TALK @ PhilMusic.com - The Online Home of the Pinoy Musician
The Musician Forums => Guitar Central => Topic started by: rolexm on August 17, 2009, 11:34:43 AM
Title: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 17, 2009, 11:34:43 AM
I've read through so many threads that both bash cheap and expensive gear. Everyone has preferences wrt this. However, do we even wonder if the more expensive gear is really of GOOD quality?
How do you know you're only buying something for THE NAME? Is there a really significant difference between quality as cost goes up? For all we know cost can escalade exponentially but quality is growing at almost a flatline.
For those purists, maybe you should rethink about praising your gear. For those who are anti-purists, maybe you should consider reviewing what you have. That's just a maybe. What do you guys think?
The goal of this thread is to determine when we can say something is practical, meaning the cost and the quality are at par.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 17, 2009, 11:55:36 AM
Let me tell you this story.
I've been doing electronics since I was Grade 6. At first I used my kuya's gear, for instance, his Stanley screwdrivers. They were tough, very durable and very functional.
When I got to College, my brother was no longer living with me, so I had to buy my own tools. Being on a college allowance, I bought those 50 pesos a set screwdrivers which were so pissy they would round out when met with a tough screw.
Once I started working, I was able to afford those Stanley screw drivers again and life went along as usual.
Then one day, a screwdriver salesman came to my shop. He said "Hey man, you should try this screwdriver ! Its got a tungsten-carbide tip with titanium shaft for the ultimate in toughness. This thing will NEVER round out except if it meets another titanium screw (and how many of those do you find lying around??). The micro-serrations on the edge of the driving tip will "bite" into the screw and ensure positive traction as you turn the screwdriver. The new synthetic rubber grip varies its viscosity as the temperature of your hand will make it stickier ! No more dropping screwdrivers ! The grip on this thing will make it stick to your hand like glue ! So order your Ultramega Screwdriver now for the very cheap price of Fifteen thousand pesos ! But wait, there's more ! If you order now, you'll get a free titanium hammer. Show off to your friends. Be the envy of every hammer-wielding person on your block. This hammer is light but very strong and is 99.5% sterling silver plated. Order now and get your UltraMega screwdriver with your free gift of the Titanium Hammer. We will even give you glass cases for these amazing tools so you can show them off to your friends with pride and joy that any tool owner can have.
I told him "take your driver and hammer and shove it up your arse".
n.b. - some parts of this story are fictional
So what does it tell me ?
1. At the bottom is crap 2. Somewhere in the middle is something that's just right 3. Somewhere beyond your needs is impractical although undoubtedly of higher quality.
So which gear is your gear ? At the end of the day, it's what suits you.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 17, 2009, 12:48:56 PM
can't wait till the guy w/ the $5k Suhr , boutique pedals & hi end NYC Tube Amps posts more of his obnoxious remarks... (http://smileyicons.net/s/528.gif)
BRING OUT THE POPCORN!!! (http://smileyicons.net/s/552.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 17, 2009, 12:52:07 PM
To some people, there will be no difference at both ends of the economic scale.
The Quality vs. Cost argument presupposes they are opposites. If they are, then no use in arguing.
As BAMF wisely put it, it is what suits you. And I may get flak for this, but there some quality gear that is cost efficient just like someone said there are lousy sounding expensive gear.
I am neither a purist nor an anti-purist. I am just anti-bashing.
Let me tell you a story, the legendary psychic_sushi made my $100 Epi LP junior sound like a $1000 Gibson LP standard. If he played it longer, it would have sounded like a $4000 PRS Custom.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: trinch on August 17, 2009, 02:15:29 PM
i am just hoping that this would not turn out to be one of those " tone is in the finger, tone is in the equipment" kinda thread. :lol:
would really like to hear the side of those who can afford the high end gears. :mrgreen:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: badongrodrigs on August 17, 2009, 02:52:47 PM
Let me tell you a story, the legendary psychic_sushi made my $100 Epi LP junior sound like a $1000 Gibson LP standard. If he played it longer, it would have sounded like a $4000 PRS Custom.
classic example!
parang fashion and modeling din yan siguro.
have a fat guy dress in an expensive Hugo Boss and he'll look average at best, then have him dress in a Bench outfit, he'll still look the same, even more average.
and then, have a well-built guy dress in an expensive Hugo Boss and he'll look good, then have him dress in a Bench outfit, if he's confident, then he'll still be able to pull it off and look awesome.
the point is: if you know you'll still look the same whatever you wear, be it expensive or not, then buy what's best comfortable to your status. nothing wrong with that.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 17, 2009, 03:34:58 PM
can't wait till the guy w/ the $5k Suhr , boutique pedals & hi end NYC Tube Amps posts more of his obnoxious remarks... (http://smileyicons.net/s/528.gif)
BRING OUT THE POPCORN!!! (http://smileyicons.net/s/552.gif)
I've been doing electronics since I was Grade 6. At first I used my kuya's gear, for instance, his Stanley screwdrivers. They were tough, very durable and very functional.
When I got to College, my brother was no longer living with me, so I had to buy my own tools. Being on a college allowance, I bought those 50 pesos a set screwdrivers which were so pissy they would round out when met with a tough screw.
Once I started working, I was able to afford those Stanley screw drivers again and life went along as usual.
Then one day, a screwdriver salesman came to my shop. He said "Hey man, you should try this screwdriver ! Its got a tungsten-carbide tip with titanium shaft for the ultimate in toughness. This thing will NEVER round out except if it meets another titanium screw (and how many of those do you find lying around??). The micro-serrations on the edge of the driving tip will "bite" into the screw and ensure positive traction as you turn the screwdriver. The new synthetic rubber grip varies its viscosity as the temperature of your hand will make it stickier ! No more dropping screwdrivers ! The grip on this thing will make it stick to your hand like glue ! So order your Ultramega Screwdriver now for the very cheap price of Fifteen thousand pesos ! But wait, there's more ! If you order now, you'll get a free titanium hammer. Show off to your friends. Be the envy of every hammer-wielding person on your block. This hammer is light but very strong and is 99.5% sterling silver plated. Order now and get your UltraMega screwdriver with your free gift of the Titanium Hammer. We will even give you glass cases for these amazing tools so you can show them off to your friends with pride and joy that any tool owner can have.
I told him "take your driver and hammer and shove it up your arse".
n.b. - some parts of this story are fictional
So what does it tell me ?
1. At the bottom is crap 2. Somewhere in the middle is something that's just right 3. Somewhere beyond your needs is impractical although undoubtedly of higher quality.
So which gear is your gear ? At the end of the day, it's what suits you.
But are all the HIGH HIGH TO THE HEAVENS END worth it? I certainly agree with most that the differences would be negligible in most cases. It's not like when you play live people will say, "His tone isn't very clear, his cables must be really cheap." Or you would only notice the bottom end of really bad cables and midrange up it is least likely to be noticble. So just because you can afford it doesn't mean it's practical right?
Please share more of your opinions. :)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: kune_km on August 17, 2009, 03:37:07 PM
But are all the HIGH HIGH TO THE HEAVENS END worth it? I certainly agree with most that the differences would be negligible in most cases. It's not like when you play live people will say, "His tone isn't very clear, his cables must be really cheap." Or you would only notice the bottom end of really bad cables and midrange up it is least likely to be noticble. So just because you can afford it doesn't mean it's practical right?
Please share more of your opinions. :)
good point!!!
:-)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: markv on August 17, 2009, 03:53:42 PM
Pag mahal, maganda kadalasan.
Pag mura, may dahilan.
:D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: boogsy on August 17, 2009, 04:08:19 PM
It all boils down to diminishing returns. You certainly can't deny that quality often comes with a price. I say often, not always, because there are a few exceptions like a lot of japanese workhorses we have. Though a lot of them have poor quality too. Unfortunately, its a fact that the more durable materials, stricter quality standards, and more pleasing aesthetics all incur cost.
However, the more we pay in the long run, the less we get out of it. The first big bucks we shell out, there's a dramatic difference. Let's say jumping from your first RJ guitar to a Fender American Standard. Your first tube amp from a solid state. Your first boutique effects (still debatable). It's the remaining 10% improvement that makes us go bankrupt. You start focusing on all these small details that nobody else will notice.. You start changing to boutique pickups, strings, cables, tubes, etc.. For people who can afford it, the slight improvements are still worth it.. But I guess if you can afford it, why the hell not? You don't have to be Schumi to drive a Ferarri.
Here's an analogy.. When you get a Nissan Skyline after driving a Corolla for a long time, you WILL feel and see the difference. Even if you kept telling yourself that you were happy with your Corolla and that's all you'll ever need. But from then on, when you move on to a Porsche.. to a Lambo.. paliit na ng paliit yung returns.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 17, 2009, 04:21:14 PM
(http://smileyicons.net/s/119.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 17, 2009, 04:35:49 PM
It all boils down to diminishing returns. You certainly can't deny that quality often comes with a price. I say often, not always, because there are a few exceptions like a lot of japanese workhorses we have. Though a lot of them have poor quality too. Unfortunately, its a fact that the more durable materials, stricter quality standards, and more pleasing aesthetics all incur cost.
