# What screams "cheap" to you?



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

Hey guys, thought this might be fun to discuss, what are some features on guitars high-end or low-end alike that screams "I'm cheap" to you, regardless of price?

To me, pickup rings. This is the worst culprit to me. Any time I see a guitar with black plastic pickup rings I always picture a Donner or Musiclily Amazon part bin pieces and just really turns me off. Same with plain maple necks/fretboards. Unless it's on a nice lake placid blue or something similar it always looks so cheap to me, I'm really not sure why.

Anyone else have anything like this?


----------



## Gain_Junkie93 (Jul 30, 2021)

White dot inlays
Nonmatching headstock finish
Strat style trems on anything other than a strat
Pickup rings


----------



## Adieu (Jul 30, 2021)

Unsealed or trapeze tuners

Almost all rosewood (or "rosewood") boards. If it isn't dark smooth and even, please use frikkin maple instead.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jul 30, 2021)

proprietary hardware. Very very few guitar companies are using oem stuff that's worth a damn imo.
Not matching all the screws to the hardware color scheme
Sharp fret ends
Tool marks on the fretboard/body
poorly figured photoflame/veneers
gaps around inlays/binding

I don't mind pickup rings, so long as they're not using black rings with other colors of hardware *cough* PRS *cough*


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

I morely meant barring obvious cheap guitar symptoms like sharp fret ends and stuff, I morely meant not cheap appointments that scream cheap to you.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Jul 30, 2021)

Most pau ferro fret-boards and fret-boards that appear dry.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 30, 2021)

Prices under $1500 just scream cheap. 

Cringe...


----------



## ArtDecade (Jul 30, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> To me, pickup rings.



... er ... that's like every Les Paul.


----------



## manu80 (Jul 30, 2021)

Laurel fretboard/Light wood fretboard
Dot inlays
Nickel/chrome hardware. Especially tuners, don't know why.
Gotoh pups on 2K guitars


----------



## bigcupholder (Jul 30, 2021)

Black pickup rings with black pickups. Pickup rings themselves are fine, but it needs contrast either with pickup covers or using creme rings (like how Gibson usually does it).

Black or sunburst strats with white pickguards. Doesn't matter if it cost $3k, it immediately looks like every $200 knockoff plywood guitar. Use a black or tort guard instead.



Adieu said:


> Unsealed or trapeze tuners
> 
> Almost all rosewood (or "rosewood") boards. If it isn't dark smooth and even, please use frikkin maple instead.


Rosewood doesn't need a finish like maple and doesn't crack or split like ebony if it dries out. Maple is prone to warping/twisting. Ebony is prone to shrinking and leaving fret ends poking out. I wish more guitars came with rosewood.


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

ArtDecade said:


> ... er ... that's like every Les Paul.


Which most scream cheap to me lol


----------



## ArtDecade (Jul 30, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Which most scream cheap to me lol



Delusional.


----------



## Randy (Jul 30, 2021)

High Plains Drifter said:


> Most pau ferro fret-boards and fret-boards that appear dry.



This. In general, faux wood or low quality wood that's chosen for it's very vague appearance to real wood is sketch. The type of rosewood they're trying to replace had unique color and graining, and the pao ferro etc are a uniform brown that replicates the hue of DRY rosewood with no figure.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jul 30, 2021)

bigcupholder said:


> Black pickup rings with black pickups. Pickup rings themselves are fine, but it needs contrast either with pickup covers or using creme rings (like how Gibson usually does it).
> 
> Black or sunburst strats with white pickguards. Doesn't matter if it cost $3k, it immediately looks like every $200 knockoff plywood guitar. Use a black or tort guard instead.
> 
> ...


maple doesn't really need a finish either. Ebony only shrinks if it had too high of a moisture content when installed on a guitar. Same shit happens with other woods when they're improperly dried.

Good wood suppliers will kiln dry everything and keep the wood in a humidity controlled environ.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 30, 2021)

Bolt on necks. Just ugh...

Cringe...


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

possumkiller said:


> Bolt on necks. Just ugh...
> 
> Cringe...


I used to really feel this, now I cannot stand neckthrus lol. Bolt ons just make me feel so much better for some reason.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 30, 2021)

Like the whole bullet and affinity series just scream cheapo cringe to me.

Classic vibe?? How about classic cheap ass cringe guitar...


----------



## soliloquy (Jul 30, 2021)

Dot inlays, bolt on necks, square heel joints, metal neck plates.


----------



## possumkiller (Jul 30, 2021)

Single coils. Like jesus fucking christ man a little bit of wire and plastic doesnt cost a fortune. Throw another one on there and get rid of all that noise.


----------



## Metropolis (Jul 30, 2021)

Plastic nut, flimsy feeling pots, most non-branded pickups, bad fretwork, nyatoh as body wood. I don't know, sometimes pickguard can make it look cheap. Looks wise sometimes these things really depend how the whole instrument is.

Non matching screws or any other part on hardware looks pretty cool to me, for example Hipshot bridges, Schaller Hannes, and Floyd Rose with titanium screws. Schaller open tuners... Gotoh MG-T.


----------



## _MonSTeR_ (Jul 30, 2021)

For me it’s when the look just isn’t ‘complete’ it looks like small costs were saved relative to the overall value of the guitar. 

Mismatched headstocks are a big no-no. So a sunburst LP can have a black headstock because even though it’s not matched to the colour or the top, it’s part of the overall aesthetic.

A painted Fender Strat with a rosewood board and an unpainted maple headstock looks cheap to me, but that same guitar with a maple board on a maple neck would be fine, even though there little if any difference in price...

A PRS with a plain mahogany headstock facing but a fancy, stained, figured maple top is another no-no. It makes what should look like a 5000 dollar guitar look like someone wasn’t prepared to pay that last $350 for the matching headstock. I guess that makes the owner look cheap rather than the guitar 

Vintage bent saddles look cheap to me because ‘good’ Strats came with more modern fittings and budget guitars had these when I was first learning about guitars and was more impressionable.


----------



## Pat (Jul 30, 2021)

Black strats with a white scratchplate - they always look so much better with a black or tortoiseshell scratchplate.

Red strats - these only really look good with white scratchplates, but still always look cheap to me for some reason.


----------



## Matt08642 (Jul 30, 2021)

Weird headstocks can make or break a guitar for me in terms of just looking tacky or cheap.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 30, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Hey guys, thought this might be fun to discuss, what are some features on guitars high-end or low-end alike that screams "I'm cheap" to you, regardless of price?
> 
> To me, pickup rings. This is the worst culprit to me. Any time I see a guitar with black plastic pickup rings I always picture a Donner or Musiclily Amazon part bin pieces and just really turns me off.



How about three pickup rings then?









CanserDYI said:


> Same with plain maple necks/fretboards. Unless it's on a nice lake placid blue or something similar it always looks so cheap to me, I'm really not sure why.








Does that count as plain with all the wear? 

tl;dr don't we already have a complaint thread?


----------



## protest (Jul 30, 2021)

My guitar with black plastic pickup rings:






My guitar with plain maple fretboard:






Thankfully I can't see them that well when I play them cause they look so cheap.


----------



## ArtDecade (Jul 30, 2021)

^ Cheap AF. LOL.


----------



## Kovah (Jul 30, 2021)

Chrome hardware on electric guitars and pickup rings.


----------



## Louis Cypher (Jul 30, 2021)

A Floyd Rose Special on a $2400+ guitar....... Yes Washburn I am looking at you and the Mahogany N4..... 



Kovah said:


> Chrome hardware on electric guitars and pickup rings.



Billy Duffy & his Les Pauls disagree with you


----------



## protest (Jul 30, 2021)

If we're talking things outside of bad manufacturing and build quality, and just purely aesthetics, then I would say badly done curly tops/veneers. 

PRS S2s look much nicer in solid colors than with bad flame tops, especially when you look at the quality of the SE veneers.


----------



## mlp187 (Jul 30, 2021)

Not always, but black headstocks on guitars with vibrantly colored bodies can appear cheap to me. 
But also consider that I like the following:
I like laurel for fretboards, and I like a nice rosewood fretboard more than ebony.
So, really, all of this is pointless and like, just my opinion man.


----------



## Crungy (Jul 30, 2021)

Adieu said:


> Unsealed or trapeze tuners
> 
> Almost all rosewood (or "rosewood") boards. If it isn't dark smooth and even, please use frikkin maple instead.



I'm with you minus the rosewood bit, but dried out rosewood looks like trash.


----------



## CovertSovietBear (Jul 30, 2021)

mlp187 said:


> Not always, but black headstocks on guitars with vibrantly colored bodies can appear cheap to me.
> But also consider that I like the following:
> I like laurel for fretboards, and I like a nice rosewood fretboard more than ebony.
> So, really, all of this is pointless and like, just my opinion man.


Jackson tend to do that, not sure if all the necks are premade and painted before joining up to the body, but considering a lot of them have white binding shouldn't be too much to ask for color matched headstocks, but agreed, everyone's got their slight nitpicks with these things.


----------



## _MonSTeR_ (Jul 30, 2021)

protest said:


> My guitar with black plastic pickup rings:



Please tell me this one has a fancy headstock?!?!?!


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Jul 30, 2021)

In addition to Randy's perfect description of why I loathe modern brown fretboards, I'll also add Grover tuners to the list. I dunno why. I just can't stand the look of them. I'd seriously rather have standard Gotoh tuners than locking Grovers. No beef with their function. 

Of course, house brand pickups.
And also, for whatever reason, white fretboard binding. This is weird one because I've seen it done tastefully many times, but this one quite often just gives me a very cheap vibe. Maybe it's just cause I don't like fretboard binding in general.


----------



## xzacx (Jul 30, 2021)

Burl doesn't always scream cheap (although when it's bad, it's really bad), but it often is a signal that some terrible music is about to be played.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

Otherwise high end, expensive guitars and basses with cheap tuners. With the caveat that if they're going for a certain vintage vibe or aesthetic, I think it's fine. 

The weird part is, I usually don't give a shit about tuners. I know they don't really do anything besides hold the string, but there's just something about cheapo OEMs, or even Grovers, on high end instruments. 

Gibson is one of the worst offenders. I get having Klusons on Reissue/VOS stuff, or even if that's just the vibe they're going for, but Grovers on an LPC is sort of bullshit. Wholesale, a set of Schallers or Gotohs is like $30, but they can't spring for it on something that MAPs just shy of $5k?


----------



## beerandbeards (Jul 30, 2021)

“Abalone” binding


----------



## bostjan (Jul 30, 2021)

Wow, such hate for Pau Ferro. I love Pau Ferro. It's durable, it's relatively easy to obtain, it has nice grain. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, though.

Pickup rings do sort of bother me, though. I know it's irrational, but if a guitar has a nice top, I want to be able to see it without a totally unnecessary piece of hardware in the way. Actually, on solid-finish guitars, I don't really care either way.

I'm old enough that I'm super picky now, but, when I was first starting to play gigs, I mostly used really cheap guitars, because the cheaper it was, the more likely I was to replace the bits I wasn't crazy about. The more modifications I did, the more I usually ended up liking the guitar. 

So, yeah, I hate cheap tuners, but if that's the only issue, why not just replace them? If you don't have to widen the holes, it takes 20 minutes. If you do have to widen the holes, it takes like an hour. If you have to narrow the holes, it takes a couple days, but if you figure that inconvenience and the cost of new tuners and still get a good deal, who cares?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

The only time I don't like pickup rings is when their only purpose is hiding shitty routing. A flat top guitar with a lower profile bridge (most trems, Fender style flatmounts, etc.) doesn't need to extend the height of the pickup, which is their original purpose, and thus doesn't need rings. A guitar with a pronounced carved top and a non-recessed ToM usually needs to boost the height of at least the bridge pickup, so rings make sense in that context.


----------



## Bearitone (Jul 30, 2021)

Chrome. Period.

Plastic parts with seems from the molding.

Casting seems.
Poor finish on cast parts.


----------



## soul_lip_mike (Jul 30, 2021)

Indonesia


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

soul_lip_mike said:


> Indonesia


my theory....in 20 years we will be coveting Korean made guitars as we do Japanese guitars right now, Japanese Guitars will be revered as American Products, and Indonesia will be the new Korea, China will be the new Indonesia, and African countries will start making the cheap stuff, seeing as China is already now outsourcing THEIR labor to african labor fields.


----------



## Choop (Jul 30, 2021)

Fretboard binding on an otherwise plain guitar. Gaudy inlays, dot inlays on pointy guitars, wonky pickguards.


----------



## TedEH (Jul 30, 2021)

I only skimmed the other responses, but did we get to headstock shapes yet? I'm sure you can picture the kind I'm thinking: the ones that started off as a Fender shape, but had some bits lopped off or awkwardly rounded so that it doesn't look fender-y anymore, but with enough of the original shape to just nod knowingly in a "yeh, you know it's a cheap strat-copy" kind of way.


----------



## Adieu (Jul 30, 2021)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> Of course, house brand pickups.



Not necessarily

Some Japanese stuff has had awesome house brand pickups


----------



## TheBolivianSniper (Jul 30, 2021)

Plain brown fretboard, acrylic dots, square neck heel with a die cast neck plate, 1 piece natural gloss maple necks on top of that is the cherry on the dumpster fire. Also, wonky rail pickups or knockoff actives. Strat style trems also look like ass and work about as well unless it's an actually expensive guitar. I haven't played a budget vintage trem that works. Also, floyd specials. Fuck those things.


----------



## laxu (Jul 30, 2021)

Natural finish on light colored wood. It always somehow reminds me of low end guitars or some 1970s reject.
Pots that move too easily and pickup switches that are also too loose even when new.
Low quality plastic parts. Things like a pickguard or pickup rings that don't sit quite flush or have rough edges.
Thick gloss finishes. Reminds me of my first guitar, an Ibanez Stagestar in 3-tone sunburst that had a 1 cm thick finish on the body. I am not even exaggerating.
Rosewood fretboard that is very light color. I have an Ibanez acoustic that I love dearly because it sounds great and plays great but I really need to dye that fretboard because it looks like roasted maple rather than rosewood!
Gold finish on hardware that has that same too yellow hue that extremely cheap jewelry has.
Strandberg figured maple tops. Unless it's a Japanese made model those usually look like shit with barely any figuring going on.


----------



## Ordacleaphobia (Jul 30, 2021)

Adieu said:


> Not necessarily
> 
> Some Japanese stuff has had awesome house brand pickups



True! But it still feels cheap. I think the old Ibanez V7/8 pickups that came with the Prestiges were super underrated and definitely not 'insta-swap' tier at all.
Still, if I spend $2k on a brand new guitar, boi I really want to see some DiMarzios or Duncans in there or something lol.


----------



## Rosal76 (Jul 30, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Hey guys, thought this might be fun to discuss, what are some features on guitars high-end or low-end alike that screams "I'm cheap" to you, regardless of price?



The 1 inlay that is on the Jackson Limited edition Wildcard series Soloist guitar. The fact that it's hollow/just the outline, like you said, screams cheap to me. I'm sure the guitar is well built and plays good (I would hope so with a price tag of $1,949) but that 1 hollow inlay just looks cheap to me.


----------



## wheresthefbomb (Jul 30, 2021)

Thin/cast TOM bridge is a big one for me. Gotoh is the bare minimum, anything less isn't even trying. I especially hate when they have half the saddles installed backwards so your strings are breaking over a goddamn sharp edge, and usually the cheap bridges make it very difficult if not impossible to turn the saddles back around without breaking something. 

Funny that others perceive Grover tuners as "cheap," while they may be affordable I absolutely love their resistance/gear ratio and they were the only piece of hardware I didn't swap on my Agile LP (RIP). I like their look better than any other chrome tuners I've used or seen, especially the gross "vintage" tuners with off-white plastic keys, blech. Those make vintage LPs look like actual old garbage to me.

All that said, I had a high end classical for a bit with ebony tuning keys and those were a class act. _Everything_ else looks cheap now. 


Honorable mention goes to black hardware, bridges specifically. I love black, but I think about it wearing through and it just screams lack of foresight. "I wanted this to sell because it looks goth or br00tal in the GC window display but I don't give a shit how it looks in 5 years." Chrome does this too but slightly less offensively. I like raw nickel the best because it develops a patina and ages gracefully.


----------



## aesthyrian (Jul 30, 2021)

There are exceptions for all of these, but this is what I dislike and feel is cheap most of the time.

Painted necks(what are they trying to hide?? haha), set necks, printed/fake flame or quilted maple tops, pitch black ebony dye jobs, puke burst finishes(I've just seen them on so much garbage at this point), plastic pickup rings, black finishes, plywood bodies(not obvious until you remove the neck or something but damn that's cheap)
Guitars that are heavily spec'd but still made in China or Indonesia with sketch QC among other things. You can upgrade bridges, pickups, nuts.. but if the guitar is built like shit, then it's just that.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Jul 30, 2021)

This screwed on logo on a $5k guitar. It looks like something you would put on a 1988 Chevrolet dad-mobile. It doesn't even look like a premium piece of metal. It looks plastic-y even up close.


----------



## AltecGreen (Jul 30, 2021)

Ordacleaphobia said:


> True! But it still feels cheap. I think the old Ibanez V7/8 pickups that came with the Prestiges were super underrated and definitely not 'insta-swap' tier at all.
> Still, if I spend $2k on a brand new guitar, boi I really want to see some DiMarzios or Duncans in there or something lol.



I tend to buy Japanese guitars with their house pickups and those house pickups are a selling point to me. I see DiMarzios and Duncans as low end stuff that seem cheap to me. 

This is a matter of perspective. People see house pickups as the stuff that comes on really low end guitars. Whereas I'm looking at stuff made by Sago, Saito, Bizen. Dragonfly, G-Life, etc. I wish some of those companies would sell their pickups separately. I would totally replace the BKP pickups in my Waghorn with the ones that came with my G-Life.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

I'm sort of put off by "parts bin" guitars. Stuff that's basically just a vehicle for whatever hardware and pickups you can grab off the shelf. It just seems so...I don't know..."Impersonal." Like no thought was really put in, just grab whatever everyone else is using. 

