future of guitars....

okay so i just recently got a new guitar and had been looking around at guitars and i noticed something and i was wondering what others thought:

it seems to me that parker and prs are taking fender and gibson's places as the constant quality guitars. i realize fender and gibson will always survive because of their history and fender has been making moves lately to try to catch up...but overall, it seems the direction of guitars is moving more towards parker and prs...more specifically prs since they have more celebrity backing right now and won that lawsuit with gibson over their single cut model.


what leads me to say this is mainly not only artist support but that while gibson and fenders are hit or miss in many cases with not only their foriegn guitars but also their domestic models while parker and prs both seem very consistantly quality with both domestic and models made out of the country. better product eventually means more popular product, right?

will we possibly be asking in the future if someone is more a parker guy or a prs guy instead of a fender guy or gibson guy?

Originally Posted by: tehplatypus... will we possibly be asking in the future if someone is more a parker guy or a prs guy instead of a fender guy or gibson guy?

[font=trebuchet ms]~shrug~ I play Yamahas and Washburns.[/font]

Originally Posted by: Lordathestrings[font=trebuchet ms]~shrug~ I play Yamahas and Washburns.[/font]

yeah but i think you know what i meant....how it seems people can be split up into either fender or gibson people. the david gilmores and the angus youngs.

I think you will always have your "clicks" when it comes to guitars. How many people love SRV, and Hendrix and so on, and want that tone? They're most of your strat fans. How many folks love the rock sound only a Gibson LP can give you? What I'm gettin at here is everyone is different and buys different brands or may own more than one brand already. Therefore, no one certain company will dominate the market any time soon.

Originally Posted by: Lordathestrings[font=trebuchet ms]~shrug~ I play Yamahas and Washburns.[/font]

I'm with you all the way brother...I'd choose a washburn over a fender or gibson any day. Even my crappy $100 washburn is better than any strat I've played. :p

Originally Posted by: Lordathestrings[font=trebuchet ms]~shrug~ I play Yamahas and Washburns.[/font]

Im also with you dude, If only some guitarist would not be that " brand conscious", they will discover that some $200+ Washburns, Yamahas and even Dean guitars are equal if not better than those expensive Gibsons, Fenders and PRS (especially the signature models).

Always remember that when we purchase those big names, we are not just paying for our guitar but part of your payment goes to the marketing, advertising and endorsement fees by famous artist to further broaden the scope of their market share. But when we remove those factors, we will realize that what we have purchased is just as good as those cheap guitars made by those companies who didn't spend too much on their marketing schemes and strategies.

But if you have cash, why not go for those Big time brands.....anyway everyone is entitled for their right to choose, and what you think satisfies you and makes you happy will always be the best :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by: tehplatypusit seems to me that parker and prs are taking fender and gibson's places as the constant quality guitars. i realize fender and gibson will always survive because of their history and fender has been making moves lately to try to catch up...but overall, it seems the direction of guitars is moving more towards parker and prs...more specifically prs since they have more celebrity backing right now and won that lawsuit with gibson over their single cut model.

what leads me to say this is mainly not only artist support but that while gibson and fenders are hit or miss in many cases with not only their foriegn guitars but also their domestic models while parker and prs both seem very consistantly quality with both domestic and models made out of the country. better product eventually means more popular product, right?

will we possibly be asking in the future if someone is more a parker guy or a prs guy instead of a fender guy or gibson guy?

I think this goes more along with the younger guitar crowd. PRS and/or Parker might be the popular "trend" at the moment, but as has been said, there is no substitute for a real Les Paul, or Strat. However, it is true that Gibson and Fender have sub pare QC when compaired to PRS (can't speak for Parker, can't stand them myself). BUT, there will alway's be a dud or two that slip through, and that goes for any company. I'm not saying they don't make great guitars, because they do... They're just not as consistant.