However, the more we pay in the long run, the less we get out of it. The first big bucks we shell out, there's a dramatic difference. Let's say jumping from your first RJ guitar to a Fender American Standard. Your first tube amp from a solid state. Your first boutique effects (still debatable). It's the remaining 10% improvement that makes us go bankrupt. You start focusing on all these small details that nobody else will notice.. You start changing to boutique pickups, strings, cables, tubes, etc.. For people who can afford it, the slight improvements are still worth it.. But I guess if you can afford it, why the hell not? You don't have to be Scumi to drive a Ferarri.
Here's an analogy.. When you get a Nissan Skyline after driving a Corolla for a long time, you WILL feel and see the difference. Even if you kept telling yourself that you were happy with your Corolla and that's all you'll ever need. But from then on, when you move on to a Porsche.. to a Lambo.. paliit na ng paliit yung returns.
Exactly what I was pointing out: The law of diminshing returns. Economics! Hehe. :-)
There is a place within the range that the utils are not worth the increase in cost but then again this is also relative. But ceteris paribus, taking 90% confidence level, we could conclude that this range exists for the average Filipino. Naks, statistics. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 17, 2009, 08:01:25 PM
+1 there boogsy.
Rolex, all that I'm trying to say is that the word "worth it" or "sulit" is not portable, and neither can we put a "one size fits all" definition of it. The definition of sulit is always your own. It' always a cost-benefit thing, and is based on your personal criteria of what's important to you. If your criteria is getting from point A to point B, and just that then a Corolla will always kick the butt of a Porsche. If your criteria dictates that you want to get from A to B faster, then a more powerful car will be justified. If your criteria dictates that you have to get from A to B fast, and look good while doing it, then the Porsche becomes definitely justified. It all boils down to what's important to you and what are the criteria you use when selecting gear.
Now, attempting to hit the nail on the head. A story from ussfdoc during one of my visits. He told me that the Fender Standard MIM and the American Standard MIA strats are THE SAME everywhere. In wood, hardware, wires etc. The only difference is that legal mexicans assemble the MIA's in Corona while Mexican nationals assemble the MIM's in Tijuana. Its in the higher end where Fender puts your money's worth. This is a guy who worked in the Fender factory.
In less detail, he recalls how his 500 dollar Epiphone LP has absolutely no sonic difference to his 4,000 dollar Gibson LP.
Another anecdote. I was in this party and the player was sporting a Baker B3. There were other (more seasoned, if I may add) guitarists in the table with me. One of them remarked "okay, it's a Les Paul". Oh well. But he sure looked awesome (played awesome too no doubt) wearing that B3 and of course there was that "wow" factor.
Another anecdote. http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coat-hangers-sound-as-good-monster-cables . Audiophiles cannot determine the difference between a monster cable and a coat hanger.
From my own personal experience too. In a blind test of Overdrives, my TS7 won over several and much more expensive OD's. Of course there were other factors that played out but yeah in that particular test, a humble TS7 (and a ego-maniacal owner) won.
The Boston HM100 is electronically superior to the Boss Metalzone costing more than four times its price, although let's lay off the sonically superior until a blind test is done. Besides that's too subjective.
Then there's the China tube amp clones.
So where is it exactly ? Going back now to guitar. At some point even a midline guitar will meet your criteria for "OK" sound. If you want more then upgrade the pickups. If you want to look awesome and people go "ooh, he's really rich" then get something really expensive. But as for the money-for-tone thing ? Oh I don't know. I've seen too many counter-examples. You *can* get more than what you pay for by not paying for expensive labor, marketing expenses, expensive currencies and "the name".
Tell me if I'm off the line.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pao2pao16 on August 17, 2009, 08:15:28 PM
can't wait till the guy w/ the $5k Suhr , boutique pedals & hi end NYC Tube Amps posts more of his obnoxious remarks... (http://smileyicons.net/s/528.gif)
BRING OUT THE POPCORN!!! (http://smileyicons.net/s/552.gif)
ooohh... I know this guy. hehe.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: aHeartThatNeverFade on August 17, 2009, 08:25:43 PM
Rolex, all that I'm trying to say is that the word "worth it" or "sulit" is not portable, and neither can we put a "one size fits all" definition of it. The definition of sulit is always your own. It' always a cost-benefit thing, and is based on your personal criteria of what's important to you. If your criteria is getting from point A to point B, and just that then a Corolla will always kick the butt of a Porsche. If your criteria dictates that you want to get from A to B faster, then a more powerful car will be justified. If your criteria dictates that you have to get from A to B fast, and look good while doing it, then the Porsche becomes definitely justified. It all boils down to what's important to you and what are the criteria you use when selecting gear.
Now, attempting to hit the nail on the head. A story from ussfdoc during one of my visits. He told me that the Fender Standard MIM and the American Standard MIA strats are THE SAME everywhere. In wood, hardware, wires etc. The only difference is that legal mexicans assemble the MIA's in Corona while Mexican nationals assemble the MIM's in Tijuana. Its in the higher end where Fender puts your money's worth. This is a guy who worked in the Fender factory.
In less detail, he recalls how his 500 dollar Epiphone LP has absolutely no sonic difference to his 4,000 dollar Gibson LP.
Another anecdote. I was in this party and the player was sporting a Baker B3. There were other (more seasoned, if I may add) guitarists in the table with me. One of them remarked "okay, it's a Les Paul". Oh well. But he sure looked awesome (played awesome too no doubt) wearing that B3 and of course there was that "wow" factor.
Another anecdote. http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coat-hangers-sound-as-good-monster-cables . Audiophiles cannot determine the difference between a monster cable and a coat hanger.
From my own personal experience too. In a blind test of Overdrives, my TS7 won over several and much more expensive OD's. Of course there were other factors that played out but yeah in that particular test, a humble TS7 (and a ego-maniacal owner) won.
The Boston HM100 is electronically superior to the Boss Metalzone costing more than four times its price, although let's lay off the sonically superior until a blind test is done. Besides that's too subjective.
Then there's the China tube amp clones.
So where is it exactly ? Going back now to guitar. At some point even a midline guitar will meet your criteria for "OK" sound. If you want more then upgrade the pickups. If you want to look awesome and people go "ooh, he's really rich" then get something really expensive. But as for the money-for-tone thing ? Oh I don't know. I've seen too many counter-examples. You *can* get more than what you pay for by not paying for expensive labor, marketing expenses, expensive currencies and "the name".
Tell me if I'm off the line.
this will tell everything... :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: plugzzzz on August 17, 2009, 10:17:38 PM
sa efx i believe that the more expenssive mas maganda ang quality... boston OD pedal doesnt have a chance against Bk tube driver... for some reason newbies thinks the more gain your have the more ok yung pedal pro mali yun tinatago ng gain yung mga sabit nang player while boutique expenssive pedals are very transparent pag sumabit ka rinig na rinig so mapipilitan kang mag practice plus your tone cuts thru with band settings....dati masaya nako sa metalzone but pro nung nakagamit nako ng boutique di nako bumalik sa boss pedals...
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: plugzzzz on August 17, 2009, 10:23:26 PM
sa efx i believe that the more expenssive mas maganda ang quality... boston OD pedal doesnt have a chance against Bk tube driver... for some reason newbies thinks the more gain your have the more ok yung pedal pro mali yun tinatago ng gain yung mga sabit nang player while boutique expenssive pedals are very transparent pag sumabit ka rinig na rinig so mapipilitan kang mag practice plus your tone cuts thru with band settings....dati masaya nako sa metalzone but pro nung nakagamit nako ng boutique di nako bumalik sa boss pedals...
boutique/expenssive pedals using highquality componentscompare sa cheap ones... parang ganto nalang bumili ka ng china fon after ilang months nasira so bumili kaulet tapos after ilang months nasira ulet why not bumili ka nalang ng high quality fon na me warranty for several years and kilalang brand mas nakatipid kapa diba
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: killjom on August 17, 2009, 10:33:15 PM
I believe you that we can't really have a conclusion on this question, anyone has his or her own view on Quality vs. Cost, and I wouldn't be surprised to see this thread to have those same arguments in the past. At the end of the day, I'm sure you're gonna ask yourself if it is worth every penny you've spent.
Basta ako, hindi ako bibili ng gitarang worth 20-40k na agathis ang kahoy. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: qroon on August 17, 2009, 11:06:35 PM
Very nice thread!
I think that it will boil down on what we value. Aside from the perceived quality increase in more expensive gear, there is the playability factor that others will bring out. Of course economy is a big factor. Like recently, I've been looking for an alder-bodied P Bass. I'm already contemplating about getting a MIM Fender (after my good experience with the MIM Jazz) then SX came along :)
Is it the same as the MIM Fender? No. But the low cost of acquiring this bass outweighs the added value of the MIM Fender.
