Worst change to a guitar made by the manufacturer?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ido1957
  • Start date Start date
Robus said:
Unlike a well made shim, the micro tilt doesn't give solid wood to wood contact between neck and pocket. Maybe it doesn't matter but I never liked the idea.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty on the fence on the whole "tone wood" debate. But I do think that allowing resonance to pass between the nut and bridge must make a difference.
 
JDOD said:
I'm pretty on the fence on the whole "tone wood" debate. But I do think that allowing resonance to pass between the nut and bridge must make a difference.
Click to expand...

Not so much at the levels of gain you use.
 
Greg_L said:
That would actually probably be your favorite Gibson ever. Shaved heel for noodle shredding, locked nut, Floyd Rose style trem? Don't you like all that stuff?
Click to expand...

LOL. You've seen my guitar haven't you? The completely non-pointy T shaped guitar with a tune-o-matic.

I don't shred! I play melodic well crafted lead lines! (just quite quickly sometimes)
 
JDOD said:
LOL. You've seen my guitar haven't you? The completely non-pointy T shaped guitar with a tune-o-matic.

I don't shred! I play melodic well crafted lead lines! (just quite quickly sometimes)
Click to expand...

I've seen your guitar, yes. I'm just saying...those "Axxess" LPs, or whatever they're called, are very noodle-player friendly. They're the most shred-friendly Les Pauls ever. I think they're disgusting, but I hate anything with a Floyd Rose on it. I do like the shaved heel though. It's pretty comfortable if you spend time up in the 17-22 fret range.
 
Greg_L said:
I've seen your guitar, yes. I'm just saying...those "Axxess" LPs, or whatever they're called, are very noodle-player friendly. They're the most shred-friendly Les Pauls ever. I think they're disgusting, but I hate anything with a Floyd Rose on it. I do like the shaved heel though. It's pretty comfortable if you spend time up in the 17-22 fret range.
Click to expand...
Yeah, a Floyd Rose is just all wrong on an LP. At least they look like they're supposed to be there on an Ibanez or a BC Rich or something. They just look like a hatchet job on an LP.

They look shite on strats too... and even worse on the "modern player" teles.

Speaking of shaved heals on a LP - have you seen these before?
boutique Twin 45rpm guitars - Crimson Guitars gallery
 
Those are pretty hideous, but nice job on the heel.

The Gibson shaved heel is not that drastic or fancy. It's smoother, less distinct. They don't accentuate the shaved heel. It's just there.
 
Greg_L said:
Those are pretty hideous, but nice job on the heel.
Click to expand...

They're a little too "pretty" aren't they. I don't like the 3 pickups and the gold hardware either. Two pickups slightly less flash would look good though.

EDIT: Uggghhh. I just noticed the crucifix inlays.
 
JDOD said:
They're a little too "pretty" aren't they. I don't like the 3 pickups and the gold hardware either. Two pickups slightly less flash would look good though.

EDIT: Uggghhh. I just noticed the crucifix inlays.
Click to expand...

Right. Lol. It's all hideous.

I'm not a fan of obvious and accentuated wood. I know a fucking guitar is made of wood. I don't want my guitars to look like coffee tables or armoires. I don't care about striped necks and wood grain and all that stupid shit. So when I see guitars like that, it just turns me off. I don't understand why people get so excited over stripes in wood. Just build it, paint it, and let me have at it.
 
I can see your point of view on wood - but I do think wood grain looks nice provided its not too "pretty". AAA flame maple style shit is too much for me but I do like the natural spalted ash in the back of my guitar - its not some "beautified" rare wood pattern, its just a slightly weird natural wood grain.
 
JDOD said:
I can see your point of view on wood - but I do think wood grain looks nice provided its not too "pretty". AAA flame maple style shit is too much for me but I do like the natural spalted ash in the back of my guitar - its not some "beautified" rare wood pattern, its just a slightly weird natural wood grain.
Click to expand...

That's cool. Different strokes and all that shit. But do you look at the back of your guitar often? I don't. My LP has the natural mahogany back...and it just looks like reddish-brown brown wood. The top has the best LP finish ever - Goldtop. All of my other guitars are painted. No grain to be found anywhere. Well, I take that back. One of my SGs has a slight hint of grain that shows through the cherry stain or whatever it's called. It's such a deep, dark red that it pretty much looks black though.
 
Greg_L said:
That's cool. Different strokes and all that shit. But do you look at the back of your guitar often? I don't. My LP has the natural mahogany back...and it just looks like reddish-brown brown wood. The top has the best LP finish ever - Goldtop. All of my other guitars are painted. No grain to be found anywhere. Well, I take that back. One of my SGs has a slight hint of grain that shows through the cherry stain or whatever it's called. It's such a deep, dark red that it pretty much looks black though.
Click to expand...

I do look at it occasionally just 'cos it looks nice I turn over my guitar and think to myself "Ooo, that looks nice" then go back to normal playing. Un-lacquered stained wood does feel much nicer though. Its much smoother and less sticky :) The top of my guitar is real dark stain too - you can barely see the grain. Its already starting to go smooth and shiney where my right forearm hangs over body.
 
I think that the worst change ever made to a guitar happens every time Parker turns a blank piece of wood into a Fly body.

I want to get shitty tone, but I also want everybody to know that I'm a total douche. I know! I'll get a Parker Fly!
 
Tadpui said:
I think that the worst change ever made to a guitar happens every time Parker turns a blank piece of wood into a Fly body.

I want to get shitty tone, but I also want everybody to know that I'm a total douche. I know! I'll get a Parker Fly!
Click to expand...
:laughings::laughings::laughings:
 
Oh, I forgot. Gibson's reverse flying V. The original design was bad enough from a practical ergonomic standpoint, but to reverse the body??? Fail.
 
RFR said:
Oh, I forgot. Gibson's reverse flying V. The original design was bad enough from a practical ergonomic standpoint, but to reverse the body??? Fail.
Click to expand...

True. The reverse V is poo. But what's wrong with a regular V? Besides looking silly, they're pretty easy to play.
 
Yeah, the reverse V is an abomination. The regular V isn't up my alley, but they do have a certain mojo to them. And they sound like a Gibson, so that's a plus!
 
You know what's worse than the reverse V? Those stupid zakk wylde half flying V/half SG things.

This....
tumblr_niflh5i0cQ1tkzb05o1_1280.jpg


Great headstock, nice fretboard, the rest is hideous shit.
 
Greg_L said:
You know what's worse than the reverse V? Those stupid zakk wylde half flying V/half SG things.

This....
tumblr_niflh5i0cQ1tkzb05o1_1280.jpg


Great headstock, nice fretboard, the rest is hideous shit.
Click to expand...
But - you could play it sitting down lol
The shred expectation is too high for me to ever buy one of those.
Hi - we'd like to play a few folk songs for you now lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top