Is it simply brand recognition and nostalgia why people keep buying Gibsons and Fenders?

[guitarman001]

By the way, on another forum I'm on we had two blind tests of Gibson vs prs... both times I thought the best tone belonged to the Gibson guitar but both times I was glad to be wrong.

There was no clear consensus... we're talking hard-core guitar heads and half of them got it wrong! So I decided it was better to get the guitar that plays best.

 

[JTroska]

Veering a little off the original question but...

I have to admit, as beautiful as PRS is, there's something about that classic clunky Les Paul look that grabs my heart the way a 1967 Ford Mustang does. Fender Strats, not so much.

That said, I can't quite get myself to buy one of those gorgeous Les Pauls I drool over. I know of a nice LP Traditional going for the price of an LP Studio that is tempting. But I've just had too much negative experience with Gibsons to actually pull the trigger... Yet.

My brain argues with my heart that a PRS S2 solid body would do a better job for about the same price.

But going back to the original topic... I get what you're saying because almost any other guitar company offers more practical instruments than Gibson or Fender for less money. But I guess the Gibsons and Fenders offer timeless looks and sound and brand recognition.

 

[Suppalak Klabdee]

There is another factor as well, a brand new true core PRS will set you at above $3,000 while the true meat and potato Fender strat will set you around $1,000-2,000 and Gibson LP standard at $2,000. These are for the "norm" models that people will think of from these brands. Most of the people will just not ready to spend that much for PRS.

Apart from that, we will have to accept the fact that in almost every corners of the world, when talking about electric guitars, people will think of either F or G, not PRS. The popularity on the global level are not close, and may not be getting any closer in the near future, or forever.

I have to admit that my dream guitar since I started playing back in 1989 has always been a Gibson Les Paul. It will always has that special place for me. The main reason was that a few iconic Thai guitarists used them (not Page nor Clapton) and that was what I grew up with. I have one in my arsenal, a 1987 LP Standard, and this one will stay with me until the end of the world. As special as it is for me, it is not the most comfortable to play nor the best sounding one but it still truly is "special".

 

[Maertl513]

@Suppalak Klabdee,
Thank you for repeating my point of view with the price level.

 

[Suppalak Klabdee]

@Suppalak Klabdee,
Thank you for repeating my point of view with the price level.

It took me 7 years to get my hands on PRS since I know of its existence. The price is the one reason for that!

But, it took me almost 25 years to get the first and only Gibson Les Paul, my iconic guitar. The only reason is that finding the right one, the good one, is that hard...

 

[Maertl513]

19 years to get my own PRS ;-)

 

[László]

I think the characteristic sound of a single-cutaway guitar is easily explainable. The extra contact between body & neck on the non-cutaway side adds some punch in the lower midrange.

I agree, as does more mass in the thicker body. And, uh...you know, the two piece bridge, and...maybe the scale length, neck and fingerboard woods...

It's interesting. On Pete Thorn's latest You Tube vid, he's asked if he thinks the woods matter, and of course, he gives pretty much the very same answers that you and I and others have discussed many, many times, and that we agree on.

 

[G-Man]

I think you also have to go back in time a bit to answer this question. Growing up in the late 70's, you had two choices, Fender and Gibson for decent guitars. Yes there were some Kramers and Ibanez guitars in addition to many unplayable starter guitars. Even then when Fender was bought out and only producing custom shop guitars and Gibson was teetering on bankruptcy, you still have only a few choices, Fender and Gibson in addition to Kramer and Ibanez who flooded the market because really nice Gibsons and Fenders were scarce and people had not figured out that the Japanese imports were actually really nice guitars.

Roll to today, people have tons of choices but Gibson and Fender are still thriving in the market because they build pretty good guitars and huge brand recognition across most musical segments and very strong artist relations across these segments. Much better than the 70's, 80's models and endorser list. Does PRS have the same situation,yes, to some extent. Their products are at par or above Fender or Gibson, they are innovators but I believe with the exception of a few big names, they are still a bit of a niche player in the market with a widening presence in heavier rock and country. Getting John Mayer and Martin Barre on the list will pay off for the company.

