battle of the les pauls: Rally vs Gibson

[Whitestrat]

Perhaps that's more of the eyes judging than the ears? No? Hehe..

Yes, I can agree that it is the bond that certainly adds to the value. But tone and feel is subjective, and not necessarily used to judge a guitar's merits. If you judge thing like construction, natural sustain, etc etc, then it becomes very clear cut. To judge whether a guitar is better or not, then a quantifiable criteria must be used. the minute you begin talking about intangibles, logic goes out the window and emotion takes over.

 

[dillon333]

This thread is just kinda pointless...I mean there is a reason why Gibson cost thousands and Rally cost hundreds.If you are rich by all means afford a Gibson but if you are poor then Rally would be good enough, simple logic.

 

[Jumpin'Jellybean]

This thread is just kinda pointless...I mean there is a reason why Gibson cost thousands and Rally cost hundreds.If you are rich by all means afford a Gibson but if you are poor then Rally would be good enough, simple logic.

I don't get your point?
So if TGMs cost thousands we should buy them over Fenders?

 

[lemonade93]

I don't get your point?
So if TGMs cost thousands we should buy them over Fenders?

He's just talking about how much you have, he's not saying if Rally is 4k you should buy it over the Gibson, he's just saying that if you don't got the money, buy the Rally cause the Gibson is soooo far from your budget like Singapore is to China.... i think. HAHAHA

 

[Jumpin'Jellybean]

lemonade93: hahah i do get your point. But the point i'm driving at is expensive does not mean quality. He's comparing cost and not quality.
Dillon333: More expensive does not equal better quality/playability.

That's my pov, ymmv.

 

[dillon333]

Jumpin'Jellybean: Lol sorry but i still dont get your point. I mean it is common sense and simple logic that if a guitar is so much more expensive than another guitar it is definitely because of its quality and playability. Do you ever see TGM/Squier/Rally going over the thousands?It is rare. These guitar simply fulfill people that wishes to attain the tone of leading brand such as Fender/Gibson but they do not have the cash to do so. Thus, they can also go for guitars such as Rally which is somewhat a fraction comparable to guitars such as Gibson. So you spend a few hundred but you also can get the rough feel of a Gibson/Fender which is good because normally a few hundred can probably land you a pretty shitty guitar if you anyhow buy.

Actually my POV is very simple, Rally guitars is only trying to attain the tone that Gibson has, to cater to consumers that have lesser income. But Gibson is always up there, so this thread is pretty pointless because Gibson is definitely better, but it is very expensive, so what about those poor people that wants something like a Gibson, naturally you go for a good imitation which is Rally.

 

[Ized]

For me, its a Gibson. No contest.

I've owned an Edwards -which many forum mongers claim its a Gibson killer.... but I still felt something was missing from the guitar. Got myself a Gibson, and haven't looked back since.

 

[Jumpin'Jellybean]

Jumpin'Jellybean: Lol sorry but i still dont get your point. I mean it is common sense and simple logic that if a guitar is so much more expensive than another guitar it is definitely because of its quality and playability. Do you ever see TGM/Squier/Rally going over the thousands?It is rare. These guitar simply fulfill people that wishes to attain the tone of leading brand such as Fender/Gibson but they do not have the cash to do so. Thus, they can also go for guitars such as Rally which is somewhat a fraction comparable to guitars such as Gibson. So you spend a few hundred but you also can get the rough feel of a Gibson/Fender which is good because normally a few hundred can probably land you a pretty shitty guitar if you anyhow buy.

Actually my POV is very simple, Rally guitars is only trying to attain the tone that Gibson has, to cater to consumers that have lesser income. But Gibson is always up there, so this thread is pretty pointless because Gibson is definitely better, but it is very expensive, so what about those poor people that wants something like a Gibson, naturally you go for a good imitation which is Rally.

I'm sure many would disagree...
Boss DS-1 or Danelectro TOD v1?
So a Fender from SV is much lousier than a Fender from SL (since Sl charges so much more?)
I'm not contesting your point Gibson is better than Rally. I actually voted Gibson over Rally. The point i'm contesting is that expensive gear is better than cheaper gear. IMO, This is NOT true. (again, ymmv)
Since you base your buying criteria on price, i have nothing more to say.

 

[Benster]

i typed a lengthy wordy response suggesting the relativity of perceived value but i backspaced everything cos i realised it's pointless. sigh

 

[dodgethis]

Law of diminishing returns applies here. Also, buying a Gibson means you fund the coffers of a mad man who has no idea what to do with a well-established brand and continues to bring idiotic ideas to an audience that neither wants nor needs what he thinks is revolutionary.