That's sort of what drew me to Ibanez guitars back in the day. Everything was built specifically for them. It just seemed to make for something more cohesive overall.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 30, 2021)

White dot inlays
Non matching headstock colors
Unfinished necks
Bolt on necks
Basswood bodies
Maple veneers
Rosewood fretboards
House brand tuners
Chrome hardware


----------



## jaxadam (Jul 30, 2021)

Anything that doesn’t say “Private Stock”


----------



## gunch (Jul 30, 2021)

Specifically, red guitars with black bobbins and black pickup rings.


----------



## c7spheres (Jul 30, 2021)

- I think anything with a logo on the headstock looks cheap, but it's impossible to avoid without going custom. Even custom people seem to want their logo on the headstocks. 

- Guitars that seem to be made of cheap light weight eco wood with no grain, jaundice looking color, and feel like you could put a dent in them with your finger nail. They smell weird too usually. Not that lovely new or old guitar smell we all love, but that chemical illness paint rubber plastic smell that makes you think it's giving you cancer as you hold it. 
- Sharp fret ends and low twangy buzzy setup = cheap feeling. 
- Most guitars can be made to be awesome with a few hours of TLC, new strings, and sometimes new pickups.


----------



## Musiscience (Jul 30, 2021)

Dry and super light brown rosewood boards. 
Sharp fret ends. 
Sloppy and very visible glue et the nut.
Rough and unpolished frets.


----------



## Kyle Jordan (Jul 30, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> my theory....in 20 years we will be coveting Korean made guitars as we do Japanese guitars right now, Japanese Guitars will be revered as American Products, and Indonesia will be the new Korea, China will be the new Indonesia, and African countries will start making the cheap stuff, seeing as China is already now outsourcing THEIR labor to african labor fields.



^This, but I think the time frame is more like a decade/2030. Maybe 2035. 

And as for what looks cheap to me:

Blue

Blue finishes of all types tend to look super cheap to me. Even more so than the low effort, solid middle of the road red.


----------



## StevenC (Jul 30, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Otherwise high end, expensive guitars and basses with cheap tuners. With the caveat that if they're going for a certain vintage vibe or aesthetic, I think it's fine.
> 
> The weird part is, I usually don't give a shit about tuners. I know they don't really do anything besides hold the string, but there's just something about cheapo OEMs, or even Grovers, on high end instruments.
> 
> Gibson is one of the worst offenders. I get having Klusons on Reissue/VOS stuff, or even if that's just the vibe they're going for, but Grovers on an LPC is sort of bullshit. Wholesale, a set of Schallers or Gotohs is like $30, but they can't spring for it on something that MAPs just shy of $5k?


An 3 pickup LPC is definitely going to be one of my next guitars I buy and I'm so irrationally angry about having to buy replacement tuners. And at least part of that anger is that it'll be taking away the vintage correctness.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

StevenC said:


> An 3 pickup LPC is definitely going to be one of my next guitars I buy and I'm so irrationally angry about having to buy replacement tuners. And at least part of that anger is that it'll be taking away the vintage correctness.



It's one of those things I'll never replace (Grovers aren't that terrible unless you get one full of burrs...which isn't that rare unfortunately), which is why it bothers me so much.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Jul 30, 2021)

As mentioned about plastic plate head-stock logos... the LTD series with the 3D looking plastic logo. Was the only thing aesthetically on my Viper7 that I couldn't stand... Looked so cheesy.


----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)

protest said:


> My guitar with black plastic pickup rings:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You forgot about the cheap OEM hardware and pickups


----------



## jaxadam (Jul 30, 2021)

Acrylic guitars


----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)

c7spheres said:


> - I think anything with a logo on the headstock looks cheap, but it's *impossible to avoid without going custom*. Even custom people seem to want their logo on the headstocks.


----------



## c7spheres (Jul 30, 2021)

mbardu said:


> View attachment 96187
> View attachment 96188
> View attachment 96189


 That solves it !


----------



## protest (Jul 30, 2021)




----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)

protest said:


>



Especially those heathens who don't like blue guitars.
I feel attacked.


----------



## StevenC (Jul 30, 2021)

mbardu said:


> View attachment 96190
> 
> View attachment 96187
> View attachment 96188
> View attachment 96189


That Ibanez has a logo on the headstock though.


----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)

StevenC said:


> That Ibanez has a logo on the headstock though.



No you see that's not a _headstock _though.
We call that the nub or the lump, or the _protuberance_...


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 30, 2021)

StevenC said:


> That Ibanez has a logo on the headstock though.


It's not actually a headstock. It's just vestigial.


----------



## SteveFireland (Jul 30, 2021)

Bolt-ons, dot inlays, no Floyd, crap looking headstocks, any of the "cheaper" brands like Squire, Epiphone, LTD etc... I'm not proud of any of those views though.


----------



## USMarine75 (Jul 30, 2021)

A New Jersey accent.


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

Oh for sure, I've seen enough fucking awful strandberg copies that even strandbergs all look like shit to me.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

SteveFireland said:


> any of the "cheaper" brands like Squire, Epiphone, LTD etc...



I think that's kind of an age thing.

When I started out Squire and Epiphone stuff was still frequently MIJ with a focus on offering more unique options vs. just cheap copies of the marquee brands. It wasn't until the late 90's where the focus switched, and things didn't start getting "good" again until maybe 10 years ago. 

So it you came up in the early 00's playing guitar, all you really saw were fairly junky versions of the "real thing" until maybe around 2010 or so. 

I definitely see where you're coming from and you're certainly not alone in your thinking.


----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)




----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

mbardu said:


> View attachment 96195



Having met Tyler before, I think it's more like:


----------



## mbardu (Jul 30, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Having met Tyler before, I think it's more like:
> 
> View attachment 96197



For sure. One of the few who can churn out pretty much anything and people will still line up to spend 6k on it.

I just found it funny is all


----------



## josh1 (Jul 30, 2021)

Pickup rings.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Jul 30, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Having met Tyler before, I think it's more like:
> 
> View attachment 96197


yeah that was pretty evident from.his godawful headstock design


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Jul 30, 2021)

This makes it hard for me to feel like all Epi's look cheap...


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

I will retract my statement about pickup rings on a Les Paul. If not black. I think it's just black ones tbh.


----------



## Randy (Jul 30, 2021)

possumkiller said:


> Single coils. Like jesus fucking christ man a little bit of wire and plastic doesnt cost a fortune. Throw another one on there and get rid of all that noise.



Fun fact: significantly more $$$ in wire on single coil vs a humbucker. Magnets are more too.


----------



## bigbusterstar (Jul 30, 2021)

Abalone binding and non matching headstocks are gross. Body binding that doesn't line up with the board / neck...


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 30, 2021)

Randy said:


> Fun fact: significantly more $$$ in wire on single coil vs a humbucker. Magnets are more too.


Not saying you're wrong, please please explain this


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

Here's one: bad bursts. Just ones with terrible blending. Nothing makes a guitar seem cheap like a "bullseye" burst. 

Legator is like the king of it.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Jul 30, 2021)

Honestly? The wrong headstock.

I'm looking at you Dean








MaxOfMetal said:


> Here's one: bad bursts. Just ones with terrible blending. Nothing makes a guitar seem cheap like a "bullseye" burst.
> 
> Legator is like the king of it.



You just explained why Silverburst is both the most beautiful finish






And most ugly finish






I know it can be like this for a lot of burst finishes, but when you're dealing with a black on top of a shiny, glittering silver finish, the flaw is *glaring*


----------



## vilk (Jul 30, 2021)

wheresthefbomb said:


> Thin/cast TOM bridge is a big one for me. Gotoh is the bare minimum, anything less isn't even trying. I especially hate when they have half the saddles installed backwards so your strings are breaking over a goddamn sharp edge, and usually the cheap bridges make it very difficult if not impossible to turn the saddles back around without breaking something.



I have a Gotoh TOM, and half the saddles are facing a different direction... Are you saying this is a manufacturing error?? I don't know if I've ever seen a TOM that's not this way...

If I were to flip them to all face the same way, is there some benefit? Also, which way would that be?


----------



## mmr007 (Jul 30, 2021)

The word “Dean” on the headstock


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 30, 2021)

Unbound fretboards


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Unbound fretboards



Especially if there are block inlays. Blocks need binding. NEED.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 30, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Especially if there are block inlays. Blocks need binding. NEED.


TRUTH


----------



## BornToLooze (Jul 30, 2021)

The Epi headstock on their Les Pauls. Stuff like the new Wilshires look great with it, because it's an Epi headstock on an Epi guitar, but it just looks wrong on a Les Paul.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 30, 2021)

BornToLooze said:


> The Epi headstock on their Les Pauls. Stuff like the new Wilshires look great with it, because it's an Epi headstock on an Epi guitar, but it just looks wrong on a Les Paul.



The Wilshire didn't exist prior to Gibson ownership. They bought Epiphone in 57' (deal closed in 58'), but the Crestwood came out in 58'.


----------



## r33per (Jul 30, 2021)

Relicing that isn't earned (a lovely Geddy Lee phrase).

Instant put off for me. I think it gimmicky, tacky and just downright cheap looking.


----------



## BornToLooze (Jul 31, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> The Wilshire didn't exist prior to Gibson ownership. They bought Epiphone in 57' (deal closed in 58'), but the Crestwood came out in 58'.



I know, but as far as I know, even the ones that the Gibson Custom shop made where still labeled Epiphone.


----------



## Blytheryn (Jul 31, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Hey guys, thought this might be fun to discuss, what are some features on guitars high-end or low-end alike that screams "I'm cheap" to you, regardless of price?
> 
> To me, pickup rings. This is the worst culprit to me. Any time I see a guitar with black plastic pickup rings I always picture a Donner or Musiclily Amazon part bin pieces and just really turns me off. Same with plain maple necks/fretboards. Unless it's on a nice lake placid blue or something similar it always looks so cheap to me, I'm really not sure why.
> 
> Anyone else have anything like this?



Sticky necks.


----------



## mbardu (Jul 31, 2021)

Blytheryn said:


> Sticky necks.



PRS is sad


----------



## Chanson (Jul 31, 2021)

Black gloss finish, unfinished headstock, with a rosewood fretboard and white pickguard. To me, it is just the most vanilla looking finish imaginable and reminds me of every single Walmart style starter guitar you see in shops.


----------



## Empryrean (Jul 31, 2021)

I think this might be super nit-picky but:
Ash topped guitars that aren't grain filled
Electronics/Trem covers (specifically on expensive guitars) that aren't recessed.


----------



## Zeppelinskies (Jul 31, 2021)

The only thing that always makes me think super cheap is the overuse of Abalone. It can look good as dots / diamonds, but anything more than that anywhere just screams 'trying not to look cheap when cheap' to me. Especially BCR and Schecter, and the old LTD1000 series. Just awful.


----------



## budda (Jul 31, 2021)

Zeppelinskies said:


> The only thing that always makes me think super cheap is the overuse of Abalone. It can look good as dots / diamonds, but anything more than that anywhere just screams 'trying not to look cheap when cheap' to me. Especially BCR and Schecter, and the old LTD1000 series. Just awful.



Which is weird given that old 1000 series ltd's and equivalent schecters are still good guitars


----------



## BornToLooze (Jul 31, 2021)

budda said:


> Which is weird given that old 1000 series ltd's and equivalent schecters are still good guitars



I still have a soft spot for the ol' goth Schecters.


----------



## Zeppelinskies (Jul 31, 2021)

budda said:


> Which is weird given that old 1000 series ltd's and equivalent schecters are still good guitars



You're not wrong, but they do look cheap!


----------



## budda (Jul 31, 2021)

Zeppelinskies said:


> You're not wrong, but they do look cheap!



One man's "cheap" is another man's "gaudy"


----------



## laxu (Jul 31, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> my theory....in 20 years we will be coveting Korean made guitars as we do Japanese guitars right now, Japanese Guitars will be revered as American Products, and Indonesia will be the new Korea, China will be the new Indonesia, and African countries will start making the cheap stuff, seeing as China is already now outsourcing THEIR labor to african labor fields.



We are already there. Japanese guitars are pretty much regarded as great higher end products. Korea and Indonesia are sort of on the same level but I actually feel the Indonesian factories make better guitars these days.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Not saying you're wrong, please please explain this



1.) Humbuckers are wound with thinner gauge wire because the coil itself is shorter (to make room for the magnet and base underneath). Thinner wire = more resistance per turn = less wire.

2.) It's negligible but heavier gauge wire is more expensive per foot. So you use more feet of it and it costs more per foot.

3.) Humbuckers use bar magnets, which are larger in volume but it's less labor to produce than the multiple polished rod magnets in a single coil pickup. Also, yeah there are a lot of Alnico humbuckers out there but also a lot of ceramics, and ceramic bars are way cheaper than Alnico mags.

Humbuckers have more "stuff" but it's all the cheap stuff. The plastic and the non ferrous slugs, etc.


----------



## CanserDYI (Jul 31, 2021)

Randy said:


> 1.) Humbuckers are wound with thinner gauge wire because the coil itself is shorter (to make room for the magnet and base underneath). Thinner wire = more resistance per turn = less wire.
> 
> 2.) It's negligible but heavier gauge wire is more expensive per foot. So you use more feet of it and it costs more per foot.
> 
> ...


Appreciate the reply! Never thought about that stuff. I always figured a humbucker was 2 single coils essentially so it'd cost twice what a single coil does in theory.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Appreciate the reply! Never thought about that stuff. I always figured a humbucker was 2 single coils essentially so it'd cost twice what a single coil does in theory.



Cheap singles in something like a Squier are a mix of the cheap aspects of both. They're a single coil with thin gauge wire, steel slugs and ceramic bars magnets underneath. That's probably a good amount of where the impression of cheap singles comes from. They're the hot dogs of pickups; all the junk parts.


----------



## Demiurge (Jul 31, 2021)

Ah, my poor guitar collection...

Just because something looks cheap doesn't mean it's not a great time: if that adage is good enough for the world's oldest profession, it's good enough for me.


----------



## SteveFireland (Jul 31, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> I think that's kind of an age thing.
> 
> So it you came up in the early 00's playing guitar, all you really saw were fairly junky versions of the "real thing" until maybe around 2010 or so.
> 
> I definitely see where you're coming from and you're certainly not alone in your thinking.



Started guitar in 91, but those brands were always lumped in with the other budget brands like Encore etc even Aria Pro II to an extent, even though they clearly made some really good guitars as well. I guess the stuff that was available in Northern Ireland in the 90s was mainly the cheapest, nastiest stuff!

I'm still a bit of a brand snob though... I want my ESP to say ESP, not LTD or E-II. Labelling stuff like that devalues it for me.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

SteveFireland said:


> I want my ESP to say ESP, not LTD or E-II. Labelling stuff like that devalues it for me.



Yeah that one is still a head scratcher to me. ESP has so many different brands, I don't know why they would choose one of the crappier names for their MIJ, North American released line. E-II, is it E two? E second? E eye eye?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 31, 2021)

Randy said:


> Yeah that one is still a head scratcher to me. ESP has so many different brands, I don't know why they would choose one of the crappier names for their MIJ, North American released line. E-II, is it E two? E second? E eye eye?



Beats the heck out of "LTD Elite." 

Remember that nonsense?


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Beats the heck out of "LTD Elite."
> 
> Remember that nonsense?



I didn't until you said that  But I do love some shitty branding if it means they fly below the radar on the used market.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Jul 31, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Unbound fretboards



I call them Boundless.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Jul 31, 2021)

Randy said:


> I didn't until you said that  But I do love some shitty branding if it means they fly below the radar on the used market.



The best part was the downright angry listings where you could tell the seller was being low balled to oblivion because their ESP Standard said LTD on the headstock. Ooof.


----------



## Lozek (Jul 31, 2021)

Abalone


----------



## mbardu (Jul 31, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> The best part was the downright angry listings where you could tell the seller was being low balled to oblivion because their ESP Standard said LTD on the headstock. Ooof.



Conversely, getting an mij esp for 500$ on gc.com was pretty sweet.


----------



## Crumbling (Jul 31, 2021)

SteveFireland said:


> Started guitar in 91, but those brands were always lumped in with the other budget brands like Encore etc even Aria Pro II to an extent, even though they clearly made some really good guitars as well. I guess the stuff that was available in Northern Ireland in the 90s was mainly the cheapest, nastiest stuff!
> 
> I'm still a bit of a brand snob though... I want my ESP to say ESP, not LTD or E-II. Labelling stuff like that devalues it for me.



Isn't that the idea though? They want to keep the ESP name to their top tier production and custom shop models like they do in Japan, because having the Standard Series having the name devalue them, especially when they were being back-imported into Japan.


----------



## sunnyd88 (Jul 31, 2021)

Gloss black and pickup rings. Both things PRS and ESP absolutely love to put on their guitars. I hate it when I see a PRS or ESP with a beautiful front side but then you look at the back side and it's completely gloss black. Yuck. Nothing scratches, smudges, and attracts fingerprints much like gloss black does. Pickup rings only look alright when they're used with covered pickups. I also find that brown ebony fretboards scream "cheap" to me too because some ebony boards these days are as light brown as dry rosewood. Dye it black or use black richlite.


----------



## sunnyd88 (Jul 31, 2021)

Crumbling said:


> Isn't that the idea though? They want to keep the ESP name to their top tier production and custom shop models like they do in Japan, because having the Standard Series having the name devalue them, especially when they were being back-imported into Japan.


The easiest solution to that would've been to add a "standard series" subtext under the ESP logo on the headstock. It's not like other Ibanez lines devalue their J.Custom line and it's not like PRS SE devalues PRS's other lines. Getting rid of ESP Standard Series and going E-II was just a big money grab. Right now, E-II's run like $2000 for normal models and $2500 for the seven string evertune models before sales tax. Imagine paying that much money for something that doesn't say "ESP" on the headstock. And as someone who has owned and played ESP original series, Edwards, E-II etc the differences in quality are negligible. ESP Original Series just has less paint/finish defects and has carbon fiber neck reinforcements but in terms of feel and fretwork, Edwards and E-II get like 95% of the way there for half the price.


