Our attitude towards brand name
- Thread starter subversion
- Start date
subversion
Moderator
that would be the rightful association but if your brand name has authority, there's a tendency to forgive some oversight...
Whitestrat
New member
Gibson?:mrgreen:
subversion
Moderator
aw, darn... was i alluding to that brand name? :-o
No, you didn't say so. But we folks have been seeing and hearing for ourselves.
Hey! That brand name fits the description!
MadWerewolfBoy
New member
For guitar accessories and gear, i would prefer more well known brand names/mods as of now because they won't lose too much resale value. Definately don't have enough money to buy and throw away. But if i am certain that a certain something is what i really want and dn't intend to sell, then brand name comes second.
I always try to get as much infomation and reviews from wide sources before commiting money on products. And i would avoid being influenced by a brand's advertisements as much as possible cause they're usually empty hypes. At the end of the day, my purchase can be quite irrational, but it would be one which i don't regret.
I always try to get as much infomation and reviews from wide sources before commiting money on products. And i would avoid being influenced by a brand's advertisements as much as possible cause they're usually empty hypes. At the end of the day, my purchase can be quite irrational, but it would be one which i don't regret.
Last edited:
teokiatuan
New member
for me, i will ONLY buy brand names, boss, digitech etc. i just started out, so we'll see how it goes.
8fingermadness
New member
To each his own la, if you have the moola, you can buy a nameless strat and also custom your own $5k D'Pergo strat that looks absolutely stunning. If the nameless strat plays well then good for you, but you still got the D'Pergo strat when you want to flash, and of course, since its to your specs it should play well too! IMO it's all about the $$$. Just know what you want, and with more money, you can afford to want more.
It's like the ceriatone/dumble clones spat. Those who have enough to buy fuchs and tworocks and what not will always say the ceriatone, no matter how much value for the money, cannot match up to the boutiques. But for those who can only afford ceriatone will be satisfied with their ceriatones. It's really circumstantial. haha just my 2cents. (and brand name, no matter what people say, will always matter)
It's like the ceriatone/dumble clones spat. Those who have enough to buy fuchs and tworocks and what not will always say the ceriatone, no matter how much value for the money, cannot match up to the boutiques. But for those who can only afford ceriatone will be satisfied with their ceriatones. It's really circumstantial. haha just my 2cents. (and brand name, no matter what people say, will always matter)
8fingermadness
New member
sorry for talking so much, just one more point to add....
if you find something of good quality for good money, then buy it quick before the word gets out, before the price rises and the name becomes branded. Then it'll become out of reach. haha.
if you find something of good quality for good money, then buy it quick before the word gets out, before the price rises and the name becomes branded. Then it'll become out of reach. haha.
Re:
I own a lawsuit Les Paul but im still hoping to own a Gibson.
Why? I can't deny that the brand plays a big factor. There are cheaper brands with similar specs as the gibbys and fenders but Gibson and Fender are icons in our music history. They ooze an appeal that brands like edwards, heritage just don't seem to have.
However, at the end of the day - If you try out the guitar, you like the feel and the tone, the branding shouldnt bother you too much. No point buying a guitar just for the appeal of the brand.
I own a lawsuit Les Paul but im still hoping to own a Gibson.
Why? I can't deny that the brand plays a big factor. There are cheaper brands with similar specs as the gibbys and fenders but Gibson and Fender are icons in our music history. They ooze an appeal that brands like edwards, heritage just don't seem to have.
However, at the end of the day - If you try out the guitar, you like the feel and the tone, the branding shouldnt bother you too much. No point buying a guitar just for the appeal of the brand.
subversion
Moderator
non-Gibson/ Fenders are desireable but there are limited people in this camp. many are 'safer' with the tried & tested names, nothing wrong with that... in fact, we have this behaviour in ourselves, yes?
Last edited:
adamqlw
Member
As the years go by, my faith in large corporations has faltered. One must first ask the question: What's in a brand name?
A brand represents the image of a company. There was a time when brand names really meant something, and usually, that was when these brands were first starting out. They set out to achieve excellence in their field, and in doing so, developed a reputation. To me, that's the difference between a name, and a brand name. Once something is seen as profitable and is taken over by a large corporate machine, you can bet your bottom dollar that the fundamental tenets that originally guided the company get thrown out the window.
When you look at companies like Fender, Gibson, Ibanez etc, we tend to think quality. After all, if it's good enough for our musical heroes, it should be good enough for us right? Wrong.
