# If I could ban a guitar model...



## blacai (Mar 31, 2017)

... it would be the SG(or DC)

-Thread just for fun


----------



## lewis (Mar 31, 2017)

anything from BC Rich.


----------



## Steinmetzify (Mar 31, 2017)

lewis said:


> anything from BC Rich.



+1. All of that .... is fugly. Don't care, no ....s. It all sucks.


----------



## Mwoit (Mar 31, 2017)

Any form of Super Strat shape so that everyone is forced to use a different model and we'd get some mad ideas and models.


----------



## Possessed (Mar 31, 2017)

steinmetzify said:


> +1. All of that .... is fugly. Don't care, no ....s. It all sucks.



I actually think some shape such as Bich, mockingbird are pretty nice. However, the biggest issue of their design is the balance problem. My bich sounds great with top craftmanship, but when you play them standing up, the neck diving is huge. I really think they should redesign the locations of the strap pins.


----------



## endmysuffering (Mar 31, 2017)

steinmetzify said:


> +1. All of that .... is fugly. Don't care, no ....s. It all sucks.



My warlock is my baby, fight me.


----------



## narad (Mar 31, 2017)

Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.


----------



## dr_game0ver (Mar 31, 2017)

steinmetzify said:


> +1. All of that .... is fugly. Don't care, no ....s. It all sucks.



Yeah. Between the Eagle and the PX3...

To me, dildo shaped upper horned Warwick.


----------



## Rachmaninoff (Mar 31, 2017)

It's so fugly it hurts my eyes.







And almost all other EBMM monstrosities.


----------



## milquetoast (Mar 31, 2017)

Easily the Dean ML. Or hell, most things made by Dean for that matter. I've never liked anything they produce.


----------



## Zado (Mar 31, 2017)

Rachmaninoff said:


> It's so fugly it hurts my eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



^ I can second this









Also, not meaning to ride the hatehorse, but the shape of pretty much every Kiesel I've seen so far always felt akward


----------



## lewis (Mar 31, 2017)

milquetoast said:


> Easily the Dean ML. Or hell, most things made by Dean for that matter. I've never liked anything they produce.



they suited one man. Dimebag. On anyone else they are utter cereal box guitars. I bought a Dean Inferno V when I was very young because i thought flames and a Dean V were "cool"

The guitar literally felt like it was made out of Balsa wood. Pathetic.
Trivium stopped their brief Dean endorsement because on tour, all the headstocks kept crack/snapping off.


----------



## exo (Mar 31, 2017)

endmysuffering said:


> My warlock is my baby, fight me.



+1.

My Mockingbird is a close second.



I hate almost every EBMM I've laid my eyes on except the JP model. Thought the Albert Lee, Majesty, and Bongo were terrible.....then they topped it off with that St. Vincent abomination........


----------



## thraxil (Mar 31, 2017)

These kinds, where the lower horn is longer than the upper horn:





Can't stand those for some reason, though I *love* the Iceman shape...


----------



## marcwormjim (Mar 31, 2017)

Zado said:


>



SIR YOU HATE WOMEN AND ARE A SEXIST IF YOU WERE A WOMAN YOU'D UNDERSTAND THAT THAT GUITAR IS A VICTORY WORTHY OF INCLUSION UPON THE VOYAGER SPACECRAFT.


----------



## Insomnia (Mar 31, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.



At the very least Ormsby introduce some pretty extreme fan scales to the design. Siggery is by far the worst.


----------



## extendedsolo (Mar 31, 2017)

Zado said:


> ^ I can second this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've actually always to try this guitar, but can't find one in a shop. I wonder if people are actually buying it since St Vincent isn't a super popular band. Maybe younger indie bands are buying it. 

I've always thought that Kiesel/carvins by and large are super super tacky. I'm not saying that they aren't good, but oh my god some of the ones I see on facebook and instagram are awful. It's like a completely blinged out car. It's like that guy in your neighborhood with too many lawn ornaments, yeah it gets your attention but it's gross looking. Thankfully metal players are the only ones that seem to be really getting on the kiesel train.


----------



## Shask (Mar 31, 2017)

Possessed said:


> I actually think some shape such as Bich, mockingbird are pretty nice. However, the biggest issue of their design is the balance problem. My bich sounds great with top craftmanship, but when you play them standing up, the neck diving is huge. I really think they should redesign the locations of the strap pins.



This is how I feel. Actually, the Mockingbird is one of my favorite looking guitars..... but I cant play them. They neck dive like a SG, and it drives me crazy! I have an old US one in parts in my basement and it has been there for years, lol. I played a Warlock for years when I was in college, and had an Ironbird in high school. I loved them for what they were at the time. Nowadays, I am not sure I would get one with all of the MIK options available today.


As far as guitars, I can't stand guitars that look like Gumby, or a coffee table. Fender Jaguars, Mustangs, etc.... other designs similar to this abomination...


----------



## beerandbeards (Mar 31, 2017)

extendedsolo said:


> I've actually always to try this guitar, but can't find one in a shop. I wonder if people are actually buying it since St Vincent isn't a super popular band. Maybe younger indie bands are buying it.
> 
> I've always thought that Kiesel/carvins by and large are super super tacky. I'm not saying that they aren't good, but oh my god some of the ones I see on facebook and instagram are awful. It's like a completely blinged out car. It's like that guy in your neighborhood with too many lawn ornaments, yeah it gets your attention but it's gross looking. Thankfully metal players are the only ones that seem to be really getting on the kiesel train.



I played one and I thought it was a great guitar. Well built and felt very comfortable under my man boobs . The mini humbucker don't suit me for what I play but I've I had plenty of disposable income I wouldn't mind owning one


----------



## Pikka Bird (Mar 31, 2017)

Danelectro Longhorn and pretty much any Minarik shape...



narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.



Which aspect of it? Strings over a gap? BM weren't the first by a long margin.

Anyways, I think Blackwater and Stinnett (oh, and the Padalka Space) are pretty much the only ones who have made good looking headstocks incorporating that idea, and yes- that includes Blackmachine, which I personally think look halfway atrocious.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

Personally I hate the dean Ml and BC Rich Warlocks with a passion. They look unbelievably stupid. Also the firebird, it just has .... ergonomics imo. I actually liked the St. Vincent model I tried at guitar center, though it's not really ideal for playing classical style imo.


----------



## bostjan (Mar 31, 2017)

Anything that tries too hard to be multiscale. I could complain about Etherial's take on e-scale that totally misses the point, but I think the impact is pretty small.

On the other hand, Ibanez made me really excited by introducing multiscale guitars and basses, then totally missed the boat on the specs, so I fear, due to high visibility in the market, that folks will form an impression that multiscale guitars are not that much of an improvement in ergonomics or tone. Hopefully their competitors will recover the ball from that fumble. I think ESP and Jackson are on the right track.


----------



## vilk (Mar 31, 2017)

I would just ban the plastic pickup switch cover-like thing of an Ibanez saber


----------



## prlgmnr (Mar 31, 2017)

Left handed Jackson custom shop Juggernauts.


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Mar 31, 2017)

vilk said:


> I would just ban the plastic pickup switch cover-like thing of an Ibanez saber


So you'd be quite happy with the switch protruding out of the front of the guitar, eh?


----------



## Blytheryn (Mar 31, 2017)

Weird pseudo Les-Pauls with seriously off shapes make my eyes bleed. To they all look like they were designed by a drunk four year old, throw them all in the fire.


----------



## dr_game0ver (Mar 31, 2017)

F*ck you that solo looks nice! The DC eclipse is the worst looking guitar in existence!!


----------



## narad (Mar 31, 2017)

Pikka Bird said:


> Which aspect of it? Strings over a gap? BM weren't the first by a long margin.
> 
> Anyways, I think Blackwater and Stinnett (oh, and the Padalka Space) are pretty much the only ones who have made good looking headstocks incorporating that idea, and yes- that includes Blackmachine, which I personally think look halfway atrocious.



I think it's rather clear which ones are developed _because_ of blackmachine. Two of them had/have "_machine" in the model name


----------



## crg123 (Mar 31, 2017)

^ Agreed. This thing ruins the S model ibanez for me.


----------



## asfeir (Mar 31, 2017)

prlgmnr said:


> Left handed Jackson custom shop Juggernauts.



hahahaha


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

Blytheryn said:


> Weird pseudo Les-Pauls with seriously off shapes make my eyes bleed. To they all look like they were designed by a drunk four year old, throw them all in the fire.



i actually like the jackson monarkh  something about a les paul with a better neck heel, a shreddier neck and a pointy headstock just gets my blood pumping.


----------



## bostjan (Mar 31, 2017)

Regarding LP copies...meh, I don't really like the LP shape that much anymore. It looked really cool in the 50's and 60's, but, by the 70's, there were already better shapes available. I think that Schecter actually is a slight improvement, more like an oversized nighthawk shape.

But seriously, what is the point of the singlecut solidbody shape? The body is just there for looks and ergonomics, right? Anyone who tells me body mass improves sustain might strike up a little physics debate.



GuitarBizarre said:


> So you'd be quite happy with the switch protruding out of the front of the guitar, eh?



Or a much more expensive redesigned switch? Or a wooden cover instead? Or just not use a switch? Or redesign the body contour to accommodate the larger switch... There is more than one possibility.

I love the feel of the S series, but I agree that the way the switch is done is a bummer.

Maybe two mini toggles instead of a 5 way switch?


