# What makes cheap guitars look "cheap"?



## MF_Kitten (Dec 1, 2013)

I've found myself wondering why it is that some guitars, despite being of high quality, just look really cheap, and what can be done to avoid that?

The most obvious one is the whole "black gloss finish, chrome hardware, white 1-ply pickguard" thing, but even then there are guitars that pull that off while looking GREAT. Why is it that the crappy cheap ones look crappy and cheap?

One thing I've noticed is that having an even and flat surface on the finish, and having the finish buffed to a really high gloss, will make it look pricey right away. So that's one part of it. I think there's something to the look of the metal parts too, like if the tint and surface aren't quite right, it just looks cheap and fake. 

What sticks out to you guys as features that will make an instrument look cheap, regardless of knowing anything about it?


----------



## Roland777 (Dec 1, 2013)

Chrome hardware is difficult to combine with black. For me - and this is personal of course - pickup-rings are an absolute dealbreaker.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Dec 1, 2013)

Anything meant to be ostentatious and flashy or obviously expensive ironically makes many guitars look cheap and tacky because import brands have adopted that style in the last decade. Tons of inlay, abalone purfling, and gold hardware are good examples.


----------



## thraxil (Dec 1, 2013)

Centered dot inlays do it for me. I know there are high end, decent guitars with them, but I strongly associate them with low end models.


----------



## Allealex (Dec 1, 2013)

Pickup rings on glossy finish look ridicolously cheap


----------



## Hollowway (Dec 1, 2013)

If the gloss is too thick it looks cheap to me. Poo-brown rosewood FB screams cheap, also.


----------



## Yo_Wattup (Dec 1, 2013)

Unfinished and rough feeling necks (low end ibanez) look and feel way cheaper than a well polished gloss neck.


----------



## Benjamin Millar (Dec 1, 2013)

Red glossy guitars with chrome hardware- to me its even worse than black/chrome.

Sloppy inlays surrounded by resin.

on acoustics' tops - thick glossy lacquer that hasn't sunk into the grain. makes everything look like plastic.

sunburst finish or, Oden forbid, Black finish on acoustic soundboards- again, this is a place that need to show wood.


----------



## Benjamin Millar (Dec 1, 2013)

Hollowway said:


> If the gloss is too thick it looks cheap to me. Poo-brown rosewood FB screams cheap, also.



+1000 on the too thick finish issue.


----------



## kevdes93 (Dec 1, 2013)

light colored rosewood, dots, and chrome hardware... -shudder-


----------



## straymond (Dec 1, 2013)

First off the bat, I'd avoid this guy. 
If a cheap guitar doesn't look cheap enough, he'll get the job done.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Dec 1, 2013)

Satin finishes can look terrible when too thick as well. I remember the first Agile Intrepids (no idea about later ones) had a super thick finish with a "milky" look. Possibly sprayed in humid conditions.


----------



## DistinguishedPapyrus (Dec 1, 2013)

For me the first thing I take notice of is the feel of a guitar, how it plays and such. Alot of Ibanez are great playing guitars, even some of the low end ones that are gloss black. They seem more high end because of the build quality regardless of the finish.


----------



## ramses (Dec 1, 2013)

Chrome hardware. I get sad whenever I see a $2k+ Carvin with chrome hardware, because there is definitely nothing cheap about it.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Dec 1, 2013)

Interesting to see all the comments about chrome hardware. Seems like many guitars with chrome hardware would look way out of place with black hardware.


----------



## sehnomatic (Dec 1, 2013)

Black + Chrome hardware... looking at you low end ibanez

graphics that look like a kid just discovered deviantart and photoshop

on some... headstock doesn't match body

And these


----------



## Zalbu (Dec 1, 2013)

Chrome screws around the pickups, like on this guitar.


----------



## Cloudy (Dec 1, 2013)

For me its dot inlays, rosewood fretboards, and what pickups are in the guitar.


----------



## guitarfan85 (Dec 1, 2013)

All BC Rich guitars look cheap to me. Especially the ones with giant fly decals. Or those tacky lines around the perimeter.

