Most advanced guitar ever...

But it might be a forgone conclusion that high-end instruments already have the tone, feel, and vibe thing covered.
Or not.
One bit of the aesthetic that I'm very sensitive to is the actual shape of the body. "Right" and "Wrong" seem to just grab me. The cutaways on a 335 style semihollow, for instance - just the smallest change in the profile can make the difference between a beautifully flowing, integrated curve and a stuck-on mouse ear. For an example, look at pics of how the Country Gentleman has changed over the years. Harrison's has the sweetest profile, in my opinion, but they then do a number of different, less attractive cutaway shapes before finally drifting back to the original decades later.
 
As much as I'd prefer to disagree with you about looks, I cant.

But at the risk of sounding like a broke record. I choose looks over sound and playability when I got my CE24 and I've been paying for that mistake ever since. Yes, my one is beautiful, and the other one was ugly. But... the point is, I bought the wrong guitar. Aesthetics are a nice thing. Function is a vital thing.

I don't think you can take anything for granted irrespective of the price, brand or spec of the instrument. They still all need to be individually assessed.

So, the guitar of your dreams may not sound or feel anything like what you think it is supposed to sound or feel like, until you've actually held it and test-driven it? Despite how you were attracted to the guitar because of good-looking the guitar is?

TBH, I've purchased several single-coil style Strat guitars and never been able to bond with them entirely, simply because my ears prefer humbucker pickups over single coils.

The guitars had all the visual esthetic appeal that would make one oooh and aaah over them, but it took several months of concerted listening to myself struggle to obtain a decent sound from them 1) because the neck profile made it more difficult to play, 2) the string height made it difficult to bend strings, 3) the single coil pickups didn't have the midrange "quack" one might expect in the #2 and #4 pickup positions.

These 3 factors made me reassess my owning these guitars. And return to PRS because of my previous ownership and experience with PRS guitars.

Or not.
One bit of the aesthetic that I'm very sensitive to is the actual shape of the body. "Right" and "Wrong" seem to just grab me. The cutaways on a 335 style semihollow, for instance - just the smallest change in the profile can make the difference between a beautifully flowing, integrated curve and a stuck-on mouse ear. For an example, look at pics of how the Country Gentleman has changed over the years. Harrison's has the sweetest profile, in my opinion, but they then do a number of different, less attractive cutaway shapes before finally drifting back to the original decades later.

I think what I was trying to say was, "high-end instruments automatically have the sound, tone, vibe, feel thing covered" because of the quality workmanship that went into the high-end instrument. I think most folks might agree that a PS is included in this, however a high-end LP might not be. Body shape may certainly appeal to some, but since personal tastes vary, there are other factors that may be more important to individual guitarists (e.g. stock pickups, neck carve, weight, etc)
 
Last edited:
I think what I was trying to say was, "high-end instruments automatically have the sound, tone, vibe, feel thing covered" because of the quality workmanship that went into the high-end instrument.
Actually, I was thinking of the Relish guitar that started the discussion. Everyone who's seen one seems to agree that the workmanship is there, and they're certainly high end if price is any measure. Nevertheless, none of us thought it had tone, vibe or any kind of character at all.

The thing about the cutaways is really a separate comment. But yes, aesthetics is one factor among many, and strictly speaking it should be the least of our concerns compared to more practical things like tone and playability. Nevertheless, the Heart hath reasons of it's own!
 
So, the guitar of your dreams may not sound or feel anything like what you think it is supposed to sound or feel like, until you've actually held it and test-driven it? Despite how you were attracted to the guitar because of good-looking the guitar is?

I know there are LOTS of people that have bought a guitar purely because of the way it looks. I can think of MANY that bought a Les Paul or Strat because of the look and spent most of their early years playing these guitars because of the way they look primarily. I know quite a few that wouldn't buy a guitar - like a Tele because of its aesthetic. Many that 'try' to make a guitar work for them and avoid buying others because of their aesthetic.

I also can't imagine someone buying a guitar based on the way it plays/sounds etc if the 'look' doesn't fit their genre - like buying a Warlock or some pointy guitar that's associated with Shred to play in their worship at church. There are people that won't buy a PRS because it looks so flash with the high quality flame tops because it doesn't fit with their 'grunge' look so its not just about playability or tonality - they are buying to fit their image, their genre etc.

I think the majority of guitarists can look at a guitar and have an opinion on where that guitar 'fits', the genre and musical style just on the way it looks. Most, if not all guitars can probably do a job in any genre and style of play. A classic strat with a 7.25" radius isn't a guitar for Shredders for example - yet Yngwie makes it work. It doesn't matter how good or close to a 63/64 Strat the Silver Sky gets, if you don't like the headstock or birds, you aren't going to buy that over a 'real' Fender - even if its not quite as playable or isn't quite as good tonally across ALL the pick-up selections - you probably won't even try it because it doesn't look 'right' to you.

There are numerous people that have bought an instrument because of the way it looks and whether they end up keeping it or trying to make it work for them. Those trying to hunt the 'perfect' Gibson Les Paul because that's the guitar they like visually. There are lots of people that buy a guitar because of the way it looks and hoping to 'mod' it to get it to play and sound the way they want with after market parts and even changing the neck - either the shape or finish to make it feel and play the way they want. That isn't just about functionality - ie making string changes quicker and easier with tuners or improving the tuning stability by changing the nut, these are mods to change the sound, change the playability but it was the 'look' that made them buy in the first place!
 
Actually, I was thinking of the Relish guitar that started the discussion. Everyone who's seen one seems to agree that the workmanship is there, and they're certainly high end if price is any measure. Nevertheless, none of us thought it had tone, vibe or any kind of character at all.

The thing about the cutaways is really a separate comment. But yes, aesthetics is one factor among many, and strictly speaking it should be the least of our concerns compared to more practical things like tone and playability. Nevertheless, the Heart hath reasons of it's own!

That was the reason for my comment. While a guitar may have aesthetic appeal and quality workmanship, unless the sound, tone, and feel is there, the builder will have a lot of overstock that will never find its market niche. Personally, I find it quite puzzling as to why some guitarists might prefer guitars based on how they look, and consider the other factors as an afterthought.

Though I do get the notion of Mozzi's comment about why you might not desire a BC Rich Warlock for P&W, and perhaps why you might need a colorful guitar to pull off the tan cargo shorts/Hawaiian shirt thing ad infinitum...:)
 
Different strokes for different folks. Some days I really like the bling of a PRS, some days it makes me nauseous. I do have to like the way a guitar looks but I don’t need to love the way it looks.
 
- like buying a Warlock or some pointy guitar that's associated with Shred to play in their worship at church.

Church service demands a red SG. Devil horns integral to the design before anyone suspected!
 
Different strokes for different folks. Some days I really like the bling of a PRS, some days it makes me nauseous. I do have to like the way a guitar looks but I don’t need to love the way it looks.

Simple 'hog body and neck, rosewood fretboard, solid or satin burst color is enough for me. Some folks like to gild the lily, so it seems. Yet if folks can afford it, no sense putting up a fuss against popular opinion...

Regards modular pickups, if the guitar's resultant tone were better, I think there'd be a larger market for the OP's assertion. Perhaps the builder will use folks' feedback wisely and improve on the tone so there might be a niche for him.
 
Back
Top