Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Beginners/FAQ' started by CrazyDean, Dec 18, 2017.
That guy’s a douchebag, obviously. No need to dig into it.
I'm waiting for the inevitable thread where someone complains about their brand new relic Strat showing signs of wear...
...or maybe not showing enough signs of wear
My 95 RG550 with no veneer top, no binding, no wood showing, and a pickguard covering the routes up had no finish flaws, you guys.
My 2002 RG550EX has a little bit of silver paint in the truss rod access route. Totally unacceptable, what are my audience going to think?
Everyone stop being babies or I'm going to call everyone an arsehole for no reason in the manner of a very much non-baby type individual.
I once imported a $3,200 guitar from Grigny, France. It shipped in a flight case from Grigny to Manchester, Manchester to Memphis, and then to my home in southern California. Thirty-Two HUNDRED dollars in high expectations.
Guitar arrives, I open the flight case latches, look over the stainless frets, varnished body, waxed neck - I strum the strings to test the transatlantic tuning stability, when I see it out the corner of my eye. I look out the window: A rainbow. Would it turn into a double rainbow? I squeezed my eyes shut, wished, and opened them: Yes - It had turned into a double rainbow. Would it turn into a triple rainbow? I looked once more: No - Just a double rainbow.
I hung my head in disappointment.
Just visited the Invective thread lol....Yeah you guys are expecting way too much.
We shall never forget his hilariously uneducated yet pretentious “wattage” thread.
At the end of the day, if an instrument plays in a way that makes me feel like God, I'll forgive an AWFUL lot......but at the same time, if I'm spending essentially two complete pay checks on the damn thing, well, I have decently high expectations not to have some sort of glaring (to me) cosmetic flaw. That's only natural......
It's definitely true that you can get a lot more guitar for less money nowadays. The quality of a $400 import today is much better than that of one 10 years ago. The quality is better, but not perfect. I think the issue is that manufacturers are more often slapping name-brand pickups & hardware and prettier finishes on the same better-but-not-perfect guitars, raising costs (and therefore prices) commensurately, while there's an assumption by some about greater build quality instead.
That is, people think, "If this $400 MIK guitar has a few flaws, then one that costs twice as much should be immaculate," forgetting that they're paying for pricier parts on the same quality build more often than not.
I missed that "wattage" thread, but just went through it now. That is some funny, albeit painful, reading.
I agree with this. I may be willing to "forgive" certain flaws or issues, but then it just becomes a value call as to whether the price being paid is still worth it.
It all depends... maybe there's just something wrong with your paycheck.
Please link said wattage thread, I am curious now.
Merry Christmas, ya filthy animals!! Enjoy!!
I think overall that people now are more concerned with guitars looking pretty instead of being functionally sound. In the past, budget guitars pretty much came in black, white, or red. No binding, no veneers, no decent trems, generic tuners, etc.... pretty hard to screw that up. You just hoped to get something that could be set up to play nicely.
Now most guitars above $100 come with veneers in multiple colors, binding, different neck constructions, different types of hardware, fancy inlays, etc.... there is a lot more to mess up on, so things don't always come out perfect. If they offered $1000 in nothing but plain black with superior hardware and quality, people would complain they are not worth the price because they look plain.
I am not saying that I wouldn't ask for some cash or an exchange if something was all scratched up, had crooked parts, etc.... but a few small paint blemishes is not a big deal. I even consider many fret issues to be OK because I have to get most guitars fret leveled because of the crazy weather where I live. When it goes from 101 degrees, to -10 degrees 6 months later, all guitars are going to have issues. I have a small file to take care of sharp fret ends.
Actually, a good example of this is the newer Charvel guitars. Many people praise them for being high quality for the price. They are usually built very well, but look pretty plain compared to other brands. I know many other people won't buy them because they are not flashy enough. So, people who care about functionality typically love them, and people who care more about looks will pass on them, even though they are known for their quality.
So, I think that perhaps this expectation for perfection is coming from just the aesthetic of the times. Players in some genres buy guitars from the fifties because their obscure or whatever, and older players that play rock seem to like the chips, dings, and scrapes, so I think this new sleek, fine aesthetic of the 2010's has something to do with he expectation of perfection from just about anything.
I'd also venture that it has something to do with how rediculous advertising is. Also, how much hype everything has cuz we can all sit on guitar forums and dissect every aspect of playing for hours a day so people can be more hyper focused.
Those are just my guesses
At the end of the day the only thing that matters is if you like your own playing. What things look like does not really matter if it plays and works so what? People just follow trends and whatever there favorite player is at the time.
All honesty, I see both sides to this argument.
On the one hand, beggars can't be choosers. If you want a cheap guitar, you're not going to be able to expect all that much from your guitar.
However, on the other hand, we are starting to reach this point where even the lower end guitars actually cost well over $1K, case in point, my ESP LTD Snakebyte (that costed $1.6K out of the box and the mounting ring on the neck pickup was flat out busted, and yes, I bought it new, no less), and everything is starting to become way more overpriced than they actually should be, i.e. guitars that normally should cost only around $600 now cost well over $1K or even $2K, meaning more than half the guitars' prices are actually markup.
So when people say that their expectations are realistic and even those are not being met, especially when it comes to prices, I can't help but wholeheartedly agree. Yes, all that gear is way more expensive than it should be, and we are being forced to pay way more for way less value.
Finishes, though, that's also a tough one. I for one would really love blue finishes, but I know I'll pretty much never be able to get one, even on a really expensive guitar, because blue finishes aren't popular (I say this because I'm a metalhead, and guitars that are made ideally for metal genres never have blue finishes. Very sad indeed). On the other hand, depending on the guitar, I might actually not mind all that much when it comes to a few dings on the finishes.
Again, though, I see both sides. If you were buying a guitar completely new for $1.6K like me and found out that one of the mounting rings came busted, or maybe it came with a big divot, wouldn't you be frustrated as well?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I for one pay equal attention to both the finish and the tone (albeit for the latter I'm more concerned of the actual colour), but if the instrument came with an actual functional problem like mine did, then what?
All honesty, saying that we expect too much, especially when we paid nearly half our life savings for an instrument, isn't all that helpful. On the other hand, calling something a lemon just because of a minor ding, when it's a perfectly fine guitar outside that, is a bit of a shame.