This is what I heard: Gibson, Fender, Ibanez Argument
 

Some good points between the two parties.

-Gibson- Baseball Bat Necks
-Fender-"pitchy" noise. The Ugly strat is overpriced, old-timer stuff that should have been left in the 70's.
-Ibanez- Played out "sceney guitar", thin and without subtance, much like their users and the music they play behind. (which is untrue...i know i know)

Haha! now, trying to sift through this highschoolyass conversation I more listened to rather than interacted, which actually took place between two adults(one adult minded at least). What is true, sterotypically, that can be improved about these mainstream guitar brands?

Anything other than whats listed. Please discuss.

Paul Reed Smith?

Are you looking for recommendations on which brand is the best? Your original post was kind of hard to understand.

Uhh...I think I understand what you are asking for.

Gibson - Well, really the only flaw is what you listed. I guess the argument can be made that they are ridiculously heavy, but really that is just the Les Paul. I'm a proud owner of an SG and that thing is basically perfect aside from the baseball bat neck.

Fender - Twangy. Too much high end. Some people actually like this, though. You can always do what I did and put in some more aggressive pickups. Stick in some Lace Sensors and you can get a low end that rivals Gibson while keeping the high end (if you want it).

Ibanez - I just straight hate these guitars. The only person who plays one yet keeps my respect is Steve Vai...and even he thought they were a joke. They wanted him to play their guitars so he famously gave them a huge list of ridiculous demands which - to their credit - they actually met. Including a handle. Other than that, these guitars blow.

teh winnarawr!! this is about commonly heard(sorta annoying), non technical stereotypes.

yes, exactly what I was looking for.

See, I was kinda sorta involved in the original exchange that turned into the inspiration for this thread. For the most part, what I wrote at the top of this thread was the general wording of the exchange.

So a level-headed guitarist(sitting next to me). Is now telling me:

B.C. Rich: Is the "Hipster Guitar". The "I love satan" body styling with no regards to the beauty that should be apparent in a stringed instrument. Buying one essentially states that the owner is trying to be "The Ultimate Badass" That is now $170 dollars poorer after buying one. He himself plays an ESP custom shop alexi V, seymour duncan blackouts, light top heavy bottom strings.

I guess in this thread, generalization and stereotypes are a must!!!

Um, not really. Glad you like your guitar, but I think you got lucky.

http://www.musicbanter.com/talk-inst...on-guitar.html

Now I love a good guitar no matter who its made by, but Gibson aren't kind of the hill anymore.

On the same token, neither are fender. I know a guy with a £1500 fender fat strat that came with a bridge pickup that wasn't even wired in!

As for ibanez...Their problem isn't quality as such, its that their customer support sucks ass, and getting hold of spare parts is a ****ing nightmare.

I have tiny hands, so the Gibson neck is completely out of the question for me. That's the beef I have with Gibson. I do think they make great archtop guitars, but I've never really been a fan of Les Paul guitars aesthetically; too clunky. I much prefer their hollow / semi-hollow guitars. And again, that neck.

Fender have some serious issues, but they're very durable and player-friendly instruments. The Stratocaster isn't even remotely the most exciting looking guitar, but they're actually putting out some decent instruments now with noiseless pickups...which is a vast improvement. They also started making Blacktop series instruments which are more aggressive Fender guitars with reasonable price tags, which is pretty dank. I still love Fender, and they're small-hand friendly.

Ibanez...well. I've never been a huge fan, but I don't really play heavier music myself. When they started their Artcore series, I saw those guitars and was pumped. Many people gave them shining reviews, and I almost bought one. Almost. I realized, after playing a buddy's AF75 that they're really not top-of-the-line instruments in the slightest. You're paying for looks with those, pretty much. I will say that fretboard access is definitely superb, but they make some weak hollowbody and semi-hollowbody instruments.

Can't say I agree here. The AK95 in particular jumps out as a very nice hollowbody for the price. The only reason I don't own one is because I went for an epiphone swingster instead, mostly on the basis of the filtertron style pickups for a different style with some jangle.

The RGT series are excellent too, and the RG550 is nigh-on legendary, along with the S540 and so on.

Ibanez make some excellent instruments in every area, they really do. I don't think thats up for question. What is up for question is whether their design decisions make sense for the consumer. As great as the edge and ZR and Edge Pro trems are, Ibanez haven't endeared themselves to traditionalists by insisting on using proprietary hardware, and subsequently making their stuff difficult to customise or get replacement parts for. Need a new trem arm holder for an Edge Zero? BUY A NEW TREM, SPARE PARTS NOT SOLD.

i own an Ibanez, it's not really sceney or wankey-shreddy

it's versatile - the 2 humbuckers and single coil in their 6 different configurations allows me to get great tones for funk, blues, metal, jazz and country

Gibson and Fenders doesn't come with locking trems - i'm a crazy divebomber

and which guitar producer makes such slim necks and short frets?