Oh, and everything is justifiable when you got GAS. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 17, 2009, 11:16:21 PM
sa efx i believe that the more expenssive mas maganda ang quality... boston OD pedal doesnt have a chance against Bk tube driver... for some reason newbies thinks the more gain your have the more ok yung pedal pro mali yun tinatago ng gain yung mga sabit nang player while boutique expenssive pedals are very transparent pag sumabit ka rinig na rinig so mapipilitan kang mag practice plus your tone cuts thru with band settings....dati masaya nako sa metalzone but pro nung nakagamit nako ng boutique di nako bumalik sa boss pedals...
boutique/expenssive pedals using highquality componentscompare sa cheap ones... parang ganto nalang bumili ka ng china fon after ilang months nasira so bumili kaulet tapos after ilang months nasira ulet why not bumili ka nalang ng high quality fon na me warranty for several years and kilalang brand mas nakatipid kapa diba
But here lies the problem. Don't compare the Boston OD100 with a Butler BK Tube Driver. They are very different animals and don't even share the same voicing.
Compare it with its peer. The Boston OD100 is a "modified" Boss BD2. Eh sa sound pa lang papaluin kahit ng stock na Boston OD100 ang Boss BD2 because the latter sounds like ipis
A quick check of the effects databases show that the close (very close) clone of the Butler BK Tube driver is the Behringer VT911. They just have one resistor value of difference AFAIK and according to the guy who traced out both circuits. Just change the stock tube to a decent one in the behri and you're in the ballpark.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: abyssinianson on August 17, 2009, 11:56:12 PM
does quality usually cost money - usually. does quality ALWAYS have to cost a lot of money? it depends on what your definition of quality is because it is really subjective. what one dude might find as "ok" i might consider pretty darn good. as a result, i explore the entire range of products from cheapos to more expensive stuff to see what it can do for me so i've had experience owning everything from pawnshop gems to high end boutique stuff. now, Suhr's are great and i've tried and played em but i can't justify getting one because i happen to play fine with my regular Strat. again, it all depends what you think the gear can do for you will the quality question become more concrete, otherwise, it is such a grey area that will incite more stupid arguments than constructive dialogue.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: killjom on August 18, 2009, 12:13:14 AM
Nawala yung post ko. :-(
This question can never be concluded in my opinion because of the different views that we have, and I won't be surprised if we will see those same arguments in the past :-) At the end of the day, you'll be asking yourself if it is worth every penny, and I believe that's what is important. :-)
Basta ako, hindi ako bibili ng 25k-40k na gitara na agathis ang kahoy. :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 18, 2009, 02:04:17 AM
Rolex, all that I'm trying to say is that the word "worth it" or "sulit" is not portable, and neither can we put a "one size fits all" definition of it. The definition of sulit is always your own. It' always a cost-benefit thing, and is based on your personal criteria of what's important to you. If your criteria is getting from point A to point B, and just that then a Corolla will always kick the butt of a Porsche. If your criteria dictates that you want to get from A to B faster, then a more powerful car will be justified. If your criteria dictates that you have to get from A to B fast, and look good while doing it, then the Porsche becomes definitely justified. It all boils down to what's important to you and what are the criteria you use when selecting gear.
Now, attempting to hit the nail on the head. A story from ussfdoc during one of my visits. He told me that the Fender Standard MIM and the American Standard MIA strats are THE SAME everywhere. In wood, hardware, wires etc. The only difference is that legal mexicans assemble the MIA's in Corona while Mexican nationals assemble the MIM's in Tijuana. Its in the higher end where Fender puts your money's worth. This is a guy who worked in the Fender factory.
In less detail, he recalls how his 500 dollar Epiphone LP has absolutely no sonic difference to his 4,000 dollar Gibson LP.
Another anecdote. I was in this party and the player was sporting a Baker B3. There were other (more seasoned, if I may add) guitarists in the table with me. One of them remarked "okay, it's a Les Paul". Oh well. But he sure looked awesome (played awesome too no doubt) wearing that B3 and of course there was that "wow" factor.
Another anecdote. http://consumerist.com/362926/do-coat-hangers-sound-as-good-monster-cables . Audiophiles cannot determine the difference between a monster cable and a coat hanger.
From my own personal experience too. In a blind test of Overdrives, my TS7 won over several and much more expensive OD's. Of course there were other factors that played out but yeah in that particular test, a humble TS7 (and a ego-maniacal owner) won.
The Boston HM100 is electronically superior to the Boss Metalzone costing more than four times its price, although let's lay off the sonically superior until a blind test is done. Besides that's too subjective.
Then there's the China tube amp clones.
So where is it exactly ? Going back now to guitar. At some point even a midline guitar will meet your criteria for "OK" sound. If you want more then upgrade the pickups. If you want to look awesome and people go "ooh, he's really rich" then get something really expensive. But as for the money-for-tone thing ? Oh I don't know. I've seen too many counter-examples. You *can* get more than what you pay for by not paying for expensive labor, marketing expenses, expensive currencies and "the name".
Tell me if I'm off the line.
Good shares sir Bamf!
So in some cases the difference is quality is so negligible even if cost is way different. And I did not mention that there is a one-size-fits-all definition. I'm just saying statistically speaking, there will always be a way to determine the range of comfort. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 18, 2009, 08:18:35 AM
It's not in the "Fender"...
It's in the "Hendrix" :mrgreen:(http://smileyicons.net/s/683.gif) (http://smileyicons.net/s/682.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 18, 2009, 10:04:07 AM
But here lies the problem. Don't compare the Boston OD100 with a Butler BK Tube Driver. They are very different animals and don't even share the same voicing.
Compare it with its peer. The Boston OD100 is a "modified" Boss BD2. Eh sa sound pa lang papaluin kahit ng stock na Boston OD100 ang Boss BD2 because the latter sounds like ipis
A quick check of the effects databases show that the close (very close) clone of the Butler BK Tube driver is the Behringer VT911. They just have one resistor value of difference AFAIK and according to the guy who traced out both circuits. Just change the stock tube to a decent one in the behri and you're in the ballpark.
I've read through so many threads that both bash cheap and expensive gear. Everyone has preferences wrt this. However, do we even wonder if the more expensive gear is really of GOOD quality?
IF YOU FIND A REALLY GOOD SOUNDING PIECE OF EXPENSIVE GEAR, IT IS REALLY MORE THAN GOOD BUT MORE OF MAGICAL -- IT REACHES IN TO TOUCH YOUR SOUL. WOULD I BUY A REALLY GOOD SOUNDING 59 BURST (US$250k). IF I HAD THE MONEY, THE ANSWER WOULD BE A YES.
How do you know you're only buying something for THE NAME? Is there a really significant difference between quality as cost goes up? For all we know cost can escalade exponentially but quality is growing at almost a flatline.
I REALLY DON'T BUY BECAUSE A NAME IS POPULAR. MOST OF THE STUFF I BUY TODAY ARE NEVER HEARD OR NOT A POPULAR BRAND. IF YOU COMPARE A SANTAMESA GUITAR TO A BAKER, THERE IS DEFINITELY A BIG QUALITY DIFFERENCE. IF YOU COMPARE A BAKER TO GIBSON CUSTOM SHOP, THERE IS A DEFINITE QUALITY ADVANTAGE WITH THE BAKER, IN FACT IT MAKES THE MORE EXPENSIVE GIBSONS LOOK LIKE CHEATS -- GIBSON CUSTOM SHOP (SPECIALLY THE ARTIST MODELS) ARE EXAMPLES OF EXPONENTIAL ESCALATION BUT WITH FLATLINE QUALITY. I WILL SAY THIS ABOUT CURRENT GENE BAKER B3 GUITARS, THEY ARE HEIRLOOM INSTRUMENTS AND WORKS OF ART THAT YOU CAN PASS ON FROM ONE GENERATION TO ANOTHER. IN MY OPINION YOU CAN NEVER CLAIM AN IBANEZ AS AN HEIRLOOM INSTRUMENT ASSUMING THAT BOTH SOUND GREAT.
For those purists, maybe you should rethink about praising your gear. For those who are anti-purists, maybe you should consider reviewing what you have. That's just a maybe. What do you guys think?
I PRAISE GEAR OR I ACTUALLY PRAISE THE GUYS MAKING THE GOOD SOUNDING GEAR BECAUSE IT CUTS THRU A NUMBER OF MEANINGLESS OPINIONS AND FIRST IMPRESSIONS THAT ARE POSTED ON WEBSITE REVIEWS AND MAGAZINE PUBLICATIONS. FOR ME, A PIECE OF GUITAR GEAR EITHER SOUNDS GREAT OR IT DOESN'T.
The goal of this thread is to determine when we can say something is practical, meaning the cost and the quality are at par.
PRACTICALITY IS THE LEAST CONCERN OF GOOD SOUNDING GEAR -- AFTER ALL TUBE AMPS ARE NEVER PRACTICAL IN TERMS OF AFFORDABILITY, PORTABILITY, WEIGHT, PRICE AND MAINTENANCE VERSUS SOLID STATE AMPS. SO I GUESS, YOU HAVE TO MAKE A CHOICE IN A MAJORITY OF CASES.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 19, 2009, 08:23:55 AM
the only way a guitar touches your soul is if you know how to really play it, other than that..its just a tool,
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 19, 2009, 08:37:03 AM
You edited my quote? It's not a questionnaire! What's with the all caps agression? Haha.