----------



## feraledge (Mar 31, 2017)




----------



## Blytheryn (Mar 31, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> i actually like the jackson monarkh  something about a les paul with a better neck heel, a shreddier neck and a pointy headstock just gets my blood pumping.



Those aspects are all awesome, what gets me is the horn... Might look better in person, but it looks off to me.




dr_game0ver said:


> F*ck you that solo looks nice! The DC eclipse is the worst looking guitar in existence!!



The Eclipse looks amazing with the old four knob, shaper horn. I agree on the new one.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

actually I forgot- anything from zakk wylde's lind of new guitars. I hate those points on the body. It's like they tried so hard to make a metal guitar that they forgot about comfort.


----------



## vilk (Mar 31, 2017)

GuitarBizarre said:


> So you'd be quite happy with the switch protruding out of the front of the guitar, eh?



idk I kinda figured maybe the could try making it like practically every single other pickup switch I've ever seen on a guitar in my entire life-- absent of a convex piece of black plastic.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Mar 31, 2017)

Strandbergs

I await your hate mail.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Strandbergs
> 
> I await your hate mail.



what exactly do you not like about them? just curious.


----------



## Blytheryn (Mar 31, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> actually I forgot- anything from zakk wylde's lind of new guitars. I hate those points on the body. It's like they tried so hard to make a metal guitar that they forgot about comfort.



That finish is on point though...


----------



## dr_game0ver (Mar 31, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> what exactly do you not like about them? just curious.



all Headless guitars looks the same. Also, the headstock is part of the design, removing it il like a car without wheels or a LP with a floyd, it just does not looks right.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

Blytheryn said:


> That finish is on point though...



it's a pretty cool finish though let's be honest, it's such a missed opportunity to call a guitar the blood eagle and not offer a blood red finish


----------



## xzacx (Mar 31, 2017)

beerandbeards said:


> I played one and I thought it was a great guitar. Well built and felt very comfortable under my man boobs . The mini humbucker don't suit me for what I play but I've I had plenty of disposable income I wouldn't mind owning one



I would absolutely own a St. Vincent if they weren't so uncomfortable to play in classical position. Love the look/feel/sound. I'm not really a mini-hum fan either, but it would be cool just to have. 



dr_game0ver said:


> all Headless guitars looks the same.



I'd argue that Strandbergs look pretty unique. No problem with not liking them, but I'm at a loss trying to figure out what you'd mistake a Varberg for.

I'd ban finishes that have more colors on a single surface than a multicolor swirl. See below - I count at least 5 distinctive colors, not to mention wood grain going in two different directions.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

xzacx said:


> I would absolutely own a St. Vincent if they weren't so uncomfortable to play in classical position. Love the look/feel/sound. I'm not really a mini-hum fan either, but it would be cool just to have.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd argue that Strandbergs look pretty unique. No problem with not liking them, but I'm at a loss trying to figure out what you'd mistake a Varberg for.


Yeah that was my experience as well. I like everything about the guitar excluding how it felt when trying to play in classical position. 

I'd argue that the padalka headless guitars are pretty unique along with anything rick toone has made. There's no mistaking those for a steinberger or a vader.


----------



## xzacx (Mar 31, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> Yeah that was my experience as well. I like everything about the guitar excluding how it felt when trying to play in classical position.
> 
> I'd argue that the padalka headless guitars are pretty unique along with anything rick toone has made. There's no mistaking those for a steinberger or a vader.



What about a Birdfish or Tesla too? Headstocks absolutely play into a guitar's overall design, but I don't get how you can say all headless guitars look the same.


----------



## All_¥our_Bass (Mar 31, 2017)

Les Paul


----------



## Mprinsje (Mar 31, 2017)

if i never have to see a picture of a reverse V again it'll be too soon. 





AARH


God everything about those things is so incredibly wrong.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

xzacx said:


> What about a Birdfish or Tesla too? Headstocks absolutely play into a guitar's overall design, but I don't get how you can say all headless guitars look the same.



sure those too. I'm not a fan of Tesla's work but it is definitely iconic. I like what frank montag is doing too:


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Mar 31, 2017)

vilk said:


> idk I kinda figured maybe the could try making it like practically every single other pickup switch I've ever seen on a guitar in my entire life-- absent of a convex piece of black plastic.


You realise the cover exists because the body is not thick enough to hold a normal 5 way in that position, right?


----------



## wannabguitarist (Mar 31, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.





Insomnia said:


> At the very least Ormsby introduce some pretty extreme fan scales to the design. Siggery is by far the worst.



Nah, Ormsby is the worst. He's just to f*cking blatant about it. "Hypemachine." Whether or not you think the design is attractive it's just disrespectful.


----------



## TedEH (Mar 31, 2017)

Mprinsje said:


> if i never have to see a picture of a reverse V again it'll be too soon.



Agreed. I think you win the thread. There was also a "flying W" shaped guitar, I forget who makes it. Almost as ugly as this, but the reverse V still wins the "should be banned" contest for me.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Mar 31, 2017)

I never understood the blackmachine hype. I remember just seeing bare bones superstrats with a different style of headstock. 
Siggi Braun's headstocks are gross, same with his fafnyr body shape.




Also this guitar is ....ing ugly:


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Mar 31, 2017)

TedEH said:


> Agreed. I think you win the thread. There was also a "flying W" shaped guitar, I forget who makes it. Almost as ugly as this, but the reverse V still wins the "should be banned" contest for me.


Most "Flying W" guitars are just doubleneck Vs, but I know the one you mean, and it's a single necked abortion.


----------



## Viginez (Mar 31, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.


all of them. including blackmachine. mainly because of the retarded headstock and all the hype.


----------



## Jeffbro (Mar 31, 2017)

Any Gibson with those retarded self tuning things

Seriously the most worthless invention ever, if you play guitar you have ears and you have hands


----------



## vilk (Mar 31, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.



You mean having the strings suspended above thin air between the nut and the tuning machines? Because really really the first popular guitar brand do that was Parker. At least, the first time I saw a blackmachine my immediate reaction was_ It's like a heavy metal Parker headstock!_


----------



## narad (Mar 31, 2017)

vilk said:


> You mean having the strings suspended above thin air between the nut and the tuning machines? Because really really the first popular guitar brand do that was Parker. At least, the first time I saw a blackmachine my immediate reaction was_ It's like a heavy metal Parker headstock!_



Yea, I mean, I have a Parker with that headstock that I like. It's not so much a dig at string-over-air headstocks, but the builders who can't actually design anything decent themselves. They see people want blackmachines, so they create a market of slightly distorted blackmachine guitars. Ormsby like to phrase the hypemachines as satire, but really he's just cashing in and they're way more successful than anything he's actually designed. I'd feel like a huge failure if that was the best I could do at my craft.


----------



## vilk (Mar 31, 2017)

if I ever cash in on anything ever in the rest of my life I think it'll be totally dope

also I want more string-over-air headstocks with the 3x3 config like those metal neck Kramers. Maybe I'll make it V or O shaped instead of U shaped and cash in on that


----------



## A-Branger (Mar 31, 2017)

I get what you guys saying with all the blackmachine copies out there, but... Black machine dont make them anymore so whats the problem with others building them? every mayor brand has a "strat" and a "lessPaul" guitar in their lineup, and some of those are 99.9% identical to the originals. Some of them till the point were it makes me think "why you even botter??"...."can you at least change/fix ANY spec so people can have a reason to buy them apart of brand loyalty?"

BM its just another "body shape" to use. Got popularized, people want them, people build them.... and I cant really complain since I got a hypemachine on order right now  

speaking of that topic, the only thing I would ban right now is every single stupid "Fender" bass. Seriusly, like 80% of the bass market is a fender J or P bass look a like. And those are the worst un-comfortable, un-ergonomic, neck diving, huge, un-practical, basses out there. Seriously, cant anyone design a new bass shape anymore?. If this were the cream of the cream of basses I would get it, but as a bass design (not as sound), they are the worst. Its jsut an augmented Strat guitar with no real though of a bass player in mind


----------



## jl-austin (Mar 31, 2017)

at someone point in one's life you realize "it takes a lot of different people (and their likes) to make the world go around"

Ban guitars I would not.


----------



## feraledge (Mar 31, 2017)

As much as I hate a lot of these guitars on a gut level, in time we are all going to need fugly guitars solely to prove to our significant others that "no, I don't want one of EVERY guitar." And for that, I thank them.


----------



## Humbuck (Apr 1, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.



Totally agree...it's complete design plagiarism bull. Because of this I think a lot of people that like these guitars now don't even know what a Blackmachine is at this point.


----------



## Alberto7 (Apr 1, 2017)

I don't think very many things are as ungodly fugly and/or awkward looking as this abomination of a guitar:












It looks like someone broke a guitar and then didn't quite know how to fix it.


----------



## marcwormjim (Apr 1, 2017)

*Guitar _*company*_.


----------



## TheKindred (Apr 1, 2017)

narad said:


> Anything that takes a blackmachine headstock and distorts it slightly to pretend they're not just cashing in on kids who want a blackmachine but can't get one. Skervesen, Ormsby, Blackwater, Siggery.



Including Blackmachine since it's basically copped from Parker?