Huge gaps in the cavities around the pickups look really cheap to me especially on ibanez. All ibanez guitars look cheap to me. No offense to anyone here..

Some whammy bars look cheap with the plastic tips.

top hat knobs look cheap to me.

The walkind dead guitars look ridiculously cheap.


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Dec 1, 2013)

When traditionally the guitar design is neck-through or set-neck,
And this cheap clone has a square chrome neck-plate for its Bolt-on neck to go along with a horrible square chunk of a heel.

Seeing "Brands" on guitars/hardware such as Duncan Designed or EMG Select, Licensed By Floyd Rose or no label or branding at all.

Strat bodies. Makes me think this must be the cheapest model in their low-end line. Every pawn shop is full of shite strat clones with thick gloss over solid colour.


----------



## tommychains (Dec 1, 2013)

I may get lip for this, but my top 4 are

Sunburst finish (They are often done on many low end guitars, this alone ruined it for me)
Small dot inlays (smaller then the fender ones, like an eraser tip. Cheeaapp!)
Strat style input jacks. (Just a weird peeve of mine)

The big killer for me topping my list? 

Thick Gloss Coat! As an ASE certified painter, I know the clear coat brings out the quality in the base coat. It adds gloss and also protects the base coat. For cars this is quite common, but for guitars it's a big no-no. It deadens the tone of the wood and makes refinishes even more time consuming. Poor quality materials, poor application techniques, inadequate air ventilation, etc., all of which can make the paint look and feel flawed and cheap.


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Dec 1, 2013)

^Tobacco Sunburst specifically.

Gross finish with a Gross yellow tainted name.


----------



## Floppystrings (Dec 2, 2013)

Chrome hardware, with black pickup rigs and chrome screws, black pickups with chrome pole pieces.

Also, sub AAA maple paper thin veneer on carved tops.

Satin gold silkscreen logos...

No-name Floyd Roses...

Abalone...


----------



## guitarfan85 (Dec 2, 2013)

I like Dot inlays aside from the PRS bird inlays. I hate big clunky blocks or jagged looking shark teeth inlays.


----------



## Randy (Dec 2, 2013)

Photoflame


----------



## mcsalty (Dec 2, 2013)

square heels (especially big ones), TOM bridges, pickup rings


----------



## rikomaru (Dec 2, 2013)

I won't say chrome in general, but some just looks extra shiny and cheap.....i don't know exactly what itvis but something's just off. Pup mounts most of the time. I absolutely love how prs pups are perfectly shaped and fitted for their mounts though. Most binding is an instant turn-off for me. It's mainly the plain bindings that annoy me. Lastly, things on the instrument looking blatantly loose. Lol


----------



## Fretless (Dec 2, 2013)

Non perfectly aligned book matching. If I see a seam, no matter how expensive the guitar, I find it cheap looking.


----------



## teamSKDM (Dec 2, 2013)

Fretboards play a huge role in how a guitar looks cheap. A high end j custom with a dry ass rosewood fretboard will still make it look like a toy


----------



## The Reverend (Dec 2, 2013)

This is really interesting to me. I can't actually name what about guitars makes some of them look cheap to me, but I know it when I see it.


----------



## Leveebreaks (Dec 2, 2013)

tommychains said:


> Thick Gloss Coat! As an ASE certified painter, I know the clear coat brings out the quality in the base coat. It adds gloss and also protects the base coat. For cars this is quite common, but for guitars it's a big no-no. It deadens the tone of the wood and makes refinishes even more time consuming. Poor quality materials, poor application techniques, inadequate air ventilation, etc., all of which can make the paint look and feel flawed and cheap.


 
This is the one for me too, I'm specifically thinking of crappy entry level Squire-type guitars when i think of this. They tend to look really chunky because of the gloss, then you pick them up and they are light as a feather.

Crappy looking machine heads are another bugbear too.