----------



## brett8388 (Jul 31, 2021)

Photo-flame tops


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 31, 2021)

Graphic tops. I'M LOOKING AT YOU, DEAN


----------



## mbardu (Jul 31, 2021)

sunnyd88 said:


> The easiest solution to that would've been to add a "standard series" subtext under the ESP logo on the headstock. It's not like other Ibanez lines devalue their J.Custom line and it's not like PRS SE devalues PRS's other lines. Getting rid of ESP Standard Series and going E-II was just a big money grab. Right now, E-II's run like $2000 for normal models and $2500 for the seven string evertune models before sales tax. Imagine paying that much money for something that doesn't say "ESP" on the headstock. And as someone who has owned and played ESP original series, Edwards, E-II etc the differences in quality are negligible. ESP Original Series just has less paint/finish defects and has carbon fiber neck reinforcements but in terms of feel and fretwork, Edwards and E-II get like 95% of the way there for half the price.



On top of Edwards, now you can also add the LTD 1000s to the list of "basically equivalent for way less $$$". Oh, and with stainless steel frets to boot on those compared to guitars costing twice the price.


----------



## mbardu (Jul 31, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> DEAN



Could have stopped there.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 31, 2021)

mbardu said:


> Could have stopped there.


Yeah..I think they're doing better but they've got "we cater to aspiring white trash with cheap tacky guitars, GETCHA PULL!" written all over them.

Speaking of which. Schecter guitars. All look cheap...besides the Prince guitars. Those don't count.


----------



## Mechayoshi (Jul 31, 2021)

You asked for it!


Always ugly or terrible:
Trapezoid tuners
Chrome hardware
Pseudo Fender yet not headstocks. 
blocks and other special inlays WITHOUT binding
Light colored rosewood or equivalent brown wood or ‘wood’
Photoflame veneer tops that are super fake
Really fake moto inlays
Sticky necks
Plain metal neck plates
Weird looking burl or so called fancy tops
That generic ‘Aliexpress special look’ ( you know what I mean)
Non branded Floyd type bridges
That 70s tri color sunburst 


Just perfectly fine in some contexts:
Pickup rings, especially if not plastic
Non matching headstock color
Dot inlays (white, black or pearl)
In house pickups, especially if good (Creates a unique brand identity instead of just throwing Duncans in everything) 
Plain maple fretboard
Graphic finishes (depends on what)
Bolt on necks (seriously nothing is wrong with this…)


----------



## Marked Man (Jul 31, 2021)

Anything more than a VERY limited, tasteful application of abalone. This has ruined many otherwise killer MIK guitars for me....


----------



## spudmunkey (Jul 31, 2021)

Empryrean said:


> Electronics/Trem covers (specifically on expensive guitars) that aren't recessed.



This doesn't bother me, because I know the alternative is likely a shrunk-down trem block, making the whole body thicker, or raising the trem off the top of the guitar for the same interior clearance.



When you can see an outline around the logo from where the decal was cut around the logo, but not right up to the logo. Like what you see with many water slide decals.

This is an exaggerated version of what I'm talking about:






I've seen this on a few really expensive guitars...but can't remember specifics. It instantly makes me think it's a "kit" guitar or makes me assume automatically negative connotations of "home made", no matter how nice the guitar might actually be.


----------



## Marked Man (Jul 31, 2021)

r33per said:


> Relicing that isn't earned (a lovely Geddy Lee phrase).
> 
> Instant put off for me. I think it gimmicky, tacky and just downright cheap looking.



I'll go further. It's an insult to the people who have actually played the hell out of their guitars and fought/won many battles on tour/on stage. 

I'm totally against it, although if others want to pay a huge premium for fake wear....whatever.....


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 31, 2021)

Marked Man said:


> I'll go further. It's an insult to the people who have actually played the hell out of their guitars and fought/won many battles on tour/on stage.



It's a damn guitar...it's not that serious. If people wanna pay for a relic job it's just like any other finish.


----------



## Marked Man (Jul 31, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> It's a damn guitar...it's not that serious. If people wanna pay for a relic job it's just like any other finish.



The post wasn't serious either. 

But I don't like it for myself, that's for sure.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Jul 31, 2021)

Marked Man said:


> The post wasn't serious either.
> 
> But I don't like it for myself, that's for sure.


(Pssst.....they do lowkey look like shit tho..)


----------



## Kyle Jordan (Jul 31, 2021)

Marked Man said:


> Anything more than a VERY limited, tasteful application of abalone. This has ruined many otherwise killer MIK guitars for me....



This post gave me flashbacks of ‘00-‘10 LTDs and Schecters. Gaudy monstrosities. And I say that as a former owner of a UV777BK that I loved. All that abalone or fake abalone made them look so damn cheap. The hoop earrings, press on nails, and clown makeup of the guitar world.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

Photoflame is one. That and really 99.9% of veneer. A good figured top has to have three distinct tones; low, medium and highlights. Photo flame and veneer tops (the Holcomb PRS SE comes mind) have no depth and look like chunky beef stew.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

Another one is faux stained walnut. My old Ibanez was mahogany, so the darker stain on it just evened out the tone but there's some "walnut" tops or bodies that are ol' lumber yard special, mystery plank stained brown with cheap balsawood grain pattern.


----------



## Randy (Jul 31, 2021)

Exhibit A


----------



## mbardu (Jul 31, 2021)

spudmunkey said:


> This doesn't bother me, because I know the alternative is likely a shrunk-down trem block, making the whole body thicker, or raising the trem off the top of the guitar for the same interior clearance.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yuck


----------



## wheresthefbomb (Aug 1, 2021)

vilk said:


> I have a Gotoh TOM, and half the saddles are facing a different direction... Are you saying this is a manufacturing error?? I don't know if I've ever seen a TOM that's not this way...
> 
> If I were to flip them to all face the same way, is there some benefit? Also, which way would that be?



Not an error necessarily, but a common practice that I take issue with. 

It seems to me from a mechanical perspective that they should all have the break angle on the back, leading the string down toward the stop bar/ferrules, and that they should break over the 90* angle to toward the nut. 

There is no good reason that I see to have the saddle break angle on the side of the string that goes straight to the bridge (except perhaps intonation in extreme cases?), and having the string break over a 90* angle on the rear end makes it much more prone to breakage. 

All TOMs I have ordered from StewMac come with the saddles facing the same direction, so it's hard to say where along the manufacturing process this decision is being made, but it's fairly easy to reverse on any decent TOM.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 1, 2021)

wheresthefbomb said:


> Not an error necessarily, but a common practice that I take issue with.
> 
> It seems to me from a mechanical perspective that they should all have the break angle on the back, leading the string down toward the stop bar/ferrules, and that they should break over the 90* angle to toward the nut.
> 
> ...



The orientation makes no difference so long as the saddle is properly cut for the given string.


----------



## mmr007 (Aug 1, 2021)

Here we go again with the relic'ing arguments again and what I see as a fallacy in that argument. The notion that battle scars have to be earned is ridiculous. By that logic one could never buy a used instrument period because YOU, the buyer didn't earn those scrapes and dings from touring. You just came along and bought what somebody else was done with. Taken to the extreme, if I was a wealthy collector I could never buy the original EVH frankie because I had nothing to do with earning the scars....they are not transferable so in reality it doesn't matter how they got their because whether I bought a custom shop relic frankie or the original...whether I got a custom shop Yngwie or an original...in neither case do I get to claim credit for the guitar's condition and the only difference is the size of my wallet needed for purchase.

I've said it before and I'll say it again people like old and relic'ed things. Not unique to guitar. I can walk into any number of brand new furniture stores and find furniture that has been purposely relic'ed to look like turn of the century french farmhouse décor or western americana...same with some vehicles or artwork designed to look older and more used than they are in reality.

The problem is that there are BAD relic jobs and people use that as an excuse to ridicule those who find GOOD relic job aesthetically pleasing.

My 2 cents. If you feel you need a refund let me know.


----------



## Hoss632 (Aug 1, 2021)

shitty hardware IE: nut, tuners, pick ups, bridge, pots, switches. Not a big fan of laurel or pau ferro boards really either but I can deal with them if I upgrade the hardware on a cheaper guitar. I use to think basswood meant cheap but have come around and learned otherwise.


----------



## maliciousteve (Aug 1, 2021)

Brushed Chrome/Aluminium hardware. Jackson used to use the cheap nasty brushed looking hardware on their import models in the early 2000's and it put me off.

Pickups with big logos, Seymour Duncan spring to mind. Nothing wrong with the pickups but they cheapen the look with the big logo.

Non-locking tremolos on guitars with pointy headstocks.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2021)

Randy said:


> Photoflame is one. That and really 99.9% of veneer. A good figured top has to have three distinct tones; low, medium and highlights. Photo flame and veneer tops (the Holcomb PRS SE comes mind) have no depth and look like chunky beef stew.



just paint the guitar a nice solid color already.


----------



## Possessed (Aug 1, 2021)

Abalone binding


----------



## Dyster (Aug 1, 2021)

painted bolt-on necks, alot of old cheap BC Rich had this and i cant for the life of me understand why. i also hate centered dot inlays with a passion... that being said i kinda like the janky parts-bin aesthetic sometimes


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 1, 2021)

Putting logos other than Esp on Esp guitars. E-II? LTD? Ugh.... Screams cheap and cringe af.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 1, 2021)

It's funny that abalone keeps coming up, when it was never really used on "cheap" mainstream available guitars. The Schecter Hellraiser and LTD Deluxe lines were more midrange. It's tacky as you can get, but it's weird to be associated with "cheap."


----------



## laxu (Aug 1, 2021)

spudmunkey said:


> This doesn't bother me, because I know the alternative is likely a shrunk-down trem block, making the whole body thicker, or raising the trem off the top of the guitar for the same interior clearance.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Correct me if I am wrong but I think that might be a factor with the finish on it as well as the quality of the decals. If that bass neck had a thicker gloss finish that logo would blend right in.

If I look at my 2018 nitro finished Fender Jazzmaster, in the right lighting I can see the outline of the decal but most of the time it's not noticeable. The Fender logo is probably one of the trickier ones to blend because of its shape and the amount of crap they write on it like those patent numbers and whatnot.

By comparison it's much harder to see the square outline of the decal spelling the brand on my 40 years old Yamaha SA-1200S (poly finish) where it sits on a black painted headstock rather than bare wood.

Logo outline being visible may also be a vintage repro/relic thing. Nitro finish can sink and shrink a bit over time so the logo can become more apparent so maybe they have seen this on vintage Fenders and replicated it accordingly, for better or worse. I don't like the look of that either.


----------



## laxu (Aug 1, 2021)

wheresthefbomb said:


> Not an error necessarily, but a common practice that I take issue with.
> 
> It seems to me from a mechanical perspective that they should all have the break angle on the back, leading the string down toward the stop bar/ferrules, and that they should break over the 90* angle to toward the nut.
> 
> ...



The Tune-o-matic is one of the shittiest bridge designs out there considering how popular it remains for cost and tradition reasons. Consider this:

The guitar needs neck angle or recessing the bridge to install the TOM and have it work properly because it's so tall.
It needs a tailpiece or stringthru setup in addition rather than being a single thing.
Because it's so narrow it has narrow intonation range so it needs to be installed at an angle. This is what also requires sometimes reversing the saddle.
Its saddles are held in place with a flimsy retainer wire or equally finicky C-clips on many models.
There is no per string height adjustment.
Older models are prone to caving in the middle from string pressure over time, changing the radius of the bridge because there is nothing to support it in the middle.

Models with thin posts might bend forward over time. Again mainly a concern for older guitars.
Intonation adjustment is more finicky to access as those screws are never in a position that is easy to access with a screwdriver. Either the bridge pickup or strings to tailpiece get in the way.
The bridge post holes may not be all that tight, making the bridge sloppy on its posts which can affect intonation and tuning. Tonepros system is a fix for this.
But in general the saddle reversing is a necessity for intonation sometimes. Reversing the saddle can give you that extra little bit of intonation room. Yamaha solved this 40 years ago already with a bridge that has extremely tight tolerances and wider intonation range. It works just as well as any of the older style TOM on my other guitars and I wish I could buy the Yamaha style nowadays.


----------



## narad (Aug 1, 2021)

USMarine75 said:


> How about three pickup rings then?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Tele neck pickup ring is where it's at.


----------



## USMarine75 (Aug 1, 2021)

narad said:


> Tele neck pickup ring is where it's at.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Aug 1, 2021)




----------



## narad (Aug 1, 2021)

USMarine75 said:


> View attachment 96232



Too far!


----------



## Adieu (Aug 1, 2021)

Oh! That reminds me!!

THE penultimate sloppy drunk tweaker redneck mods of them all: Eddie's attempts at DIY



mmr007 said:


> Here we go again with the relic'ing arguments again and what I see as a fallacy in that argument. The notion that battle scars have to be earned is ridiculous. By that logic one could never buy a used instrument period because YOU, the buyer didn't earn those scrapes and dings from touring. You just came along and bought what somebody else was done with. Taken to the extreme, if I was a wealthy collector I could never buy the original EVH frankie because I had nothing to do with earning the scars....they are not transferable so in reality it doesn't matter how they got their because whether I bought a custom shop relic frankie or the original...whether I got a custom shop Yngwie or an original...in neither case do I get to claim credit for the guitar's condition and the only difference is the size of my wallet needed for purchase.
> 
> I've said it before and I'll say it again people like old and relic'ed things. Not unique to guitar. I can walk into any number of brand new furniture stores and find furniture that has been purposely relic'ed to look like turn of the century french farmhouse décor or western americana...same with some vehicles or artwork designed to look older and more used than they are in reality.
> 
> ...


----------



## AltecGreen (Aug 1, 2021)

possumkiller said:


> Putting logos other than Esp on Esp guitars. E-II? LTD? Ugh.... Screams cheap and cringe af.



Looking at the prices of ESP labelled guitars versus E-II. The E-II is definitely cheaper. LTD even moreso. So what's the point other than wanting ESP on the headstock at LTD prices.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 1, 2021)

AltecGreen said:


> Looking at the prices of ESP labelled guitars versus E-II. The E-II is definitely cheaper. LTD even moreso. So what's the point other than wanting ESP on the headstock at LTD prices.


If companies are too cheap to put their name on the headstock, it screams cheapo cringe.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 1, 2021)

It's a very ESP Japan thing to have defined and divided quality tiers. No one really does it like they do, to they extent that they have. There are something like 7 or 8 sub-brands and almost all don't say "ESP" as the primary. It's not like Gibson or Fender who have purchased other marquees over the years.


----------



## diagrammatiks (Aug 1, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> It's a very ESP Japan thing to have defined and divided quality tiers. No one really does it like they do, to they extent that they have. There are something like 7 or 8 sub-brands and almost all don't say "ESP" as the primary. It's not like Gibson or Fender who have purchased other marquees over the years.



I’m still a little surprised when I scroll through my classifieds and see a neon pointy shredder guitar by grassroots. 

that word don’t match up


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 1, 2021)

diagrammatiks said:


> I’m still a little surprised when I scroll through my classifieds and see a neon pointy shredder guitar by grassroots.
> 
> that word don’t match up



Yeah, it's been interesting seeing what they've done with Grassroots. I remember when it was just "the LTD of Navigator."


----------



## wheresthefbomb (Aug 1, 2021)

MaxOfMetal said:


> The orientation makes no difference so long as the saddle is properly cut for the given string.





laxu said:


> The Tune-o-matic is one of the shittiest bridge designs out there considering how popular it remains for cost and tradition reasons. Consider this:
> 
> The guitar needs neck angle or recessing the bridge to install the TOM and have it work properly because it's so tall.
> It needs a tailpiece or stringthru setup in addition rather than being a single thing.
> ...



Well, I stand corrected, thank you for this thorough explanation. I still like TOM bridges and still think the reversed saddles look bad, but that's just one cat's opinion.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 1, 2021)

Randy said:


> Photoflame is one. That and really 99.9% of veneer. A good figured top has to have three distinct tones; low, medium and highlights. Photo flame and veneer tops (the Holcomb PRS SE comes mind) have no depth and look like chunky beef stew.



Actual photoflames are as bad as ever.
Veneers, some of them are shockingly good, but they're still variable.
Flame remains a bit difficult to get right if you know what a natural-cleared deep flamed maple top should look like and how much chatoyance you should expect to see (although some examples can do a good job). At the opposite end of the spectrum, exotic things like non-flamed spalts, burls, ebonies etc are much more expensive to get in thick tops- yet don't have as much depth to their looks; so veneers are excellent for those looks (ideally if you have opaque body binding or blacked out backs).
In the middle, things like quilts...those often depend on the particular veneer, and even more so the finish. Holcombs often look bad. The Jackson "Northern Lights" looks very bad in person in my experience. But sometimes with some finishes, they work. This is a fairly thin veneer and I'm quite happy with it:



Or this one:



Then you have thick maple tops getting a very aggressive finish that washes out all the nuances of the wood anyway for many thousands of $$$s ... and you might as well have used a veneer for that...


----------



## jl-austin (Aug 1, 2021)

There are some things that I think make a guitar look cheap.

Dot inlays with binding. 
Cosmo black (or black nickel) on a cheap guitar, I'm not exactly sure why, but for some reason this stuff only works on nicer guitars, again, I don't know why.
Any type of "special" top on a cheap guitar. (don't try to be something you aren't!)
I really don't like Rosewood at all, but it looks REALLY bad (at least when it was offered) on cheap guitars. I will gladly take a nice piece of "alternate" fingerboard wood over a dry Chunk of rosewood.
Any type of fender style bridge on anything other than a strat or tele with a pickguard. 
Chrome (unless done really well, like some of the Ibanez Jem's over the years)
Again, chrome or gold hardware on a black painted headstock, YUK!


----------



## Estilo (Aug 2, 2021)

- Nickel alloy frets. Sorry, it's 2021. Schecter has definitely ruined it on this one with their stainless steel fret offerings at their prices. It can be done. Paul Reed Smith's defence of his use of nickel alloy frets is major cringe (it's a 9 year old video though). 
- Incidental to that, small frets. Nothing positive about them unless you slide a lot. Combined with the nickel alloy part, small, short nickel alloy frets are a scam. 
- No brand parts on guitars of adequately high prices. Don't mean to bash but a brand called Soloking (cringe!) has been making the rounds where I live. They're about $300-400, which isn't a lot but come with no-name pickups, bridges and tuners, nickel alloy frets and they promote a ton the qualitative aspects such as superior quality wood, full-sized trem block etc which difficult to assess until months after buying. It's not a lot of money but given how better-established offerings such as the Cort G300 or Schecters and Yamahas are just $100-150 more, just screams to me that a bulk of the price tag is in profit margins.