1. Magical my foot. We're talking about utility. 2. Name- Doesn't necessary have to be popular. More expensive cars/cameras/guitar/whatnot are not popular because not a lot of people can afford. Name pertaining to two pairs of shoes both made in china and one costing 10x more than the other because of the name. 3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. :-) 4. Oh you'd be surprised that there is always something practical out there.
the only way a guitar touches your soul is if you know how to really play it, other than that..its just a tool,
We should roadtest with the purists! So that we'll really know the difference. Well, if the purist can't play, oh well. I know a lot of anti-purists who can play really well. Haha.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 19, 2009, 08:52:19 AM
Btw, just to share... If you check the Gibson book, their guitars were once made with Philippine Mahogany! Proud to be pinoy! :-)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 19, 2009, 10:52:39 AM
Frank Gambale's Signature Ibby is also made fm. Philippine Mahogany! (http://smileyicons.net/s/683.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 19, 2009, 01:35:11 PM
(http://smileyicons.net/s/97.gif)
jimi the biker :mrgreen:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: changedmynametojimi on August 19, 2009, 02:26:45 PM
does quality usually cost money - usually. does quality ALWAYS have to cost a lot of money? it depends on what your definition of quality is because it is really subjective. what one dude might find as "ok" i might consider pretty darn good. as a result, i explore the entire range of products from cheapos to more expensive stuff to see what it can do for me so i've had experience owning everything from pawnshop gems to high end boutique stuff. now, Suhr's are great and i've tried and played em but i can't justify getting one because i happen to play fine with my regular Strat. again, it all depends what you think the gear can do for you will the quality question become more concrete, otherwise, it is such a grey area that will incite more stupid arguments than constructive dialogue.
can we end this thread with this comment?
i cannot agree more.....different strokes for different folks...
whatever, whichever works best for you guys i guess....
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: aHeartThatNeverFade on August 19, 2009, 08:22:15 PM
in tagalog, kanya-kanyang trip yan...
walang basagan ng trip.hahaha!(http://smileyicons.net/s/520.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 19, 2009, 08:59:34 PM
rolexm,
1. Magical my foot. We're talking about utility -- Some guitars and equipment are more than utility. I once asked a respected producer to what the secret was with Certain luthiers who can produce magical sounding instruments and his answer was that it was a God given talent. 2. Name- Doesn't necessary have to be popular. More expensive cars/cameras/guitar/whatnot are not popular because not a lot of people can afford. Name pertaining to two pairs of shoes both made in china and one costing 10x more than the other because of the name. -- But guitars and musical instruments are NOT exactly shoes nor are they similar to cars & cameras where technology is more of a factor for performance. If this were true, then all good sounding vintage gear will be easily replicable even today. 3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. -- playing has nothing to do with the quality vs cost argument. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point. 4. Oh you'd be surprised that there is always something practical out there. -- What is superior sounding and practical musical instrument at the same time?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 19, 2009, 10:46:30 PM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: boogsy on August 20, 2009, 12:46:04 AM
guys, dissing playing is no different from dissing gear.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 20, 2009, 02:15:51 AM
i thought there was a bond between guitar and guitar player so if someone just plays my guitar for me...whats the point..
i agree with boogsy and abys, its not just a tool, in my statement i forgot to add inspiration, i dont buy gear for the sake of owning, i can get curious and buy something risky to feed my curiosity, if its good i keep it. if its bad it goes to craigslist /let go of it
but main question why cant we just get along? its the same path all these threads take and end up in a void...
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 20, 2009, 05:39:04 AM
3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. -- playing has nothing to do with the quality vs cost argument. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point.
Rolexm, play daw. Show him wat you've got. Lulz. firemodel55, you're known to praise your gear a lot. Show us what you got (playing skills).
4. Oh you'd be surprised that there is always something practical out there. -- What is superior sounding and practical musical instrument at the same time?
Heard/Saw: Joey Puyat's MIJ Squier. It's practical. And it REALLY sounds magical. And this was the first time I saw him play at a fund raising gig at Hobbit House last year.
Tried/Tested/Raped: -MarkV's Ibanez RG (XXXX?). My kind of guitar too. He mentioned used and brand new prices. Practical. And it REALLY sounds magical. -My MIJ Standard Strat. Same. It's cheap. Practical and it REALLY sounds magical. And I really waited for this for almost three years until my good friend let it go.
Rolexm, your Ibanez 7 String sucks. Sorry man. Probably needs setup. But you're a good player.
Tone is in teh hair. I'm losing some but there I said it.
3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. -- playing has nothing to do with the quality vs cost argument. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point.
I just love this quote! He contradicts himself in one paragraph. Couldn't have done a better job myself.
It's just worth repeating: If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. vs. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point.
Ok, let me break it down. "Show us how you play it" - this is asking for skill. Not how the gear sounds but how the gear is played.
Broken record: A legendary player that loves mind controlled japanese food played my cheap gear. And it "sounded" magical. I was there. It was at BAMF's place two years ago. Also, it has BAMF's magical and practical "tool" inserted.
The Youtube piece is an absolute gem. And are two videos pala. The Elgee PRS sounded better in my opinion.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 20, 2009, 07:14:43 AM
(http://smileyicons.net/s/839.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 20, 2009, 09:04:18 AM
epic. thread is epic.
in. lulz.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 20, 2009, 10:21:33 AM
1. Magical my foot. We're talking about utility -- Some guitars and equipment are more than utility. I once asked a respected producer to what the secret was with Certain luthiers who can produce magical sounding instruments and his answer was that it was a God given talent. 2. Name- Doesn't necessary have to be popular. More expensive cars/cameras/guitar/whatnot are not popular because not a lot of people can afford. Name pertaining to two pairs of shoes both made in china and one costing 10x more than the other because of the name. -- But guitars and musical instruments are NOT exactly shoes nor are they similar to cars & cameras where technology is more of a factor for performance. If this were true, then all good sounding vintage gear will be easily replicable even today. 3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. -- playing has nothing to do with the quality vs cost argument. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point. 4. Oh you'd be surprised that there is always something practical out there. -- What is superior sounding and practical musical instrument at the same time?
Man you have to learn how to quote properly. It's really confusing already.
1. Can we speak in terms of what we actually use the guitar for? We use it to play. That's utility. Now, if playing-well held constant, there should be alternatives out that at a marginal difference in quality/sound but having a very substancial difference in cost. 2. Okay, putting technology aside, can you therefore say that the NEW ways of manufacturing are no comparison to the craftmaship you are talking about? Does it also give those "great manufacturers" that you speak of the right to charge so much? Does it follow that the additional quality justifies the additional cost? 3. Whoa, nice video. So if you can't make your gear look and sound good, why buy something so expensive? What guitar was that? Baker? Does it give any value added to the sound you get when YOU play? 4. There are a lot of examples. Generally spekaing, get a well made body and upgrade the parts that match the guitar very well, and poof: TONE.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: cumbersome on August 20, 2009, 10:34:10 AM
In my experience, improvement in quality comes in huge gobs in the 10k-70k range; after that, it's really trickles. Nothin' wrong with trickles if you can afford it. The problem only really comes if you seek validation all the time for a 150k guitar you bought that was owned by an entry-level jap copy. Or you want people to say that your MIC Les is as good as a Gibby. If you really know what you want, it shouldn't even matter. There will always be people who would think that your gear sucks, or is not worth it, or whatever, but so long as you think it delivers regardless of price or brand, then there shouldn't be any argument.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 20, 2009, 10:40:46 AM
In my experience, improvement in quality comes in huge gobs in the 10k-70k range; after that, it's really trickles. Nothin' wrong with trickles if you can afford it. The problem only really comes if you seek validation all the time for a 150k guitar you bought that was owned by an entry-level jap copy. Or you want people to say that your MIC Les is as good as a Gibby. If you really know what you want, it shouldn't even matter. There will always be people who would think that your gear sucks, or is not worth it, or whatever, but so long as you think it delivers regardless of price or brand, then there shouldn't be any argument.
I have to agree with everything you said. Sometimes I believe that there is a placebo effect with people who buy gear that is too expensive (not all of them and not all the gear).
I have to agree with everything you said. Sometimes I believe that there is a placebo effect with people who buy gear that is too expensive (not all of them and not all the gear).
Naniniwala rin ako dito. Some things are really just plain hype or snake oil. But you have to remember, some people buy the more expensive things simply because THEY CAN. Like I said in a previous post, you don't have to be Schumacher to drive a Ferrari. Whether it's worth it or not is entirely relative to capacity.
In my experience, improvement in quality comes in huge gobs in the 10k-70k range; after that, it's really trickles. Nothin' wrong with trickles if you can afford it. The problem only really comes if you seek validation all the time for a 150k guitar you bought that was owned by an entry-level jap copy. Or you want people to say that your MIC Les is as good as a Gibby. If you really know what you want, it shouldn't even matter. There will always be people who would think that your gear sucks, or is not worth it, or whatever, but so long as you think it delivers regardless of price or brand, then there shouldn't be any argument.