----------



## constepatdyak (Dec 2, 2013)

the dry, light coloured rosewood. Really makes a guitar look bad


----------



## Djentliman (Dec 2, 2013)

All of this together on one guitar makes a cheap look for me: Dots, no binding (especially the FB), chrome hardware, and some bolt ons. Glaring at you Ibanez.

My friend has an Ibanez that sounds like it would make some people cringe on here. Opinions?



























This is after I cleaned the frets, fretboard, and a string change. I also added the chrome covers. it looked ghastly without them! Unfortunately, I forgot to take pictures of after the fret polish and the oiled fretboard.


----------



## Fretless (Dec 2, 2013)

I don't think that looks cheap at all. Not as expensive as a custom, but not cheap


----------



## Tommy Deaks (Dec 2, 2013)

Tobacco sunburst for me. Super pet hate of mine - I think it looks disgusting. Never seen it on a guitar and thought that it looked good. 

Usually agree with the rosewood board, but I have a guitar with a rosewood board and it's lovely. Has a very nice subtle figure, but it is a high end guitar. 

I also think a gloss finish on a neck is a big no no. My personal taste, of course, but I don't like the look of it. Looks cheap and feels cheap to me.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Dec 2, 2013)

I like rosewood... Even the red/streaky brown stuff...


----------



## cwhitey2 (Dec 2, 2013)

Shit tuners.

Tacky hardware.

Black.


----------



## Stereordinary (Dec 2, 2013)

Interesting thread! I'm really surprised by some of what is listed here. While I agree with certain things, I feel like others are situational.

Most notably, the chrome hardware on a black guitar thing. To me, well I have an eye for quickly identifying hardware that actually is cheap, versus hardware that is good quality. So in situations where the chrome hardware is legitimately pot metal crap, yeah, that's always gonna look cheap. There's also good and bad as far as the chrome plating itself is concerned. But I love black guitars, it's my favorite color, however I believe black all over with no bindings or other colors can definitely look low-end. I think of it this way: a quality guitar should have at least a three-color theme. That's pretty much not including the color of the fretboard, as in the case of an all-over black guitar with chrome hardware. There's nothing there to set it off. But if you take that same guitar and add a pearloid pickguard, it will have much more visual impact. Not that that would necessarily look good (I'm not big on pearloid), but at least then you take something obviously made for mass appeal, and turn it into something with a much narrower audience.

The hardware color is pretty much always going to be one of the three color themes, and I usually consider "natural wood" to be a single color. Even in cases where there are multiple wood species laminated together, I still just look at is as one part of the themes. The final color doesn't necessarily have to take up a lot of real estate, even though sometimes it might. Something like a binding line, pickup rings, or even just the knobs can be the third.

Obviously that's a broad and simultaneously narrow definition, but it generally works for me. If a guitar only has what I would consider two color themes I try to imagine what I could add, and if it has more than three, it's a matter of asking well is that ok, or does it look tacky?


----------



## HighPotency (Dec 2, 2013)

I think it's like what makes a car look cheap vs what makes a car look expensive. Lackluster finishing, fitment issues, and small details add up to make the whole thing look rather dull. The time taken (or rather, not taken) reflects the quality of the product. Things just look off which isn't appealing to our picky eyesight.


----------



## SpaceDock (Dec 2, 2013)

^ this, the sum of the parts

There are plenty of les pauls and prs with chrome hardware that are super nice, lots of high end acoustics have poo brown fb's but are still very high end. It is the final fit and finish and how they all come together in the overall product. Same reason a cheap car with hop up parts still looks cheap unless a real pro spent time fitting everything just so.


----------



## hairychris (Dec 2, 2013)

HighPotency said:


> I think it's like what makes a car look cheap vs what makes a car look expensive. Lackluster finishing, fitment issues, and small details add up to make the whole thing look rather dull. The time taken (or rather, not taken) reflects the quality of the product. Things just look off which isn't appealing to our picky eyesight.



That's close to it, I think.

In design, you have crappy proportions, clunky control layout, etc. You have to pay a lot for good design.

Execution you have tight clearances, thick gloss (PRS can *just about* get away with it), hardware that doesn't fit the design. Woods is a funny one, as you could potentially get some very acoustically active timbers in cheap instruments that are fine with some TLC.