 

[kingsleyd]

I agree, as does more mass in the thicker body. And, uh...you know, the two piece bridge, and...maybe the scale length, neck and fingerboard woods...

I should probably have prefaced my statement with "Other things being equal," but since I was on my iPhone (I'm in France at the moment, yeah, poor poor pitiful me) I was uncharacteristically brief in my response.

The best demonstration I've experienced of the principle that not having a cutaway on the one side makes a diff, and what diff it makes, was by Tom Anderson and his right hand man Roy Fought. They did a road show in which they brought 12 guitars, 6 matched pairs of an S-style and a T-style. Within each pair, the wood recipe, the pickups, and the hardware were the same. (i.e., the S ones were hard tails with the same bridge setup as the T-styles) Across the 6 pairs there was some variation in the wood recipes. Very consistently, the T-types had more prominent lower mids.

In my own at-home experience it's not so much about matched A-B pairs as it is having multiple examples of both single- and double-cutaway guitars with all sorts of different combinations of woods, hardware, pickups, and scale lengths. The same observation holds: irrespective of everything else, the single-cutaway guitars generally have a more prominent lower midrange than the double-cutaway guitars. I spent a lot of time last summer carefully listening to and analyzing the sound of my various electric guitars. (N = 40, give or take) This is the conclusion I ended up with.

It's interesting. On Pete Thorn's latest You Tube vid, he's asked if he thinks the woods matter, and of course, he gives pretty much the very same answers that you and I and others have discussed many, many times, and that we agree on.

Yep. Pretty clear Pete is a guy who knows his guitar sounds: how to listen, how to get good sounds, and how & when to use them.

 

[guitarman001]

So double cuts have more low-mids?

UPDATE. I tried a 2016 standard HP LP today... and an R9. Both played like broomsticks, unfortunately. I immediately wanted to wash my hands an grab my PRS

 

[Michael_DK]

I should probably have prefaced my statement with "Other things being equal," but since I was on my iPhone (I'm in France at the moment, yeah, poor poor pitiful me) I was uncharacteristically brief in my response.

The best demonstration I've experienced of the principle that not having a cutaway on the one side makes a diff, and what diff it makes, was by Tom Anderson and his right hand man Roy Fought. They did a road show in which they brought 12 guitars, 6 matched pairs of an S-style and a T-style. Within each pair, the wood recipe, the pickups, and the hardware were the same. (i.e., the S ones were hard tails with the same bridge setup as the T-styles) Across the 6 pairs there was some variation in the wood recipes. Very consistently, the T-types had more prominent lower mids.

In my own at-home experience it's not so much about matched A-B pairs as it is having multiple examples of both single- and double-cutaway guitars with all sorts of different combinations of woods, hardware, pickups, and scale lengths. The same observation holds: irrespective of everything else, the single-cutaway guitars generally have a more prominent lower midrange than the double-cutaway guitars. I spent a lot of time last summer carefully listening to and analyzing the sound of my various electric guitars. (N = 40, give or take) This is the conclusion I ended up with.



Yep. Pretty clear Pete is a guy who knows his guitar sounds: how to listen, how to get good sounds, and how & when to use them.

Now THAT is a great demonstration. Thanks for that story.

 

[kingsleyd]

Even so, Fender is the dominant #1 and I really don't see any reason why people are so estatic over them? I think it's just the power of icons and symbols and brand recognition that keep sales so high for them.

Thoughts?

Guess I'll take a shot at answering the OP here, rather than going off on a tangent like I so often do.

Part of it is definitely the whole icon/symbol/brand recognition thing.

But part of it is that over a period of 60+ years the Stratocaster and Telecaster have clearly established themselves as professional, roadworthy guitars with a winning sound. Yeah, there are some quirks and limitations you deal with when playing them, and arguably the ones around the $1000 might sound a little generic next to the good vintage ones, but then you have to think about inflation and the fact that the '50s versions would list for more like $3000 today, plus you have to consider how many they built in a month then vs. now.

