software

I know people get tired of hearing the praises for Les Pauls, 335's, SG's, Strats, Teles, Gretsch's, P-Basses, Jazz Basses, Martins and Rickenbachers.....BUT...

For those of you who have sifted through a mountain of guitars, and have found 'the one' out of this list, why did you arrive there?

I've always moved through a bunch of different brands, and continue to buy other brands like Gamp;L, Schecter, and Musicman, but no matter what, I realize that the guitars that have truly been the 'perfect designs' are the Les Paul, Strat, Martin Acoustic, and what I consider the new classic, PRS McCarties. No matter what I own, those guitars always beat them on almost every level. I was playing different brands tonight, then picked up those guitars and realized they're just BETTER. Why is this? Is it my hands and ears, or did these classics truly earn this title by being superior designs?
Your thoughts?

I will play my Music Man above any other guitar I have ever tried. Theres not an LP, Strat or Tele that can make me feel that good about my playing.

I do like my classics I admit. I also have some nifty boutique, restored, and collectable amps. If you've been following recent posts, I've been ranting about a Tele I really like. I was a big Les Paul fan for a long time, but when I started studying them, and talking to my luthier, I was kind of disappointed that a lot of what you pay for in a Les Paul is in the name. They use some kind of second rate tricks in putting some of that stuff together (eg 50 cent plastic nuts on the neck where a decent graphite nut would make a world of difference). For straight up buying by name brand goes, I think Taylor guitars hold up pretty well to inspection.

Man, I'm walking this road too. The Tele, Strat, LP, and 335 all are very very special guitars. In their context they were/are perfect. The thing is that we watch the greats from years ago, and they play guitar X and we associate guitar X with great tone. So I think we condition ourselves in that way. Hopefully here shortly I'll be able to better comment on this, comparing my Strat, Tele, Heritage, 330, to the Blue Demon. The name is a work in progress.

Luke

I went and played a few PRS's recently. I'm astonished at their quality. I didn't know building a guitar that good was possible. Of course like anything I'd change a few things to suit me personally but there's nothing wrong with them.

I'd have to say the best guitars made today would be by PRS, Gibson (when they have their act together), Ernie Ball music man, Gamp;L. Well as far as american companies go. I can't include Fender anymore because over the past week I played a ton of american strats and was very disappointed with each and every one.

Here's the thing, the evolution of the guitar and amplifier ended some 40 years ago. At this point not much else can be changed. Some people/companies that do try to evolve/change them, their ideas and products never really take hold because of how we are used to the traditional.

I can write an essay on that topic and it would include modelers and why they don't really quot;stayquot;. I'll start a post on this topic sometime when I feel like typing a lot.

I, too, find that the original designs just seem to work better. I had a Gibson Les Paul Standard in the past that was just quot;okquot;, but I'm in love with my '60 RI Gibson Les Paul Special DC. While a double cut Les Paul with p90s isn't everyone's first thought when they hear Gibson, the combination of the woods and pickups are nothing short of inspiring.

It is like my keyboard player says: quot;You gitarist are just a bunch of ****, so afraid to try anything new!!!quot;

I understand what he says though. I am definetly a traditionalist when it comes to guitars, amps and effects
(stompboxes, not POD's or anything)

I guess Fender and Gibson got it right back in the day! Easy as that.

I think the thing the classic designs have in common is that they're simple designs with nothing wasted, nothing out of place, and the whole is somehow greater than the sum of the parts

plus the combination of the wood and pickups in each one just works

I love my Tele amp; the Strat I have right now fits me like a glove...the Brian Moore is also very nice, but so far...by far...the nicest guitar I've ever owned is this Hamer Studio Custom.

Again, it just quot;fitsquot; me as though it was MY Custom Shop order.

Super nice....can't wait to stick the 50th Seth's in there either tomorrow or Thursday!!!

i am right there with you GJ, i may not own a gibson but i own one les paul like guitar and of course my teles. i also have a les paul like guitar on order right now. they are so simple, bare bones guitars that they just work for me. they feel right and they sound right. you can add all kinds of new equipment to them but they are still just simple guitars and that is what i think i will always play. nothing quot;newquot; (that is not based on a classic design) ever inspires me in the least. the only exception to that has been dr. z's amps. they are new designes but they seem like classics and they are also very simple. mine only has vol, treble, and bass.