----------



## NeglectedField (Aug 2, 2021)

Right, 'ere we go:

- That 'metuhl' guitar thing where it's matte black, black or brushed chrome hardware, a stupid BC Rich-but-not-quite shape, and pseudo-Invader looking pickups with the giant polepieces; bonus points for 'spooky' inlays
- Brushed chrome (sometimes)
- Really pale looking rosewood (or jibbly flibly jibby jooby whatever CITES-friendly substitute wood is being used)
- Most licensed Floyd-style trems (barring the ones on high-end Ibanezes); glad Jackson/LTD etc had the common sense to use Special models where an OFR should in theory be a drop-in replacement
- Attempting to give a neck a 'vintage' look by clearly just a light coat of yellow paint
- Dean
- Glue residue or shavings not cleaned up
- Improperly aligned binding or inlays
- The way the angle of the bridge on Squier Affinity series Teles is obviously a coupla degrees off - whyyyy?

I can probably think of plenty more later


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Aug 2, 2021)

Plastic inlays on $2k EIIs and a lot of $3k+ ESPs. Why??? They have done mother of pearl to LTDs before! Is there an MOP rule in Japan or something?


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 2, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> Plastic inlays on $2k EIIs and a lot of $3k+ ESPs. Why??? They have done mother of pearl to LTDs before! Is there an MOP rule in Japan or something?



It is CITES controlled, yes. So there are complications as far as manufacturers having to be accountable for shipments they receive.


----------



## bigsimpin (Aug 2, 2021)

- Bolt on necks with chunky square metal baseplates and an unfinished maple neck (or stained yellow)
- Bad examples of gradient guitars (esp where part of it is almost all black or fades into the wrong colour)
- Flame maple tops on superstrat shapes where the pattern of the matched sides splits away from each other towards the horns
- When the whole guitar is one solid colour and has cheap looking chrome or nickel hardware
- When the guitar comes with a cheap gig bag and/or a SS amp
- Made in China QC stickers
- Small frets
- Cheap floyd systems especially if not setup level to the body


----------



## John (Aug 2, 2021)

-Poor fretwork
-Paint runs, overspray, etc in the guitar finish
-Kiesel's raw tone finish. Cost cutting measure or otherwise, it still screams cheaped out and really crude to me.
-Actually, just lump the rest of Kiesel's weird finishes onto this thread anyway.
-Uncomfortable square neck heels
-I also recall seeing a lot of lower-priced guitars outfitted with 'Duncan Designed' pickups, years ago. That was compounded with the extra large billboard logos, just like the regular Seymour Duncan counterparts.
-Hot take, but certain guitar shapes just look awry. Or at least weird enough to pass off as some cheap toy instead of being an actual instrument.


----------



## bigcupholder (Aug 2, 2021)

laxu said:


> The Tune-o-matic is one of the shittiest bridge designs out there considering how popular it remains for cost and tradition reasons. Consider this:
> 
> The guitar needs neck angle or recessing the bridge to install the TOM and have it work properly because it's so tall.
> It needs a tailpiece or stringthru setup in addition rather than being a single thing.
> ...


Everything you said is correct, but I personally like having an angled neck for playability. The guitar kind of subtly curves around you with one


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 2, 2021)

*clears throat*

Your mom.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 2, 2021)

I hate tuneomatics so much...but....I learned on one. Now it's pretty much my favorite bridge in terms of playing, everything else nope. I hate the looks the most.


----------



## USMarine75 (Aug 2, 2021)

mbardu said:


> Actual photoflames are as bad as ever.
> Veneers, some of them are shockingly good, but they're still variable.
> Flame remains a bit difficult to get right if you know what a natural-cleared deep flamed maple top should look like and how much chatoyance you should expect to see (although some examples can do a good job). At the opposite end of the spectrum, exotic things like non-flamed spalts, burls, ebonies etc are much more expensive to get in thick tops- yet don't have as much depth to their looks; so veneers are excellent for those looks (ideally if you have opaque body binding or blacked out backs).
> In the middle, things like quilts...those often depend on the particular veneer, and even more so the finish. Holcombs often look bad. The Jackson "Northern Lights" looks very bad in person in my experience. But sometimes with some finishes, they work. This is a fairly thin veneer and I'm quite happy with it:
> ...



I still love it though...


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 2, 2021)

NeglectedField said:


> Right, 'ere we go:
> 
> - That 'metuhl' guitar thing where it's matte black, black or brushed chrome hardware, a stupid BC Rich-but-not-quite shape, and pseudo-Invader looking pickups with the giant polepieces; bonus points for 'spooky' inlays/QUOTE]
> 
> Yeah. Idk what it is about BC Rich but their shapes, although wild, seem.to be just wild enough. When other guitar companies attempt it the guitars look like gimmicky cheap pieces of shit.


----------



## USMarine75 (Aug 2, 2021)

Sparkles


----------



## laxu (Aug 3, 2021)

bigcupholder said:


> Everything you said is correct, but I personally like having an angled neck for playability. The guitar kind of subtly curves around you with one


That's fine, it's just that getting the neck angle exactly right is a challenging step that for example Gibson fucks up quite regularly, which results in those skyhigh TOMs, top wrapping to fix it and so on.


----------



## Viginez (Aug 3, 2021)

cheap logos, cheap names, bad looking logos


----------



## Necros (Aug 3, 2021)

Adieu said:


> Unsealed or trapeze tuners
> 
> Almost all rosewood (or "rosewood") boards. If it isn't dark smooth and even, please use frikkin maple instead.



So much this! You see a 2000$ guitar with a light-colored rosewood, what an instant turn off.


Gold hardware of any kind. Just looks really tasteless and tacky.
Neck/headstock backside not matching the body color.
Strat-style pickguards (or any kind really), just screams starter pack or boomer guitar right away.
FR Specials or non-top end Edge trems on $900+ metal guitars like the Ibanez Iron Label Xiphos or Jackson X-series Warriors.
Non-locking tuners on anything $800+
Bell knobs unless its a PRS
covered humbuckers unless its Bareknuckle
bindings, not necessarily cheap, but just feels really out of place on most guitars.
pup rings too but ive almost never seen them on expensive guitars anyway


----------



## p0ke (Aug 3, 2021)

It depends a lot, I wouldn't really say it's a particular feature that does it.
For example take the cheapest of the Jackson JS-series guitars - on paper it sounds like they have somewhat similar specs to the more expensive models they're based on, but they're just generally bulky looking. They're decent guitars when set up properly, but when you see a JS-series Kelly next to a KE-2 in a store, it just looks like a toy.


----------



## TerpDudeMatt (Aug 3, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Hey guys, thought this might be fun to discuss, what are some features on guitars high-end or low-end alike that screams "I'm cheap" to you, regardless of price?
> 
> To me, pickup rings. This is the worst culprit to me. Any time I see a guitar with black plastic pickup rings I always picture a Donner or Musiclily Amazon part bin pieces and just really turns me off. Same with plain maple necks/fretboards. Unless it's on a nice lake placid blue or something similar it always looks so cheap to me, I'm really not sure why.
> 
> Anyone else have anything like this?


Plastic nuts on an $800+ guitar. A Tusq nut is like $12 retail.


----------



## redragon (Aug 3, 2021)

White pickup rings.


----------



## Iron1 (Aug 3, 2021)

Randy said:


> E-II, is it E two? E second? E eye eye?



It's pronounced "lame". 

For me:
-Centered, dot inlays (dig the offset ones in most applications like my KM6, Jackson Pro H7, S7521, etc).
-unbound fretboards on plain maple necks
-A headstock shape that's a clear ripoff of a name brand
-Most major guitar brand pickups (ESP, BC Rich, Jackson, etc...)
-Fixed bridges that are just one flat piece of metal with a bend in it that the saddles attach to... 
-Abalone binding
-And, as someone said above, Strat style trems on non-Strat guitars

I don't get the hate for pickup rings, but they certainly don't belong on all guitars. Some they work well with, some they don't.


----------



## TheAegisInitiative (Aug 3, 2021)

With the understanding that a lot of this is subjective, there seems to be a lot of opinions here based on a lack of experience with higher end stuff.

1. In house pups are cheap? How about Xotic, LSL, Suhr, Tom Anderson, Schecter Custom Shop, PRS, etc? All hand wound in house and are second to none. Pups are always subjective sonically but their stuff as as good as anyone’s. Seems like this opinion is based off of Ibanez pups used in their lower end stuff and other stuff along those lines.

2. Pickup rings. I don’t like how they look either, but PRS, ESP, Gibson and so on still use them and they are amongst the most expensive guitars made.

3. Pau Ferro boards. I kinda see this one. Suhr uses them and I had a Modern with one. No issues with it but something about it seemed cheap. I suppose it’s because you usually see them on lower end Fenders more than anything else.

4. Someone mentioned single coil pickups are cheap. Lmao wut. I own strats and I also own modern metal guitars with buckers. There is no replacement for good single coil strat or tele pickups. Splitting a bucker is not even close. They make noiseless single coils if you really need them but they typically lose something dynamically. The 60 cycle hum is mitigated with proper muting technique. Strats and Teles require a finer attention to technique than your RG does. If they’re not your thing then that’s fine, but this is more user error than anything else.

5. Plastic nuts. You need to be more specific here. If it’s some cheap plastic on a low end strat or Indo Ibby or Jackson then sure, they’re garbage. I prefer bone but there’s nothing wrong with a Graphtech or TUSQ nut, which are just fancy names for specially formulated plastic nuts. They’re still plastic at the end of the day.


----------



## NeglectedField (Aug 3, 2021)

p0ke said:


> It depends a lot, I wouldn't really say it's a particular feature that does it.
> For example take the cheapest of the Jackson JS-series guitars - on paper it sounds like they have somewhat similar specs to the more expensive models they're based on, but they're just generally bulky looking. They're decent guitars when set up properly, but when you see a JS-series Kelly next to a KE-2 in a store, it just looks like a toy.



Sometimes you can just sniff out a 'cheap' guitar, as your eye gets better over time. But you can't put your finger on it. Even so much as a millimetre 'off' in the shape of a guitar compared to its more expensive versions can tip you off, stuff like that.


----------



## Djentlover666 (Aug 3, 2021)

Pickup rings, plastic nuts, dot inlays, toggle switch for pickup switch. Dot inlays are the only reason I don't want an rg8. Otherwise I'd get one. I want an ironlabel 8 but they seem to be hard to find and not cheap.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Aug 3, 2021)

I can understand things like dots and rings not being aesthetically pleasing to a lot of people but it's really hard for me to see things like that as screaming "cheap" as those appointments are so common on many mid/ upper level and custom guitars.


----------



## Emperoff (Aug 3, 2021)

Cheapo trans finishes.

Things like these are atrocious:












And these are not inexpensive guitars, precisely. I've yet to see a decently made trans finish in a MII or MIC guitar. Most can look good in pictures, but in person they look fake with no "3D" effect going on at all.


----------



## Neon_Knight_ (Aug 3, 2021)

Adieu said:


> Unsealed or trapeze tuners
> 
> Almost all rosewood (or "rosewood") boards. If it isn't dark smooth and even, please use frikkin maple instead.


Rosewood costs more than maple, so I'm surprised you see it that way around...I feel the opposite.

My guess is you either play Fender strats or 80s-style "shreddy" super strats. Am I right? 

Most manufacturers seem to do a better job of fret edge finishing on rosewood/ebony compared to maple (someone has explained that on Jemsite.com, but I forget the reason).

If a rosewood fretboard that isn't plain looks cheap to you, what are your thoughts on birdseye maple fretboards (which are more upmarket than plain maple)? Also, figured ebony fretboards with dark and light streaks?

Orange jatoba and other cheaper / more environmentally friendly alternatives to rosewood tend to look cheap to me. Not because I know they are cheaper, but because the colour doesn't blend in with the overall aesthetics as well.


----------



## ExpatZ (Aug 3, 2021)

Most of my girlfriends.


----------



## Wucan (Aug 3, 2021)

Gain_Junkie93 said:


> White dot inlays
> Nonmatching headstock finish
> Strat style trems on anything other than a strat
> Pickup rings


I've read that NOT matching headstocks is actually more expensive, because you don't get to piggyback on the finish that you applied to the body. There are some highly logical reasons why you wouldn't match (e.g. one-piece maple neck and fretboard) but Fender and Gibson made it popular to have the headstock be its own thing divorced from the body's colors.



> Like the whole bullet and affinity series just scream cheapo cringe to me.
> Classic vibe?? How about classic cheap ass cringe guitar...



I mean, Squier is literally Fender's budget brand. Is it "cringe" to not want to spend x2-3 times for virtually the same product?


----------



## KolArdins (Aug 3, 2021)

No case. Line 6, AU$3k. WTF?


----------



## Spicypickles (Aug 3, 2021)

This just turned into a “what do you hate on guitars” thread.
There are certainly specs I hate but don’t necessarily thing look cheap. The recent wild numbers of guitars with vintage trems come to mind.

I guess to me, cheap looking specs are mismatched headstock to body finishes, and mismatched plastics. Like a cream binding etc with white rings and switch tips. Also, covered pickups on a solid color guitar, although I fear this falls into the camp I just described up top.

Also, the black backs and necks on figured top PRS’ bother the shit out of me, especially when they have the scraped binding already. That screams cheap to me


----------



## BMFan30 (Aug 3, 2021)

ExpatZ said:


> Most of my girlfriends.


Stronk fifth post from almost a decade ago. Get you some more expensive bitches.

The whole backstreet of Amsterdam is full of them, damn. Just make you left turn instead of that right one you usually make. That's all it take.


----------



## JimboLodisC (Aug 3, 2021)

every Strat looks cheap to me cuz my first guitar was a cheap clone and everybody and their brother can make their own copy, nothing about it seems expensive or exotic to me


----------



## TedEH (Aug 3, 2021)

JimboLodisC said:


> every Strat looks cheap to me cuz my first guitar was a cheap clone and everybody and their brother can make their own copy, nothing about it seems expensive or exotic to me


Not gonna lie, I felt the same way for the same reason for a long time.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 3, 2021)

Emperoff said:


> Cheapo trans finishes.
> 
> Things like these are atrocious:
> 
> ...



Like the prior poster remarked, those deep finishes themselves _could _be nice. On thick wood for instance.
But the effect we're seeing is mostly the effect of very very thin veneers, especially flamed maple, which doesn't take well to those finishes at all.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 3, 2021)

Emperoff said:


> Cheapo trans finishes.
> 
> Things like these are atrocious:
> 
> ...



These are done by robots on paper thin veneers.


----------



## TheDraeg (Aug 3, 2021)

Any shitty looking gloss finish


----------



## Krauthammer (Aug 3, 2021)

I really could care less the aesthetic of the guitar. Absurd question. If it gets you the sound the looks are irrelevant


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 3, 2021)

Spicypickles said:


> This just turned into a “what do you hate on guitars” thread.
> There are certainly specs I hate but don’t necessarily thing look cheap.



True. If anything, there needs to be a distinction between stuff looking cheap and stuff looking tacky. There's a lot of evidence in the market that shows that people have a lot of money but very little taste.


----------



## beerandbeards (Aug 3, 2021)

Guitars made of balsa wood


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Aug 3, 2021)

beerandbeards said:


> Guitars made of balsa wood


That's a thing?


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 4, 2021)

mbardu said:


> Like the prior poster remarked, those deep finishes themselves _could _be nice. On thick wood for instance.
> But the effect we're seeing is mostly the effect of very very thin veneers, especially flamed maple, which doesn't take well to those finishes at all.



This doesn't make any sense to me. When you see figuring/grain if the wood, you're not seeing any of the wood's actual thickness. You're seeing the very top layer of the tree's cells, which is way way thinner than even the thinnest veneer.

IMO, if you took the board that the veneer was cut from, and applied the same finish, it would look the same.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 4, 2021)

spudmunkey said:


> This doesn't make any sense to me. When you see figuring/grain if the wood, you're not seeing any of the wood's actual thickness. You're seeing the very top layer of the tree's cells, which is way way thinner than even the thinnest veneer.
> 
> IMO, if you took the board that the veneer was cut from, and applied the same finish, it would look the same.



Maybe it's anecdotal, but the thin flamed veneers I've seen in person with that type of looks tend to just lack any and all chatoyance. Add a heavy finish with dark grain, and you end up with something super flat without any shimmer or movement (and that's coming from someone who has nothing against well done veneers) - just rough dark spots. On actual tops, even with uneven figuring, you seem to almost always have at least some of that (except with very heavy and flat finishes like I mentioned earlier).

Not sure that it's solely the piece of wood, since as you mention you won't really see much depth of the wood itself. But maybe it's a combination with the finish process, and for example you can't really sand as much during a multi-step finish process for fear of just sanding through the veneer? Sound extreme, but I know people who did just that while trying to refinish a veneer.
Regardless, it's been my experience at least.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 4, 2021)

Demiurge said:


> True. If anything, there needs to be a distinction between stuff looking cheap and stuff looking tacky. There's a lot of evidence in the market that shows that people have a lot of money but very little taste.



You mean to say this is not in good taste?!?


----------



## Dumple Stilzkin (Aug 4, 2021)

mbardu said:


> You mean to say this is not in good taste?!?
> 
> View attachment 96302


Still looks better than most Kiesel’s.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 4, 2021)

Dumple Stilzkin said:


> Still looks better than most Kiesel’s.





Demiurge said:


> There's a lot of evidence in the market that people have very little taste.


----------



## Necros (Aug 4, 2021)

Oh and non-angled headstocks, a prime staple of starterpack guitars. Its something thats BOTH functional AND aesthetically better, how on earth high-end guitars like MusicMan or USA Strats dont have them is baffling.


----------



## beerandbeards (Aug 4, 2021)

Seabeast2000 said:


> That's a thing?



no but it would actually be cheap!


----------



## protest (Aug 4, 2021)

Seabeast2000 said:


> That's a thing?


----------



## aesthyrian (Aug 4, 2021)

Can't pass up an opportunity to post more wrestling gifs..


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Aug 4, 2021)

Scream Cheap for me Long Beach!!