 

[Godspeed64]

just get whatever works dammit.

pointless to argue over which is better when it clearly points out to personal taste. a $200 stagg tele made my jaw drop once (a week after i bought a gibson sg, when i was still in my HONEYMOON period) and was sold an hour later as i browsed around penin. anything can happen. rally>gibson>rally>gibson whatever

 

[guitarsan]

^ I agree. It's pointless to argue over a topic started grudgingly by someone in ban land.

 

[dillon333]

LOL I find you really a bit wierd, I mean this discussion is on different guitars with different prices, why are you talking about the same guitar with different prices? It is like totally off the track. Of course guitar prices differs over different stores. And also Rally guitars and Gibson guitars are not different in prices by the hundreds, it is by the thousands. So you tell me that Gibson would sell their guitar at such a price that is so much higher than Rally and not give you a better quality?

I'm sure many would disagree...
Boss DS-1 or Danelectro TOD v1?
So a Fender from SV is much lousier than a Fender from SL (since Sl charges so much more?)
I'm not contesting your point Gibson is better than Rally. I actually voted Gibson over Rally. The point i'm contesting is that expensive gear is better than cheaper gear. IMO, This is NOT true. (again, ymmv)
Since you base your buying criteria on price, i have nothing more to say.

 

[Jumpin'Jellybean]

LOL I find you really a bit wierd, I mean this discussion is on different guitars with different prices, why are you talking about the same guitar with different prices? It is like totally off the track. Of course guitar prices differs over different stores. And also Rally guitars and Gibson guitars are not different in prices by the hundreds, it is by the thousands. So you tell me that Gibson would sell their guitar at such a price that is so much higher than Rally and not give you a better quality?

Dude... Seriously. Does it matter if the difference is in hundreds or thousands?
Just cause a piece of gear is more expensive makes it better? Once again, if that's your buying criteria...
Up to you. Hope you spend your money wisely.

Godspeed/guitarsan: Not arguing about Rally vs Gibson. Rather, arguing the fact that more expensive does not equal better. Cheaper gear if used right can be as good or even better.

 

[lemonade93]

Dude... Seriously. Does it matter if the difference is in hundreds or thousands?
Just cause a piece of gear is more expensive makes it better? Once again, if that's your buying criteria...
Up to you. Hope you spend your money wisely.

Godspeed/guitarsan: Not arguing about Rally vs Gibson. Rather, arguing the fact that more expensive does not equal better. Cheaper gear if used right can be as good or even better.

Errrrr.... not sure if you've all noticed.... but technically no one gives a rats ass about this thread cause it's pointless? Might as well ignore it no? Technically, its TRUE, the more expensive the better cause you're assured good wood and what not, with guitars, you pay what you get for :/. You're not gonna see a $100 Tom Anderson are you? or a $50 PRS :/

 

[dillon333]

Errrrr.... not sure if you've all noticed.... but technically no one gives a rats ass about this thread cause it's pointless? Might as well ignore it no? Technically, its TRUE, the more expensive the better cause you're assured good wood and what not, with guitars, you pay what you get for :/. You're not gonna see a $100 Tom Anderson are you? or a $50 PRS :/

Finally someone got me lol

 

[keithC]

"Cheaper gear if used right can be as good or even better."

its when you reach that level where you get better gear, and start sounding normal.

 

[Ken-]

Sorry to side track, why was van halen banned?

 

[Ized]

Law of diminishing returns applies here. Also, buying a Gibson means you fund the coffers of a mad man who has no idea what to do with a well-established brand and continues to bring idiotic ideas to an audience that neither wants nor needs what he thinks is revolutionary.

I agree...Firebird X...what the hell was Henry thinking?

Anyways, I bought a Gibson to because I specifically wanted the Gibson tone, which the other Les Paul copies I've tried couldn't deliver. Of course, your definition of the Gibson tone may differ from mine,tastes are subjective.

 

[Whitestrat]

I agree...Firebird X...what the hell was Henry thinking?

That mad man might not be as mad as many think. Personally, I think the Firebird X was a mistake.

However, if you step back and observe, the Les Paul is the ONE key product in Gibson that is holding the fort. In corporate-speak, that product distribution mix is a problem. Meaning, if people one day wake up and think that Les Pauls are no longer the "IT" thing, the company will go down faster than a ton of bricks.

So, in long term strategy thinking, relying soley on one product line is very dangerous for the longevity of the company. I applaud the Firebird X's philosophy, just not the execution. I just think Henry J needs better designers.

And a better events agency.