Originally Posted by: alucard0941you know guys, there are many more better guitars than Fender and Gibsons

...(GASP!!! OMG I CANT BELIVE HE JUST SAID THERE ARE BETTER GUITARS THAN FENDER AND GIBSON!!! THAT CANNOT BE!!!!!! BUT NO!!!!!) I know in all the guitar books out there, the only guitars they mention are Fender and Gibsons, well for all you people who think those are the only quality guitars out there listen up:

May I add that Stratocasters and Telecasters, and Les Pauls are not even as close in quality as what they used to be at their birth. Now you can find many more guitars better than those companies, but no one choosed them cause you gotta have the the name brand... ;)

I belive if your gonna shell out 2000 bucks on a gibson thats mass produced, made in a factory and comes in box from the local guitar center, you might aswell slap yourself in the face if you were going to buy that guitar for the sound. You should take in some consideration into handmade guitars about the same price. They will offer much more in a guitar with precise details in qualitly.
You guys should visit some local guitar stores that are run privatly and see what they have to offer. Usually, they dont carry big name brands and only carry the stuff you cant find at the Guitar Center, and the really rare handmade guitars priced to compete with big name brands.



this is a Heritage guitar. They built this Les Paul copy that can mop the floors with any Gibson. Its handmade and costs $1199.99 while a Gibson Les Paul can cost in the same price range but is made in factory my machines.

I couldn't agree more. Heritage guitars are also built in the original Gibson factory in Kalamazoo, Mi. on the original machines, and was started by a group of original Gibson employees that didn't want to relocate to Nashville.

I think Fenders are more reasonably priced, but that is because of construction techniques. It is easier to produce a bolt on guitar with a flat top than a guitar with a glued in set dove tail neck joint. Also, it is more expensive to aquire the figured top woods that Gibson uses, and to carve them into an arch.

But for what Gibson charges, you think they could at least put on a METAL jack plate instead of the crummy PLASTIC plate that they commonly use....sheesh...I can't count how many times I have had to replace a cracked or broken jack plate for my customers that are Gibson owners. Another gripe would be the fragile headstocks. I've done inumerous repairs to Gibson headstocks. The reason being that they have an angle to the head stock, which does allow for the absence of string trees, but if it tips over backwards, the top of the headstock hits the ground before the rest of the guitar does and then SNAP! Another reason for the frail nature is that these necks have a glue joint near the headstock. The reason for that is to save money on construction because of how large a peice of wood you would need in order to produce the angle of the headstock. Fender does not have an angled headstock and make there necks from a single peice of wood. I have yet to ever see a broken headstock on a Fender. I'm not saying it isn't possible, but you would have to actually try to break the headstock on a fender...it isn't gonna break from just being knocked over.

For the price of most Gibsons or Fender Custom Shop guitars, I would rather go with a custom build for around the same price and control the specs myself. Independent luthiers are usually a real treat to work with, and give your instrument the individual attention that you deserve.

As for the original question, I prefer Fender. Gibsons just feel to "boxy" to me, and because of the shorter scale length I get all cramped up on the upper frets. I also don't like how high the strings are from the body or the angle they use in the neck pocket. Plus with the shorter scale, I would have to use a heavier gauge string to compensate for the "slack" feel of these guitars.

Phew....I'm outta breath :o