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 1, 2017)

Humbuck said:


> Totally agree...it's complete design plagiarism bull. Because of this I think a lot of people that like these guitars now don't even know what a Blackmachine is at this point.



well people dnot know what a blackmachine is at this point because Blackmachine doesnt make them anymore, and they are so few and insane expensive the ones out there that theres a good chance you come across to any of the others before you even see a real BM one. I did, I had no idea whatsoever who was the first one and who copy who. And I hated the shape until I got to play one, I just went with the one that I liked and could afford. Forget about buying some second hand 5-15k$ thing

also I out of those brands only siggery is the one who has the exact shape, which I give it to you, thats plagiarism, the others they have their own take or design around the original idea

and again, Gibson/ESP ec models. and any LP copy out there. Ibanez/dean, JAckson/LTD/BCrich (this one can go with the LP too), Fender/any strat or tele copy, Schecter/LTD f guitars, and ect ect ect all those closer in design to each others than the blackmachine copies you mentioned (except Siggery). If not Skerseven raptor and Ormsby hypemachine headstocks are closer to each others than they are to the BM one


----------



## Bearitone (Apr 1, 2017)

Zado said:


> ^ I can second this
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Other than the sh!tty upper fret access, I love the look of the St. Vincent

I think the Wylde Audio guitars are definitely up there in the garbage department (when it comes to aesthetics and shapes)


----------



## Zado (Apr 1, 2017)




----------



## laxu (Apr 1, 2017)

Blytheryn said:


> Weird pseudo Les-Pauls with seriously off shapes make my eyes bleed. To they all look like they were designed by a drunk four year old, throw them all in the fire.



Out of these only the Jackson looks off to me and that is because the outline looks like it's poorly drawn and the headstock is totally wrong for the design. IMO I don't get why Jackson would make a singlecut guitar in the first place, especially one that looks so off.


----------



## Zado (Apr 1, 2017)

laxu said:


> Out of these only the Jackson looks off to me and that is because the outline looks like it's poorly drawn and the headstock is totally wrong for the design. IMO I don't get why Jackson would make a singlecut guitar in the first place, especially one that looks so off.



Yeah, the cutaway looks just wrong ..... I guess they did it this way to avoid it being identical to an Eclipse


----------



## marcwormjim (Apr 1, 2017)

The Jackson only looks appropriate when played by a DC character.


----------



## narad (Apr 1, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> well people dnot know what a blackmachine is at this point because Blackmachine doesnt make them anymore



Says who? Doug still makes them. And you can still buy a Feline-built Blackmachine as well. The "I can't get X so I had to go with a copy" argument doesn't work.

As to the Les Paul / Strat type of argument, the "copies" people are after cost more than official ones. Why is that? Because it's been 70 years since they were made and the companies who officially produce them now often don't make them in a manner true to their original production. People want Les Pauls with nitro and hyde glue and brazilian rosewood. They want good quality control. For a long time you couldn't get that through Gibson. These blackmachine cloners are just offering low-cost versions of a popular design, built to lower standards, outsourced to Korea, etc. 

I guess that's fine if someone wants to say, "I'm an unscrupulous businessman and I'm terrible at this luthiery thing", but these guys are pretending they're actually good at this stuff!



A-Branger said:


> also I out of those brands only siggery is the one who has the exact shape, which I give it to you, thats plagiarism, the others they have their own take or design around the original idea



Their own take is just a contortion of the original. I mean, they're just godawful. The skervesen one looks like an oversized bottle-opener and the hypemachine one looks like the blackmachine headstock got stung by a bee. 

I mean, are you really going to defend that this wasn't a rip-off when this is the backside?


----------



## caspian (Apr 1, 2017)

new hetfield model and headless carvins for me are among the biggest eyesores. Others that come to mind: super strats with sparkling paints jobs, BC Rich, Dean Dime style guitars.

I guess on a different track I am completely over old, normal strats. I know a surprising amount of dads who just want to sound EXACTLY like Eric Clapton, have no creativity, but have enough money to buy a freakin dumble and black strat. It's just the lamest thing ever. I feel like aping anyone who's famous too closely is particularly lame, but it's old "tone questers" whom are the lamest


----------



## narad (Apr 1, 2017)

caspian said:


> I guess on a different track I am completely over old, normal strats. I know a surprising amount of dads who just want to sound EXACTLY like Eric Clapton, have no creativity, but have enough money to buy a freakin dumble and black strat. It's just the lamest thing ever. I feel like aping anyone who's famous too closely is particularly lame, but it's old "tone questers" whom are the lamest



Yea, I frikkin hate older people with hobbies they enjoy. Just die already, amirite?!


----------



## Siggevaio (Apr 1, 2017)

Future guitars made by this man.


----------



## endmysuffering (Apr 1, 2017)

narad said:


> Yea, I frikkin hate older people with hobbies they enjoy. Just die already, amirite?!



Thank you.


----------



## Mprinsje (Apr 1, 2017)

Zado said:


>



naww man this is genuinely one of my all time favs. Want one so bad.


----------



## crackout (Apr 1, 2017)

I absolutely hate Vaders. Looks like a ballsack and p*nis with chopped off tip.

This thing is equally as bad:






Also, I also got hatred for carved-top superstrats.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 1, 2017)

narad said:


> Says who? Doug still makes them. And you can still buy a Feline-built Blackmachine as well. The "I can't get X so I had to go with a copy" argument doesn't work.



Didnt knew they still were made. Theres no word on it on their site and for the last few years Ive been in this forum I havent seen anyone with a NGD or having one in construction. My bad in there, maybe I missed one post around. But they do are harder to get than the others, like I said I came across to all the other brands first before I knew about BM, I was giving my pov on it. In fact I remember a tread of one of those ebay sales where someone made a list of all the BM built. The simple fact that someone can list them up on tread lets you know how rare and pretty much to a point "un-achievable" these are.



narad said:


> As to the Les Paul / Strat type of argument, the "copies" people are after cost more than official ones. Why is that? Because it's been 70 years since they were made and the companies who officially produce them now often don't make them in a manner true to their original production. People want Les Pauls with nitro and hyde glue and brazilian rosewood. They want good quality control. For a long time you couldn't get that through Gibson. These blackmachine cloners are just offering low-cost versions of a popular design, built to lower standards, outsourced to Korea, etc.



You basing your argument about a low cost BM vs high end Strats or LP. When the whole point of my argument was that every mayor, little, and "no-brand" out there makes a "low-cost" copy of those guitars. Plus the usual fair share of boutique shops too (specially on the bass dept). Why suddenly it is bad for some other brand to make a "BM" shape guitar (since they are popular and hard to get), but completely fine for thing like EBMM releasing the cutlass, LTD SN, Schecter traditional, Yamaha pacifica, ect which they make their own suttle twist on them. up to things like Ibanez with the Talman, which they change the body alot. Plus the countless little brands who dont care about changing body shapes, jsut the headstock, including boutique shops, semi-custom shops, even stuff like warmoth. And the many examples of LP shape guitars, some of them already showed up there. And for basses the Fender copies are even far out more ripoff than the guitars, they dont even care about how 120% exact they are

And why because its build in Korea, it suddenly makes them "lower standards"?... aaah right I keep forgetting the high end luthier>USA>japan>korea>indonesia>china chain of commands  

yes, they are low-cost and mass produced. So? Thats kinda the whole point of them. I dont have two jobs and live with my parents in order to save 700$ per week to make a custom one of a kind order of a popular guitar like that kid. I cant spend 10k$ (or whatever huge amount) the "original" cost these days, only because "its the original", just like Gibson or Fender these days, you are paying extra $ for the name on the headstock (or backplate in this case). But I like the design, so I went for a more affordable approach, and since I cant even afford the custom shop version of any of those Luthiers I went with the "low-standards" one. Its ok, I would be happy with my poorly build guitar 




narad said:


> Their own take is just a contortion of the original. I mean, they're just godawful. The skervesen one looks like an oversized bottle-opener and the hypemachine one looks like the blackmachine headstock got stung by a bee.
> 
> I mean, are you really going to defend that this wasn't a rip-off when this is the backside?



yeah I know the bodies are the same, not sure on how precise are, but my point wasnt about the bodies, Im not defending it since I know they are pretty much the same. My argument up there was about the headstocks, since that was the point that was brought up. 

And my argument remains the same, everyone and their dog makes a 90-100% exact copy of a strat/tele or LP body, with some minor differences to headstocks. So why is acceptable for them (including big name brands) to do so, but for these shops/luthiers/brands is not ok to them have a BM copy? or is it because BM supposed to be your underground "djent popularised" modern metal custom shop/luthier that only you and your buddies knew of from SSO? so it supposed to stay like that because you liked the "uniqueness" of them? the BM body became "too mainstream"?

or it would be fine when jackson and ibanez decide to release their own take of a BM body guitar?


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 1, 2017)

Zado said:


>



I actually like this shape quite a lot, not sure about the bevel since I havent seen one live. But I though it was a great take on a explorer, love the headstock. It was things like their LTD EX, that its awful and ugly.


----------



## narad (Apr 1, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> Didnt knew they still were made. Theres no word on it on their site and for the last few years Ive been in this forum I havent seen anyone with a NGD or having one in construction.



Because all the blackmachine guys got banned from the forum. There's been a couple new ones shipped, but you won't won't see them here.