Again, brings us back to the law of diminishing returns.
As for who sounds better.. what the hell does that have to do with the relationship between cost and quality?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 20, 2009, 11:37:23 AM
Naniniwala rin ako dito. Some things are really just plain hype or snake oil. But you have to remember, some people buy the more expensive things simply because THEY CAN. Like I said in a previous post, you don't have to be Schumacher to drive a Ferrari. Whether it's worth it or not is entirely relative to capacity.
Again, brings us back to the law of diminishing returns.
As for who sounds better.. what the hell does that have to do with the relationship between cost and quality?
The point of this thread was already stated. It's more to gather opinions and see if people are aware of this.
For those who do just because they CAN, that's not a problem. But if you're going to bash people who can't, then that's just foul.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: blackwingchai on August 20, 2009, 11:51:17 AM
The point of this thread was already stated. It's more to gather opinions and see if people are aware of this.
For those who do just because they CAN, that's not a problem. But if you're going to bash people who can't, then that's just foul.
Yup. This thread is pretty much covered.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 20, 2009, 10:39:40 PM
You are going down a very long and slippery slope. Welcome to errr...the club (?)
Basta all I can say is that my Guitar GAS has ended. There's this 1978 Aria Pro Strat that came my way recently. Inisnab ko pa nga until I played it. It just sounds so good, I just had to keep it. It is magical,despite the worn-down frets. Now if I only had the magical chops. Frustrating. Kinda like owning the Elder Wand (Wand of Destiny) and not knowing any spells to use it for. It would look funny too if a Squibb, or worse a Muggle, buys an expensive wand from Ollivanders shop in Diagon Alley eh? Oh well...it's like simply saying, don't get what you can afford, get what you deserve. But that's me of course.
Man you have to learn how to quote properly. It's really confusing already.
1. Can we speak in terms of what we actually use the guitar for? We use it to play. That's utility. Now, if playing-well held constant, there should be alternatives out that at a marginal difference in quality/sound but having a very substancial difference in cost. 2. Okay, putting technology aside, can you therefore say that the NEW ways of manufacturing are no comparison to the craftmaship you are talking about? Does it also give those "great manufacturers" that you speak of the right to charge so much? Does it follow that the additional quality justifies the additional cost? 3. Whoa, nice video. So if you can't make your gear look and sound good, why buy something so expensive? What guitar was that? Baker? Does it give any value added to the sound you get when YOU play? 4. There are a lot of examples. Generally spekaing, get a well made body and upgrade the parts that match the guitar very well, and poof: TONE.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 20, 2009, 11:22:37 PM
So in some cases the difference is quality is so negligible even if cost is way different. And I did not mention that there is a one-size-fits-all definition. I'm just saying statistically speaking, there will always be a way to determine the range of comfort. :-D
The comfort range is also up to the particular person. Some people will not be caught dead wearing anything less than signature clothes. Ako...my jeans are like P150 from 168 Mall. Pero ang tatak ha. Original na Levis...may mga run lang kaya reject and binebenta ng mura hehehe.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 20, 2009, 11:24:27 PM
Man you have to learn how to quote properly. It's really confusing already.
1. Can we speak in terms of what we actually use the guitar for? We use it to play. That's utility. Now, if playing-well held constant, there should be alternatives out that at a marginal difference in quality/sound but having a very substancial difference in cost. (So you think. Well based on my standards either a guitar has it or it doesn't -- natapos na ako sa marginal differences. Sometimes you can get lucky at a certain price class but if I get the best of what a highest price class has to offer versus best of what the lowest price class has to offer -- the differences are NOT marginal.) 2. Okay, putting technology aside, can you therefore say that the NEW ways of manufacturing are no comparison to the craftmaship you are talking about? (No comparison to a well seasoned and respected luthier who has an ear) Does it also give those "great manufacturers" that you speak of the right to charge so much? (Yes it gives them the right.) Does it follow that the additional quality justifies the additional cost? (Yes it does) 3. Whoa, nice video. So if you can't make your gear look and sound good, why buy something so expensive? (Because you never heard it and played it in person) What guitar was that? Baker? (Baker Firemodel#55) Does it give any value added to the sound you get when YOU play? (Yes it does -- why don't you come over and bring your guitar and compare it in person) 4. There are a lot of examples. Generally spekaing, get a well made body and upgrade the parts that match the guitar very well, and poof: TONE. (And Possibly a DEAD sounding guitar too)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 20, 2009, 11:44:21 PM
Rolexm, play daw. Show him wat you've got. Lulz. firemodel55, you're known to praise your gear a lot. Show us what you got (playing skills).
TURI, IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE MY CREDIBILITY, JUST ASK IRA CRUZ. HE USED THE GUITAR ON THEIR MOST RECENT ALBUM AND WITH ALL THINGS BEING EQUAL THE ENGINEERS AT THE ANDY BRAUER STUDIO FELT THAT THE TRACKS DONE WITH THE BAKER SOUNDED BETTER.
Heard/Saw: Joey Puyat's MIJ Squier. It's practical. And it REALLY sounds magical. And this was the first time I saw him play at a fund raising gig at Hobbit House last year.
BY THE WAY, THIS IS THE SAME JOEY PUYAT WHO SAID THAT MY BAKER#41 IS AN HEIRLOOM GUITAR AND HE REALLY LOVED IT A FEW MONTHS AGO. IN FACT, ON THE SAME DAY I WAS TELLING HIM HOW IMPORTANT RS GUITARPOTS WHICH ARE NOW WHAT HE HAD INSTALLED ON HIS GUITAR JUST LAST WEEK.
Tried/Tested/Raped: -MarkV's Ibanez RG (XXXX?). My kind of guitar too. He mentioned used and brand new prices. Practical. And it REALLY sounds magical. WHY NOT TEST IT AGAINST MY SUHR MODERN -My MIJ Standard Strat. Same. It's cheap. Practical and it REALLY sounds magical. And I really waited for this for almost three years until my good friend let it go. WHY NOT TEST IT AGAINST MY SUHR STRAT -- HAND PICKED BY ED YOON AND THE GUYS AT THE SUHR FACTORY Rolexm, your Ibanez 7 String sucks. Sorry man. Probably needs setup. But you're a good player.
TURI, YOU KNOW WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE SUHR GUYS, THEY ARE HONEST UNLIKE SOME HERE WHO ARE FULL OF AIR. JUST RECENTLY, THEY HAD A BEAUTIFUL REB BEACH SPEC'ED OUT GUITAR COME OUT OF THE FACTORY BUT WITH A FINISHED KOA BODY. I WROTE TO ED. I REALLY BADLY WANTED THIS GUITAR BECAUSE IT WAS RARE FOR THE SUHR FACTORY TO PRODUCE A REB BEACH MODEL WITHOUT A CUSTOM ORDER. I REMINDED ED ABOUT MY REQUIREMENTS AND ASKED HIM TO TEST IT. AFTER A DAY, HE WROTE BACK AND TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD FALL SHORT OF MY EXPECTATIONS AND IT WAS NOT FOR ME DESPITE IT BEING A US$3600 GUITAR FOB. JUST AN HOUR AGO I WAS HAVING A CHAT WITH A CLOSE LUTHIER FRIEND AND WE WERE JUST SO OVERWHELMED BY THE CONTRAST WE HAVE LOCALLY. HERE WE HAVE LOCAL LUTHIERS ALWAYS SAYING GOOD THINGS ABOUT ALL THE GUITARS THAT THEY MAKE, YET WE HAVE A GUY FROM THE SUHR FACTORY WHO CAN EASILY MAKE A SALE AND YET SAY THAT IT WILL NOT MEET MY REQUIREMENTS.
Tone is in teh hair. I'm losing some but there I said it.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 20, 2009, 11:54:09 PM
Sounds like the time is ripe for another TONE PARTY, Turi :-D.
Blind test syempre the guitarist and guitars will be hidden.
OT, I'm jealous of you Turi. The pedals I've modded for JP and the Gibson LP and MIJ Squier strat you saw which I scal...(cough) all "rotate". But the only thing constantly with him in gigs is the pedalboard you made for him (sob).