I have a '57 relic that cost me somewhere in the high 2000s new, so more or less the equivalent to what it would have cost had my dad bought it for me the day I was born in 1958. Every time I play it on a gig, it just has that sound and leaves me -- and my band-mates and anyone in the audience who's paying attention -- smiling. I'm used to the instrument's quirks and have learned to live with them, and I'm not trying to make it do anything it doesn't especially want to do. It's hard to argue with an instrument that works that well. And takes a licking and keeps on ticking, to borrow an advertising tag-line from a similarly mass-produced item. Non-pro players generally underestimate that side of it. Touring guitars take a beating, no matter how persnickety their owners are.

 

[G-Man]

Yes, King, you bring great insight into he conversation since both companies were on the brink at the same time and figured out how to flourish. Brand recognition and good products for the working musician. Sound familiar? Also take a listen to David Gilmour, Pete Townshend and Eric Clapton who all basically play the same guitar with some minor tweaks. Do they should like a classic stratocater? In some way, they may have secretly come over to the dark side of those dentist and lawyer guitars.

 

[clasbtenn]

So many observations here that are so absolutely correct.
When you grow up and see specific guitars and amps being used, talked about, and written about for so long, almost universally, it gets ingrained into your head.

It may take a generation or two more before PRS gets more equal footing into the F and G world...maybe.

I played those guitars for over 50 years. I am first getting into PRS, and while they may sound a bit different from F and G guitars, since I had been using F and G guitars, I still sounded like me, and not the players I was listening too for so long. It is what it is. When you have such a long-standing foothold on product recognition, it takes time for new products to gain similar footing.

As an example, look at the foreign car market. How long has it taken foreign cars to catch up with American car sales, and finally surpass them?

It may take longer in the guitar market, but even I see it beginning to happen, at least a little more then it used to be.

 

[bluenova]

It may take a generation or two more before PRS gets more equal footing into the F and G world...maybe.

I wonder what will happen to the company when Paul decides to retire????

 

[clasbtenn]

I wonder what will happen to the company when Paul decides to retire????

Well, someone in Paul's position may bring his family into the company, if they desire to carry on. If he sells outright, it will possibly go down in quality if the company buying him out is like most corporations doing business.

There is really no way to know these things ahead of time. Feel lucky in that you are playing guitar at a time when Paul is in his prime, and using his talents to his greatest advantage, which is also to the benefit of those playing PRS.

I'm late to the game, but happy I didn't miss the boat entirely.

 

[markintime]

Could be his son taking the reins over or maybe he's mentored someone like McCarty mentored him? He's certainly got plenty of talent, hopefully he also has someone with the proper business sense.

 

[coyote]

Getting John Mayer and Martin Barre on the list will pay off for the company.

Martin Barre? Sorry, but much as I love Tull and admire the playing of Martin Barre I just don't see his endorsement making a big diff for PRS. Because Tull's day as a live act has come and gone.

I've never lusted for LesPauls. They were THE guitar when I was coming up, while very few were playing Strats. But to me, with the exceptions of Jeff Beck and Al DiMieola, the most exciting and skilled rockers were playing Strats. So I went for Stratocasters. And Jeff Beck segued into Strats too starting around !975.... it is a more challenging guitar to play, and therefore has a tendency to expose a player's uniqueness.

Gotta say, I love how my 408 seems to occupy a niche right between the Strat and the LP.

 

[László]

I wonder what will happen to the company when Paul decides to retire????

He's handing the reins over to me to run the place.

"Who's LSchefman, and why is there a signature PRS model for this dude?"

"Oh, Paul Smith felt sorry for him or something, so when he retired, he decided to let this guy run the company. It's weird as hell."

"But what's that got to do with this model of guitar?"

"Trust me, it's the only way on EARTH that LSchefman could ever get a signature model made. I hear he's working for free just to make that happen."

"But he's old. Dude looks like he's 100."

"Yeah, actually, he's almost 800. Probably sleeps in a coffin."