A-Branger said:


> Why suddenly it is bad for some other brand to make a "BM" shape guitar (since they are popular and hard to get),



Because they didn't create it? Maybe that's just me, but I don't buy counterfit things or support counterfit industries. The LP/strat counterpoint is such a weak one, here's the rundown:

Gibson/Fender:
-- 70 year old designs
-- original designer / builders dead, you can't support them in any way
-- other companies often considered to make better versions of them
-- other US companies will not do anything resembling either headstock, or the LP body
-- other companies are charging more. It's not about price, it's about quality.
-- Gibson/Fender -- gigantic corporations
-- Gibson/Fender not building to original specs
-- other companies have other guitars that are comparably/more popular (EBMM cutlass is not a main EBMM -- EBMM stingray is a classic, EBMM JP is super popular, etc.)

vs.

Blackmachine:
-- 5-10 yr old design, just gaining popularity
-- still obtainable from the exact guy who built the original
-- copied by people who have trouble selling their own designs
-- copies not built to original standards
-- copies bought by people who can't afford original

The situations are not the same at all. The blackmachine scenario fits just about any counterfitting one -- it's why there's fake rolexes and fake prada bags, etc. And if you try this stuff as a major company, it doesn't go over well:
http://oppositelock.kinja.com/breaking-news-bmw-suing-hyundai-over-logo-brand-infrin-1634945755

And we wouldn't tolerate this if it was say... music -- if some band put out "Fake Total Destroy" that was just transposed up a key, they'd be chastised and make no money. If that was their best song, they'd be terrible musicians. But by all means let's give Ormsby a pass because you really want it.


----------



## marcwormjim (Apr 1, 2017)

crackout said:


> This thing is equally as bad:



In all fairness to Jeff and Mark, Mr. Holdsworth himself is to blame for that: 

The original design he submitted to Carvin in the 90s was so hideous, that Mark flat-out refused to build it. The original H2 line, with the "melted tele" look (and headstock) was the compromise, until he withdrew his endorsement circa 2012 (on the grounds they had been producing guitars and pickups with his name on them that he didn't even use or care for - He was using Steinbergers, Delaps, and a custom Yamaha all outfitted with double-screw Duncan '59s). At the same time, Rick Canton announced that Allan was playing his guitars exclusively; and that a signature model was available for order. To appease and retain him, the Kiesels finally came out with a headless version of his sig, but had to shrink and cut the dimensions of the previous model down to "balance" it.

So...the present iteration is a rushed adaptation of a cop-out of a disaster. I love it, though.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 1, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> what exactly do you not like about them? just curious.



The shape. 

I'm sure it plays well, I know people love it, and, dammit, I'm all for people trying to make headless guitars again, but... I can't stand that superstrat-with-a-couple-of-bites-taken-out-of-it shape they've got going on.

As much as we've been ragging on Kiesel lately, I like the look of the Vader a lot more. It looks more... complete, for want of a better term.


----------



## BigBossAF (Apr 1, 2017)

prlgmnr said:


> Left handed Jackson custom shop Juggernauts.



Someone has been to the Misha's sig thread ahahaha
I bet the kid parents would love such a ban!

LP would be my choice, I've always saw it as ugly af guitar shape! (don't hate me)


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 1, 2017)

> -- 70 year old designs
> -- 5-10 yr old design, just gaining popularity


so because one is "old" and the other is "new". Or there is a time limit when its aceptable to make a copy?




> -- other companies often considered to make better versions of them


debatable, some people think Fender custom shop would be the best out there by a mile, same as Gibson custom. We are not talking about their entry level or mass produced stuff. Just to put it at same debate level with BM and their copies



> -- other companies are charging more. It's not about price, it's about quality.


so if you say that its not about the price (which agree with you), then why you mention that "others are charging more". Also have you seen the prices for Gibson and Fender custom shop? Insane stuff

Also again quality is debatable, depends on who is the one touching the guitar, everyone would have a different opinion on which guitar is build "better". At this level of hand made luthier stuff, it boils down to personal opinion. Just because BM was the first it doesnt mean they are the best (they could be)




> -- other companies have other guitars that are comparably/more popular


many companies started as a ripoff of those classic brands untill they found their niche, and made their own stuff. Ibanez and ESP for example. And jsut because they have a more popular model it doesnt give them a pass on having a copy rippoff either if that would be the case. And like you say before, there are boutique highend stuff that only do classic sutff rippoff because according to you people buy them for old specs. Do those companies have other popular models?




> -- copies not built to original standards
> -- copies bought by people who can't afford original



exactly the point on why there is copies out there. As there is a gap in the market for them. Some folk might not want the specs of the original, like you just said that some folks want a Strat build just like in the 60's but Fender wont do it, so this other guy do. Well this other brands offer stuff that maybe the BM wont. Not sure if he still builds them fully custom as the info in their site and the ones selling in their fb page seems to be locked to one spec. For example Ormsby offers them in multiscale (and pretty much is their selling point nowadays, very little people order a custom with a normal scale) BM didnt had multiscale, so thats a different spec enough to go with one or another. Now BM offers multisclae only in 8, so who copy who now?. Skerseven have a different line and finishes that might attract some folks who like their aesthetics better, ect ect

And as for the Korean ones, whats the issue?, they are an affordable version for those who want a BM but cant pay the high prices of an original one or any of the other brands custom shop ones. Completely different market and target audience. Plus the Hype is only 1 model out of the current 4 they have in the import line plus other two in the works

Just because someone cant pay for the original, it doesnt mean its suddenly bad to build cheap ones. If that were the case Fender would limit to only build high end custom shop, and things like the Squire line would never been in existence.



> But by all means let's give Ormsby a pass because you really want it.



but lets not because you dont. 

I like them, you dont. I hate Fender basses, (and most of their guitars), but you might love them. We dont have to agree on everything


----------



## xzacx (Apr 1, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> Just because someone cant pay for the original, it doesnt mean its suddenly bad to build cheap ones. If that were the case Fender would limit to only build high end custom shop, and things like the Squire line would never been in existence.



Actually, that's exactly what i means. 

I think Ferraris are cool - I can't afford one, so I drive something I can pay for. I've never understood why that's accepted in the guitar world. Gibson gets criticized for for protecting their designs, yet it's totally fine to play an Edwards or Tokai knockoff. It's no different to me than wearing fake Jordans or carrying a fake handbag. 

Also, the Squier example - that Fender's own designs, so they can put them out a whatever price point they want. It's a totally different scenario than a cheap knockoff.


----------



## narad (Apr 1, 2017)

There's too many half-argued points here. Clearly we're not going to agree, but anyway that's why I would ban these guitars: I don't support or condone copies and counterfits. Absolutely shameful that any small builder would rip-off the design elements of another small builder.


----------



## dr_game0ver (Apr 1, 2017)

I guess it is to f*cking complicated for the internet to have a conversation without giving sh*t to each other... And we are just talking about guitars preferences.

If that forum had a religion thread, the all site will be taken down in less than 5 minutes.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 1, 2017)

dr_game0ver said:


> I guess it is to f*cking complicated for the internet to have a conversation without giving sh*t to each other... And we are just talking about guitars preferences.
> \



we are not giving s**t to each others, we are jsut having a chill argument. He brings some points, I bring mine. ITs all good. Like I said, we dont have to agree on everything, everyone has different point of view

ITs all love in here 



now if we can all agree that clip-on tunners could be handy, but the people that leave them clipped to their guitar forever should be banned from playing altogether


----------



## bloodjunkie (Apr 2, 2017)

Anything from Fender and Gibson, and also anything that isn't the wangcaster.


----------



## marcwormjim (Apr 2, 2017)

Alex needs wangcasters mailed to him until he restores the like-function.


----------



## narad (Apr 2, 2017)

dr_game0ver said:


> I guess it is to f*cking complicated for the internet to have a conversation without giving sh*t to each other... And we are just talking about guitars preferences.
> 
> If that forum had a religion thread, the all site will be taken down in less than 5 minutes.



Dude, nothing said here is harsh/personal at all. Go be pretend-moderator somewhere else.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 2, 2017)

A-Branger said:


> so because one is "old" and the other is "new". Or there is a time limit when its aceptable to make a copy?



Well, actually...yeah, there is, when the patents expire. You have companies like Gibson, trying to blur the lines between trademark law and patent law, because anyone buying an Anderson single cut knows they are not buying Gibson Les Paul.

Then there are Chinese fakes that try to pass themselves off as what they are not.

It's part about the misrepresentation of a product and part about malicious intent. And if you name your model "hypemachine," you might be drawing people's attention to the latter.

Music is the same way, really. There is a fine line between being inspired by something and ripping something off. In fact, if a song is too different or a guitar design too unfamiliar, people get offended by its presence. I'm thinking Gitler and Teuffel.

I didn't quote the rest of your post, because I thought you had some really valid points there, but I think I argue with narad enough that he might be getting bored of it, so I'll save it for later.


----------



## Djentlyman (Apr 2, 2017)

If I could I would ban the Eclipse II simply for the odd horn/cutaway and control placement.





I so much prefer the Eclipse I model


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 2, 2017)

I actually preffer the ECII to the I and way more to a Gibson LP. 

I got one but couldnt gell with the short scale


----------



## PunkBillCarson (Apr 2, 2017)

Anything missing a headstock and the bottom of the body.


----------



## narad (Apr 2, 2017)

I love that Eclipse I but would ban combining flag inlays with a 12th-fret block inlay. Banning a 12th fret inlay that just repeats the headstock logo is on the list too!


----------



## Leviathus (Apr 2, 2017)

Sorry guys, but this thing is Buh-ttugly...


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 2, 2017)

Listen... I'm not saying we should ban maple fretboards... I'm saying we should look into fretboard control.
The majority of all mismatched fretboards in this country over the past five years were carried out with legally-purchased maple! If we'd had even a little psychiatric evaluation to make sure the buyers would use it properly, we could've prevented them!


