Venting about Transparent Finishes

[Maertl513]

@László: It's always the feel to sit in the grand auditorium or lecture hall of an university attending a lecture of the most popular professor, who always shares his wise knowledge and thoughts with the students, when you respond on certain topics.

@Nathan Shane: More than other brands PRS put the focus on function of all and attractive look.
Therefore bright grain is always part of the advertising.
There are a few others, but not big players: Frank Hartung, Nik Huber, Pensa Suhr.
I remember Gibsons LP with AAA+ tops - but PRS maple tops, regardless standard or 10-Top at that time. PRS' tops remained in comparison mouthwatering. Gibson (Fender) was more kinda Prussian modesty.
The decision to my Core PRS founded first on technical specs, but it was logical without any hesitation, that the guitar needed to have perfection in colour and grain.
I don't prefer opaque colours.

The SE line started - as mentioned - with an affortable version of the Santana model.
In nowadays PRS SE offers/offered models, which are not part of the S2 and Core line.
Chris Robertson, Torrero, Marc Holcomb [there was a small batch of Private Stock Holcombs], Mikael Akerfeldt and so on.

And to take the dead fish or bone on the floor with trades via e-commerce vs. in persona buyings in a store:

I bought my (1st) Core and the SE online at different dealers. The dealer, who sold me the Core, had all guitars in stock presented on their homepage. Therefore I could select the guitar, which had the most seductive appearance.

SE was bought at (highly likely) world's largest music store (which is Thomann in Germany). They had only a symbol picture of the SE.
I share a good and long relationship to the responsible PRS Sales Manager for that region. I asked him about the quantity of purchased SE Marc Holcombs.
He told me his sales.
After that I mailed to the guitar branch, providing my actual intent of buying, and asking them kindly to send me pictures of their Holcombs in stock in forehand of my decision.
They were supportive - and I made my choice.

The 2nd Core was a second hand purchase, I fetched it in person at the first owner.

A non-PRS, 2½ Grands worth, was bought aswell online. The dealer provides symbol pics on his homepage. Quick request for pics. Got them. Selected the nicest.

 

[WingerRules]

Sorry, but I just don’t understand the thinking behind producing guitars of this aesthetic nature.

Well... if that's the hill you want to die on, then you better thank God for...

 

[Prina]

They produced Epiphones and Gibsons in the same factory, slapping a different name on each, until they got the idea to turn Epiphone into the bargain brand, and eventually, into the overseas-made brand.

Gibson's original bargain brand was Kalamazoo. From CME:
During the guitar boom of the late 60’s when Rock ‘n’ Roll was king and everybody wanted to get their hands on an electric guitar, Gibson produced electric solid body guitars and basses with Kalamazoo on the headstock. After Gibson’s buyout of Epiphone, Epi’s were marketed as a middle-tier electric guitar, whereas Kalamazoo was strictly marketed as a low-cost, beginner guitar. “U.S.A.” was added to the headstock of these guitars to differentiate them from the cheap import guitars that served as competition at the time.

From 1967 to 1969, the bodies of the KG-1 and 2 closely resembled the body style of the popular Melody Maker or Gibson SG with double cutaway horns, but removed the contours from the cutaways. The KG-1 featured one single-coil pickup, a volume knob and a tone knob and a Maestro vibrola behind its wraparound tailpiece. The KG-2 offered two single-coil pickups, with double volume and tone knobs. The KG-2A followed the vein of its predecessor by offering a Maestro vibrola as well.

The KG-2, pictured below, happened to be my first electric guitar (used for $60) split with my older brother. Almost everything about it was low budget.

 

[archtop]

Gibson's original bargain brand was Kalamazoo. From CME:
During the guitar boom of the late 60’s when Rock ‘n’ Roll was king and everybody wanted to get their hands on an electric guitar, Gibson produced electric solid body guitars and basses with Kalamazoo on the headstock. After Gibson’s buyout of Epiphone, Epi’s were marketed as a middle-tier electric guitar, whereas Kalamazoo was strictly marketed as a low-cost, beginner guitar. “U.S.A.” was added to the headstock of these guitars to differentiate them from the cheap import guitars that served as competition at the time.

From 1967 to 1969, the bodies of the KG-1 and 2 closely resembled the body style of the popular Melody Maker or Gibson SG with double cutaway horns, but removed the contours from the cutaways. The KG-1 featured one single-coil pickup, a volume knob and a tone knob and a Maestro vibrola behind its wraparound tailpiece. The KG-2 offered two single-coil pickups, with double volume and tone knobs. The KG-2A followed the vein of its predecessor by offering a Maestro vibrola as well.