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Aug 4, 2021)

This guy. $2K guitar. Has headstock binding. But it doesn't have fretboard binding. Why??? Who designs stuff like that at that pricepoint?

Can't even center the brand logo the right way.


----------



## beerandbeards (Aug 4, 2021)

aesthyrian said:


> Can't pass up an opportunity to post more wrestling gifs..


That guitar vaporized into the air!


----------



## mbardu (Aug 4, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> This guy. $2K guitar. Has headstock binding. But it doesn't have fretboard binding. Why??? Who designs stuff like that at that pricepoint?
> 
> Can't even center the brand logo the right way.



Depending on your preference, no binding might be better. If the fretwork is great, with no sprouting, then the feel of a smoothly rolled natural ebony fretboard might be preferred (as opposed to, say a plastic binding), the same way most people prefer smooth oiled necks vs sticky gloss. Best of both worlds? Figured wood binding.

Doesn't do anything for the cheap looks though, and the logo certainly doesn't help either. Plus plain gloss black just screams "how much more basic can it get?". At least the fretboard looks decently black instead of off-brown as is often the case.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Aug 4, 2021)

mbardu said:


> Depending on your preference, no binding might be better. If the fretwork is great, with no sprouting, then the feel of a smoothly rolled natural ebony fretboard might be preferred (as opposed to, say a plastic binding), the same way most people prefer smooth oiled necks vs sticky gloss. Best of both worlds? Figured wood binding.
> 
> Doesn't do anything for the cheap looks though, and the logo certainly doesn't help either. Plus plain gloss black just screams "how much more basic can it get?". At least the fretboard looks decently black instead of off-brown as is often the case.



The mismatch between headstock and board is what looks cheap. It's like they ran out of binding from the factory. lol
At least for the white version of this guitar, the headstock binding was at least black to match the ebony board.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 4, 2021)

Yeah this thread turned into "what things on cheap guitars I hate"

I was asking for things that are featured on high end guitars that aren't cheap, but look cheap. Like a maple neck and fretboard on a 4k instrument to me looks uninspired and boring.


----------



## arasys (Aug 4, 2021)

+ using plastic stickers for pinstripes instead of paint

+ a lot of BC Rich customs with ultra pointy metull shape, same goes for some of Moser's shapes as well. Especially the one that looks like an alien took a V shaped shit.





+ mismatched flame maple tops on very expensive guitars like LPCs

+ non matching headstock colors on majority of Fender guitars with chrome hardware, though some dark rosewood headstocks look classy

+ plane mahogany tops with sunburst. I don't know why but I find them so bland.


----------



## sunnyd88 (Aug 4, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Yeah this thread turned into "what things on cheap guitars I hate"
> 
> I was asking for things that are featured on high end guitars that aren't cheap, but look cheap. Like a maple neck and fretboard on a 4k instrument to me looks uninspired and boring.


Well, I mean the huge amounts of gloss black on PRS and ESP guitars that run $2k and above screams cheap to me. By no means is it "cheap" to paint these black and then do a high gloss finish on it but it looks so damn cheap, fingerprints like crazy, and scratches are easily apparent. An oiled or thin satin natural finish is so much cheaper to do yet looks so much more high end. This ESP Horizon CTM is $7k yet the back looks like it belongs on a $500 guitar. ESP used to do a matching transparent finish on the back of Horizon CTMs...To me it screams that they are using subpar looking wood on these super expensive guitars and then covering it up with black paint so that you can't see it but I highly prefer seeing even less than perfect natural wood over black paint.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 4, 2021)

sunnyd88 said:


> Well, I mean the huge amounts of gloss black on PRS and ESP guitars that run $2k and above screams cheap to me. By no means is it "cheap" to paint these black and then do a high gloss finish on it but it looks so damn cheap, fingerprints like crazy, and scratches are easily apparent. An oiled or thin satin natural finish is so much cheaper to do yet looks so much more high end. This ESP Horizon CTM is $7k yet the back looks like it belongs on a $500 guitar. ESP used to do a matching transparent finish on the back of Horizon CTMs...To me it screams that they are using subpar looking wood on these super expensive guitars and then covering it up with black paint so that you can't see it but I highly prefer seeing even less than perfect natural wood over black paint.
> View attachment 96342
> View attachment 96343



Yes man. yes.


----------



## sunnyd88 (Aug 4, 2021)

sunnyd88 said:


> Well, I mean the huge amounts of gloss black on PRS and ESP guitars that run $2k and above screams cheap to me. By no means is it "cheap" to paint these black and then do a high gloss finish on it but it looks so damn cheap, fingerprints like crazy, and scratches are easily apparent. An oiled or thin satin natural finish is so much cheaper to do yet looks so much more high end. This ESP Horizon CTM is $7k yet the back looks like it belongs on a $500 guitar. ESP used to do a matching transparent finish on the back of Horizon CTMs...To me it screams that they are using subpar looking wood on these super expensive guitars and then covering it up with black paint so that you can't see it but I highly prefer seeing even less than perfect natural wood over black paint.
> View attachment 96342
> View attachment 96343


ESP used to do a matching color transparent back, binding on the neck and headstock, big block font ESP logo, and a neck-thru construction. ESP has cheaped out and now does a set-thru construction instead of neck-thru, don't even bother to do natural maple neck binding to match the natural body and headstock reveal binding, a solid black painted back to save time in production (no matter what the front color is, they can mask off the front and do a bunch of guitars at the same time in black). Cheaper Seymour Duncan pickups instead of ESP Custom Lab pickups. SD is by no means cheap, but they used to use more expensive in-house ESP Custom Lab pickups.


----------



## laxu (Aug 5, 2021)

sunnyd88 said:


> Well, I mean the huge amounts of gloss black on PRS and ESP guitars that run $2k and above screams cheap to me. By no means is it "cheap" to paint these black and then do a high gloss finish on it but it looks so damn cheap, fingerprints like crazy, and scratches are easily apparent. An oiled or thin satin natural finish is so much cheaper to do yet looks so much more high end. This ESP Horizon CTM is $7k yet the back looks like it belongs on a $500 guitar. ESP used to do a matching transparent finish on the back of Horizon CTMs...To me it screams that they are using subpar looking wood on these super expensive guitars and then covering it up with black paint so that you can't see it but I highly prefer seeing even less than perfect natural wood over black paint.
> View attachment 96342
> View attachment 96343



Yeah I don't get why Suhr does this for a lot of models as well. Out of all colors they could pick to go with their vibrant, colorful tops they go with a black back. Those guitars would look much better with say a darker color of the main top color etc.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 5, 2021)

laxu said:


> Yeah I don't get why Suhr does this for a lot of models as well. Out of all colors they could pick to go with their vibrant, colorful tops they go with a black back. Those guitars would look much better with say a darker color of the main top color etc.



That's what's ordered. Suhr doesn't really do employee spec'd stuff, it's all dealer orders, either for customers or their own stock. On Pro models, John has been quoted saying they choose the top ordered colors for that particular model.

It's a popular enough of an option to be built into the pricing/menu of several builders, off the top of my head: ESP, Anderson, Kiesel, Fender, and G&L in addition to Suhr.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 5, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> This guy. $2K guitar. Has headstock binding. But it doesn't have fretboard binding. Why??? Who designs stuff like that at that pricepoint?
> 
> Can't even center the brand logo the right way.


That was designed by Jackson USA to ensure the Japanese Jacksons would tank while they could say they tried and they told us it wouldn't work out.


----------



## Robslalaina (Aug 5, 2021)

Figured veneer tops. For example I find that the EVH Wolfie Special looks cheaper in chlorine burst than plain gloss black. Something about the veneer that looks shallow and bland and washed out.

And I'll add this: binding that's only scraped on the side of the body so it barely shows when looking at the guitar from the front. Makes the guitar look flat and almost '2D'. Particularly bad on carved tops imo.


----------



## Edika (Aug 5, 2021)

There are a few things that look cheap to me but it all depends on the guitar. For example I find chrome and gold hardware to look cheap on most guitars but they work wirh some of them. Especially if there are some black parts, like chrome and gold Floyds with black screws. I kind of hated the chrome hardware on my Carvin but I like it on my Gibson Les Paul.

A lot of things screamed cheap from far away and photos but I've found out it's not the case in person. Or the opposite. For example I though some of the Ibanez premium models, especially RG6 with wenge fretboards looked cheap but the Iron label RGA 7 with the ASH bodies and antique stain look. Then I went to a store that had both and my opinion turned 180 degrees immediatly. The Iron label looked and felt plasticky while the RG6 looked and felt class!


----------



## dspellman (Aug 5, 2021)

bigcupholder said:


> Rosewood doesn't need a finish like maple and doesn't crack or split like ebony if it dries out. Maple is prone to warping/twisting. Ebony is prone to shrinking and leaving fret ends poking out. I wish more guitars came with rosewood.



I'm in the opposite camp -- I'm a big fan of ebony, and most of my guitars have it. I've yet to have an ebony fretboard crack or shrink, and this is with a large sample size over a really long period of time (my oldest guitar was built in 1939).


----------



## dspellman (Aug 5, 2021)

Robstonin said:


> Figured veneer tops. For example I find that the EVH Wolfie Special looks cheaper in chlorine burst than plain gloss black. Something about the veneer that looks shallow and bland and washed out.



That may be specific to that guitar and finish. I do have some guitars that have figured veneer tops, and they're actually better book-matched than than those with thicker tops. If you've got a 1/16th" veneer, all of the wood's characteristics are completely present.


----------



## dspellman (Aug 5, 2021)

Adieu said:


> Not necessarily
> 
> Some Japanese stuff has had awesome house brand pickups



I have an '82 Ibanez AR-300 that just sings. Original pickups. Ditto the Yamaha SG-3000.


----------



## chipchappy (Aug 5, 2021)

anything made by protone screams cheap to me


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 5, 2021)

chipchappy said:


> anything made by protone screams cheap to me



They just seem so..."low effort." 

Like they just decided to cash in on an artist pedal and threw together whatever 30 year old stomp box design with like one component change and shipped them off to the YouTube dujour. 

Doesn't help that they sound anywhere between bad to boring/generic.


----------



## Crash Dandicoot (Aug 5, 2021)

sunnyd88 said:


> Well, I mean the huge amounts of gloss black on PRS and ESP guitars that run $2k and above screams cheap to me. By no means is it "cheap" to paint these black and then do a high gloss finish on it but it looks so damn cheap, fingerprints like crazy, and scratches are easily apparent. An oiled or thin satin natural finish is so much cheaper to do yet looks so much more high end. This ESP Horizon CTM is $7k yet the back looks like it belongs on a $500 guitar. ESP used to do a matching transparent finish on the back of Horizon CTMs...To me it screams that they are using subpar looking wood on these super expensive guitars and then covering it up with black paint so that you can't see it but I highly prefer seeing even less than perfect natural wood over black paint.
> View attachment 96342
> View attachment 96343



Not to be pedantic, but as a guy who owns the Floyd/quilt top version of that exact guitar the back isn't black. Each color is matched with a nice, dark holoflake sparkle that translates to stock photos poorly. I 100% agree with your sentiment, though.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Aug 5, 2021)

chipchappy said:


> anything made by protone screams cheap to me



omg that dino cazares pedal. lmao the graphic doesn't even help. it's pixelated and looks like it came from the 90s.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 5, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> omg that dino cazares pedal. lmao the graphic doesn't even help. it's pixelated and looks like it came from the 90s.



So accidentally on brand?


----------



## xzacx (Aug 5, 2021)

dspellman said:


> That may be specific to that guitar and finish. I do have some guitars that have figured veneer tops, and they're actually better book-matched than than those with thicker tops. If you've got a 1/16th" veneer, all of the wood's characteristics are completely present.



Two ways of looking at it, but perfect book matching screams "veneer" to me. An actual thick, carved top is rarely perfect, and the imperfections and character make it look "real" and more expensive imo.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 5, 2021)

Binding so "aged" it just looks like orange binding on an Eclipse or EC1000. Ugh...


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 5, 2021)

EMGs. Ugh...


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 5, 2021)

Esteban guitars just scream cheap cringey shit.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 5, 2021)

xzacx said:


> Two ways of looking at it, but perfect book matching screams "veneer" to me. An actual thick, carved top is rarely perfect, and the imperfections and character make it look "real" and more expensive imo.



Yeah, depends on the type of guitar.
A PRS-type, with fancy specs, but a bad-looking bookmatch or uneven figure- that can look cheap.
Like they didn't really try, even if we know full well it's perfectly expected when you carve through the thick wood.
A Gibson R on the opposite end of the spectrum, yeah...the dirtier the top, the more raw or "imperfect" figuring - the more authentic and expensive it's going to look.


----------



## possumkiller (Aug 5, 2021)

Telecasters. Ugh... Like bare bones cheap af. Companies trying to modernize telecasters. Just gross...


----------



## mikeymike (Aug 5, 2021)

dspellman said:


> I'm in the opposite camp -- I'm a big fan of ebony, and most of my guitars have it. I've yet to have an ebony fretboard crack or shrink, and this is with a large sample size over a really long period of time (my oldest guitar was built in 1939).


Considering the "large sample size" you have, I highly doubt you have actually inspected every single square inch of fretboard for cracks. Ebony cracks if you look at it wrong. It's a terrible wood for fingerboards


----------



## Phlegethon (Aug 5, 2021)

Plastic pickup rings, regardless of the guitar. If my 400 dollar RG321 MH can manage to have metal pickup rings, then PRS/Gibson/whoever else can use something appropriate for their 4000 dollar guitars. 
Mother of toilet set anything. Just use normal plastic for fuck's sakes. 
Bullseye bursts that look like the outside colour was applied with a paint roller.
Using abalone in excess. Looks disgusting. Whoever at Schecter thought this was a good idea needs to be kicked in the dick. 
matte satin finishes on guitar bodies. serves a functional purpose on the back of a neck, but fuck right off if you're using it on the body. 
In house pickups. At this point, established aftermarket pickup makers are better than in house ones regarding quality of sound, period. The only reason a guitar company puts in house pickups in a guitar is to save on money by bulk ordering from Artec.


----------



## protest (Aug 5, 2021)

Strings... Every cheap guitar I see has strings


----------



## TheBloodstained (Aug 9, 2021)

I'm probably going to step on a lot of toes here, but here goes...

Most Fender instruments (I type "most" because there is exceptions!) looks really cheap to me. I think it's down to personal preferences. I always thought that they made poor color choises/combinations.
Also, chrome hardware is often seen on budget guitars too, and so many (if not all?) Fenders use chrome hardware, so...

One exception, for me personally, is David Gilmours iconic black strat. I like that one. I have also seen custom shop stuff and one-of builds from them that was cool, but most of their production line stuff simply doesn't appear to be worth the price tag at first glance to me.


----------



## teamSKDM (Aug 9, 2021)

when companies make an obvious djent stick I think is really cheap and cheesy


----------



## CovertSovietBear (Aug 9, 2021)

teamSKDM said:


> when companies make an obvious djent stick I think is really cheap and cheesy


ESP Black Metal Series w/ only a bridge pickup?


----------



## zw470 (Aug 9, 2021)

"Natural masked" binding...












E6DB2BFB-3FE7-4903-83DE-220DB1D4FC57



__ zw470
__ Aug 9, 2021






Double-whammy when it's paired with traditional binding...












782D52BA-584F-4543-91AA-46CBE4136B1E



__ zw470
__ Aug 9, 2021


----------



## jahosy (Aug 9, 2021)

'Pearloid' fretboard inlays. I've the Jackson Wildcard SL27 EX, absolute beauty and excellent built quality, BUT the pearloid 12th fret shark inlay is just plain bad and cheap up close. I'd rather no inlay, or two small pirahnah fins located at the high and low E position on the 12th. 

Even the pearloid numeric fretboard inlays of the Schecter Mach 7 looks cheap unfortunately.


----------



## SCJR (Aug 9, 2021)

Interesting thread.

I actually find matte finishes to look cheap. And I have a guitar with a matte finish that I love but I can't shake the association with the crappy inch-thick paint jobs on the low-end Dean electrics they used to push at the guitar shop I took lessons at as a kid.

I do like an Aristides with a matte finish, though.


----------



## Wucan (Aug 10, 2021)

TheBloodstained said:


> I'm probably going to step on a lot of toes here, but here goes...
> 
> Most Fender instruments (I type "most" because there is exceptions!) looks really cheap to me. I think it's down to personal preferences. I always thought that they made poor color choises/combinations.
> Also, chrome hardware is often seen on budget guitars too, and so many (if not all?) Fenders use chrome hardware, so...
> ...



You're right, after all Fender is the OG of cutting corners to stretch out the bottom line as far as possible. If you want something with modern specs like locking tuners or SS frets you're already in EBMM/Suhr range anyways... they're in the business of rehashing the same shit over and over, for the most part.

I still buy their guitars, though, because no one competes with them in the 24" arena and occasionally they'll release cool unusual guitars. Squiers have also gotten very nice despite their price, and they occasionally have better fit/finish than Fenders.


----------



## Estilo (Aug 10, 2021)

Estilo said:


> - Nickel alloy frets. Sorry, it's 2021. Schecter has definitely ruined it on this one with their stainless steel fret offerings at their prices. It can be done. Paul Reed Smith's defence of his use of nickel alloy frets is major cringe (it's a 9 year old video though).
> - Incidental to that, small frets. Nothing positive about them unless you slide a lot. Combined with the nickel alloy part, small, short nickel alloy frets are a scam.
> - No brand parts on guitars of adequately high prices. Don't mean to bash but a brand called Soloking (cringe!) has been making the rounds where I live. They're about $300-400, which isn't a lot but come with no-name pickups, bridges and tuners, nickel alloy frets and they promote a ton the qualitative aspects such as superior quality wood, full-sized trem block etc which difficult to assess until months after buying. It's not a lot of money but given how better-established offerings such as the Cort G300 or Schecters and Yamahas are just $100-150 more, just screams to me that a bulk of the price tag is in profit margins.