----------



## bostjan (Apr 2, 2017)

I also don't "get" the new Tosin model. The scale length, switch position, jack placement, strap button positions, etc., all strike me as trying to make an improvement but missing the mark. As long as Tosin is happy with it, I'm glad for him, but if I were to buy another guitar, this would not be it.

I kind of like maple fretboard, just not on les pauls.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 3, 2017)

narad said:


> I love that Eclipse I but would ban combining flag inlays with a 12th-fret block inlay. Banning a 12th fret inlay that just repeats the headstock logo is on the list too!



see we do can agree on something


----------



## The Mirror (Apr 3, 2017)

Okay, come at me.

I'd ban the god damn 80s and 90s neon colored guitars. Those neon green and pink JEMs are the most ugly un-guitar like instruments I've ever seen.

And while we're at it: That fugly John Petrucci Picasso Ibanez.


----------



## Viginez (Apr 3, 2017)

The Mirror said:


> Okay, come at me.
> 
> I'd ban the god damn 80s and 90s neon colored guitars. Those neon green and pink JEMs are the most ugly un-guitar like instruments I've ever seen.
> 
> And while we're at it: That fugly John Petrucci Picasso Ibanez.


haha not sure about the color but i'd ban those with the monkey grip


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 3, 2017)

The Mirror said:


> Okay, come at me.
> 
> And while we're at it: That fugly John Petrucci Picasso Ibanez.



same, I've always hated the picasso JP.


----------



## vilk (Apr 3, 2017)

question to all the arguing folks from page 3 and 4: does it become acceptable to want a hypemachine if you believe that the guitars are built better/more to your preference than actual blackmachines?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> question to all the arguing folks from page 3 and 4: does it become acceptable to want a hypemachine if you believe that the guitars are built better/more to your preference than actual blackmachines?



You can want whatever you want. 

Wanting is just fine. 

I want a Cattle Decapitation 2008 "This is Cattle Decap" shirt. Unfortunately they aren't as easy to get as I'd like. That's a bummer. Though that doesn't give me the right to go to a local screen printer and make my own. I know it's cheap and I could certainly get away with it, but it's still not right. 

I'm not even a fan of Doug/Blackmachine and think that he honestly brought a lot of this on himself, but that still doesn't make Perry Ormsby not kind of a jerk from profiting off it so hard.


----------



## narad (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> question to all the arguing folks from page 3 and 4: does it become acceptable to want a hypemachine if you believe that the guitars are built better/more to your preference than actual blackmachines?



That's an acceptable reason to buy a hypemachine -- it's the same reason folks are willing to pay more for a well-built LP replica than the nicest thing Gibson themselves will put out. It's still not an acceptable move to nick someone else's distinguishing design cues to make up for the fact your own guitar designs don't sell.

I had this friend once who was hopping on the vegetarian train for a few weeks prior to his birthday. For his party it was super important that we booked a restaurant with veggie options. Then when we're there and having a few drinks he's like, "Wouldn't it be funny if I ordered a cheeseburger? Right? Oh man, I'm totally going to do it!" But like...it wasn't funny. He just wanted the cheeseburger and was not very clever or self delusional. I feel similarly about the Hypemachine. Oh wow, what clever satire! Or really you just were annoyed no one wanted your guitars, and so you went and started making the closest thing you could to someone else's, using satire as an excuse to follow it closer.


----------



## vilk (Apr 3, 2017)

Following the same logic, would it then be wrong for me to like some Weird Al songs better than the original version? I've had "Gump" stuck in my head for like at least a week now. And I totally like the Presidents of the USA. But which version am I singing in the kitchen? He's Gump, He's Gump, He's Gump....


----------



## JSanta (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> Following the same logic, would it then be wrong for me to like some Weird Al songs better than the original version? I've had "Gump" stuck in my head for like at least a week now. And I totally like the Presidents of the USA. But which version am I singing in the kitchen? He's Gump, He's Gump, He's Gump....



You can of course like whatever you like. However, because Weird Al gets permission from whomever owns the songs before doing the parody, your point is not really relevant.


----------



## narad (Apr 3, 2017)

JSanta said:


> You can of course like whatever you like. However, because Weird Al gets permission from whomever owns the songs before doing the parody, your point is not really relevant.



^^ 100%. And Weird Al's market isn't - "Can't afford/obtain the Coolio single you want? Buy 'Amish Paradise' by Weird Al"


----------



## bostjan (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> Following the same logic, would it then be wrong for me to like some Weird Al songs better than the original version? I've had "Gump" stuck in my head for like at least a week now. And I totally like the Presidents of the USA. But which version am I singing in the kitchen? He's Gump, He's Gump, He's Gump....



That's a pretty bad counter-example, since it's a parody and Al obtains permission from the artist.

Even Weird Al had some trouble, though, when he spoofed Coolio's "Gangsta's Paradise" with "Amish Paradise." Coolio's label gave permission, on behalf of Coolio, and there was some miscommunication. So now Al goes directly to the artist to make sure they are cool with it.

As a sidetrack tangent, though, Coolio's "Gangsta's Paradise" was actually a parody by Coolio of Stevie Wonder's "Pastime Paradise." The anecdote is that Stevie Wonder heard the original version of the song and threw a fit, because Coolio sampled his music and added too much profanity. Wonder was not upset about the sampling in and of itself, though, so Coolio re-recorded the track without the profanity, and everyone was happy with the outcome.

EDIT: Sorry, not trying to pile on; I didn't see the other responses.
EDIT #2: Funny how Narad and I chose the same example song from Weird Al.


----------



## vilk (Apr 3, 2017)

I'm not trying to be argumentative it's just kinda slow at work this morning. 

Should we assume that everyone buying a hypemachine from Ormsby actually wants a blackmachine? Is it not plausible that someone is interested in buying an Ormsby because of whether it be pricing or availability or reputation, and of the Ormsby models they decide hypemachine is best for them? Or would that not change anything about the ethics of it?

It seems like we're talking about two cases:
1. It's wrong of Ormsby to copy Blackmachine
&
2. It's wrong as a consumer to purchase a hypemachine in lieu of a genuine Blackmachine

I can/do understand the argument for #1; I'm just having a hard time wrapping my head around #2 I guess. We were talking about tribute bands in another thread, like Gruesome or Cannabis Corpse. They're metal musicians, and they decide to do their best to copy already major successful bands. Now, I understand it's not exactly the same because while most people can afford to buy the new Cannibal Corpse and the new Cannabis Corpse both and they generally cannot afford to buy two custom guitars. But Cannabis Corpse is making music that appeals to Cannibal Corpse fans, and they themselves are Cannibal Corpse fans, and they are beyond a doubt grabbing the same market. All of these assumptions that we're making about Ormsby, we could also make about Cannabis Corpse, but we don't because we think of Cannabis Corpse as musicians and artists expressing themselves.

Do we know that this Ormsby guy is just trying to grab up market shares to fund a gold toilet seat? Isn't he passionate about luthiery? You don't think he saw a blackmachine and felt inspired to build one like it, much like how Cannabis Corpse listens to Cannibal Corpse and feel inspired to make songs like it? I know it sounds like a rhetorical question but it's not I mean I've heard of luthiers doing some shady stuff.


----------



## Malkav (Apr 3, 2017)

I don't get the Ormsby thing, I actually like the look of his other models more.

That being said, and this is just an opinion, but I think that at the root of all this Blackmachine just kinda ripped on the RG and I don't personally think his design is different enough to warrant it not being considered derogatory, which I suppose the RG kinda is to begin with, so I don't really feel any particular party isn't sitting in some moral grey area really.

I don't really personally feel any model should be banned, but I'm not much of a fan of any of Gibson's offerings but just cause I don't agree with them doesn't mean I think other people shouldn't get to play them 

So I'm gonna go with anything made by Devries, BRJ, Decibel, S7G, ViK, or any of the other asshole builders who screwed people over and then disappeared.


----------



## narad (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> Do we know that this Ormsby guy is just trying to grab up market shares to fund a gold toilet seat? Isn't he passionate about luthiery? You don't think he saw a blackmachine and felt inspired to build one like it, much like how Cannabis Corpse listens to Cannibal Corpse and feel inspired to make songs like it? I know it sounds like a rhetorical question but it's not I mean I've heard of luthiers doing some shady stuff.



Well when you're inspired by something you usually pay tribute or some positive homage to it. You don't deride it while copying it and profiting from it.

I don't have a particularly high opinion of Perry after he came on to the forums to say that his guitars have sold for upwards of $90k, failing to mention it was basically a coffin for one Randy Rhoads' fingernails or something to that extent.

And if he was super passionate about luthiery, he wouldn't have most of the hypemachines being produced by another crew in Korea. 



Malkav said:


> That being said, and this is just an opinion, but I think that at the root of all this Blackmachine just kinda ripped on the RG and I don't personally think his design is different enough to warrant it not being considered derogatory, which I suppose the RG kinda is to begin with, so I don't really feel any particular party isn't sitting in some moral grey area really.



Well isn't that the rub. If the blackmachine is just a small departure from an RG, you might not expect another luthier to copy it in precisely all the ways it deviates from an RG...