The KG-2, pictured below, happened to be my first electric guitar (used for $60) split with my older brother. Almost everything about it was low budget.

Yesteryear's "cheap" and "student" guitars are today's "vintage" and "collectible" guitars.

 

[László]

Gibson's original bargain brand was Kalamazoo. From CME:
During the guitar boom of the late 60’s when Rock ‘n’ Roll was king and everybody wanted to get their hands on an electric guitar, Gibson produced electric solid body guitars and basses with Kalamazoo on the headstock. After Gibson’s buyout of Epiphone, Epi’s were marketed as a middle-tier electric guitar, whereas Kalamazoo was strictly marketed as a low-cost, beginner guitar. “U.S.A.” was added to the headstock of these guitars to differentiate them from the cheap import guitars that served as competition at the time.

From 1967 to 1969, the bodies of the KG-1 and 2 closely resembled the body style of the popular Melody Maker or Gibson SG with double cutaway horns, but removed the contours from the cutaways. The KG-1 featured one single-coil pickup, a volume knob and a tone knob and a Maestro vibrola behind its wraparound tailpiece. The KG-2 offered two single-coil pickups, with double volume and tone knobs. The KG-2A followed the vein of its predecessor by offering a Maestro vibrola as well.

The KG-2, pictured below, happened to be my first electric guitar (used for $60) split with my older brother. Almost everything about it was low budget.

Yup, I forgot all about Kalamazoo guitars! Most of the players in bands around here were Fender or Gibson types. There were a few Ricks, and a few Gretsches, and that's pretty much all I was aware of back then.

On the weekends I was either playing gigs or hanging out with friends. I wasn't into gear at all. Looking back, that seems strange, but I had some nice stuff that worked, and I was fine with it.

 

[László]

@László: It's always the feel to sit in the grand auditorium or lecture hall of an university attending a lecture of the most popular professor, who always shares his wise knowledge and thoughts with the students, when you respond on certain topics.

If only I knew what the heck I was talking about!

 

[Prina]

Yesteryear's "cheap" and "student" guitars are today's "vintage" and "collectible" guitars.

Oh yeah... nuthin' better than a 'vintage' Masonite body along with poor tuners, weak pickups and failing electronics!

Yup, I forgot all about Kalamazoo guitars! Most of the players in bands around here were Fender or Gibson types. There were a few Ricks, and a few Gretsches, and that's pretty much all I was aware of back then.

With what you guys were getting paid at the time y'all could afford them.

Fortunately, a few years after we got the Kalamazoo my brother got a used '66 ES-335 and I followed with an LP. Massive difference. I think the Kalamazoo eventually became a movie prop.

 

[veinbuster]

On the weekends I was either playing gigs or hanging out with friends. I wasn't into gear at all. Looking back, that seems strange, but I had some nice stuff that worked, and I was fine with it.

I was the same. I didn’t look at gear, well except when I blew up and amp and had to replace it. Somehow, I went through a lot of amps.

I do remember liking the artwork on Fender ads in the early 70s.

 

[Prs Mods too]

I also never looked at gear until I needed a replacement. Still kinda that way really. My friends Dad told me early on that as long as it plays ok the main thing is technique and theory. Once you get really good with those then you can start looking at different gear. That really stuck with me.

 

[WingerRules]

I also never looked at gear until I needed a replacement. Still kinda that way really. My friends Dad told me early on that as long as it plays ok the main thing is technique and theory. Once you get really good with those then you can start looking at different gear. That really stuck with me.

Boy am I glad I never got that advice, or at least, never listened to it if I did. If I had to learn theory to play I would have never wasted my time picking up guitar.

 

[archtop]

Boy am I glad I never got that advice, or at least, never listened to it if I did. If I had to learn theory to play I would have never wasted my time picking up guitar.

You never learned music theory? What did you do in high school geometry class? Study geometry? I sat in the back row with Dick Grove's Harmony and Theory Applied to Improvisation on All Instruments vol. 1 - 3. Luckily I aced the geometry final as it offset the solid 'F' I was getting going into the final. I had to put away the music theory books for 2 weeks to study for that final and I blame that 2 week break for killing my career in music. Damn that geometry... who needs it!