Ibanez ALL the way, dudes and dudettes

See.

This is a point that the guy talking to me brought up. It's actually what started the whole thing.

He sent me a link of a truely purrrrty guitar. And it was an Ibanez.

He swears by them.

My only experience with Ibanez was a few bass guitars that I owned back in high school (a 4 string and a 5 string). They seemed pretty cheaply made, and the sound quality wasn't they best, but it was good bang for your buck, which seems to be the selling point for most Ibanez products (good price point rather than quality).

I can't see this as a problem imo, because of the tone nob - it can be use to change the sound of the guitar. Frequency analysis shows that Fender single coil pickups have both higher levels of both high and low frequencies, with lower levels of mid range frequency. This gives Fender guitars with single coils that trademark twangy sound. If it's a pretty decent guitar with good pickups and the electronics in it are OK one can use either the tone to warm up the sound or use the volume to bleed off some of the high end off the single and still end up with a decent sound. Having a Strat in the 2 or 4 position also warms up the sound a bit too.


Even though I like Fender guitars, I don't think Fender is the greatest guitar company out there when it comes to manufacturing quality guitars down to the finest details, and feel sometimes they rely on their reputation from the past to sells their guitars - but this is true with most guitar companies imo.

To be honest this whole argument is mute. With enough modding any guitar can sound like any other guitar. Also how one is better than the other I dont know, they are typically used for different purposes.

Not every time but Fenders have been long used for cleaner sounding music while gibsons (at least as of last) are more used in distorted music.


Also anyone who knocks Gibson or Fender as a company has the right to do so but fails miserably. Even if they go through bad periods (which all companies are bound to do) they each created the most popular and widely used guitars today.

Ibanez wouldnt be selling guitars if not for these companies.

That reasoning is bull****. A company that trades a sub-par product is a company that trades a sub-par product, regardless of their heritage. Be it a guitar company, a bank, a cinema or anything else, the product you are selling to me this moment is the important thing.

I did not buy a guitar in order to own a piece of history. I bought a guitar to play it and make music. If the guitar in question is capable of doing that well, for a reasonable price, I will respect the company that made it. If it is not, as many recent gibsons or fenders are not, then I will not respect your company until the time at which you provide me with a product meeting the standards of quality your advertising (Or more importantly, pricing) purports those products to provide.

For less than £3k I can buy a guitar handmade by a luthier to my exact spcifications out of my choice of hardware, woods, and design features. It will be measured to fit my body and will be in every way the closest possible thing to what I want, built to a high standard even by the standards of boutique production, let alone mass production. The hardware will be customized, the pickups my choice, the neck profile copied from my favourite guitar, the fretwire my size and choice of material, and the body sized to fit me and balanced to fit me too. It will be built from start to finish by one man, with whom I will have direct contact throughout the build process in order to turn out an instrument that isn't just a collection of paper specifications, but also a piece of functional design, integrated in every sense posible to achieve a high quality end product.

Sadly, for upwards of £7k I cannot get any of that from Gibson, Fender, or PRS, to name but 3 particularly overpriced guitar companies. Thats more than twice as much, for LESS, and that is bull****.

As great as a good old strat is, or a good les paul, or SG or Explorer or M-II or Jaguar or Jazzmaster, they're great because they're good instruments, not because they're oft copied instruments.

It would still be nice to buy a guitar off the rack and not have to mod it, or worry about dull pick ups or fret buzz etc etc.

That was a rule of thumb that carried over from the 60s when they needed the humbucker to overdrive tube (valve) amps. I don't know how much it really matter nowadays when using distortion pedal, but imo humbuckers still do a better job for a tighter distortion, but not every humbucker have the same treble response and the ones on certain mid range guitars are dull when playing clean.

I wont disagree with anything you said. But I think you missed part of what I meant. When talking about getting (for instance) a Gibson I dont mean new, I mean in any condition and from anyone. There are so many WELL MADE ones floating aorund the paper, craigslist, friends, and other sources.

And so few of them are from the late 70's or 80's that those periods can be effectively missed out, the 90's aren't a great deal better, the 00's are awful, and we're just now starting to see an improvement again. You have to be so very, very choosy when it comes to buying a used les paul.

Counting out an entire decades worth of guitars is absurd. You have to take them on a guitar by guitar basis. I have played and seen some amazing new models. Especially there Reissues. Now I may not be the best guitarist but I dont know quite a bit about lutherie, and telling if a guitar is made well or not is not the most challnging task.

If you always make sure to play for a drunken audience they will never hear the difference anyway. Just buy a walmart special (not that theres anything wrong with walmart) and paint Gibson on there and pluck away.

Epiphone Special 2 ftw!

yes <3 actually quite glad I didn't buy that as my first guitar