----------



## bostjan (Apr 3, 2017)

vilk said:


> I'm not trying to be argumentative it's just kinda slow at work this morning.
> 
> Should we assume that everyone buying a hypemachine from Ormsby actually wants a blackmachine? Is it not plausible that someone is interested in buying an Ormsby because of whether it be pricing or availability or reputation, and of the Ormsby models they decide hypemachine is best for them? Or would that not change anything about the ethics of it?
> 
> ...



Much better argument. 

I think the Ormsby thing is arguable, either way. Personally, I don't think there's a legality issue, but I don't particularly think the premise behind the "hypemachine" is 100% ethical, either.

On the extreme, though, there are knockoffs of the Blackmachine that are just outright counterfeits, and I think those should be shut down.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 3, 2017)

The Mirror said:


> Okay, come at me.
> 
> I'd ban the god damn 80s and 90s neon colored guitars. Those neon green and pink JEMs are the most ugly un-guitar like instruments I've ever seen.
> 
> And while we're at it: That fugly John Petrucci Picasso Ibanez.



The Neon Green JEM (or at least the ones I found on Google) could've looked nice without the random bits of pink thrown in. Just do the whole thing neon green, and, for the love of God (heh...) either have the inlays match or just make them black! That's another thing people need to learn about maple fretboards...


----------



## Cloudy (Apr 3, 2017)

The Mirror said:


> Okay, come at me.
> 
> I'd ban the god damn 80s and 90s neon colored guitars. Those neon green and pink JEMs are the most ugly un-guitar like instruments I've ever seen.
> 
> And while we're at it: That fugly John Petrucci Picasso Ibanez.










Wheres the negative rep button?! 

I have 2 777 jems, a neon pink carvin and a bright orange aristides. My love for 80s/90s style neon shredmachines knows no bounds.


I'd ban any guitar where the bevel cuts through the top wood


----------



## JSanta (Apr 3, 2017)

bostjan said:


> Much better argument.
> 
> I think the Ormsby thing is arguable, either way. Personally, I don't think there's a legality issue, but I don't particularly think the premise behind the "hypemachine" is 100% ethical, either.
> 
> On the extreme, though, there are knockoffs of the Blackmachine that are just outright counterfeits, and I think those should be shut down.



Right, at least Ormsby is putting his name on the instruments. The ethical quagmire? That's something else entirely.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 3, 2017)

I think I'm coming to the realization that I like ugly guitars. 

I like the UV MC, the weird neon stuff, the picasso graphics, pointy horns, etc.



JSanta said:


> Right, at least Ormsby is putting his name on the instruments. The ethical quagmire? That's something else entirely.



Yeah, I'm just not really thrilled about small builders attacking each other. I don't care if it's somebody well respected publicly going after S7G or BRJ, I just don't think it's the best business strategy.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 3, 2017)

I can't afford to buy a blackmachine(nor would i be inclined even if i had the cash) so for me personally the hypemachine is something entirely different in execution and style. Sure the body shape and headstock are basically direct copies, but perry went a completely different route aesthetically. Blackmachines are too barebones for my tastes. If I'm dropping some dough on a guitar I want more than just a simple workhorse, i want pretty wood and pretty finishes. Honestly the only reason i've ordered a hypemachine is they had a turquoise colored one with blackburst edges, plus it's multiscale and i love my multiscales. The dollar goes a long way compared to the aussie one, which also doesn't hurt. I won't moralize about designs and ripping them off since padalka does this (his headless is pretty damn similar to blackwater's) but i can appreciate how he tweaked it. Design is an iterative process and I don't care if people copy or are inspired by designs, that's how good ideas come about, not magically in a vacuum. It'd be cool if everyone tried to do their own thing body shape wise, but the truth is most peoplle want superstrats or such. The amount of negativity I got on facebook for posting some of my designs asking for feedback was surprising. I'm fine with constructive criticism but when people just tell you, "it's ugly" it's not really helpful. I guess having to think about why they dislike it is a bit too much for some people though.I thought extended range players would be a bit more open minded to body shapes.


----------



## oracles (Apr 3, 2017)

narad said:


> his guitars have sold for upwards of $90k



Have they really though? If so, that's mighty unfortunate for whoever bought one...his MiK Hype copies are better than his full blown CS builds as it is.


----------



## narad (Apr 3, 2017)

oracles said:


> Have they really though? If so, that's mighty unfortunate for whoever bought one...his MiK Hype copies are better than his full blown CS builds as it is.



I think there was some mention of an auction, but I can't find any details. But the point still being that no, it was a very misleading statement. It was definitely on this forum, but I don't know where I'd go to hunt it down. Maybe someone else knows what I'm talking about?


----------



## wannabguitarist (Apr 3, 2017)

oracles said:


> Have they really though? If so, that's mighty unfortunate for whoever bought one...his MiK Hype copies are better than his full blown CS builds as it is.



Wait, really? I remember him being the luthier everyone loved on UG years (a decade ) ago. He's been building for a long time.

Still think the Hypemachine thing is in the top 5 most disrespectful/shameless moments on this site


----------



## AxeHappy (Apr 3, 2017)

*PILING ON*

Isn't he like 2+ years behind on runs too? Have all of the 2014 hypes shipped? Have the 2015s even started shipping? How about the SX limited? Or the Fantasy and Muscle Car runs? Let alone the 2016 Hypes.

Sure great that after he took payments for those runs he was magically able to start the GTR runs.

Ormsby is to date, the only bad experience I have had with a builder. I can not recommend to avoid him enough. I had a better experience with ViK. After ViK stopped shipping guitars to people. Really let that sink in.

On Topic:
I like a lot of gross things, like whacky shaped guitars (I *love* BC Rich's Beast) and eye searing paint jobs (Ala Everything Vai before the 7Vwh) so I wouldn't go after those. 

I would target any guitar that looks like a ....ing coffee table.


----------



## gunch (Apr 3, 2017)

I think Doug just was on the leading edge with the whole minimalism movement in art and design and everyone else into it piled on as it got more and more popular, especially with the "internet" growing and forming it's own market and attitudes outside of the pre-existing guitar making industry


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 3, 2017)

AxeHappy said:


> *PILING ON*
> 
> Isn't he like 2+ years behind on runs too? Have all of the 2014 hypes shipped? Have the 2015s even started shipping? How about the SX limited? Or the Fantasy and Muscle Car runs? Let alone the 2016 Hypes.
> 
> ...


last run that shipped was run 3 (gtrs with single coil in neck). run 4 (headless) and 5 (more hypemachines) are being built right now apparently. never heard anything about the muscle car run and whether it came to fruition or not.
EDIT: just asked Perry, he said he's still working with people on the muscle car run...


----------



## AxeHappy (Apr 3, 2017)

I wasn't talking about the GTR runs. I was talking about the "semi-custom" runs he used to fund the GTR and hasn't shipped. 

Asking Perry is akin to asking BRJ.


----------



## mongey (Apr 3, 2017)

every dan electro ever made


----------



## couverdure (Apr 3, 2017)

This thread has certainly derailed from "I don't like this particular shape" to "It's an offense to copy everything from Blackmachine, even if it's inspired by Ibanez's designs".


----------



## TheWarAgainstTime (Apr 4, 2017)

Any B.C. Rich or Dean


----------



## blacai (Apr 4, 2017)

So... lot of people wrote here with interesting points of view.
And now I would like to ask also if you ended buying one of the models you hated before.

For example, I was hating headless for long time until I could play one personally and then I decided to buy a strandberg and suddenly they don't look so ugly.

But mayones hydra approach, which is just a duvell still doesn't fit for me and shoggies from skervesen are "too much". It looks like forced.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 4, 2017)

blacai said:


> So... lot of people wrote here with interesting points of view.
> And now I would like to ask also if you ended buying one of the models you hated before.



I always hated Fender, now Im considering buying a Squire strat I saw pretty cheap 

at least I still stick to my guns on the wont be getting any Fender style basses ever


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 4, 2017)

BC Rich mockingbirds and warlocks are super dumb. Daemoness' atlantean is dumb looking too, excluding Maj. Meadows' guitar because the skeletor burst/dope inlay.


----------



## TedEH (Apr 4, 2017)

blacai said:


> And now I would like to ask also if you ended buying one of the models you hated before.



I definitely used to think Fenders were "for old people" and teles were ugly.

I still think teles are kind of ugly, but I've got a MiM strat I really like, and I really like some of the sounds you can get out of teles.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 4, 2017)

Story of my guitar-buying life. I started out, as a young teenager, aspiring to get teles and les pauls, but after owning them and comparing those guitars with modern designs, I was confused before.

When I started working part time assisting a luthier, I thought "I'll never buy a guitar with a floating trem." About two months later, I bought an RG7620, hoping to block the trem, then I fell in love with the trem, and thought "I'll never buy another guitar without a floating trem," then, a few years later, my main guitars all had fixed bridges...

But in terms of a specific model that I swore I'd never buy...I don't think I ever went back on that. I don't get along with Ovation roundback acoustics. I never owned one. I don't like Hofner violin basses, and I never owned one. Since I stopped liking Les Pauls, I have not owned one. I don't like the EBMM Majesty, nor the St. Vincent. Never bought those....

I think I'm fairly picky, though... I mean, there are ten thousand different types of guitars out there that want you to buy them. I've expressed complete disgust for maybe 0.001% of those. Pretty easy to stay away from those ten guitars and focus instead on the other 9990.


----------



## gnoll (Apr 4, 2017)

I think I'd choose not to ban anything.

But if I had to...

I'd ban every Jackson that doesn't have the classic headstock and big shark fin inlays.