Death by a thousand cuts, etc.


----------



## Matthew (Dec 2, 2013)

Fretless said:


> Non perfectly aligned book matching. If I see a seam, no matter how expensive the guitar, I find it cheap looking.



This, SO MUCH THIS. I see people around here all the time with absolutely stunning guitars, then I see a huge seam running right down the middle. It ruins everything. I won't touch a bookmatched top unless it looks proper. I find PRS to be a big offender here. Sure, you've got a 10 top, but that line makes it look like a 3D sticker from those quarter vending machines. 

That said, a bookmatched top where the seam isn't noticeable might be one of the best things ever. Unfortunately, it just never happens.


----------



## xwmucradiox (Dec 2, 2013)

The point of a bookmatch is to have a mirror image on their side or as close to it as possible. If you dont like the idea of the mirror image then you'll have to look for guitars with one-piece tops.


----------



## Jacobine (Dec 2, 2013)

Most guitars with a TOM look cheap to me. I love TOM but they just look so cheap.

Any guitar that's black just looks to me like the player's one of those 'make metal totez brutez drop Ab on a 6er w/ normal guage strings blaring through a l6 spider iv 15watt"

I dislike pretty much most gloss finishes though. Especially a gloss finish on a natural body looks like its trying to justify the extremely high price for something that'll sound piss poor.

I actually like most (if not all) rosewood fingerboards. but what gets me is

chrome hardware on a super gloss white with a "vintage yellow" maple fingerboard with the fender style black dot inlays


----------



## Prophetable (Dec 2, 2013)

Chrome bolt on neck plates:






Plastic tuner buttons:





Inlays like this:


----------



## molsoncanadian (Dec 2, 2013)

- Pickup rings, with the exception of some PRS
- Abalone binding (body or neck)
- Abalone in general anywhere (unless classical guitar)
- Fret Markers (Jackson/Ibanez shark ones)
- Square fret markers (Jackson dominion)
- Pickup rings
- Those huge 3 way switches you seen on agiles/jacksons (prefer the EBMM)
- Pick guards 
- TOM Bridges


----------



## russmuller (Dec 2, 2013)

Most of this has already been said, but...

Visually:
-uncontoured heel
-bolt-on has a blank metal plate on the back with no logo/SN/anything on it
-thick/uneven clearcoat (especially on the neck)
-mis-aligned figured top
-pickup rings
-string spacing appears uneven (check for consistent/symmetrical alignment with fingerboard edges and the inlays when applicable)
-black black black
-no-name pickups (especially if active)
-chips/scratches in hardware finish
-gaps around neck pocket
-rough edges on pickup cavities
-pickguard appears warped from misaligned or over-tightened screws

In your hands:
-loose tuning machines
-loose strap buttons
-loose knobs/output jack
-crackling in pots
-switch has too much resistance or doesn't settle into contact points properly
-rattling when the body moves (either from hardware or electronics).
-ground hum (either bad wiring or no shielding)
-bridge has sharp edges or screws protruding uncomfortably
-poor neck/body balance
-neck feels like a 1"x3" plank


----------



## djentychvggs (Dec 2, 2013)

For me, Light Rosewood fretboards, when headstock paint doesn't match body paint most of the time.

But the two biggest deal breakers are pickup rings and TOM Bridges


----------



## HaMMerHeD (Dec 2, 2013)

Plastic pick guards.

Chrome hardware.

Gold hardware.

Plastic tuner buttons.

Poorly leveled high-gloss finish.

Decal logos, especially waterslide ones that say "Fender".

That shitstick Fender/Wilkins stock tremolo.

Plastic knobs.

Slab bodies.

Colored plastic pickup covers (pickup casings/covers should be black, metal, or wood).

Tele/Strat style pickup switches.

Really, just about anything plastic (except TR covers and rear cavity covers).