Endorsements are an example of where brand names have gone wrong. These days, you can see a musician endorse a great variety of products, from strings right down to pedals. More often than not, this offers very little indication as to what they actually *use*. They're merely lending their name to the product, thus giving it a false sense of validity.
You merely have to look at the range of products that a companies produce. Ibanez stamps its name on both their custom shop guitars as well as the guitars cheaply mass produced in places like China or Indonesia. Once you outsource your production cycle, quality control becomes a problem. That's not to say that you won't find luthiers in Indonesia crafting wonderful instruments, but rather to say that when production costs and margins become important, quality tends to take a nosedive.
To put it simply, once a small company becomes obsessed with the financial bottom line, you can pretty much stop trusting the brand name completely. Sure Ibanez and Fender still do make quality instruments, but that quality isn't reflected across their entire product range. Rather, they now sell and image and lifestyle, and charge a premium for quality products, compared to their mass market range. There's a lot of money that goes into marketing and hype these days, and I trust none of it. Even reviews that you find in guitar magazines are rubbish nowadays, because they're usually funded by the manufacturer and hence are no longer objective and unbiased.
Personally I've developed a taste for small, boutique brand names. That's not to say that all boutique items are good, or that they're right for me, but you can trust that when a small company has developed a reputation on the strength of the products themselves, you can trust that the product will be of a certain quality. It may not live up to the hype surrounding it by its rabid fan base, but it certainly will have a minimum standard of quality. And when I say boutique, I don't necessarily mean a "pay through the nose to join an exclusive club" sort of manufacturer, but rather, a small business run by individuals who honestly care about the products they make, and take pride in their work.
That's not to say that I won't buy something from a brand name, but I'm far more sceptical about the quality of goods these days, and I'd much rather try it for myself and form my own opinion. After all, why should you part with your money if you're not entirely convinced it's worth it, and who better to determine if something is worth the asking price than the person who's actually going to use it? I'm honestly fed up with hype and marketing bullshit. I've been burned more times than I care to remember, and I refuse to continue to be a victim of companies that sell and image and a lifestyle rather than quality products.
I like to see musical instruments made the same way I like to hear music played. Honestly, passionately, and with a hunger for knowledge and progress.
A brand represents the image of a company. There was a time when brand names really meant something, and usually, that was when these brands were first starting out. They set out to achieve excellence in their field, and in doing so, developed a reputation. To me, that's the difference between a name, and a brand name. Once something is seen as profitable and is taken over by a large corporate machine, you can bet your bottom dollar that the fundamental tenets that originally guided the company get thrown out the window.
When you look at companies like Fender, Gibson, Ibanez etc, we tend to think quality. After all, if it's good enough for our musical heroes, it should be good enough for us right? Wrong.
Endorsements are an example of where brand names have gone wrong. These days, you can see a musician endorse a great variety of products, from strings right down to pedals. More often than not, this offers very little indication as to what they actually *use*. They're merely lending their name to the product, thus giving it a false sense of validity.
You merely have to look at the range of products that a companies produce. Ibanez stamps its name on both their custom shop guitars as well as the guitars cheaply mass produced in places like China or Indonesia. Once you outsource your production cycle, quality control becomes a problem. That's not to say that you won't find luthiers in Indonesia crafting wonderful instruments, but rather to say that when production costs and margins become important, quality tends to take a nosedive.
To put it simply, once a small company becomes obsessed with the financial bottom line, you can pretty much stop trusting the brand name completely. Sure Ibanez and Fender still do make quality instruments, but that quality isn't reflected across their entire product range. Rather, they now sell and image and lifestyle, and charge a premium for quality products, compared to their mass market range. There's a lot of money that goes into marketing and hype these days, and I trust none of it. Even reviews that you find in guitar magazines are rubbish nowadays, because they're usually funded by the manufacturer and hence are no longer objective and unbiased.
Personally I've developed a taste for small, boutique brand names. That's not to say that all boutique items are good, or that they're right for me, but you can trust that when a small company has developed a reputation on the strength of the products themselves, you can trust that the product will be of a certain quality. It may not live up to the hype surrounding it by its rabid fan base, but it certainly will have a minimum standard of quality. And when I say boutique, I don't necessarily mean a "pay through the nose to join an exclusive club" sort of manufacturer, but rather, a small business run by individuals who honestly care about the products they make, and take pride in their work.