 

[aamefford]

You never learned music theory? What did you do in high school geometry class? Study geometry? I sat in the back row with Dick Grove's Harmony and Theory Applied to Improvisation on All Instruments vol. 1 - 3. Luckily I aced the geometry final as it offset the solid 'F' I was getting going into the final. I had to put away the music theory books for 2 weeks to study for that final and I blame that 2 week break for killing my career in music. Damn that geometry... who needs it!

Now that’s just funny! I spent geometry staring at the cute girl in the fuzzy sweater to magical to touch who sat in front of me.

 

[Moondog Wily]

Now that’s just funny! I spent geometry staring at the cute girl in the fuzzy sweater to magical to touch who sat in front of me.

I spent Geometry class getting sent to the principals office because the teacher and I did not see eye to eye! He hated that I refused to do his homework and aced all the tests! Got straight A's on all tests and he gave me a D- in the class because I refused to do the homework (that I obviously did not need to learn this material) ;~)) Rather than challenging me, he punished me, a questionable learning model!

 

[Bogner]

OP - You Shouldn't Ever Get Upset With What You Bought When You Buy Blind. If You Get Upset With Anybody it should Be With Yourself For Buying Blind. There Are Plenty Of Dealers Out There Who Will "Reveal" What Guitar You Will Be Getting So Do Business With Them.

Here Is How I See It.
1. Change Your Buying Methods
2. Change Your Buying Source
3. Buy Painted Guitar, Not Stained Guitars
4. Private Stock Is Your Friend if All Else Fails.

 

[Nathan Shane]

I wanted to clarify what this post was actually about…my dislike and venting about transparent finishes. And yes, while I made mention about buying a guitar unseen, that aspect was an issue, but not the issue. But since we’re on the topic of buying a guitar unseen, even seeing photos of a guitar is only trustworthy to a point. Showing wood grain and wood pieces is easily seen in a photo. The greater issue with photos is that we don’t know just how accurate the guitar’s colors and exposure are. In photos, colors vary in many different ways, in terms of hue, saturation, brightness, gloss, etc. Each of us sees colors differently. And this is the same for how different screens show and reproduce color.

So when we’re looking at Sweetwater’s (or other retailers, sellers) guitar photos, to what degree is their ability to reproduce and communicate an instrument’s true to life colors? Personally, I have complete faith that Sweetwater has the expertise to accurately photograph their guitars. Throughout my music career, I’ve purchased most every guitar having seen the instrument first in person. But I’ve also purchased guitars after seeing photos of the instrument, only to be disappointed (and upset) that when I’m finally holding the guitar in my hands, I realize the instrument’s photos were not accurate enough in revealing how the guitar actually looks.

 

[Bogner]

I wanted to clarify what this post was actually about…my dislike and venting about transparent finishes. And yes, while I made mention about buying a guitar unseen, that aspect was an issue, but not the issue. But since we’re on the topic of buying a guitar unseen, even seeing photos of a guitar is only trustworthy to a point. Showing wood grain and wood pieces is easily seen in a photo. The greater issue with photos is that we don’t know just how accurate the guitar’s colors and exposure are. In photos, colors vary in many different ways, in terms of hue, saturation, brightness, gloss, etc. Each of us sees colors differently. And this is the same for how different screens show and reproduce color.

So when we’re looking at Sweetwater’s (or other retailers, sellers) guitar photos, to what degree is their ability to reproduce and communicate an instrument’s true to life colors? Personally, I have complete faith that Sweetwater has the expertise to accurately photograph their guitars. Throughout my music career, I’ve purchased most every guitar having seen the instrument first in person. But I’ve also purchased guitars after seeing photos of the instrument, only to be disappointed (and upset) that when I’m finally holding the guitar in my hands, I realize the instrument’s photos were not accurate enough in revealing how the guitar actually looks.

All Good Points And I Get It And Agree...But Did The "Disappointing" Guitars At Least Play Good? To Me, That Is The Most Important.

 

[Nathan Shane]

All Good Points And I Get It And Agree...But Did The "Disappointing" Guitars At Least Play Good? To Me, That Is The Most Important.

Yes, they played good after some minor tweaking of the action and that’s ultimately the most important aspect. When I first started playing guitar 40+ years ago, I knew nothing technical about guitars. I just purchased guitars based solely upon their look and played them “as is” because they looked cool. It took a few years for my awareness to develop in regard to how well a guitar played and was setup. As the saying goes - “ignorance is bliss.” I sometimes long for those days, because I was far more blissful than critical when picking up guitars to try out.