Welp, this sure aged well. Turns out the very brand I singled out has an interesting value proposition - STAINLESS STEEL frets, double binding and spoke wheel truss rod adjustment T-style all for USD 267 at current rates (https://www.instagram.com/p/CSWxQwPl0r8/). That's about as cheap as I've seen for a brand new guitar with SS frets. Still falls short on the other aspects but the above themselves make up for them me thinks. I've just gotten an old stock Gary Holt Schecter V, but damn if they release an S-style version I might just pull the trigger.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 10, 2021)

Estilo said:


> Welp, this sure aged well. Turns out the very brand I singled out has an interesting value proposition - STAINLESS STEEL frets, double binding and spoke wheel truss rod adjustment T-style all for USD 267 at current rates (https://www.instagram.com/p/CSWxQwPl0r8/). That's about as cheap as I've seen for a brand new guitar with SS frets. Still falls short on the other aspects but the above themselves make up for them me thinks. I've just gotten an old stock Gary Holt Schecter V, but damn if they release an S-style version I might just pull the trigger.



https://www.thomannmusic.com/harley_benton_fusion_iii_hh_eb_bk.htm

A bit more, but this one is 250>300 (regular or B-Stock) with a trem, humbuckers and locking tuners. Spoke wheel too, and not-terrible neck joint. Add 100$ for flamed maple veneer and roasted maple neck.

I'll say I'm not necessarily convinced of the quality of the stainless steel on those (or the quality of anything, really). Never tried, and put all those specs in a package at that price...it may be good, but it sure _screams _cheap indeed.


----------



## Estilo (Aug 10, 2021)

mbardu said:


> https://www.thomannmusic.com/harley_benton_fusion_iii_hh_eb_bk.htm
> 
> A bit more, but this one is 250>300 (regular or B-Stock) with a trem, humbuckers and locking tuners. Spoke wheel too, and not-terrible neck joint. Add 100$ for flamed maple veneer and roasted maple neck.
> 
> I'll say I'm not necessarily convinced of the quality of the stainless steel on those (or the quality of anything, really). Never tried, and put all those specs in a package at that price...it may be good, but it sure _screams _cheap indeed.



Oh yeah, that Soloking one comes with roasted maple neck too. It was about the only proposition of the whole line prior to this update with ss frets. 

I agree though there's no way the ss frets on those should be compared to say Schecter's, but I don't mind low-priced stuff that needs work rather than outright rip-offs. They can even be mod platforms in due course.


----------



## Celtic Frosted Flakes (Aug 10, 2021)

(White) fretboard binding on a rosewood fretboard screams cheap IMO.


----------



## gclef (Aug 10, 2021)

Jatoba fretboards. 

The color looks cheap


----------



## dspellman (Aug 10, 2021)

mikeymike said:


> Considering the "large sample size" you have, I highly doubt you have actually inspected every single square inch of fretboard for cracks. Ebony cracks if you look at it wrong. It's a terrible wood for fingerboards



I'm aware of the propensity of ebony to crack. But it doesn't necessarily do so. 

I change strings often on my guitars, and I've been over every single square inch of fretboard on most of my guitars within a three month rotation, and they get used a lot. So far so good. Guitar brands include Gibson (nothing newer than 2009, many are '70's), Carvin (ebony was their default roughly forever), Moonstone (custom builder in California's gold country) and even Agile (the AL-3XXX series all sport ebony fretboards). 

The newest Carvin is from about 2006, with the rest constructed in the late '80's and early '90's. Gibsons run back into the '60's (there's a '49 ES-175, but that's got a well-furrowed rosewood f/b), with three mid-fifties. The '39 is an Epiphone Emperor archtop that was refinished in french polish back in the late '60's. The Moonstones are all from the '70's. It'll be interesting watching the Agiles; they were all relatively cheap (save one), all Korean. We'll see how they do going forward. 

A lot of my guitars were (obviously) purchased used, most have had time to settle in, and the necks don't move around a lot. A few of the Gibsons have multi-piece laminated maple necks (you'll find these on the highest-end archtops, on the '78 25/50, on the '70's L5-S. Most are mahogany, one is a maybe-single-piece maple neck with an ebony fretboard (L6-S in black). I think the stability of the neck itself might have a lot to do with whether the fretboard is unstable. The Moonstones all have multi-piece necks (maple, walnut) as well. The Carvins are a mixed bag, some with mahogany, some with koa, hard rock maple. Carvin, in the late '80's, had some of the best wood of any guitar manufacturer. They promised action "as low as 1/16th" at the 24th fret, with no buzzing frets," and they delivered. And it stayed that way.


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Aug 10, 2021)

Here's a couple of things that definitely scream cheap

-Ugly figuring
-Poor staining
-Hard-edged burst that goes too far into the body


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 10, 2021)

^Thats bloody terrible.......


----------



## Señor Voorhees (Aug 10, 2021)

In this day and age, the only thing that screams out "cheap" is truly bad cheese grater fretwork. I recently obtained a walmart special "starcaster" and it *is* a cheap guitar, but feels/sounds no better or worse than other mid-high end guitars I've owned.

I guess if it's pre-judging a guitar as cheap, then just generic black strats scream out cheap to me. Which is why it's good to play a guitar before buying it. Some of the actually cheapest guitars have been great in my experience. A $70 used Ibanez RG, a $200 Chibson, and the beforementioned starcaster are all great feeling/playing guitars in my stable. Best part about all 3 of them is that they're all financially worthless, so reselling is a waste so no selling something I'll regret later on down the line like I did with my LP standard and Vader.


----------



## mbardu (Aug 10, 2021)

dspellman said:


> I'm aware of the propensity of ebony to crack. But it doesn't necessarily do so.
> 
> I change strings often on my guitars, and I've been over every single square inch of fretboard on most of my guitars within a three month rotation, and they get used a lot. So far so good. Guitar brands include Gibson (nothing newer than 2009, many are '70's), Carvin (ebony was their default roughly forever), Moonstone (custom builder in California's gold country) and even Agile (the AL-3XXX series all sport ebony fretboards).
> 
> ...



I've probably owned and setup a hundred guitars with ebony at this point, and I've seen one guitar with an ebony crack. Living in both dry and humid climates. 
The" problem" is overblown IMO.


----------



## Matt08642 (Aug 10, 2021)

This doesn't happen much anymore due to the availability of Floyd Rose 1000 and Special series for inexpensive guitars, but back in the day when the trem base plate was a trapezoid shape, you were in for a _bad_ time.












This is the ultimate "screams cheap" thing from the past lol.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 10, 2021)

Matt08642 said:


> This doesn't happen much anymore due to the availability of Floyd Rose 1000 and Special series for inexpensive guitars, but back in the day when the trem base plate was a trapezoid shape, you were in for a _bad_ time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## HeHasTheJazzHands (Aug 10, 2021)

Matt08642 said:


> This doesn't happen much anymore due to the availability of Floyd Rose 1000 and Special series for inexpensive guitars, but back in the day when the trem base plate was a trapezoid shape, you were in for a _bad_ time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Shit, don't know how I missed that.  People complain about the FR specials, but at least the baseplates were steel. These were *all* pot metal, and good luck replacing these with afermarkets. Your only option is the Schaller Floyd Rose IIRC, and even then it's a tossup if that would fit or not.

I pretty much avoid guitars if they have these bridges.


----------



## sunnyd88 (Aug 23, 2021)

Speaking of expensive things that look extremely cheap, ebony that is as brown as dry rosewood. That ebony cannot be cheap, I'm guessing manufacturers are charging the same amount for this brown ebony as they were for black ebony back in the day, if not more. It's time to move on the black richlite. It's the same price as ebony with the same characteristics except it will always be jet black and requires no maintenance since it doesn't have shrinkage. Plus richlite is sustainable.


----------



## eoinbmorg (Aug 23, 2021)

Matt08642 said:


> This doesn't happen much anymore due to the availability of Floyd Rose 1000 and Special series for inexpensive guitars, but back in the day when the trem base plate was a trapezoid shape, you were in for a _bad_ time.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I thought this was just me...

For me it's non-tiltback headstocks. Because given a little relief in the neck the headstock seems to point "forward" rather than just parallel. And without a locking nut you also need a string retainer tree (or two!) which is gross.


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 23, 2021)

eoinbmorg said:


> I thought this was just me...
> 
> For me it's non-tiltback headstocks. Because given a little relief in the neck the headstock seems to point "forward" rather than just parallel. And without a locking nut you also need a string retainer tree (or two!) which is gross.



Or staggered-height tuners...sort of.


----------



## JDinSC (Aug 23, 2021)

Honestly, the biggest thing that gets me and screams "cheap" is a non-rolled fingerboard edge or any harsh/sharp edge. The feel just throws me off, even if it is a high end/boutique guitar. I don't care if it's made of unobtanium if the damn thing doesn't feel good in my hands.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 24, 2021)

Jackson guitars in general but especially the Rhoads Vs.


----------



## noise in my mind (Aug 24, 2021)

I'm pretty cheap...


----------



## eaeolian (Aug 24, 2021)

Blade switches on two-hum guitars.

Rosewood that's almost blonde.

Six-screw Strat trems. Stop it, Fender!


----------



## eaeolian (Aug 24, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Jackson guitars in general but especially the Rhoads Vs.



Does not compute.


----------



## technomancer (Aug 24, 2021)

eaeolian said:


> Blade switches on two-hum guitars.
> 
> Rosewood that's almost blonde.
> 
> Six-screw Strat trems. Stop it, Fender!



One out of 3 ain't bad


----------



## Turd Ferguson (Aug 24, 2021)

My wife. She screams at me all the time that I'm cheap.

(I'm not)


----------



## dmlinger (Aug 24, 2021)

Drunk redneck guitars. You know what I'm talking about...guitars with wood burns, license plates, bottle caps, etc. fastened to them. There are actual companies that makes these.


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 25, 2021)

Stamped metal parts. For example,, the ubiquitous strat-style output jack or the myriad of bridges where the back edge is just rolled up. You find these on very very expensive guitars, but it always screams "cheap" to me.

Interestingly, as "stratty" as it is, the output jack in the PRS Silver Sky appears to be cast. Even if it's not, it LOOKS like it is, and I'm more accepting of it.


----------



## mmr007 (Aug 25, 2021)

eaeolian said:


> Six-screw Strat trems. Stop it, Fender!



Does not compute.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Aug 25, 2021)

eaeolian said:


> Six-screw Strat trems. Stop it, Fender!



I used to think this. Then I got a Gotoh GE101TS, which is awesome and ironically, not all that expensive.


----------



## gnoll (Aug 25, 2021)

When guitars that are supposed to have mother of pearl inlays don't have mother of pearl inlays. Les Paul Customs, Jacksons.


----------



## ZXIIIT (Aug 25, 2021)




----------



## works0fheart (Aug 25, 2021)

This thread has made me realize that things I thought were normal are considered cheap by many. 

Weird feeling. 

It's like I just sent my guitar to elementary school for the first time and the other kids made fun of it because of the way I dressed it.


----------



## Winspear (Aug 25, 2021)

spudmunkey said:


> Stamped metal parts. For example,, the ubiquitous strat-style output jack or the myriad of bridges where the back edge is just rolled up. You find these on very very expensive guitars, but it always screams "cheap" to me.
> 
> Interestingly, as "stratty" as it is, the output jack in the PRS Silver Sky appears to be cast. Even if it's not, it LOOKS like it is, and I'm more accepting of it.



Wow, you're right - that does look so much better! I really can't stand those parts either. Honestly I can answer this thread with 'almost everything' these days 
Wood screws and more than 2 or at a push 3 colours (on e_verything in sight_, excluding only the fretwire) are big ones for me haha


----------



## Dooky (Aug 25, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Jackson guitars in general but especially the Rhoads Vs.


Obvious troll is obvious.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 25, 2021)

Dooky said:


> Obvious troll is obvious.



I don't know, depending on when and where you started playing, for a pretty significant amount of time, Jackson was mostly stocking stores with cheaper stuff, and we're starting to see that again as the USA line is getting harder to find.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 26, 2021)

Dooky said:


> Obvious troll is obvious.


Nah, the more high end RVs often look just like the cheapies, only with better specs so just looking at them you can't tell which is which. Also, I remember seeing that shape ALL the time at flea markets selling 100-300 dollar guitars and if you didn't know better (or read the brand on the headstock) you'd think it was a Jackson.

Now that I think about it all their shapes looked that way to me, especially when they were doing paint jobs like graveyards and shit. Jacksons all remind me of flea market specials regardless of their price point


----------



## Andromalia (Aug 26, 2021)

Non-black/white solid colors guitars without binding. I do know some really good guitars are made that way (starting with a ton of ESPs in the 80es) but the looks really scream "made by Cort in a sweat shop somewhere".

Bonus stage: 1:1 strat copies from brands I never heard about.


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 26, 2021)

No matter how expensive or well-done they are: airbrush paint jobs.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 26, 2021)

Even 10k dollar USA Jackson custom shops look cheap as shit to me. Jackson has never scratched any sort of itch or caused any sort of gas for me. I'm sure they're fine, but I've played so many bargain barrel, guitar center rack for 3 years Jacksons that I dont ever want to see a Jackson logo on my headstock ever again.


----------



## gnoll (Aug 26, 2021)

I don't really get how people can think the expensive Jacksons look cheap. The mother of pearl sharkies are dead giveaways that they're expensive guitars! They may not be good, but they're expensive and they look it too. None of the cheap crap has mother of pearl, not even the new Japanese stuff!


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Aug 26, 2021)

gnoll said:


> I don't really get how people can think the expensive Jacksons look cheap. The mother of pearl sharkies are dead giveaways that they're expensive guitars! They may not be good, but they're expensive and they look it too. None of the cheap crap has mother of pearl, not even the new Japanese stuff!



Because most folks can't tell the difference between MoP or Mother of Toiletseat at first glance anyway.


----------



## protest (Aug 26, 2021)

This thread is an interesting view into how people think differently about the same situations.

Personally, I look at clear imitations of Fender, Gibson, Jackson etc. and think that those are cheap ripoffs. I don't then equate the brands they're ripping off as being cheap. 

There's thousands of knock off Rolex's because of how successful Rolex has been, but I doubt people would say a Rolex looks cheap because there's a bunch of Submariner copies in JC Penny.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 26, 2021)

gnoll said:


> I don't really get how people can think the expensive Jacksons look cheap. The mother of pearl sharkies are dead giveaways that they're expensive guitars! They may not be good, but they're expensive and they look it too. None of the cheap crap has mother of pearl, not even the new Japanese stuff!



Jackson is a boring as fuck company and their designs always look like Chinese knockoffs. Even when I know it's a "high end" model, it just doesn't look like anything.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 26, 2021)

Oh wow same black bodied super strat with a bolt on maple neck and shark fin inlays you've seen in every mom and pop shop on the bottom rack every time, fret sprout and rusty licensed floyd to boot!


----------



## gnoll (Aug 26, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Jackson is a boring as fuck company and their designs always look like Chinese knockoffs. Even when I know it's a "high end" model, it just doesn't look like anything.



But they're like, the original metal guitar... If the designs aren't as out there as some of the stuff that exists today, that's not exactly surprising is it? And I don't see what that has to do with price or looking cheap.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 26, 2021)

gnoll said:


> But they're like, the original metal guitar... If the designs aren't as out there as some of the stuff that exists today, that's not exactly surprising is it? And I don't see what that has to do with price or looking cheap.


They look like flea market specials. There's nothing special to them and for the prices they want I'd rather go elsewhere. I'd like a guitar I'd want to look at.


----------



## gnoll (Aug 26, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> They look like flea market specials. There's nothing special to them and for the prices they want I'd rather go elsewhere. I'd like a guitar I'd want to look at.



That's fine if you don't like them, I don't buy new Jacksons either, the whole flea market/knockoff thing just is weird to me. Seems like the same could be said about Les Pauls or something then.

But then lots of people said stuff like pickup rings make guitars look cheap so eh, maybe it's just me...


----------



## xzacx (Aug 26, 2021)

gnoll said:


> That's fine if you don't like them, I don't buy new Jacksons either, the whole flea market/knockoff thing just is weird to me. Seems like the same could be said about Les Pauls or something then.
> 
> But then lots of people said stuff like pickup rings make guitars look cheap so eh, maybe it's just me...



Maybe it's just a generational thing. Jackson has plenty of faults, but I still remember it as a brand that only made customs for a long time, that brands like ESP and Carvin were ripping off and got sued for. Sure they make cheap crap too, but that's not the stuff they're known for and that countless metal bands played on classic albums. I guess if you've only been exposed to low-end stuff at chain stores, it makes more sense.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 26, 2021)

xzacx said:


> Maybe it's just a generational thing. Jackson has plenty of faults, but I still remember it as a brand that only made customs for a long time, that brands like ESP and Carvin were ripping off and got sued for. Sure they make cheap crap too, but that's not the stuff they're known for and that countless metal bands played on classic albums. I guess if you've only been exposed to low-end stuff at chain stores, it makes more sense.


Nah..they just look cheap. That's the long and short of it.

The topic is "what screams cheap" and to me it's the way Jacksons look, regardless of their pricepoint. I don't automatically associate them with their cheap models, I'm saying their models all look cheap. Especially on a Rhoads which just looks like a toy


----------



## gnoll (Aug 26, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Nah..they just look cheap. That's the long and short of it.
> 
> The topic is "what screams cheap" and to me it's the way Jacksons look, regardless of their pricepoint. I don't automatically associate them with their cheap models, I'm saying their models all look cheap. Especially on a Rhoads which just looks like a toy



Does that include copies like ESP SV's and M-II's then? Those look pretty similar but even more plain with dot inlays, no binding etc.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 26, 2021)

gnoll said:


> Does that include copies like ESP SV's and M-II's then? Those look pretty similar but even more plain with dot inlays, no binding etc.


Nope. Only applies to Jacksons for some reason


----------



## TheBolivianSniper (Aug 26, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Nope. Only applies to Jacksons for some reason


----------



## Demiurge (Aug 27, 2021)

works0fheart said:


> This thread has made me realize that things I thought were normal are considered cheap by many.
> 
> Weird feeling.
> 
> It's like I just sent my guitar to elementary school for the first time and the other kids made fun of it because of the way I dressed it.



I think it's a matter that when the more accessible something is, the tighter the gatekeeping gets. A guitar that has nice features and plays well can be had affordably, so we have to hear from the people who spend the big bucks how it's not good enough.