When I went to the music store to purchase a new guitar a few years ago, I didn't go with my mind set on a PRS, or anything particular for that matter. I sat down and played a few Fenders, Gibsons, Ibanez, PRS, and a few more. I played them all acoustically, with no amp. I picked the one that felt like it was made for my hands. It just so happened to be a PRS, and luckily, it sounded pretty darn good as well. I still like Gibsons and Fenders, and plan to own a few of both some day, but at the moment... I couldn't be happier with my PRS.

People need to stop playing with their eyes, and start playing with their hands and ears. It's not a question of who makes the better guitar, it's a question of who makes the right guitar for you.

Originally Posted by: PonyOneI haven't played a contemporary Washburn in the $100-200 range that even approached most of the Fenders I've played... I've played some of the more expensive ones that have been nice but the cheap ones are, IMHO, down there with the Squiers and other throwaway guitars...

[font=trebuchet ms]I wouldn't expect to get a 'lifetime' guitar from any company for that price. I paid about CDN$640 for my first Yamaha SBG1000, bought new in 1984. My second 1984 SBG1000 cost me about US$600 two years ago. Lately, they seem to go for about US$800 - US$1000. My Yamaha RBX350 bass cost me CDN$250, very used. I bought my used Washburn A-20CS 6 years ago for CDN$400. The A-5 re-issue was about US$300 before I changed all the hardware. My Washburn 12-string was about CDN$500 used. I spent about CDN$1000 on my used 1965 Yamaha SA30 12-string, but that's a rare axe, and I wanted it bad. So even buying used, I spend more than $200 or $300.

I think you have to match price-ranges to get a decent comparison. My first 1984 SBG1000 is the only one I bought new that I still own. But I bought that axe because it was a much better guitar than a similar Gibson Les Paul Custom that cost twice as much.

I have never seen a $500+ Yamaha guitar on the racks that didn't show great quality. But I'm not the only one who knows that you have to pick through the Gibsons to find a good one. I've owned several Fenders over the years, but the only one I bought new was a MIJ '62 re-issue Strat. It was good 'out of the box', and I still miss it sometimes. But I picked that one out of almost a dozen Strats on the rack. Once you get over $500, you should not have to sort through the pile to find a good one. They should all be 'good ones'.[/font]

well,i dont think Fender or Gibson will ever be replaced as the big brands, but if you notice, many brand copy fender and gibson, like its a strat, except for a little noch, or its a les paul, except for a little fret or somthing change

If we're going to talk about poor quality control among Fender and Gibson... I will go ahead and say that if PRS ever gets to the point that they start MASS producing guitars and selling guitars in the numbers that Fender and Gibson do.... They will have poor quality control as well. As long as a basic PRS model still costs more than 1800 dollars... they will never replace anyone on a full-market scale... They may take over the Higher end of the market... in which they pretty much have... and Gibson is starting to pric themselves out of that hot spot. I think that the reason yuo see a ton of people playing PRS guitars in the industry is because it gives them the sound they want. Every modern rock band that I have seen live in the last year and a half has atleast one... in most cases 2 or 3... guitar players playing PRS guitars. These are groups like Shinedown, 3 days grace, 3 doors down, breaking benjamin, chevelle, seether, no address, linkin park, alter bridge, and a whole host of other bands... This is how it breaks down to me... Classic Rock: Les Pauls, Blues: Stratocaster, Rock/Pop: PRS, Metal: ESP/Ibanez. They each have their target audiences

Originally Posted by: aschleman... I will go ahead and say that if PRS ever gets to the point that they start MASS producing guitars and selling guitars in the numbers that Fender and Gibson do.... They will have poor quality control as well. ...

[font=trebuchet ms]I agree, but I do not accept that as an inevitable result of high-volume production. Take a long, close look at Yamaha guitars. They arrive at the dealerships already set up. The fit and finish is always good-to-go. I bought my first SBG1000 back in 1984 because it was a better guitar than the Gibson Les Paul Custom I originally set out to buy that day. Quality Control is a matter of the cultural mindset of the people who do the work. American manufacturers that do not instill a culture of quality result in sloppy workmanship. So far, it looks like PRS does cultivate a quality-oriented workforce, resulting in high-quality products. Heritage makes guitars the way Gibson should do, and the results are uniformly excellent.[/font]