----------



## Prophetable (Dec 2, 2013)

Oh, and guitars that are trying too hard to look "evil":


----------



## TemjinStrife (Dec 2, 2013)

Randy said:


> Photoflame



Actually, I think the old MIJ Fender photoflame guitars look very upmarket and classy. It's just the modern ones that are super-high-contrast with no depth and too much black that look "cheap."


----------



## Prophetable (Dec 2, 2013)

Holy shit. This is the Epiphone casket guitar but by Schecter and with the inlay that I specifically linked and said I hated earlier. Kill this guitar with fire.


----------



## Pikka Bird (Dec 2, 2013)

Kluson's "corpse teeth" tuner buttons. Yuch!


----------



## The Reverend (Dec 3, 2013)

The Reverend said:


> This is really interesting to me. I can't actually name what about guitars makes some of them look cheap to me, but I know it when I see it.



I figured it out! Those red and black SGs. Really, any SG looks cheap to me know because of it.


----------



## Edika (Dec 3, 2013)

There are a lot of guitars that might seem cheap but there are guitars that might not seem cheap but feel cheap. For example I saw a 1100 Euro Gibson Explorer that seemed cheap as hell but on closer inspection and playing wise it was very good. There are some chrome and gold hardware that seem that have been spray painted with a can. Just touching them seems like they'll peel off. Tuners seem the same as well as plastic tuners.
Lower to mid end Ibanez guitars. A premium I tried, while it seemed nice, felt really cheap. I tried a mahogany bodied one with natural finish which felt reaaaaly cheap. Some veneers look really cheap. The light color fretoboards depend on the color scheme of the guitar. When combined with a really dark colored guitar it seems very bad.
Plastic inlays, these very white ones that are supposed to be MOP but look really fake. The same with binding and nut. If they are going to use white it has to seem a bit classy. If it's going to look like crap then just leave it simple.
Which brings me to Abalone. LTD and Schecter guitars were the most unappealing guitars I have ever seen. I had a BC Rich that had abalone on the sides of the fretboard and on the body but due to the ebony fretboard, black hardware and black guitar it didn't seem that cheap. It felt kind of cheap however.


----------



## GunpointMetal (Dec 3, 2013)

yellow maple necks


----------



## RV350ALSCYTHE (Dec 3, 2013)

String-Through Tune-O-Matics.


----------



## stevexc (Dec 3, 2013)

-Solid colour paint, aside from black... or at least, black looks the least cheap of any single solid colour to me.
-Single ply pickguards
-Plastic knobs the same color as the single-ply pickguard
-Unfinished headstocks, especially on solid color paint, especially when it's that pale ass nearly white shitty maple
-centered dot inlays, especially with the double dot at 12
-Silver screws in black pickup rings
-flat tops with rounded edges
-black headstocks with non-black bodies
-Strat-style trems on non-Strat guitars
-pickguards that cover the majority of the guitar

Of course I'm sure there's a guitar out there with all those things that looks like a million bucks.

And I'm chuckling at the fact that almost every feature of my blue H-1001 got listed in this thread, but it's never looked cheap to me, haha.


----------



## will_shred (Dec 3, 2013)

pretty much any flat top unless its a V or ex type guitar. It's gotta have at least an arm contour. By flat top, I mean as flat as kansas. No side bevels or anything. The Gibson SG has a flat top, but contoured sides to make it pop a little more.


----------



## Taylor (Dec 3, 2013)

Like a couple others have said: Black headstocks when the body ain't black.


----------



## TheWarAgainstTime (Dec 3, 2013)

Chrome on a black guitar

Chrome screws with black pickup rings. I don't hate pickup rings like most, but it definitely depends on the guitar. 

Way too much gloss

"Evil" looking guitars

Graphics of any kind

Cherry/wine trans finishes over veneers or photo tops (every Schecter Hellraiser on my local CL)

Low-end open-coil stock pickups (think lower end Epiohone/Schecter)

Large square heels

Chrome heel plates


----------



## imprinted (Dec 3, 2013)

Really poor quality, dry rosewood on any guitar looks cheap to me, presumably the same reason I'm not a fan of Baked/Roasted Maple or the "fancy" woods Suhr use on their moderns. I know they're not cheap, I know they sound fantastic but I can't get it out of my head.