And while at it, I'd ban every ESP or LTD with flag inlays.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 4, 2017)

blacai said:


> So... lot of people wrote here with interesting points of view.
> And now I would like to ask also if you ended buying one of the models you hated before.



Dunno about "hate," but I never saw myself having Strat or Les Paul styled guitars as my mains when I was a kid. I always wanted the wild V, Star, and Explorer sort of shapes.

Now I've got a MIM Strat, an EC-1000, and I still mess with my two RGs every so often. Meanwhile, I barely touch my Warrior anymore. I only keep it as a last-resort backup... Also, it's a cheap JS bolt-on, so I'm not gonna get anything for it anyway.


----------



## Amanita (Apr 4, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> BC Rich mockingbirds and warlocks are super dumb.


as much as i'm not fond of most of BC Rich aesthetic - Mockingbirds dumb? amazing how people's tastes differ 
then again maybe i just like Madball too much


----------



## Spicypickles (Apr 4, 2017)

I DESPISED strats and tele's when I first started playing, and was only mildy interested in LP's. Mainly I loved V's, Explorers and superstrats.

Now I own a strat (one of my favorite players), a 7 string tele and an LTD EC-400AT (full thickness, lp thing).

As far as GAS goes, I still want superstrats and PRSi, and teles/strats don't even register. I just happened to come across the 2 I have and they played so well I couldn't risk letting them go.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 4, 2017)

Amanita said:


> as much as i'm not fond of most of BC Rich aesthetic - Mockingbirds dumb? amazing how people's tastes differ
> then again maybe i just like Madball too much



it's literally the top horn. if it didn't have the top horn like that I'd like them. I've played a pile and they were great (all of them were higher end ones) but I just can't stand that top horn. That and I would widen the bottom cut out a bit, it's a little tight for my giant hands.


----------



## Amanita (Apr 4, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> it's literally the top horn. if it didn't have the top horn like that I'd like them. I've played a pile and they were great (all of them were higher end ones) but I just can't stand that top horn. That and I would widen the bottom cut out a bit, it's a little tight for my giant hands.


there's always something 
about bottom cut - seems a trade off, i made meself a bass with this kind of bottom horn to move a point of support while seated. works a treat but access to last frets is indeed tight


----------



## vilk (Apr 4, 2017)

I also hate mocks the most out of all BCRs
It's totally the upper horn


----------



## jl-austin (Apr 4, 2017)

blacai said:


> So... lot of people wrote here with interesting points of view.
> And now I would like to ask also if you ended buying one of the models you hated before.



I didn't buy it, but I have never liked PRS guitars, then I played an S2 Vela that I feel in love with. It is just a little too "retro" for my taste to buy though.


----------



## gunch (Apr 4, 2017)

Minariks 

I'll let you guys google at your own peril


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 4, 2017)

silverabyss said:


> Minariks
> 
> I'll let you guys google at your own peril



god how did I forget about minariks. Their inlay work is great but they're so damn tacky. I don't think I've seen a single minarik that's remotely tasteful.


----------



## raytsh (Apr 7, 2017)

Super Strat and LP shapes for me. We have way too many of those...


----------



## Zado (Apr 7, 2017)

gnoll said:


> I'd ban every Jackson that doesn't have the classic headstock and big shark fin inlays.




So much this.


And this


----------



## laxu (Apr 7, 2017)

Zado said:


> And this



I actually kinda like that but the proportions are wrong. Slim the horns a bit and it would look pretty good.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 7, 2017)

did that top horn got sting by a bee?


----------



## Casper777 (Apr 7, 2017)

The Telecaster LOL

But most seriously this monstruosity from EBMM .. teh St Vincent... the most hiddous thing ever called a guitar


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Apr 7, 2017)

Casper777 said:


> The Telecaster LOL
> 
> But most seriously this monstruosity from EBMM .. teh St Vincent... the most hiddous thing ever called a guitar


I think the St. Vincent looks awesome. Fight me.


----------



## auntyethel (Apr 7, 2017)

I would say the Wylde Audio stuff, but they kinda make me laugh so much that I hope they come out with many more.


----------



## Sang-Drax (Apr 7, 2017)

dr_game0ver said:


> all Headless guitars looks the same. Also, the headstock is part of the design, removing it il like a car without wheels or a LP with a floyd, it just does not looks right.



My thoughts exactly. Headless guitars look unfinished to me


----------



## Baconjerky (Apr 7, 2017)

Also jumping on the bandwagon and saying headless guitars. These Vaders, Strandbergs, etc all hipster guitars to me. And of course Chapman guitars. Yea I'm not buying some youtube guitar with signature models based on your friends. 

I hate the person that posed the picture of a Warrior a few pages back too.


----------



## bostjan (Apr 7, 2017)

So, how many friendships have been lost over this thread so far?


----------



## Casper777 (Apr 7, 2017)

Baconjerky said:


> Also jumping on the bandwagon and saying headless guitars. These Vaders, Strandbergs, etc all hipster guitars to me. And of course Chapman guitars. Yea I'm not buying some youtube guitar with signature models based on your friends.
> 
> I hate the person that posed the picture of a Warrior a few pages back too.



Hey! you need at least 100 post before starting bashing headless guitars on this forum!


----------



## GuitarBizarre (Apr 7, 2017)

I'm a big fan of headless - it's one of those things that you don't realise how big a difference it actually makes, until you actually live with one for a while.

I bought my stein because I wanted to try headless, and most of the other specs were stuff I was super enthused about as well. 

I didn't really notice until I'd lived with it a while and gone back to my other guitars, how little of the body of a regular guitar is actually needed. Now, I go back to my Ibanez S series and the body feels huge and unwieldy, (Even though come on, it's a friggin S series) and the weight balance feels headstock-heavy, even though the guitar has never neckdived and never will. 

It really does make me think that tiny bodied, headless guitars, are ergonomically....just.... better.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 7, 2017)

Casper777 said:


> Hey! you need at least 100 post before starting bashing headless guitars on this forum!



and like 1000 post before you attempt to say anything against an Ibanez prestige


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Apr 8, 2017)

Anything with poplar burl or spalted maple.


----------



## odibrom (Apr 8, 2017)

I think it is a sacrilege to "BAN" guitar models, come on, they are cherished all over the world, it's a guitar, lets play some tunes with it and have fun whether it is sparkling or satin, EVIL or GODLY, black or white, no guitar should be banned of this earth.

Having this said, now please evolve and let go of all those 50's outdated designs...


----------



## Jeffbro (Apr 9, 2017)

Kitchen counter top guitars, looks messy and cheap

Euro custom builders sure love them though


----------



## narad (Apr 9, 2017)

odibrom said:


> Having this said, now please evolve and let go of all those 50's outdated designs...



Maybe when they can evolve to sound better than one.


----------



## InCasinoOut (Apr 10, 2017)

KnightBrolaire said:


> god how did I forget about minariks. Their inlay work is great but they're so damn tacky. I don't think I've seen a single minarik that's remotely tasteful.



Guitars for the type of dudes who wear Affliction shirts and bedazzled jeans every day...


----------



## bostjan (Apr 10, 2017)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Anything with poplar burl or spalted maple.



Aww...not that I own anything like that, but diseased wood needs love, too.


----------



## will_shred (Apr 10, 2017)

PRS Should be permanently banned from making anything that resembles a strat thanks to John Mayer.


----------



## Science_Penguin (Apr 10, 2017)

odibrom said:


> Having this said, now please evolve and let go of all those 50's outdated designs...





narad said:


> Maybe when they can evolve to sound better than one.



For some reason, when I read that exchange, I just thought of this:



So, it's kinda like a Strat, right? It's got a lot of those Stratty specs that lend themselves well to the three single-coil configuration. But, the shape is clearly modern, and it could be argued that the pickups are an improvement on the original Strat single coils if only for the lack of hum.

...Missing link, maybe??


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 10, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> 
> For some reason, when I read that exchange, I just thought of this:
> ...




I don't know what that guitar is but I like that body.


----------



## Sumsar (Apr 10, 2017)

I am surprised that 7 pages in and noone has mention this thing yet:


----------



## Leviathus (Apr 10, 2017)

^lulz


----------



## blacai (Apr 10, 2017)

Sumsar said:


> I am surprised that 7 pages in and noone has mention this thing yet:



I kinda like it. I saw AAL and in person looks cool.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Apr 10, 2017)

Sumsar said:


> I am surprised that 7 pages in and noone has mention this thing yet:



if it was in reindeer blue I would already own one


----------



## Ataraxia2320 (Apr 11, 2017)

If the JR came in 6 strings I'd go for it.


----------



## TedEH (Apr 11, 2017)

Baconjerky said:


> I'm not buying some youtube guitar



That really does kinda miss the point, IMO. They're solid guitars. I can understand being put off by the sig models for all their friends, but I don't think their design process is any worse than the alternative of having no idea where the design came from. Or some kind of corproration-y process where the market is examined and the best cost vs. features vs. marketability vs. demand etc etc is used to decide what kinds of (flat black shredder and strat ripoff) guitars we get.

Also, I know lots of people just don't like the guy, but that has no bearing on the instruments unless you also hate their designs, or the idea of owning something associated with the guy on principle.


----------



## A-Branger (Apr 11, 2017)

TedEH said:


> Also, I know lots of people just don't like the guy, but that has no bearing on the instruments unless you also hate their designs, or the idea of owning something associated with the guy on principle.



