new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

midnite_man

midnite_man

New member
I want to put the question out for discussion concerning an issue I keep reading about at this and other websites; the issue being why do people say there are so many brand new guitars being put out factory-new by companies like Gibson and Fender that, in many people's opinion, are deemed as "bad ones" that a person has to weed through to get to the "good ones." The accompanied reason usually being "QC" or quality control at the factories.
Is this really the issue, or could much of this opinion be based on the fact that most guitars aren't going to be set up from the factory to play perfectly for all guitarists and there are many who don't take that into consideration when they pick one up to play? There's so much that can be tweaked on a guitar to make it more playable and accurate tone wise for an individual's fingers and ears.
What are your thoughts on this issue?
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

Well my brand new Les Paul standard has something rattling around in the body. I have read that it is wood chips that did not get blown out before the maple top was glued down. Apparently it is more common that you would think, so I am thinking about sending it back for another one.

On my strats, I replaced the necks (Hwy 1) with Warmoth Pro necks, and I am much happier with them. I suppose this could be a preference thing, but the Warmoth necks are light years ahead of the MIM necks.
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

Ayrton said:
Well my brand new Les Paul standard has something rattling around in the body. I have read that it is wood chips that did not get blown out before the maple top was glued down. Apparently it is more common that you would think, so I am thinking about sending it back for another one.

On my strats, I replaced the necks (Hwy 1) with Warmoth Pro necks, and I am much happier with them. I suppose this could be a preference thing, but the Warmoth necks are light years ahead of the MIM necks.
Click to expand...

You have a LP Standard Faded right?
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

Maybe we are so conscious about what goes into a guitar nowadays that we just look back to a time when we didn't know so much (even tough some details on vintage gear are so known they are reintroduced to contemporary gear).

Eat the hot dog but don't ask how it's made... unless the hot dog bites your fingers or the sausage breaks before you even touch it. That has something to do with how it was made and from what...
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

LSP said:
Maybe we are so conscious about what goes into a guitar nowadays that we just look back to a time when we didn't know so much (even tough some details on vintage gear are so known they are reintroduced to contemporary gear).
Click to expand...


i think thats pretty much it. especially being the information age and stuff, details of how guitars are "supposed to" be are far more accessable.
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

I think the more we play, and the more guitars we try, and the more guitars we own, get used to and get to know, the higher our standards get. My biggest gripe with new 'bad' guitars is resonation. The amount of guitars that will sound flat and dead in your hands if you just strum a G chord unplugged. I think you should be able to feel the guitar resonating on your lap when you strum that chord. Other stuff can be replaced, but this is the biggest factor for me. I have never changed a neck, but providing the frets are well rounded, and feels nice up and down, I'm not that picky with necks.

The fact that Fender put 9-42s on their Strats as standard does nothing to sell the guitar for me. 9/10 decent guitars sound cack with these on.
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

Any guitar can be set up to play well. That's just physics.

When I hear folks badmouthing Fenders and Gibsons it's usually the issue of quality control in reference to the build. It's usually about how well the frets are fitted, how well the finish has been done, how certain elements are not just put in to fit correctly but adjusted as they should be. I've seen things on both sides of the fence that had I the chance to walk into the office of the CEO of the company they would had to agree that something had gone wrong to let an error like that slip out. And especially with high-end isntruments things do happen and certain aspects get missed; it happens. What folks are grumbling the most about is the frequency at which it happens.

The other side of the coin is more along the line of the actual materials that are used. Everyone knows of the "boat anchor" Gibsons and Fenders from the 70's which the wood was just ungodly heavy. You don't see it as often now but what you do find to be common is smaller bodied instruments with the same material that just doesn't reasonate. For some a heavy guitar is what they want, for others it's light, so there is some subjectivity in there. But this sort of thing on high-end instruments is nowhere near as common as it used to be.
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

For what it is worth to this thread, I used to set up all my guitars on my own. However I had one that needed some work to the frets, so I had a pro fix her up, and wow. I now take all my new guitars to him straight away.
 
Re: new guitars: are there that many "bad ones" out there?

Robbiedbee said:
I think the more we play, and the more guitars we try, and the more guitars we own, get used to and get to know, the higher our standards get. My biggest gripe with new 'bad' guitars is resonation. The amount of guitars that will sound flat and dead in your hands if you just strum a G chord unplugged. I think you should be able to feel the guitar resonating on your lap when you strum that chord.
Click to expand...

Bingo. In general I find QC decent at the least..even among inexpensive guitars. there are SOME horrid ones, and some really good ones, but most are decent enough build...but VERY FEW are acoustically worth a crap.

The fact that Fender put 9-42s on their Strats as standard does nothing to sell the guitar for me. 9/10 decent guitars sound cack with these on.
Click to expand...

Light guage, and more importantly DEAD and/or CHEAP QUALITY strings are a problem. Converse to the point I made above: Alot of guitars I took home had a very significant increase in resonance with a new set of strings. I really think guitars should be restrung/re-setup fairly often by dealers (large and small), but none of them seem to want to do it. Even though I think it would move ALOT more product. Sometimes you can tell that a guitar just needs some new strings and TLC...e.g. my MIC Hamer Standard was like that. A new set of strings turned a decent instrument into a really nice bang for the buck axe.

I think the biggest "deal breaker" QC issues I see with most guitars are the nut, and fret job quality. Or the neck has been over/under bowed for so long or so badly, I'm not ballsy enough to risk putting the $ down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top