----------



## Pikka Bird (Dec 4, 2013)

Epiphone Maxi-pad headstock.  WHY can't their LPs and SGs have the Gibby headstock when the Explorers, Flying Vs and Fire/Thunderbirds can have close approximations of the original 'stocks? (I know, marketing reasons, to pursuade picky fucks like me to go for the "real thing")

...and I really think the BM headstock looks horrible*, so why every other BM-ripoff _has_ to include the headstock really irks me. Something about it looks underdesigned and unfinished to me, just like the cut-through binding on the forearm bevel. If Doug had reworked the lines on that headstock and routed the bevel so its lower edge would be inline with the binding's lower edge (perhaps leaving a smidge of it intact for a neat pinstriping effect) then I could actually see the appeal.

*) Not the strings-across-a-gap thing, just the way none of the lines actually seem to have anything to do with each other. It doesn't look dynamic, IMO.


----------



## Negav (Dec 15, 2013)

GunpointMetal said:


> yellow maple necks



THIS!!!

Doesn't matter if the guitar is the best guitar in the universe, if that thing has yellow looking maple I will not even consider it. It's dead to me. Look at some low end Schecters. They may be great low end guitars, but damn that yellow maple is a turn off.


----------



## Espresto (Dec 15, 2013)

I think what really does it for me is mediocre tops. When you see a guitar with a quilt or flame that's probably 1mm thick and has no depth or variation then you know it's cheap. It's hard to tell some things just from looking at a guitar. Zion Guitars used to make black and chrome instruments that were almost certainly excellent guitars. However, when you see a badly bookmatched, dimension-less top, then you know that someone tried to make the guitar look expensive; they did that because the guitar is, in fact, cheap and doesn't have any characteristics to commend it.


----------



## SlipknotKoRnfan (Dec 16, 2013)

I dunno about you guys, but for me it depends on what type of chorme exactly, more so, the specifics of the surface finish. the UV777bk is black on chrome but doesnt look cheap by a longshot, i find the chrome hardware on that actually looks expensive. a black on chrome GRG however, looks cheap. i find the chrome to be "smoother" on the low end stuff and have a more "sharp" appearance on higher end hardware. my


----------



## OmegaSlayer (Dec 16, 2013)

Centered dot inlays are the worst thing you can give to a classy guitar.
The kind of saddles mounted on the Fender and Hipshot bridges


----------



## patata (Dec 16, 2013)

Chrome hardware(glossy)

TOM chrome bridge

Abalone binding with rosewood fingerboard

Chrome screws on pickup rings

Chrome's really cheap looking.


----------



## Riffer Madness (Dec 18, 2013)

The biggest ones for me are...

Open pore looking grainy fretboards unless its all shiny and even grained

Factory polish caught in the grain

When obvious grain stripes dont run the full length of the neck

Strings that dont appear to properly align with the inlays on the neck

Fret tips that arent smooth looking 

Square or 'acoustic looking' unsculpted neck heels 

Plastic anywhere but the pickups [pearloid and other stuff like that excluded]

When the top and bottom strings arent an equal distance from the edge of the board

When they become closer to the edge as you move up the neck

Sharp looking fretboard edges

Binding thats not either wood, simulated "stone", black, white, or multi-ply

Natural finished necks without some kinda stripes of other wood

Graphics on the body 

Headstocks that dont match the fretboard or body color

Neck/fretboard grain that doesnt look even from end to end

Bridge saddles that have uneven gaps between them

Blade style selectors with plastic tips

Screws that dont match the thing that they screw into [like silver screws for a black pickguard]

Over the top, gaudy cosmetics

Headstocks where the string pull looks sort of random, or where some strings are almost touching other tuners

"blah-blah, by so and so" branding

When the headstock says "special", "deluxe", "limited edition" etc

shrimp kabobs, shrimp scampi, boiled shrimp, baked shrimp, broiled shrimp, shrimp burgers, shrimp cocktail, fried shrimp, etc, etc, etc ,


----------



## spn_phoenix_92 (Dec 19, 2013)

I'd say high gloss finishes, especially on solid, non-translucent colors, chrome hardware, "black" chrome (Ibanez, Schecter, Esp are all terrible at this) dot inlays, rosewood on an all black guitar, strat clones, non arch topped les paul clones, & tobacco burst. Oh & the knobs & strap buttons are giveaways for me as well. Sorry for my rant list.