I got the Ibanez STM-1 iceman. I hate Dragon Force and the artist of this guitar suposed to be. BUT, I love the guitar. Honestly the only times I remember this is a sig guitar is when I do this kinds of comments in here


----------



## Anu Custom Guitars (May 12, 2017)

Definitely don't need a guitar with a handle cut out. There's also some with built in kickstands.


----------



## Blytheryn (May 12, 2017)

Regarding the Minarik Samhain:

"The Samhain model guitar is designed to be the "heaviest" sounding guitar ever built. The majority of the mass of the body has been pushed down to the bottom of the guitar, allowing every low end frequency possible to be articulated through the larger mass now located in this crucial area, while the narrower waist and "tuning fork" horns channel the high end frequencies. This shape makes a devastating bass guitar, and a must have for artists that use drop tuning either live or in the studio."

Wait, what?


----------



## blacai (May 12, 2017)

Blytheryn said:


> Regarding the Minarik Samhain:
> 
> "The Samhain model guitar is designed to be the "heaviest" sounding guitar ever built. The majority of the mass of the body has been pushed down to the bottom of the guitar, allowing every low end frequency possible to be articulated through the larger mass now located in this crucial area, while the narrower waist and "tuning fork" horns channel the high end frequencies. This shape makes a devastating bass guitar, and a must have for artists that use drop tuning either live or in the studio."
> 
> Wait, what?


----------



## haffner1 (May 12, 2017)

There seems to be a lot of disagreement here, but I think we all can concur that anything with the name Esteban on it needs to go.


----------



## Science_Penguin (May 12, 2017)

haffner1 said:


> There seems to be a lot of disagreement here, but I think we all can concur that anything with the name Esteban on it needs to go.








I dunno, this Esteban turned up in a local store, and it felt pretty damn good to me. Not a bad fixer-upper for 60 bucks. Only thing I don't like is the headstock.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (May 12, 2017)

haffner1 said:


> There seems to be a lot of disagreement here, but I think we all can concur that anything with the name Esteban on it needs to go.



yes. those guitars are terrible.


----------



## dirtool (May 12, 2017)

Rachmaninoff said:


> It's so fugly it hurts my eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...







I agree this, and this is the only musicman I feel right


----------



## haffner1 (May 12, 2017)

Anything with a blank fingerboard


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 12, 2017)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Anything with poplar burl



Truer words have never been spoken. ESPECIALLY on Ibanez guitars.

Seriously. The best name I've seen given this finish is "ocean poopburst" or "sewerburst."








And this looks like a skin defect.





EDIT: Also, 24 fret Les Pauls. 

Because everything either looks squished together in the guitar





Or say goodbye to fret access





This also counts for any guitar that was originally designed for 21 or 22 frets, but are changed up for 24 frets.


----------



## Masoo2 (May 12, 2017)

Most Les Paul-inspired body shapes

The only brands that get it really right are ESP (Eclipse) and PRS (SC). Most others look too "off" for my tastes.


----------



## Dredg (May 14, 2017)

Les Paul and all of its copies. It's an archaic design that only sticks around because Gibson refuses to admit to its flaws.


----------



## Splenetic (May 14, 2017)

Dredg said:


> Les Paul and all of its copies. It's an archaic design that only sticks around because Gibson refuses to admit to its flaws.



Or because literally thousands of guitarists like them. What a stupid statement.


----------



## Cloudy (May 14, 2017)

haffner1 said:


> Anything with a blank fingerboard



Anything with fingerboard inlays*


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 14, 2017)

Malevolent_Croatian said:


> Or because literally thousands of guitarists like them. What a stupid statement.





No matter what shape I've tried, I always go back to the Les Paul shape. 

Hell, pretty much sold/traded most of my guitars in favor of PRS Singlecuts.


----------



## blacai (May 14, 2017)

Dredg said:


> Les Paul and all of its copies. It's an archaic design that only sticks around because Gibson refuses to admit to its flaws.



Recently I have sold my schecter, charvel and a strandberg because I "only" need my 2 Les pauls(and my mayones)


----------



## StevenC (May 14, 2017)

Ataraxia2320 said:


> If the JR came in 6 strings I'd go for it.



You know about the ESP Mystique, right? It's basically a JR but with the right proportions.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 14, 2017)

StevenC said:


> You know about the ESP Mystique, right? It's basically a JR but with the right proportions.



Also has an archtop. Looks even more like an ESP-ified PRS Custom 24.


----------



## Dredg (May 14, 2017)

Malevolent_Croatian said:


> Or because literally thousands of guitarists like them. What a stupid statement.



Popularity does not negate physical flaws.


----------



## narad (May 15, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Also has an archtop. Looks even more like an ESP-ified PRS Custom 24.



Whoawhoawhoawhaowhoa when did that happen!


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 15, 2017)

narad said:


> Whoawhoawhoawhaowhoa when did that happen!



Pretty old model but ESP finally brought it to the States a couple of years ago.


----------



## narad (May 15, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Pretty old model but ESP finally brought it to the States a couple of years ago.



Man, I've seen mystiques before -- and plenty in any exhibition showcase -- but something about the horns on this one seem elongated. Maybe it's the angle or the flametop tricking me. Great looking guitar at any rate.


----------



## aprilia4life (May 16, 2017)

IMNSHO: Anything with a trem. Ban trems in general. It pains me to see guitars with half of the body cut away to fit them. So many nice guitars out there with them added, for them to get used so rarely.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 16, 2017)

narad said:


> Man, I've seen mystiques before -- and plenty in any exhibition showcase -- but something about the horns on this one seem elongated. Maybe it's the angle or the flametop tricking me. Great looking guitar at any rate.



Probably the angle.








aprilia4life said:


> IMNSHO: Anything with a trem. Ban trems in general. It pains me to see guitars with half of the body cut away to fit them. So many nice guitars out there with them added, for them to get used so rarely.



RIP 3/4 of the guitars out there.


----------



## Leviathus (May 16, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> "ocean poopburst"


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (May 16, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> EDIT: Also, 24 fret Les Pauls.
> 
> Because everything either looks squished together in the guitar
> 
> ...



Solution: Change the scale length and make the body a little bigger.






There. No wonky proportions, and the same bad access as a normal LP .

Then again, changing the scale will make it harder to play and change the tone. Give a little, get a little.

I love my BH LP, incidentally.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (May 17, 2017)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Solution: Change the scale length and make the body a little bigger.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You know... I never realized how big a BH LP was until I saw pictures of it compared to a standard Paul.


----------



## Furtive Glance (May 17, 2017)

There is not a single aspect of the Fender Jaguar that appeals to me. Eugh.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (May 17, 2017)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> You know... I never realized how big a BH LP was until I saw pictures of it compared to a standard Paul.



Yeah, I took some pics of mine with my Epi LPC for its NGD to show the difference, too:














It is not a small guitar. 
It is, however, a 24 fret LP that doesn't have squashed together pickups or sh!tty fret access. Plus I'm a fatso, so it helps me avoid Fat Guy Little Guitar Syndrome.


----------



## El Caco (May 18, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> Strandbergs
> 
> I await your hate mail.



And any multiscale guitar that starts with a longer than 25" scale as the short scale. 



Furtive Glance said:


> There is not a single aspect of the Fender Jaguar that appeals to me. Eugh.



Almost everything about the Fender Jaguar appeals to me. The neck profile, the fretboard radius, the scale length is perfect and the switching system is IMO so smart I can't understand why everyone hasn't tried to copy it especially when you add a second volume control like Cobain did. The idea where instead of switching between pickups you switch between tones where you can blend the pickups for one tone and have different control settings for your other tone, and then just switch between the tones, genius IMO.


----------



## Science_Penguin (May 18, 2017)

El Caco said:


> And any multiscale guitar that starts with a longer than 25" scale as the short scale.



Yeah, never understood the point of that...



> Almost everything about the Fender Jaguar appeals to me. The neck profile, the fretboard radius, the scale length is perfect and the switching system is IMO so smart I can't understand why everyone hasn't tried to copy it especially when you add a second volume control like Cobain did. The idea where instead of switching between pickups you switch between tones where you can blend the pickups for one tone and have different control settings for your other tone, and then just switch between the tones, genius IMO.



It's an insanely versatile instrument, my only gripe is the hum... but, I guess it's not exactly made for high gain.


----------



## El Caco (May 18, 2017)

Science_Penguin said:


> It's an insanely versatile instrument, my only gripe is the hum... but, I guess it's not exactly made for high gain.



There are humbucker models like the Cobain model, there are stacked humbuckers that fit single pickup guitars but all that is ignoring the brilliance of the circuitry. One circuit has the ability to use both pickups without hum and to switch to the neck pickup but with a different setting to the one you are using with both pickups. Then if you add a second volume pot to the bottom circuit when using both pickups you can actually blend them allowing much more tonal variety for that channel.

And Fender laid it out in a very intuitive way but when people pick it up for the first time and see controls all over the place they just think WTF and really don't understand why you would have 2 sets of controls for the same pickup, they think Fender stuffed up and included redundant controls. Most people don't get it. As a result Fender have brought out modern variants with modern controls which to me eliminates one of the most appealing things about the Jag.

https://www.youtube.com/user/nomakills/search?query=jaguar


----------



## Hartattack1090 (May 20, 2017)

Anything without a head stock. They just look so dumb to me.


----------



## narad (May 20, 2017)

Hartattack1090 said:


> Anything without a head stock. They just look so dumb to me.



It's not supposed to look cool.


----------

