternate tunings. I tried D, and the result was, if anything, even more pleasing. All this leads me to conclude that this guitar, just as it was conceived for Dimebag Darrell, is made for modern metal styles.

While solos are harder to play than on the Jackson, the riffs, as I said, play themselves!

And what can I say about the sustain? After playing a chord, we could take a nap, wake up, and the note would still be ringing. Intercontinental.

As for the bridge, it's quite stable and handles playing well, with the fine tuners working properly. The locks and the Grovers do their job well, and the adjustments last a long time with the preset parameters.

Conclusion
Whenever I review guitars like these, so geared toward heavy metal and its offshoots, I tend to look at two sound-related performance areas: riff playing and soloing. For the first, the Dean takes the prize, and for the second, the Jackson. I should add that, despite what you see in the rating table, keep in mind that the average score is always dragged down by low marks for versatility. So if you're an exclusively metal guitarist, simply set that parameter aside and get your own results.

For €879, the DKMG is yours, and for €839 so is the ML. Guitars with active EMG pickups, excellent construction, tuning stability, and best of all: they are so different in design and technical approach (solos/riffs) that they can satisfy hard-hitting audiences of every taste.

The only significant drawback? You won't be able to play boleros on them. But if you've read this far, that's clearly not a problem for you, right?