----------



## loqtrall (Dec 19, 2013)

When kids take a generally cheap/shitty guitar and cover it with stickers. bumper/band logo/product placement stickers make a guitar of any caliber look cheap as hell. Also includes inlay stickers.


----------



## Black43 (Dec 19, 2013)

Anything like this, with its cheapy metalflake finish, extravagent design (if it has decent quality hardware, it's fine, but a spiky/in your face guitar body with cheap hardware and finish is just dreadful), and, of course, minimalist chrome hardware. Although that finish looks so chintzy that you might as well just cover the thing in abalone. Just... ugh. I DO have one of these (LTD F-350 to be precise) and love it, but that decent looking figure with terrible droning pickups kills it slightly.

EDIT: That's just me though. I have "weird" tastes.


----------



## helferlain (Dec 20, 2013)

any parts containing "licensed" and "designed" in the name

For the chrome haters:

Poorly finished hardware surface of any colour. 

Opposed by high quality finished surfaces of any colour as a feature of high quality / expensive guitars.

But: mostly you can only tell the difference by using the guitar and you see it a lot by used guitars.

And you need at least a bit of understanding of metal finishing (as i have to in my day job). This would explain why a decent chrome finsish is one of the most durtable finishes you can get.


----------



## shikamaru (Dec 20, 2013)

pickup rings, white pickguard, plastic knobs, bookmatching off for body top. zebra pickups (I mean, look at the reason these were made in the first place !), light brown rosewood fretboards. Black may look good if it&#8217;s surrounded by a white binding, otherwise it looks like a T-model Ford&#8230;


----------



## greendog86 (Dec 20, 2013)

i still can't figure out why so many people mention TOM bridges... its just
a style of bridge, some players really dig it over any other bridge style, including me *. some very good guitars are quipped with TOM bridge, my ESP Horizon for example, maybe its not a 4K custom guitar made of some exotic\endangered woods by a luthier in east europe, buts its definitely neither cheap nor looks cheap.


----------



## TeeWX (Dec 20, 2013)

Chrome hardware looks absolutely terrible. On Black it looks the worst! As said before I hate seeing Cavin's with chrome hardware.. my friend ordered a nice 6 from them and it's black and opted for chrome hardware. Sooooo depressing!

Dot Inlays as well look completely terrible.

Any really far out design, like a BC Rich looks terrible.

If it isn't made in the USA it looks cheap  **jk


----------



## flaik (Dec 20, 2013)

whats with everyone hating on dot inlays?

I have never thought of that as cheap, just kind of more utilitarian. 

I generally dont like big gawdy inlays though. It doesn't really make a guitar look cheap but it does make it lose personal value for me. Things change though maybe one day I'll be the giant inlay king.


----------



## MooseJuice (Dec 20, 2013)

I´m not a friend of inlays generally. Centered dot inlays look just meh in my opinion. Maybe they remind me too much of entry level guitars. Huge inlays that cover almost the entire fretboard just kills it.


----------



## TeeWX (Dec 20, 2013)

flaik said:


> whats with everyone hating on dot inlays?
> 
> I have never thought of that as cheap, just kind of more utilitarian.
> 
> I generally dont like big gawdy inlays though. It doesn't really make a guitar look cheap but it does make it lose personal value for me. Things change though maybe one day I'll be the giant inlay king.



I don't think it has much to do with the dots themselves. If all entry level guitars had huge inlays and black hardware, chrome hardware and dot inlays would be in. Whatever entry level gear has just kind of starts to not look as nice anymore.