I wouldn't say classics necessarily, but old wierd stuff I do love. Well, just old stuff in general. I like the classic stuff. Its a bit more unpredictable, in this world of digital and perfection, i like things to be a bit... rough round the edges, flawed beauty.

PRS for instance, i'm sure they are great guitars, taking two classics and mixing them, removing what people dont like about the two. But its those little quirks that add the personality of the insrument, I think.

i was struck at the UGD jam how few players had guitars with trems ... besides B2D and George Lynch, i cant remember one (the metal massacre notwithstanding)

back in the day, you couldnt go to a jam where every guy DIDNT have a trem

interesting how things move in and out of style

but the classics seem to always be close to the surfacet4d

Well, I think that part of this is because all other parts of tone chain are built for classic guitars. An LP or a Strat sounds often the best, because amps and pickups etc. are made for such guitars. For the same classic sounds. Starting off with just the guitar doesn't carry so far.

I haven't played many, but I love the looks, and especially the sound, of many of those older guitars. I may have to look for one as my next axe. Could be interesting.

What shocked me the most at UGD was that only me and 2 others had Fender Strats!

Even though Gibson has been doing everything in their power to turn players off to their company, Les Pauls were EVERYWHERE! The Jam was all about Teles and Pauls!

And like usual, the classic players were using classic guitars, while the metal players were using stuff suited to that image.......not many visa versas tho.


Originally Posted by GearjoneserWhat shocked me the most at UGD was that only me and 2 others had Fender Strats!

Even though Gibson has been doing everything in their power to turn players off to their company, Les Pauls were EVERYWHERE! The Jam was all about Teles and Pauls!

And like usual, the classic players were using classic guitars, while the metal players were using stuff suited to that image.......not many visa versas tho.

I play heavy music, but i'm much more attracted to the vintage gear, I live the sort of heavy sound that vintage gear produces, something a bit at odds with its image.

I think it's partly great design on the part of the manufacturers, and partly us players being socialised by an endless stream of players parading classic instruments and hearing them on recordings. Once you have that progemming, it's hard to see new 'innovations' that deviate from well used tone recipes as anything other than dilutions.

But who knows what we'd all be playing if we weren't constantly bombarded by the sound and imagery of 'classic' guitars from before we even pick up an instrument?

-Consider this: what if solid state came first. Would we then consider tubes to be 'too muddy'?


Originally Posted by Hot _Grits-Consider this: what if solid state came first. Would we then consider tubes to be 'too muddy'?yes, without a doubt, more on that later.

Damn, Hotgrits beat me to my point.

I think the quot;idealquot; tones in our head are largely tones that we've heard before, usually by our heroes who were great players with great gear (getting great tones). Most of these tones involved classic instrument designs, so therefore we're able to get closest to them by using the same gear.

I'm one of those quot;classicquot; guys. I think the real stickler for me is that despite many great manufacturers making quality instruments these days...the classics are classics because they deliver UNIQUE tones...

Nothing sounds like an LP..unless its a direct copy

Nothing sounds like a Tele..unless it's a direct copy

Nothing sounds like a Strat..unless....

335..

SG...

PRS...

etc etc...most everything else by other manufacturers is just a variation on the theme...usually to try and be more quot;versatilequot;..problem is..versatility sacrifices the unique tones...

As an example..and this is NOT a slight, please do not take it as such.....Jacksons..AWESOME guitars...they are built incredibly well...they are gorgeous...they are just fine instruments...but they have no voice of their own...sure they can do a humbucker gibson-ish sound...and they can do a strat-ish sound...but they dont sound like a LP or a Strat...they may excel in quality/playability, etc but there is nothing that distinguishes them tone-wise.

Also alot of supertrats ARE used by the guys using tons of diistortion...or effects..or both....that dillutes tone moreso...it gets to the point where you are just hearing the pickups and the amp...not the guitar, so to speak. Yet you overload a Les Paul, or a Strat or a tele..which all have very distinct voices, and you can still tell...I can't tell an Ibanez from a Jackson, from an ESP by it's sound on a recording. Jacks of all trades...masters of none.