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: IncX on August 21, 2009, 12:28:01 AM
the more i read about Firemodel nowadays, the more i tend to believe his beliefs are "religious" ... its something you do not believe in, but cannot be proved or disproved.
in my experience, i own Warwicks (forgive me, im a bassist, but since were talking about gear in general, i could contribute) ... while it is not the "bass to rule them all" i actually dont see my basses as a step up to say an EB Musicman Stingray, or even a well-made MIM Fender Jazz Bass... i think the reason why my warwicks are more expensive are simply because it uses exotic wood and is built in Germany (where labor costs are higher than china or korea) ... they do not sound "UNIVERSALLY BETTER" than other well-made basses, but they are the sound for me.
i guess i know how to differentiate my taste from other people's taste and see why they would prefer Brand X over a Warwick.
so never in my life have i made a claim that Warwicks cream all the other basses because of this and that - similarly, i also never read Karel Honasan talk about how his Fodera's sound better compared to other basses (from what i know, he could possibly play a well made Aria and think it sounds good, even if its like $4000 cheaper than his Foderas).
now Firemodel...
he just believes that one piece of gear will rule them all and then gives "is that even true?" evidences... i mean, from the last thread i made, even something as small as "shielding" would make a noticeable tone different... or the size of frets, etc. etc. i mean, sure they do make a tone difference, but no way is it possible to make a guitar lose 5000 pts in tone just because of those factors.
and theres that hiyaw, the wah wah effect, the swirly effect, etc. etc. As far as im concerned, those things are like ghosts and duwendes ... some ppl claim its real and have even encountered them, but well ... have you seen a duwende? ... OK, i have never heard a guitar do the "swirly" thing too (although the well-made ones "sing" better).
it would have been OK if you read about those opinions from a lot of ppl, but truth is, i only hear those from him... and probably from Gene Baker or whoever is pitching his product, giving reasons why his $4000 guitar is better than the other $4000 guitar.
so in conclusion, Firemodel owns damn great gear... his Bakers and his Suhrs and his army of amps are probably one of the best sounding bunch of gear in the Philippines...
but no way is it the best gear in the world as he claims.
i use to believe in Firemodel, but right now... i just see him as a guy who buys good gear to talk/brag about them.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 21, 2009, 01:08:03 AM
Sounds like the time is ripe for another TONE PARTY, Turi :-D.
Blind test syempre the guitarist and guitars will be hidden.
OT, I'm jealous of you Turi. The pedals I've modded for JP and the Gibson LP and MIJ Squier strat you saw which I scal...(cough) all "rotate". But the only thing constantly with him in gigs is the pedalboard you made for him (sob).
Another Tone party it is.
On the Pedal Board, thanks man. It's because of you that he asked me to do one. I'm giving him another this year as a replacement of his old one.
Credibility for your expensive gear? Sure, I believe you. Why not. But your skills man. Show us your skills the same way your boast to us about your gear. Ira? He's your reference for tone? (http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/FACE%20PALM/facepalm.gif) He's probably a good player to most but as my own preference I sure as hell didn't like his 'tone' on most of their albums.
On Mr. Joey Puyat - sure. I can believe that. He knows what he wants. RS pots. A friend told me about that. Will look into it. Worth a try, why not right? I will quote myself on this:
Tried a Baker. Not for me. Tried an R9. Not for me. Tried MarkV's Ibanez RG (XXX?) TONE.
Tried a Gustav. Will try it again. :lol:
And let me add to a Baker (Sorry friend, you know who you are, but it's just not for me) - I just didn't like the feel nor the tone it delivered. I put my hands on an original 1977 LP Custom. Battered to death but all stock and it sounded better (for me, which means IMO). Raped it before it got modified with Timbuckers (yes, firemodel55, $700 used LP pickups) I have a 1992 LP custom also battered to death by the previous owner who was a drug addict for 15 years and it still delivered the tone that I wanted (and I am very very picky with the tone coming from a guitar)- and I bought this guitar DIRT CHEAP (there, practicality/cost). So cheap that you're gonna puke your guts out.
Modern Suhr vs MarkV's RG(XXXX?) - Sure. Bring it on. Will never say it's better than yours. But I am willing to do it. You and me. Tone and skills(and yes, I am a very bad guitar player). Closed doors or in public. To each his own amps. Or let's use both for comparison. Oh, let's take notes.
My MIJ Strat Standard all stock vs your Suhr Strat (hand picked...blah blah blah). I hand picked mine man. You had yours hand picked by some one else. Oh, and there was a 2 1/2 year wait for this. I am thinking that makes it boutique like your Suhr or your Baker? Don't get me wrong. I would love to own a few Suhr guitars (most especially) in the future. But for Bakers, I have yet to try a few more.
TURI, YOU KNOW WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE SUHR GUYS, THEY ARE HONEST UNLIKE SOME HERE WHO ARE FULL OF AIR. JUST RECENTLY, THEY HAD A BEAUTIFUL REB BEACH SPEC'ED OUT GUITAR COME OUT OF THE FACTORY BUT WITH A FINISHED KOA BODY. I WROTE TO ED. I REALLY BADLY WANTED THIS GUITAR BECAUSE IT WAS RARE FOR THE SUHR FACTORY TO PRODUCE A REB BEACH MODEL WITHOUT A CUSTOM ORDER. I REMINDED ED ABOUT MY REQUIREMENTS AND ASKED HIM TO TEST IT. AFTER A DAY, HE WROTE BACK AND TOLD ME THAT IT WOULD FALL SHORT OF MY EXPECTATIONS AND IT WAS NOT FOR ME DESPITE IT BEING A US$3600 GUITAR FOB. JUST AN HOUR AGO I WAS HAVING A CHAT WITH A CLOSE LUTHIER FRIEND AND WE WERE JUST SO OVERWHELMED BY THE CONTRAST WE HAVE LOCALLY. HERE WE HAVE LOCAL LUTHIERS ALWAYS SAYING GOOD THINGS ABOUT ALL THE GUITARS THAT THEY MAKE, YET WE HAVE A GUY FROM THE SUHR FACTORY WHO CAN EASILY MAKE A SALE AND YET SAY THAT IT WILL NOT MEET MY REQUIREMENTS.
So, am I honest or am I full of air? I don't know what you're thinking about local luthiers. Are they THAT bad to you? Their quality sucks?
I might have a few ideas why they will not meet your requirements. But of course you have to elaborate further on why this Ed guy from the Suhr factory/company can't do it for you. :-D
Oh, in case we do have that shoot out, bring your Two-Rock Cables. I'll bring my practical and affordable Lava Clear Connect Cables. I don't have my Vovox Sonorous nor my Van Den Hul Cables yet. Let's try those too when they arrive.
Bring all your pedals too. I will bring mine.
All of them.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 21, 2009, 01:11:23 AM
Edit: LP's I mentioned above are all Gibson MIA.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 21, 2009, 02:03:53 AM
so in conclusion, Firemodel owns damn great gear... his Bakers and his Suhrs and his army of amps are probably one of the best sounding bunch of gear in the Philippines...
but no way is it the best gear in the world as he claims.
i use to believe in Firemodel, but right now... i just see him as a guy who buys good gear to talk/brag about them.
so in conclusion, Firemodel owns damn great gear... his Bakers and his Suhrs and his army of amps are probably one of the best sounding bunch of gear in the Philippines...
but no way is it the best gear in the world as he claims. Alex may be compared to a boy scout who owns an AK-47 :-D Uppps, my bad. Cub Scout lang pala. Boy Scouts have talents & Skills... While Cub Scouts are nubs...(http://smileyicons.net/s/528.gif)
i use to believe in Firemodel, but right now... i just see him as a guy who buys good gear to talk/brag about them.
Poor Little Rich Boy... All dressed up ( w/ his gears ); but nowhere to go. ( does he ever gig ) :? (http://smileyicons.net/s/532.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 21, 2009, 02:16:33 AM
SHOUTOUT!!! (http://smileyicons.net/s/1051.gif) Ala CROSSROADS (http://smileyicons.net/s/683.gif)
the more i read about Firemodel nowadays, the more i tend to believe his beliefs are "religious" ... its something you do not believe in, but cannot be proved or disproved.
in my experience, i own Warwicks (forgive me, im a bassist, but since were talking about gear in general, i could contribute) ... while it is not the "bass to rule them all" i actually dont see my basses as a step up to say an EB Musicman Stingray, or even a well-made MIM Fender Jazz Bass... i think the reason why my warwicks are more expensive are simply because it uses exotic wood and is built in Germany (where labor costs are higher than china or korea) ... they do not sound "UNIVERSALLY BETTER" than other well-made basses, but they are the sound for me.
i guess i know how to differentiate my taste from other people's taste and see why they would prefer Brand X over a Warwick.
so never in my life have i made a claim that Warwicks cream all the other basses because of this and that - similarly, i also never read Karel Honasan talk about how his Fodera's sound better compared to other basses (from what i know, he could possibly play a well made Aria and think it sounds good, even if its like $4000 cheaper than his Foderas).
now Firemodel...
he just believes that one piece of gear will rule them all and then gives "is that even true?" evidences... i mean, from the last thread i made, even something as small as "shielding" would make a noticeable tone different... or the size of frets, etc. etc. i mean, sure they do make a tone difference, but no way is it possible to make a guitar lose 5000 pts in tone just because of those factors.
and theres that hiyaw, the wah wah effect, the swirly effect, etc. etc. As far as im concerned, those things are like ghosts and duwendes ... some ppl claim its real and have even encountered them, but well ... have you seen a duwende? ... OK, i have never heard a guitar do the "swirly" thing too (although the well-made ones "sing" better).
it would have been OK if you read about those opinions from a lot of ppl, but truth is, i only hear those from him... and probably from Gene Baker or whoever is pitching his product, giving reasons why his $4000 guitar is better than the other $4000 guitar.
so in conclusion, Firemodel owns damn great gear... his Bakers and his Suhrs and his army of amps are probably one of the best sounding bunch of gear in the Philippines...
but no way is it the best gear in the world as he claims.
i use to believe in Firemodel, but right now... i just see him as a guy who buys good gear to talk/brag about them.