----------



## works0fheart (Aug 28, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Nah..they just look cheap. That's the long and short of it.
> 
> The topic is "what screams cheap" and to me it's the way Jacksons look, regardless of their pricepoint. I don't automatically associate them with their cheap models, I'm saying their models all look cheap. *Especially on a Rhoads which just looks like a toy*



From now on... We are enemies. You and I.







Like.... Just how?













I mean, to each their own, but seems like a hot take to me.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 28, 2021)

works0fheart said:


> From now on... We are enemies. You and I.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They look like shit. Simple


----------



## sirbuh (Aug 28, 2021)

Step away for a few weeks and come back to find some epic level trolling. Bravo.


----------



## works0fheart (Aug 28, 2021)

It's 2021 and people still think that trolling on forums is funny.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 28, 2021)

Okay I'm okay with most Jackson's I think, not really my thing, but its specifically a black bodied, rosewood clad maple neck with the sharp headstock that i've seen over and over a billion times, does just nothing for me.

I realized I can also say the same thing about most RG's, I grew up with a black Gio, actually pretty decent guitar, so whenever I see a black prestige or J custom I about shit at the price tag.


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 28, 2021)

TheBolivianSniper said:


> View attachment 97177


I'm super super aware of this guitar and how cheap it is, and suprisingly my eye still doesn't see "cheap".


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 28, 2021)

Anyways enough about Jacksons. That's more attention than they deserve.

Ya know what screams cheap..that skull hardware shit you see all the time on websites


----------



## MrBouleDeBowling (Aug 28, 2021)

Chrome hardware


----------



## spudmunkey (Aug 28, 2021)

AlexCorriveau said:


> Chrome hardware



Alternatively, black hardware that doesn't all match. Polished black knobs (*giggles*) and matte black bridge or Sperzel tuners, etc.


----------



## asopala (Aug 28, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Anyways enough about Jacksons. That's more attention than they deserve.
> 
> Ya know what screams cheap..that skull hardware shit you see all the time on websites



Ehh, it depends. If it's part of a band's aesthetic, I'm all for it. Does get a bit tacky outside of the purposes of live performance, though, but honestly, I'm not gonna be the arbiter of taste if they rock it. There's honestly times I've seen bands that have a "gimmick" or aesthetic that play just straight-up black guitars, and I think it would enhance the performance to get creative like this--though I've seen enough bikers in the midwest to be turned off by this aesthetically, but that's just me.

And looking at GuitarHeads' website, you'd have to be committed, cause every pewter bit is like 40 bucks apiece!


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 28, 2021)

asopala said:


> Ehh, it depends. If it's part of a band's aesthetic, I'm all for it. Does get a bit tacky outside of the purposes of live performance, though, but honestly, I'm not gonna be the arbiter of taste if they rock it. There's honestly times I've seen bands that have a "gimmick" or aesthetic that play just straight-up black guitars, and I think it would enhance the performance to get creative like this--though I've seen enough bikers in the midwest to be turned off by this aesthetically, but that's just me.
> 
> And looking at GuitarHeads' website, you'd have to be committed, cause every pewter bit is like 40 bucks apiece!


No....just no. Cheap looking


----------



## Viginez (Aug 29, 2021)

this logo screams cheap






they should always use mop or fully colored, like old mij


----------



## Halffarmer (Aug 29, 2021)

Didn't read the whole thread and i'm sure someone else said it allready but years ago i seriously thought that scarf joint headstocks are the worst and thought every Jackson, ESP, etc that had them must be bad guitars.

Fast forward to 2019 and especially the start of corona in 2020 i somehow really got into 80s metal and had to have a adequate guitar.
Finally got myself a Japan made Jackson SL3 Pro from 2005 for really cheap and couldn't care less about the neck joint.
It even has the trapezoid tremolo some mentioned before but an original takeuchi one and i have to say, it's not even bad (still going to change it when i decided if i want to go black or gold hardware).
Fun guitar i probably wouldn't have touched when i was younger because of snobbery.

Weird how opinions change over time (same thing goes for "tonewoods" but i don't want to derail the thread
I think for me it comes down to believing to many things i read on the internet or in magazines instead of trying for myself.


----------



## KentBrockman (Aug 29, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Anyways enough about Jacksons. That's more attention than they deserve.
> 
> Ya know what screams cheap..that skull hardware shit you see all the time on websites



No one above the age of 13 should have skulls on their guitars or clothes.


----------



## TheBolivianSniper (Aug 29, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> I'm super super aware of this guitar and how cheap it is, and suprisingly my eye still doesn't see "cheap".



Up close you can tell it's absolute garbage, the finish on the neck is just trash, the pickups aren't aligned with the strings but that's probably a kahler adjustment thing, there's no truss rod cover and the input jack is all sorts of weird. Also the inlays are pretty fucked so

but if you don't look at it while you're playing it's great, super thin fast neck that's not too flat or wide, it feels oddly similar to an ESP neck but a little more narrow


----------



## T00DEEPBLUE (Aug 29, 2021)

Viginez said:


> this logo screams cheap



I think you have the wrong logo buddy. This is the one you want:






No need to thank me


----------



## CanserDYI (Aug 29, 2021)

T00DEEPBLUE said:


> I think you have the wrong logo buddy. This is the one you want:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well that's the thing, this logo has never been on ANYTHING cheap. Jackson however ....


----------



## T00DEEPBLUE (Aug 29, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Well that's the thing, this logo has never been on ANYTHING cheap. Jackson however ....


I think it's a good thing that they put it on their cheap guitars as well as their expensive ones. Reduces brand snobbery. Something more weirdos on forums can benefit without.

Meanwhile, for such relatively expensive guitars ESP's are, they'd think they'd put a better logo on some of them than that thing. Looks like a logo you'd see on a piece of Chinese tat from poundland.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 29, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Well that's the thing, this logo has never been on ANYTHING cheap. Jackson however ....


The irony being that ESP makes absolute works of art and Jackson pumps out flea markets fire fuel.


----------



## mmr007 (Aug 29, 2021)

As a guy whose avatar is holding a fucking Jackson with skull stickers on it I am heading over to the banjo forum to see what they're bitching about with regards to each others instruments. Should be interesting. Will update as needed.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Aug 30, 2021)

mmr007 said:


> As a guy whose avatar is holding a fucking Jackson with skull stickers on it I am heading over to the banjo forum to see what they're bitching about with regards to each others instruments. Should be interesting. Will update as needed.


 Godspeed, you magnificent beast


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Sep 3, 2021)

Well, Charvel/Jackson started out as cheap-looking frankenstrat/superstrat pieces with rosewood boards and dot inlays. Totally belonged in the smelly Sunset Strip C-list band era. Then we saw those cheap-looking rosewood board import Jacksons played by seminal 90s death metal/ thrash bands. Cheap-looking but totally work-horse solid guitars. Jackson just stayed as a legacy brand but ESP kept pushing the envelope. You can even see the disparity of options between them at ALL pricepoints. You can get a well spec'd out USA "semi" Custom ESP for 4k. But at that price, you get a black Jackson with plastic pickup rings. Top dog LTDs have stainless frets and binding while recent MIJ 2K Jacksons don't even have neck binding. 

I have seen the original Jackson Concorde in an exhibit though, and that one was a work of art.


----------



## CapinCripes (Sep 3, 2021)

I'm beginning to wonder how many of you guys have actually held a USA Jackson. They make their trem covers out of brushed aluminum ffs.


----------



## laxu (Sep 3, 2021)

HeHasTheJazzHands said:


> Here's a couple of things that definitely scream cheap
> 
> -Ugly figuring
> -Poor staining
> -Hard-edged burst that goes too far into the body



This top still has better figuring than a Strandberg Boden 8 LE quilt top I had. Otherwise I totally agree, that's a seriously poorly done burst with a very inconsistent top.

With bursts the quality of the blending is super important. I feel for example Kiesel often has too hard lined and thin bursts that don't blend together with the colors underneath in a good way. Many other brands' similar finishes look much more gradual.


----------



## GunpointMetal (Sep 3, 2021)

Gold hardware, bright white plastic or shiny black plastic nut, really poorly matched flame/quilt, six-screw "vintage" trem bridges, gold hardware, plastic output jack mounting plate, gold hardware.
Did I mention gold hardware? That shit looks gaudy AF on pretty much everything.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Sep 3, 2021)

CapinCripes said:


> I'm beginning to wonder how many of you guys have actually held a USA Jackson. They make their trem covers out of brushed aluminum ffs.


What's with Jackson fans trying to act like it's some sort of privilege to experience a high end Jackson?
If everything below USA level looks like a toy then that says a lot. And yes I have personally seen USA Jacksons. They still look like toys to me and I can't take them seriously. 

"The people who say that obviously haven't played real/custom/USA/blahblah Jacksons"

I've been in awe of lots of guitars, cheap and expensive from brands I both like and paid no prior attention to. I just went to GC today and saw some cool stuff and I paid close attention to the Jacksons this time and my feelings still hold. They just come off as cheap toys to me.

Speaking of cheap, the Dean Kerry King signed. SO not worth the money. Holy fuck does that thing feel like a prop guitar or something


----------



## c7spheres (Sep 3, 2021)

- ESP 12th fret inlays. The difference between a lifelong repeat customer and a window shopper. - 

12th fret inlays should look good. If in doubt, leave it blank.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 3, 2021)

c7spheres said:


> - ESP 12th fret inlays. The difference between a lifelong repeat customer and a window shopper. -
> 
> 12th fret inlays should look good. If in doubt, leave it blank.


I totally used to feel this same way. Now I'm pissed my LTD doesnt have it, even though it was on the original MH1007 lol mine shows up without it and I'm relieved. A year goes by and I like the inlay now, and wish mine had it.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Sep 3, 2021)

CapinCripes said:


> I'm beginning to wonder how many of you guys have actually held a USA Jackson. They make their trem covers out of brushed aluminum ffs.



I have 2 custom shop Soloists. One even has sterling silver logo and shark inlays. Im a Jackson fan, but I am still kinda bummed about how the brand cuts corners in a lot of ways.


----------



## Themistocles (Sep 3, 2021)

high fizzy sounds without clarity ... a lack of solid tactile feel and little annoying details that kill the overall experience of playing with a thousand tiny cuts. Basically everything has to be competent to achieve competency.


----------



## laxu (Sep 4, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> I have 2 custom shop Soloists. One even has sterling silver logo and shark inlays. Im a Jackson fan, but I am still kinda bummed about how the brand cuts corners in a lot of ways.



What kind of corner cutting do they do? Besides making them pointy!  

I haven't played a Jackson in probably more than a decade because they are not that well represented here compared to ESP.


----------



## bzhang9 (Sep 4, 2021)

Jackson has fallen way behind Ibanez and ESP... even schecter...


----------



## Themistocles (Sep 4, 2021)

bzhang9 said:


> Jackson has fallen way behind Ibanez and ESP... even schecter...


That said, if you know what you are doing the Jackson JS22 line can really deliver bang for the buck. Love wacking away at my modded JS22q-7 everything is solid and there were some annoying things about the electronics but I sorted it out. Plays nice, cheap thrills so I dont put wear and tear on my 2 other 7's.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 4, 2021)

laxu said:


> What kind of corner cutting do they do? Besides making them pointy!
> 
> I haven't played a Jackson in probably more than a decade because they are not that well represented here compared to ESP.


This is semi unrelated to the thread, but Jackson likes to take frets off boards and throw them on other peoples! Ask the guys who got 23 frets and 25 frets


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Sep 4, 2021)

Maybe lat to the party, but here's my 2cents:
- misaligned parts, routing marks, sharp fret edges, not rounded fretboard edges, cheap and shitty pickups, cheap hardware
- chrome/silver hardware. period.
- cosmo black hardware
- most of the golden hardware
- brown yucky "rosewood" fretboards - especially cheap looking with black, white or blue body. Like a poo in the pool, toilet or whatever
- poorly figured maple top/veneer - why bother, just give it a nice solid color
- 1 ply white pickguard on strat style guitars
- most matte/satin finishes (like on Ibanez AZ or some Charvel models - coupled with chrome hardware to look like a 100$ practice guitar...)
- "vintage" tuners - either Strat or Les Paul or grover...
- overcomplicated fretboard inlays done with visible yucky outlines filled with the glue
- sticky wipe-on poly kinda neck finish
- excess of "abalone" etc...
- cheap looking low res cringe'y printed graphics on the body...


----------



## mastapimp (Sep 7, 2021)

These:





And any inlay that has the model number or brand name written into it.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 7, 2021)

mastapimp said:


> These:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


God those are fucking awful, Dean in general kinda all look like this to me.


----------



## budda (Sep 7, 2021)

Wolfhorsky said:


> Maybe lat to the party, but here's my 2cents:
> - misaligned parts, routing marks, sharp fret edges, not rounded fretboard edges, cheap and shitty pickups, cheap hardware
> - chrome/silver hardware. period.
> - cosmo black hardware
> ...



Given this list, what do you think doesnt look cheap/have you bought? I think most production guitars have at least 1 thing on this list lol.


----------



## Blytheryn (Sep 7, 2021)

Dot inlays. Rosewood. Stratocasters.


----------



## dreamspace (Sep 8, 2021)

- Black vintage style Stratocaster hardware.
- No binding on fretboard with sharkfin, trapezoid, etc. inlays 
- "faded" finishes, like Gibson uses (i.e no clear coat) 
- Active pickups with (guitar) brand name on them 
- Truss rod cover on Strats/Teles


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Sep 8, 2021)

budda said:


> Given this list, what do you think doesnt look cheap/have you bought? I think most production guitars have at least 1 thing on this list lol.


Recently Ibanez Genesis with maple boards.
And above list is the reason that I heavily modify my production guitars and also I have few custom ones.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 8, 2021)

budda said:


> Given this list, what do you think doesnt look cheap/have you bought? I think most production guitars have at least 1 thing on this list lol.


Yeah he said chrome hardware, black hardware, and golden hardware so I'm convinced this dude is a bongo drummer in disguise and thinks all guitars look cheap.


----------



## TheBolivianSniper (Sep 8, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Yeah he said chrome hardware, black hardware, and golden hardware so I'm convinced this dude is a bongo drummer in disguise and thinks all guitars look cheap.



I have black chrome hardware (minus tuners since they didn't have black chrome in stock, I just gotta change the buttons sometime) on my Avenger and that guitar literally looks like a custom. It has a lot of steel floyd parts too so with that, the unique hardware, and the insane sparkle finish, I personally think it looks like a >2k guitar rather than a <1k one.


----------



## Wolfhorsky (Sep 8, 2021)

CanserDYI said:


> Yeah he said chrome hardware, black hardware, and golden hardware so I'm convinced this dude is a bongo drummer in disguise and thinks all guitars look cheap.


Please read carefully. I wrote: *cosmo* black hardware. Black hardware is the way to go imho.
Cosmo black looks meh (to me) and wears off pretty quickly.





This is black hardware:


----------



## dreamspace (Sep 8, 2021)

El-cheapo, POV:

You walk into a guitar store, grab this black/red/sunburst Stratocaster knock-off from the wall, and sit down to play a few licks. 

Instantly, you feel some fret-sprout when gliding your hand down the neck. The backside of the neck is neither smooth glossy, or raw feeling, but somewhere in-between - a rough and hard feeling protective coat. 

The strings feel hard and stiff, like a set of 0.11s that came with the guitar straight out of the factory - but somehow the guitar is actually stringed with a set of 0.09-42s. Action is ok for playing cowboy chords, but gradually increases as you move up the fretboard. Even basic blues licks in the 12-15th fret sweetspot feels like a hassle - the skinny and low frets aren't helping, either. 

You strum a G cord - it's out of tune. You tune each string, and hear the occasional pings and pops. Certain times the tuning doesn't seem to do jack sh!t, until the string suddenly gives in, and moves a semi-tone; the nut looks like a white rectangular, with slots cut way too small. After 2 mins the guitar is somewhat in tune. 

The saddles are somehow already adjusted all the way down, despite the horrendous action - and the screws are chafing your hand.

After plugging into some 15w modeler on the floor, you're met with some good ol' hum and static noise. Oh well - time to hit that G again. Bridge pickup sounds shrill, mid is forgettable, and the neck is kind of thin yet wooly and undefined.

You switch over to distortion, which results in whining feedback. Lead playing sounds like shit - notes are fretting out all over the place, and no mater how much gain you use, the sound is just weak - with with notes eventually fizzling out. After 3 mins of noodling, the guitar is yet again out of tune. One of the strings seem to get stuck to the nut. 

The whammy bar is either loose and wiggly - or fully tightened at a rather useless angle. But that doesn't really mater, because even the lightest usage will result in all strings going out of tune.

You hang the back up on the wall, and snuggle back the $149.99 price tag between the strings.


----------



## High Plains Drifter (Sep 8, 2021)

For me, the whole package just needs to fit together in an aesthetically pleasing way. A lot of things don't go together regarding hardware finish, body color, overall shape of the instrument, too many alternating wood grains either in species or stains, etc. Typically, if the wood grains and paint colors and hardware finishes all fit together and the instrument doesn't have any glaring flaws, and it's a pleasing shape... then it's all good to me. It's hard for me to nit pick on a couple little things so long as the guitar flows together well and appears to be well constructed. I try to keep an open mind when looking a guitar like "does it look cheap or is it just something that I don't really like?". 

Lotta stuff I don't care for but I'd be hard-pressed to delineate those things as cheap-looking. To be completely honest, the guitars that I see that look really cheap... are actually cheap lol. They're usually new guitars that fall below the $400 mark and generally have a glaring cheap-factor like a dry ugly fret-board, cookie-cutter colors/ designs, cheap looking pickups/ bridges/ etc or a lackluster spec-sheet ( although even within those, there are exceptions... for me at least).


----------



## park0496 (Sep 8, 2021)

these two extra screws near the nut for the trussrod covers.. hate’em lol


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Sep 9, 2021)

Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.

Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.

Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?


----------



## Dumple Stilzkin (Sep 9, 2021)

Okay I’mma take my shot. 
Gold hardware, about the only time I like it is with Les Paul customs. 
Kiesels specced put by people with bad taste (the sum of the options needs some sort of flow).
Anemic looking rosewood, my 7620 has beautiful rosewood with rich browns and reds going on.
Too much abalone, those recent BC Rich, or Schecter, and LTD models just look cheap as fawk! Does anyone actually like these?