The other day I showed a friend some pictures of warmoth gecko basses and he was like why isn't it painted? But most of the higher end bass guitars have a nice wood finish so when I see it it looks nicer to my eyes than a painted one.


----------



## Char2000 (Dec 21, 2013)

Anything B.C. Rich.


----------



## flaik (Dec 21, 2013)

TeeWX said:


> I don't think it has much to do with the dots themselves. If all entry level guitars had huge inlays and black hardware, chrome hardware and dot inlays would be in. Whatever entry level gear has just kind of starts to not look as nice anymore.



I see, I guess I've just been looking at as a classic standard thing. Mostly because strats have the center dot inlays. I have two cheap guitars with different shaped inlays and two good guitars with center dot inlays.


----------



## MF_Kitten (Dec 21, 2013)

centered dot inlays just look so "DUH DIS IS WERE DA NOTES ARR!" to me for some reason, and it's so untidy and obstructive. I like off-set dot inlays way better.


----------



## Blue1970Cutlass (Dec 21, 2013)

+1 on the dot inlays looking cheap to me... as others mentioned, it's because that is what is on most entry level (i.e. cheap) guitars, hence = cheap looking

(the lone exception in my mind is Fender, for some reason dots don't cheapen the look in my mind on Fenders)

I personally don't understand all the chrome hate... I dunno - maybe it's because I'm into classic cars and maybe my tastes transcend from cars to guitars, but I like chrome


----------



## Obstsalat (Dec 22, 2013)

i think yellow'ish binding and inlays on a dark painted guitar looks really poor.
cream is nice tho (like on the iron label stuff).

besides this, dry ass rosewood fretboard where you can see these little holes makes it look insanely cheap. (i think someone mentioned this already). like this one, which has yellow'ish dot inlays also *shudders* :


----------



## MBrian0000 (Dec 22, 2013)

For me it's the too-thick gloss finish, square neck heel, honey burst/tobacco burst, bare woodgrain with little to no figuring, sloppyness where tolerances aren't quite up to par or too much glue was used, things like that. also the uber-over the top designs (warlock, beast, etc.) although i dont hate all b.c. riches. in fact my main sixer is a b.c. rich, which would actually probably make most people here cringe after reading through this thread.


----------



## wakjob (Dec 22, 2013)

Wow, I just found a thread full of people who hate Les Pauls!


----------



## maxdgad (Dec 22, 2013)

Sharp/uneven fret ends. I've noticed this on guitars costing over $900 and it's a deal breaker for me. It makes it feel like it's worth $99. The opposite is what makes a cheap guitar feel like it's worth more.


----------



## CrushingAnvil (Dec 24, 2013)

Some of the views espoused in this thread make me hate almost all of you  

Dot inlays? Good. Give me my ....ing RG550 20th back.


----------



## CrushingAnvil (Dec 24, 2013)

Obstsalat said:


> i think yellow'ish binding and inlays on a dark painted guitar looks really poor.
> cream is nice tho (like on the iron label stuff).
> 
> besides this, dry ass rosewood fretboard where you can see these little holes makes it look insanely cheap. (i think someone mentioned this already). like this one, which has yellow'ish dot inlays also *shudders* :



"Holes"? It's called wood grain you colossal plebeian


----------



## Espresto (Dec 28, 2013)

That fretboard looks fine, doesn't even look very dry. Nobody show this guy a wenge fingerboard, he'll have an aneurysm.


----------



## patata (Dec 28, 2013)

the price tag


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 29, 2013)

Zalbu said:


> Chrome screws around the pickups, like on this guitar.



Yup, those are awful.


----------



## FILTHnFEAR (Dec 29, 2013)

Prophetable said:


> Inlays like this:


----------



## Purelojik (Jan 4, 2014)

Invictus


----------



## bannyd (Jan 4, 2014)

rosewood fretboards on maple bolt on necks w/ dot inlays and super square heels

hate that shit


----------



## Prophetable (Jan 4, 2014)

bannyd said:


> rosewood fretboards on maple bolt on necks w/ dot inlays and super square heels
> 
> hate that shit



IE: Strat


----------