I would just like to clarify that I have reduced my guitars down to 4 from a multitude of around 15 or so -- so thats nothing to brag about. And infact, I have a friend who owns two Gustavsons and thats something to brag about. But rather, I really believe in the work of Gene Baker and John Suhr -- if and only if you get the really great sounding ones. Case in point, 3 out of these 4 guitars were not picked by me. And I was even blunt to both Cliff Cultreri and Ed Yoon that some of their guitars were not up to par. Nowadays, Cliff and Ed take the extra effort to make sure only the best of what they have is what I get and they do this I guess because of friendship.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:06:18 AM
On the Pedal Board, thanks man. It's because of you that he asked me to do one. I'm giving him another this year as a replacement of his old one.
Credibility for your expensive gear? Sure, I believe you. Why not. But your skills man. Show us your skills the same way your boast to us about your gear. (I BELIEVE WHEN IT COMES TO PLAYING, IT IS SOMETHING PERSONAL. YOU JUST HAVE TO LEARN TO SEPARATE EQUIPMENT FROM PLAYING. AS MOST SAY HERE, KANYA KANYA BUT YET A NUMBER OF PEOPLE HOLD ME AGAINST A DOUBLE STANDARD -- IN SHORT, PINAPAKAILAMAN ANG PLAYING NG IBA.) Ira? He's your reference for tone? (http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/FACE%20PALM/facepalm.gif) He's probably a good player to most but as my own preference I sure as hell didn't like his 'tone' on most of their albums.
On Mr. Joey Puyat - sure. I can believe that. He knows what he wants. RS pots. A friend told me about that. Will look into it. Worth a try, why not right? (YUP WORTH A TRY IF YOU LIKE TO BRING DOWN VOLUME FOR A DIFFERENT TONALITY) I will quote myself on this:
And let me add to a Baker (Sorry friend, you know who you are, but it's just not for me) - I just didn't like the feel nor the tone it delivered. I put my hands on an original 1977 LP Custom. Battered to death but all stock and it sounded better (for me, which means IMO). Raped it before it got modified with Timbuckers (yes, firemodel55, $700 used LP pickups) I have a 1992 LP custom also battered to death by the previous owner who was a drug addict for 15 years and it still delivered the tone that I wanted (and I am very very picky with the tone coming from a guitar)- and I bought this guitar DIRT CHEAP (there, practicality/cost). So cheap that you're gonna puke your guts out. (AS PREDICTABLE AS I CAN GET, GO TRY IT AGAINST MY BAKER#55 -- BY THE WAY, THE 55 IS A VERY EXCEPTIONAL BAKER AND EVEN AT THAT HEAVILY MODIFIED)
Modern Suhr vs MarkV's RG(XXXX?) - Sure. Bring it on. Will never say it's better than yours. But I am willing to do it. You and me. Tone and skills(and yes, I am a very bad guitar player). Closed doors or in public. To each his own amps. Or let's use both for comparison. Oh, let's take notes. (SURE. I GLADLY INVITE YOU TO COME OVER. WHAT COME OVER TODAY?)
My MIJ Strat Standard all stock vs your Suhr Strat (hand picked...blah blah blah). I hand picked mine man. You had yours hand picked by some one else. (OH. HE IS NOT JUST SOMEONE ELSE. HE USED TO RUN FENDER'S QC DEPARTMENT) Oh, and there was a 2 1/2 year wait for this. I am thinking that makes it boutique like your Suhr or your Baker? Don't get me wrong. I would love to own a few Suhr guitars (most especially) in the future. But for Bakers, I have yet to try a few more. (LIKE YOU, I HAVE ALSO TRIED SOME NOT SO GOOD SOUNDING BAKERS BUT I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THAT THEIR BATTING AVERAGE IS HIGHER THAN MOST. IN MY CASE, EARTH MODEL#41 WAS CLIFF CULTRERI'S PERSONAL GUITAR AND HE SOLD IT TO ME AT A TIME WHEN HE NEEDED MONEY FOR HIS MEDICAL TREATMENT. FIREMODEL#55 WAS MORE OF GENE BAKER'S CONFIGURATION AND WHICH CLIFF TOLD ME CAME FROM THEIR PRIVATE STASH. IN FACT, THE GUITAR WAS SHIPPED AND SET UP PERSONALLY BY GENE.
So, am I honest or am I full of air? I don't know what you're thinking about local luthiers. Are they THAT bad to you? Their quality sucks? (YUP FOR MY REQUIREMENTS)
I might have a few ideas why they will not meet your requirements. But of course you have to elaborate further on why this Ed guy from the Suhr factory/company can't do it for you. :-D (I WILL SHOW YOU MY EMAIL TRAIL WITH HIM AND YOU FIRST NEED TO TEST THE SUHR MODERN TO UNDERSTAND THE STORY)
Oh, in case we do have that shoot out, bring your Two-Rock Cables. I'll bring my practical and affordable Lava Clear Connect Cables. I don't have my Vovox Sonorous nor my Van Den Hul Cables yet. Let's try those too when they arrive.
Bring all your pedals too. I will bring mine. (MY HOUSE -- MY AMPS ARE JUST REALLY HEAVY WHICH IS THE NON PRACTICAL SIDE OF THINGS. I PROPOSE THAT YOU GO TO MY HOUSE AND THEN I GO TO YOUR HOUSE.)
All of them.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:10:48 AM
so in conclusion, Firemodel owns damn great gear... his Bakers and his Suhrs and his army of amps are probably one of the best sounding bunch of gear in the Philippines...
but no way is it the best gear in the world as he claims. Alex may be compared to a boy scout who owns an AK-47 :-D Uppps, my bad. Cub Scout lang pala. Boy Scouts have talents & Skills... While Cub Scouts are nubs...(http://smileyicons.net/s/528.gif)
i use to believe in Firemodel, but right now... i just see him as a guy who buys good gear to talk/brag about them.
Poor Little Rich Boy... All dressed up ( w/ his gears ); but nowhere to go. ( does he ever gig ) :? (http://smileyicons.net/s/532.gif)
AS TO HOW I CHOSE TO EARN A LIVING AND LIVE MY LIFE THATS MY BUSINESS, IF AND ONLY IF GIGGING COULD PAY ME MORE THAN WHAT I AM EARNING NOW THEN I WOULD GLADLY GIG THE REST OF MY LIFE.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Filthy on August 21, 2009, 05:21:33 AM
i've not read all the past post in this thread but on how i understand this thread, this is what i want to say. i have tried some expensive guitars like the PRS custom semi hollowed archtop. i think my manager bought it about 200 thousand pesos and it looks magnificent, but i think a much cheaper Ibanez RG feels and sounds better for me. well its just my opinion :mrgreen:.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:22:47 AM
In my experience, improvement in quality comes in huge gobs in the 10k-70k range; after that, it's really trickles. Nothin' wrong with trickles if you can afford it. The problem only really comes if you seek validation all the time for a 150k guitar you bought that was owned by an entry-level jap copy. Or you want people to say that your MIC Les is as good as a Gibby. If you really know what you want, it shouldn't even matter. There will always be people who would think that your gear sucks, or is not worth it, or whatever, but so long as you think it delivers regardless of price or brand, then there shouldn't be any argument.
I would like to point out that I used to praise Japanese Knock offs because they beat the real deal. But now with the really good sounding USA made luthier stuff, they have something that a guitar in the 10k-70k does not have. So its not a matter of trickles and its a matter of deciding if you need a certain capability or not.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:25:54 AM
i've not read all the past post in this thread but on how i understand this thread, this is what i want to say. i have tried some expensive guitars like the PRS custom semi hollowed archtop. i think my manager bought it about 200 thousand pesos and it looks magnificent, but i think a much cheaper Ibanez RG feels and sounds better for me. well its just my opinion :mrgreen:.
Have you tried a P200k Suhr Modern? I used to love and own Jap Ibanez and am familiar with them but they just cannot compare to a really great sounding Suhr Modern -- by the way, just for to set the record straight, my Suhr Modern is also heavily modified.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:28:24 AM
Btw, just to share... If you check the Gibson book, their guitars were once made with Philippine Mahogany! Proud to be pinoy! :-)
If you check the real bursts, they were made of Honduran Mahogany and with Brazilian rosewood fingerboard. Proud to be Brazilian!!!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 21, 2009, 05:28:54 AM
Oh, I can't separate equipment from playing. I am constantly learning. Both my skills and gear. Before it was the other way around. I am trying something new. :lol:
RS Pots/kit - I will.
Would love to try both Bakers that you have and compare it myself.
I'd rather bring all my gear to your house as I can imagine it would be a better place to do the comparison. Not today. One weekend for sure. Prior to the GAS Day.