----------



## mmr007 (Sep 9, 2021)

That fucking headstock logo....didn't know you could buy stuff at Pep Boys to dress up your LTD but...well there you are


----------



## Dumple Stilzkin (Sep 9, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.
> 
> Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.
> 
> Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?


I’ve always equated neck binding on metal guitars as being the icing on the cake. There’s something about an ebony board with mother of pearl inlays and binding that just does it for me. I’ve felt this was since before I actually got my first guitar— and still feel that way. 

I mentioned it above, but, the only guitar I like gold hardware on is a LP custom. Possibly for the same reasons you’ve mentioned.


----------



## Dumple Stilzkin (Sep 9, 2021)

mmr007 said:


> That fucking headstock logo....didn't know you could buy stuff at Pep Boys to dress up your LTD but...well there you are


100% Man, that logo is really tacky and cheap looking.


----------



## budda (Sep 9, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.
> 
> Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.
> 
> Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?



Flame-top PRS with bird inlays. Probably partially because they were $4k CAD the first time I ever saw one in person and just screamed "high end luxury instrument". Now that I've owned a few, I can confirm that .


----------



## Nag (Sep 9, 2021)

It's probably been mentioned a hundred times here already, but, the combination of centered dot inlays (especially white plastic ones) and solid color finishes. Fender loves to do that. Find me a custom shop strat worth like 4, 5 or 6 grand, if it's solid color and has the dots it'll look exactly like the starter kit strat to me.

Also dot inlays of any kind on a guitar by a brand that is/has been recognizable by using different inlays. Jackson sharkies, Ibanez sharkies, most notably. Ibanez puts dots on all their prestige guitars now, it's super sad and boring.


----------



## Captain Shoggoth (Sep 9, 2021)

one from the 2000s import Jackson catalogue days: chrome/gold hardware without black accenting; eg a shitty licensed chrome floyd with chrome fine tuners. Black hardware in general is kind of bleh for me for the same reason



DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.
> 
> Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.
> 
> Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?



ditto, but specifically for all the black/gold Gibson Customs, LP, Explorer, Flying V... yum

6 strings, short scale, all mahogany, hardtail, 22 frets, 12" radius, fat necks; don't care. They're too cool to be denied


----------



## mastapimp (Sep 9, 2021)

DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.
> 
> Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.
> 
> Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?



You can toss in the weight of a les paul as something that makes it feel "high end" to me. It just feels like it's a more solid instrument in many regards when it weighs twice as much as your other gear.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Sep 9, 2021)

S


DrakkarTyrannis said:


> Side note. I've become fascinated with the Les Paul aesthetic because it just looks high end as fuck. The body binding, the colors, the hardware, it all just screams high end even if Gibson's QC has been shady at times and that particular guitar might be one of those situations.
> 
> Something about them just personifies a premium axe and guitars with the same specs just don't hit the same notes (pardon pun) and I don't know why.
> 
> Any of you guys have that specific guitar that is the embodiment of "high end" to you and you don't even know why?



Same for those early "Les Paul" 1961 SG Customs. Those white, 3 pickup, gold hardware with a Vibrola that wont stay in tune. It just looks sharp and classy even though the construction is basically cheap and the sideways vibrola is flimsy. Saw one being played in a big band jazz setting. Sure looks expensive when you are decked out in a tux.


----------



## /wrists (Sep 9, 2021)

My opinion,

Not made in Korea, Japan, US. (Made in China, Indonesia, Mexico) - Yes, it does matter who sits behind the C&C machine and who is doing the quality assurance regardless of streamlined processes and procedures. I am extremely glad I returned my Indonesian variant of a mid range LTD (M1 Custom) and switched it for the Korean model. There is a notable difference. 

Made in Korea is a coin flip.
Rosewood
Bolt On
Gibson
Replica Floyd Rose
Uneven neck/fretboard job


Just know that $1000-$1500 guitar is most likely going to net you a mid-range guitar. Anything under that is most likely going to be garbage. (But people who've never played a $3000 Caparison or Jackson for example will never know what the difference between a $400 Dean guitar and a proper instrument plays/sounds like.)


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 9, 2021)

dreamspace said:


> El-cheapo, POV:
> 
> You walk into a guitar store, grab this black/red/sunburst Stratocaster knock-off from the wall, and sit down to play a few licks.
> 
> ...


Man, I pictured a black bodied Jackson with a rosewood unbound fretboard but bound headstock and a maple neck with a scarf joint that looks like it was made from a different wood species. Rusty licensed floyd, an input jack that scratches and sputters everytime you attempt to put a cord into it, the plastic from the pickup bobbin protector is coming up on half of it and you're fighting keeping it down as if taking it off will make you have to buy it. Its out of tune and you go to tune it, forget its a floyd and go to the fine tuners which twisting feels like it will snap the metal.


----------



## Flappydoodle (Sep 10, 2021)

"Schecter"

Yes I'm sure the custom shop is good. But man, I played a few, and actually owned one, back in the day. Baseball thick neck. God-awful cheap Floyd that never stayed in tune. Volume pots that scratched like crazy. It was just awful and the brand is forever ruined for me now.

Jackson and Ibanez have the same problem for me too. I think ESP, PRS etc are really smart for not putting their name on the "lesser" guitars. Having LTD or E-II or SE really helps to differentiate the high end stuff. There are some TERRIBLE Ibanez and Jackson guitars out there, and they have the exact same name as the premium stuff.


----------



## BusinessMan (Sep 10, 2021)

Ibanez. I know they're really overpriced, play well, and have really shitty hardware 90% of the time that you have to change out. That being said, I still want one of the new iron label models, the xiphos or iceman.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Sep 10, 2021)

Flappydoodle said:


> "Schecter"
> 
> Yes I'm sure the custom shop is good. But man, I played a few, and actually owned one, back in the day. Baseball thick neck. God-awful cheap Floyd that never stayed in tune. Volume pots that scratched like crazy. It was just awful and the brand is forever ruined for me now.
> 
> Jackson and Ibanez have the same problem for me too. I think ESP, PRS etc are really smart for not putting their name on the "lesser" guitars. Having LTD or E-II or SE really helps to differentiate the high end stuff. There are some TERRIBLE Ibanez and Jackson guitars out there, and they have the exact same name as the premium stuff.


they got rid of the baseball bat necks eons ago. The only schecter I've found with a chunkier neck as of late was an apocalypse e-7 (and it still wasn't as chunky as the early 2000s schecters). On a sliding scale of "cheap feeling", Jackson, Ibanez and Sterling are easily the most consistent offenders. Modern Schecters, LTDs, and Charvels are much more consistent and have better qc overall ime.


----------



## Seabeast2000 (Sep 10, 2021)

Flappydoodle said:


> "Schecter"
> 
> Yes I'm sure the custom shop is good. But man, I played a few, and actually owned one, back in the day. Baseball thick neck. God-awful cheap Floyd that never stayed in tune. Volume pots that scratched like crazy. It was just awful and the brand is forever ruined for me now.
> 
> Jackson and Ibanez have the same problem for me too. I think ESP, PRS etc are really smart for not putting their name on the "lesser" guitars. Having LTD or E-II or SE really helps to differentiate the high end stuff. There are some TERRIBLE Ibanez and Jackson guitars out there, and they have the exact same name as the premium stuff.



Dude I have an OG Hellraiser and that thick neck is perfect even thought it looks like Elvira and Danny Koker went into business together and subbed out a guitar line.


----------



## /wrists (Sep 11, 2021)

Flappydoodle said:


> "Schecter"
> 
> Yes I'm sure the custom shop is good. But man, I played a few, and actually owned one, back in the day. Baseball thick neck. God-awful cheap Floyd that never stayed in tune. Volume pots that scratched like crazy. It was just awful and the brand is forever ruined for me now.
> 
> Jackson and Ibanez have the same problem for me too. I think ESP, PRS etc are really smart for not putting their name on the "lesser" guitars. Having LTD or E-II or SE really helps to differentiate the high end stuff. There are some TERRIBLE Ibanez and Jackson guitars out there, and they have the exact same name as the premium stuff.



They've gotten increasingly better over the years, but you're generally correct. I used to be a massive connoisseur of Schecter guitars and most of their guitars are a straight bargain for what you get. I've owned around 20 Schecters for a few years and only played them. Now, I only have a Silver Mountain, but there are some workmanship defects. 

Anything that doesn't MSRP for $1000 in Schecter's department isn't playable for me. They used to be an aftermarket pick up company for Fender I think. 

Modern Jackson and Ibanez is garbage. The made in japan and US stuff now are okay, but massively overpriced. $2500-3000 for a MIJ when it used to be around $1000. Ibanez Prestiges are also whatever to me, although I should've kept mine instead of buying this LTD M1 custom.


----------



## asopala (Sep 11, 2021)

evade said:


> They've gotten increasingly better over the years, but you're generally correct. I used to be a massive connoisseur of Schecter guitars and most of their guitars are a straight bargain for what you get. I've owned around 20 Schecters for a few years and only played them. Now, I only have a Silver Mountain, but there are some workmanship defects.
> 
> Anything that doesn't MSRP for $1000 in Schecter's department isn't playable for me. They used to be an aftermarket pick up company for Fender I think.
> 
> Modern Jackson and Ibanez is garbage. The made in japan and US stuff now are okay, but massively overpriced. $2500-3000 for a MIJ when it used to be around $1000. Ibanez Prestiges are also whatever to me, although I should've kept mine instead of buying this LTD M1 custom.



Yeah, Schecter's really upped their game in recent years, though I have to admit I'm not much a fan of anything this past year (or two). The SLS Elites are killer guitars, and I felt the next models were a step down. Makes sense when you have a guitar at those prices with all THAT on it.

Oddly enough, I actually really liked Ibanez's cheaper output 10 years ago. I had an S420 which, while the pickups were crappy stock ones, was a really fun guitar to play. I sold it to a kid for what I got it for, and I only sold it because I was starting to become obsesses with stainless steel frets, and Schecter started stocking models with them.


----------



## NeglectedField (Sep 11, 2021)

I say this a lot but I love my Schecter KM-6. Build quality left next to nothing to complain about except for the push-pull pot crapping out, but I'm forgiving that because it was an ex-demo which had been in the shop since 2014 if the serial number was anything to go by. Oh, and the SD 'Blackened' Black Winters weren't to my taste but that's not a quality issue. Then again this was a guitar retailing at £1k plus so can't vouch for any models below that.


----------



## KentBrockman (Sep 12, 2021)

evade said:


> Modern Jackson and Ibanez is garbage. The made in japan and US stuff now are okay, but massively overpriced. $2500-3000 for a MIJ when it used to be around $1000. Ibanez Prestiges are also whatever to me, although I should've kept mine instead of buying this LTD M1 custom.



I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the Ibanez price hike in 2016/2017 was ridiculous. The last Ibanez guitar I bought new was an RG2550z in 2016 on sale for 750 GBP when I lived in the UK. At the time, that was $1070 USD. Now, a new Prestige with a floating bridge goes for $1600 (RG652AHM) with most being around $2000. They used to be proper workhorse guitars - generally, they came in plain finishes with in-house pickups and little in the way of bells and whistles. You got a great neck, some good hardware, good QC on the instrument overall, and a case. If you wanted anything else, that's up to you. Now, they give you fancy finishes and name-brand pickups which contribute to the cost.

Now halfway through reading this, I remembered that Ibanez has a Genesis line which would give me exactly what I'm looking for (although if I bought one, I would miss the AANJ and I would not be fond of the matching headstock. I prefer black). 

With that said, the RG5320 cosmic shadow has been extremely tempting but I haven't pulled the trigger since I have a bunch of Prestiges and wouldn't gain anything from another except for something pretty to look at.


----------



## Emperoff (Sep 13, 2021)

CapinCripes said:


> I'm beginning to wonder how many of you guys have actually held a USA Jackson. They make their trem covers out of brushed aluminum ffs.



Having 4 Jacksons myself (3 being CS), I can't but agree on current Jackson line-up being absolute garbage. The only ones that get a pass are the bottom tier JS-22 ones since they play pretty good for a beginner level guitar.

Anything not made in USA or Japan is not a Jackson to me.



angryification said:


> They used to be proper workhorse guitars - generally, they came in plain finishes with in-house pickups and little in the way of bells and whistles. You got a great neck, some good hardware, good QC on the instrument overall, and a case. If you wanted anything else, that's up to you. Now, they give you fancy finishes and name-brand pickups which contribute to the cost.


Because that's what people want nowadays. People used to care about the "core" of the guitar, so to speak, and then hot-rod it to taste. Now people want fully-loaded guitars from the get go, so specs on paper is what sells (and price rises accordingly).

I think you should check Fujigen guitars. They're exactly what you miss from Ibanez.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 13, 2021)

Man I just looked into FGN and man those are some cool guitars, but still a little pricier than I wanted them to be  then again so are most schecters these days....


----------



## Matt08642 (Sep 13, 2021)

BusinessMan said:


> Ibanez. I know they're really overpriced, play well, and have really shitty hardware 90% of the time that you have to change out. That being said, I still want one of the new iron label models, the xiphos or iceman.



Which shitty hardware do you feel _needs_ to be changed out from high-end models?

All I can really think is pickups if you don't like what's in there, but that could be said about any guitar.


----------



## MrWulf (Sep 13, 2021)

Schecter MIK right now are the best price vs performance ratio out of all the brands in the market right now. Ibanez and Jackson lower tier has been lagging behind a lot. ESP LTD is right behind Schecter imo. And Sterling is straight fucking trash.


----------



## Emperoff (Sep 13, 2021)

MrWulf said:


> Schecter MIK right now are the best price vs performance ratio out of all the brands in the market right now. Ibanez and Jackson lower tier has been lagging behind a lot. ESP LTD is right behind Schecter imo. And Sterling is straight fucking trash.



Schecter Korea is probably the best bang for your buck right now. Ltd used to be great but since they moved production to Indonesia for the 1000 series, I haven't been very impressed by them. This is a friend's Ltd-1000:


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Sep 13, 2021)

1. Flag graphics
2. Camo graphics

Sorry, Dimebag.


----------



## DrakkarTyrannis (Sep 14, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> 1. Flag graphics
> 2. Camo graphics
> 
> Sorry, Dimebag.


*cries in getchapull*


----------



## mmr007 (Sep 14, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> 1. Flag graphics
> 2. Camo graphics
> 
> Sorry, Dimebag.








uhhhhh....not all camo. ESP do it right.


----------



## Emperoff (Sep 14, 2021)

Chrome hardware. I don't know why, but it just looks cheap even on expensive instruments.

Nickel looks much better to me.


----------



## MASS DEFECT (Sep 14, 2021)

mmr007 said:


> uhhhhh....not all camo. ESP do it right.


Agree. ESP is the undisputed king of camo paint jobs. The Sabaton Warhead is much better since the camo is made from wood veneer.


----------



## TheBolivianSniper (Sep 14, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> Agree. ESP is the undisputed king of camo paint jobs. The Sabaton Warhead is much better since the camo is made from wood veneer.
> 
> View attachment 97673



WANT


----------



## spudmunkey (Sep 14, 2021)

So if ESP is the best...I would agree with @MASS DEFECT's initial comment ... no matter how "the best" ESP is, similar to how I've mentioned airbrush art painted guitars...no matter how well it's done, it still screams "cheap" to me.


----------



## Emperoff (Sep 14, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> Agree. ESP is the undisputed king of camo paint jobs. The Sabaton Warhead is much better since the camo is made from wood veneer.
> 
> View attachment 97673



HOLY SHIT 



spudmunkey said:


> So if ESP is the best...I would agree with @MASS DEFECT's initial comment ... no matter how "the best" ESP is, similar to how I've mentioned airbrush art painted guitars...no matter how well it's done, it still screams "cheap" to me.



Really? Its 9000$ pricetag screams "expensive" to me


----------



## sell2792 (Sep 17, 2021)

Every Dean, ever.

Also pickup rings.


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Sep 17, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> the camo is made from wood veneer.
> 
> View attachment 97673


uh no it's not. There's a quilt veneer on front and back but the camo looks like a hydrodip. If they'd done the camo out of veneer it wouldn't be on the belly cut, and the neck stripes wouldn't be visible/the camo wouldn't extend up that high. Still a sick build though.


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 17, 2021)

MASS DEFECT said:


> Agree. ESP is the undisputed king of camo paint jobs. The Sabaton Warhead is much better since the camo is made from wood veneer.
> 
> View attachment 97673


holy SHIT thats a monster, I need this in my life!


----------



## xzacx (Sep 17, 2021)

KnightBrolaire said:


> uh no it's not. There's a quilt veneer on front and back but the camo looks like a hydrodip. If they'd done the camo out of veneer it wouldn't be on the belly cut, and the neck stripes wouldn't be visible/the camo wouldn't extend up that high. Still a sick build though.



I remember this one, I think it's actually a paint job. It was for sale at DCGL for a long time and that's how I remember it being presented, but could also have been semantics. The price was wild though $8-9k I think, seemingly commensurate with being hand done.


----------



## budda (Sep 17, 2021)

Why is there colour in the tummy cut but nowhere else?


----------



## CanserDYI (Sep 17, 2021)

budda said:


> Why is there colour in the tummy cut but nowhere else?


I noticed that too, but I think we're seeing a sun reflection

EDIT: actually no, i think youre right, the lower horn inside on the left picture has the same color, and its facing away from the "sunlight" i would have been referring to...that is odd?


----------



## KnightBrolaire (Sep 17, 2021)

xzacx said:


> I remember this one, I think it's actually a paint job. It was for sale at DCGL for a long time and that's how I remember it being presented, but could also have been semantics. The price was wild though $8-9k I think, seemingly commensurate with being hand done.


It could be a paint job, but I highly doubt it. The fact that it's transparent so you can see the underlying wood grain makes me think hydrodip, especially since only the black part of the camo shows up on the belly cut.


----------



## jahosy (Sep 17, 2021)

budda said:


> Why is there colour in the tummy cut but nowhere else?


Think it might be the colour of the actual body wood. Feels like the body (mahogony?) is sandwiched between the quilted top and back, then camo painted over in trans colour. 

Body shape does remind me of the Capa TAT special. Nice.


----------

