Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

For your local dentist's office wall...


picker

Recommended Posts



  • Replies 11
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Well, in this case, it's supposed to be a replica of a specific guitar; either you want such a replica, or you don't.

 

I personally would rather have a guitar that is less a duplicate replica, that just focuses on copping the tone and feel of its inspiration, though perhaps with some of the effects of age and wear, such as a worn or non-existent finish on the back of the neck, "rolled" fretboard edges, "aged"/weakened/degaussed magnets in the pickups- the things that count for sound and playability, not the superficial cosmetic "aging".

Ask yourself- What Would Ren and Stimpy Do?

 

~ Caevan James-Michael Miller-O'Shite ~

_ ___ _ Leprechaun, Esquire _ ___ _

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cheapest model was 11 grand...for that kind of money I'd have Gibson build me a custom model and like Scott said no "freaking scratches or dents on it"...I'm not down with chop shop guitars either, to include Fenders...I mean I like Page and all but 25 grand would be a lot to pay for the signed model...dentists and gyn's can have'em...IMHO.
Take care, Larryz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit, that's one beautiful guitar! But that's A LOT of coin for a piece of wood and some hardware! I'm sure their marketing department confirmed that there was a market for a few of these babies BEFORE they started making them. For that price, Pagey would need to deliver it to me and spend the day jamming!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own a couple of relics (a Fender '72 Custom Shop and a Nash TC-63 Tele). I really don't care if they're meant to look aged, but they FEEL spectacular. The necks are PERFECT. Another bonus is that I can keep my shiny guitar polish OCD at bay and just enjoy playing them.

 

I do agree that paying an outrageous premium for the privilege of playing a new instrument made to LOOK old is lame. I'm pleased with the prices I played for mine.

 

This Les Paul and Gibbons' "Pearly Gates" and the other replicas are really only for collectors, not players, as far as I can tell. While they may play well, Gibson and Fender are trading on history and collectible, rather than player appeal, IMO.

Nash-customized Gibson Les Paul, Godin Progression Plus

 

Quilter MicroPro Mach 2.0

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who else could afford this?

 

I don't like Les Paul's, too heavy and mucho bad upper fret access. Not the right guitar for me at any price. In fact I gave the last one I had to my kid, and I never missed it a bit. My SG sounds almost the same, a little brighter but similar. And it be light and easy to get to the 22nd fret.

 

Plus I would never buy a signature model guitar, I don't like any player that much to pay through the nose for a guitar that is similar to one I could get for one tenth the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own a couple of relics (a Fender '72 Custom Shop and a Nash TC-63 Tele). I really don't care if they're meant to look aged, but they FEEL spectacular. The necks are PERFECT. Another bonus is that I can keep my shiny guitar polish OCD at bay and just enjoy playing them.

 

I do agree that paying an outrageous premium for the privilege of playing a new instrument made to LOOK old is lame. I'm pleased with the prices I played for mine.

 

This Les Paul and Gibbons' "Pearly Gates" and the other replicas are really only for collectors, not players, as far as I can tell. While they may play well, Gibson and Fender are trading on history and collectible, rather than player appeal, IMO.

 

You've got a couple of real Fender classics and no doubt the Custom Shop did a great job...I'd just prefer the new look using the same feel/electronics etc...IMHO.

Take care, Larryz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...