That's not to say that I won't buy something from a brand name, but I'm far more sceptical about the quality of goods these days, and I'd much rather try it for myself and form my own opinion. After all, why should you part with your money if you're not entirely convinced it's worth it, and who better to determine if something is worth the asking price than the person who's actually going to use it? I'm honestly fed up with hype and marketing bullshit. I've been burned more times than I care to remember, and I refuse to continue to be a victim of companies that sell and image and a lifestyle rather than quality products.
I like to see musical instruments made the same way I like to hear music played. Honestly, passionately, and with a hunger for knowledge and progress.
subversion
Moderator
the manufacturer can stand firm in their provision philosophy & detract themselves from the commercial shenanigans, this would garner respect but highly likely, it would not bring in the earnings into their coffers. this would then affect their very existence. welcome to Camp A.
the manufacturer can also choose to churn out popular wares & reap hot dollars with limited reconciliation to quality & reputation. buttressing efforts are made to associate product brand names with professional approvals (endorsements to the rest of us). their existence is beyond sustenance but increasing quality issues serve to undermine the name's goodwill as close competitors begin to display improved copy manifestations of the original article. this is Camp B.
in the real world, manufacturers are intrinsically commercial entities. longevity issues are first & foremost but having established some reputation, they would ensure marketing strategies to engulf as many buyer profiles as they could; this is the reason why the big names in guitar, Gibson & Fender among others, ensure top notch quality are there to provide evidence of their superiority while providing tasters in the form of product variations. both the aforementioned companies possess Custom Shops & regular product offerings for this purpose.
this is why manufacturers are displaying both Camp A & B characteristics. we note the small time boutique proponents are primarily Camp A residents, once they have achieved a certain level of reputation stability they would begin to display Camp B characteristics but those who value brand name goodwill would do well to keep their Camp A profile in tact. PRS is an illustration.
the manufacturer can also choose to churn out popular wares & reap hot dollars with limited reconciliation to quality & reputation. buttressing efforts are made to associate product brand names with professional approvals (endorsements to the rest of us). their existence is beyond sustenance but increasing quality issues serve to undermine the name's goodwill as close competitors begin to display improved copy manifestations of the original article. this is Camp B.
in the real world, manufacturers are intrinsically commercial entities. longevity issues are first & foremost but having established some reputation, they would ensure marketing strategies to engulf as many buyer profiles as they could; this is the reason why the big names in guitar, Gibson & Fender among others, ensure top notch quality are there to provide evidence of their superiority while providing tasters in the form of product variations. both the aforementioned companies possess Custom Shops & regular product offerings for this purpose.
this is why manufacturers are displaying both Camp A & B characteristics. we note the small time boutique proponents are primarily Camp A residents, once they have achieved a certain level of reputation stability they would begin to display Camp B characteristics but those who value brand name goodwill would do well to keep their Camp A profile in tact. PRS is an illustration.
Last edited:
Of late, I've become very sucked into the whole PRS thing. Gibsons have disappointed time and again with their duds and poor workmanship; something that's unacceptable to me for a guitar in that price bracket.
PRSes are much better bang for buck if you're talking high end. I also love that glassy finish they have
PRSes are much better bang for buck if you're talking high end. I also love that glassy finish they have
subversion
Moderator
i'm not quite a Gibson fan but i own a Les Paul Std- came across something that fit my quirks, so bought it 
loldude333
New member
For me, it's quality b4 brand. What's the use of buying a 4k Gibson, only to find out that it's a dud? Horrible finish, dead piece of wood, been played like millions of times. What for? I'd rather go for a Burny or Edwards, as these brands have much more consistent QC and more the money, make better instruments. But of course if i found a 1k nameless guitar that beats a Gibson hands-down, i'd definitely go for it. As a poor student, the quality of the instrument matters more than brand or resell value, reason being i wld most probably have found a guitar i like the most, so reselling won't be until a while, when i get a job. I have found many unknown guitar brands that make better guitars than some Epis or Squiers(think Timbre or Shine). But having said all that, a 50% sales makes everything different altogether.:mrgreen:
xklusivly4u
Member
How about buying guitars from collector point of view? They might not play well for one but superior craftsmanship, topnotch quality and excellent sound, I would probably spend a fortune if I can afford. I see the guitars are like paintings you can look at them and talk about the stories behind and appreciate them. These categories usually are custom guitars from top brands. Of course guitars are meant to be played even so it will be nice to have a history about an old guitar e.g. how it was produced and who played it.