Hand picked - I personally like to pick my own gear. Deemed useless by most or not.
Baker again - I'll try what you have. #41 and #55 right?
Luthiers - you serious?(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/FACE%20PALM/facepalm.gif)
Suhr - email trail - i'd rather you just tell me in person than look at something personal. And I WILL test your Suhrs.
My own conclusion for this: firemodel55. done deal. we meet then. let's try this weekend or the next. I work at very weird hours. I will coordinate with MarkV so I may borrow his axe for the meet. Either it's just you and me or up to you to request an audience.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Phil on August 21, 2009, 05:31:07 AM
...my god....you guys ever think this is just gears?... ..cccchhhhhiiiiilllllll.
it's like....." My robot is da best....your robot is poo poo."
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 21, 2009, 05:31:56 AM
...my god....you guys ever think this is just gears?... ..cccchhhhhiiiiilllllll.
it's like....." My robot is da best....your robot is poo poo."
i haz new amp and cab phil. getting the legacy back soon. (http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/TGP%20EMOTICONS/wave-1.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: guitarb0y on August 21, 2009, 05:48:00 AM
Go with the gear that suits you best and play the best out of it.
If you're a newbie like me, i'll be just happy to play with my very cheap small amp with an overdrive tone and a cheap guitar with no name that sounds like a strat. Very low end but the most people think i play very good. You'll be a rock star in no time with less money.
Business men are total getting all the money they can get from us. Thats monopoly.
Just my opinion. Peace!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 05:58:20 AM
Oh, I can't separate equipment from playing. I am constantly learning. Both my skills and gear. Before it was the other way around. I am trying something new. :lol:
RS Pots/kit - I will.
Would love to try both Bakers that you have and compare it myself.
I'd rather bring all my gear to your house as I can imagine it would be a better place to do the comparison. Not today. One weekend for sure. Prior to the GAS Day. (OKI DOKI. JUST SO I CAN PREPARE THE ROOM, WHAT AMP AND CABINET WILL YOU BRING?)
Hand picked - I personally like to pick my own gear. Deemed useless by most or not.
Baker again - I'll try what you have. #41 and #55 right? (YUP)
Luthiers - you serious?(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/FACE%20PALM/facepalm.gif)
Suhr - email trail - i'd rather you just tell me in person than look at something personal. And I WILL test your Suhrs.
My own conclusion for this: firemodel55. done deal. we meet then. let's try this weekend or the next. I work at very weird hours. I will coordinate with MarkV so I may borrow his axe for the meet. Either it's just you and me or up to you to request an audience. (JUST CHIME IN WHICH WEEKEND IS BEST FOR YOU -- I WILL MAKE MYSELF AVAILABLE)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Filthy on August 21, 2009, 06:01:51 AM
i've tried playing with the most expensive guitars and the cheapest. the most expensive ive played is a PRS custom archtop hollow body. i think my manager bought it for about 200 thou pesos. then i think i sound better with a much cheaper ibanez RG :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Phil on August 21, 2009, 07:16:40 AM
i haz new amp and cab phil. getting the legacy back soon. (http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c202/turiguiliano/TGP%20EMOTICONS/wave-1.gif)
...connect it to a full stack ...get a hb equipped axe and dime the heck out of it....then dedicate the first power chord to me.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 21, 2009, 10:01:54 AM
wow this is something!
last night was chatting with a netbuddy who lives in scotland and he was wondering what i was up to, so i told him about this topic you guys are discussing and i couldnt explain to him what 'hiyaw was' the best i could come up was this wah like 'ngahh' when you bend notes, so i asked if his guitars(he has a suhr, vigier, or his shecter custom) had something like this, i thought he was going to say 'IDK what you're talking about', but he gave me soundclips, he told me to listen to when he would ring the notes..so i suggested not to use his highend amps(matchless..he has money) so he winged me clips using a mesa F50 combo,
Suhr - http://www.mediafire.com/?2myljhm5350
Vigier - http://www.mediafire.com/?mjdgzuyemow
Schecter - http://www.mediafire.com/?mj2yhvcmnnv
the suhr and vigier are both stock, the schecter has duncans, listen to the end of each note as he bends or ring it...
my guitars couldnt do these.!? im wondering what they did, btw his guitars are hand picked by world guitars uk
hmmm is this hiyaw?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 21, 2009, 12:14:53 PM
:-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 21, 2009, 12:45:47 PM
3. If you praise your gear maybe you should show us how you play it. That would probably end all discussions if you can sound better than all of us. -- playing has nothing to do with the quality vs cost argument. I can also ask somebody who can play to play on my gear to cream you but thats not the point.
My previous post quoting a great contradiction was erased. I just want to point it again so that new readers will see that this guys would rather have someone play his gear to cream a guy.
One more thing, he has mastered technique of typing within a quote so that it won't appear in a quote. FYI.
In every forum, there is always a guy like him. He gets on everyone's nerve with his upward chin attitude. If we fuel his fix, he won't stop talking. It's a Catch 22. Know this, he was like this 3 years ago and he was banned for this keystrokes. Now he back doing the same thing. Will he ever learn?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 21, 2009, 01:08:07 PM
In every forum, there is always a guy like him. He gets on everyone's nerve with his upward chin attitude. If we fuel his fix, he won't stop talking. It's a Catch 22. Know this, he was like this 3 years ago and he was banned for this keystrokes. Now he back doing the same thing. Will he ever learn?
[/color]
Will he ever learn?
In Abnormal Psychology, only three personalities will never learn...
1) IDIOTS 2) IMBECILES 3) MORONS
and the last one is known to like expensive toys a lot, but doesn't know how to play with them...
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: killjom on August 21, 2009, 01:17:46 PM
If you check the real bursts, they were made of Honduran Mahogany and with Brazilian rosewood fingerboard. Proud to be Brazilian!!!
Sir you're a Brazilian?
Well honestly I'll follow my instincts rather than the advise of a luthier when it comes to picking the right guitar.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 21, 2009, 01:37:11 PM
I'm starting to believe firemodel55 is racist. :lol:
But then again, we don't deny that your guitars are REALLY GOOD. But you cannot deny that there are options that are cheaper and difference in quality is almost negligible.
As for playing, what's the point in owning something so beautiful if you can't make it sound good? Again, not denying your guitars sound REALLY GOOD would probably sound good in someone else's hands.
Is that practical? And, please stop misquoting and sidetracking because the point of this thread is to determine where the confidence level of the AVERAGE musician lies when it comes to practicality with the measures: QUALITY vs COST.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 03:15:36 PM
My previous post quoting a great contradiction was erased. I just want to point it again so that new readers will see that this guys would rather have someone play his gear to cream a guy.
I DONT THINK IT WAS ERASED. THERE'S JUST AN ERROR THAT DOES NOT DISPLAY THE REPLY BUT WHEN YOU 'POST A REPLY' IT STILL IS THERE. IT HAPPENS TO ME TOO. YUP, SPECIALLY FOR GUYS WHO THINK THEY PLAY GREAT.
One more thing, he has mastered technique of typing within a quote so that it won't appear in a quote. FYI.
In every forum, there is always a guy like him. He gets on everyone's nerve with his upward chin attitude. If we fuel his fix, he won't stop talking. It's a Catch 22. Know this, he was like this 3 years ago and he was banned for this keystrokes. Now he back doing the same thing. Will he ever learn?
I CAN PROVE MY POINTS JUST COME OVER. WILL YOU EVER LEARN THAT?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: firemodel55 on August 21, 2009, 03:20:22 PM
last night was chatting with a netbuddy who lives in scotland and he was wondering what i was up to, so i told him about this topic you guys are discussing and i couldnt explain to him what 'hiyaw was' the best i could come up was this wah like 'ngahh' when you bend notes, so i asked if his guitars(he has a suhr, vigier, or his shecter custom) had something like this, i thought he was going to say 'IDK what you're talking about', but he gave me soundclips, he told me to listen to when he would ring the notes..so i suggested not to use his highend amps(matchless..he has money) so he winged me clips using a mesa F50 combo,
Suhr - http://www.mediafire.com/?2myljhm5350
Vigier - http://www.mediafire.com/?mjdgzuyemow
Schecter - http://www.mediafire.com/?mj2yhvcmnnv
the suhr and vigier are both stock, the schecter has duncans, listen to the end of each note as he bends or ring it...
my guitars couldnt do these.!? im wondering what they did, btw his guitars are hand picked by world guitars uk
hmmm is this hiyaw?
Nice demos!
the schecter and vigier certainly got my attention... but the suhr is just so phat, i love it!
but on the other hand... it's just what i heard and read here...
:wink:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 22, 2009, 03:50:35 AM
the schecter and vigier certainly got my attention... but the suhr is just so phat, i love it!
but on the other hand... it's just what i heard and read here...
:wink:
yes im really surprised by this, now im not sure what to do, probably if i save enough next year ill have a suhr that thing is phat sounding! must be from the overall construction? ill ask if he can do the same with the matchless, clearly i can assume its not a pinch harmonic or the way he hits the string, because the anomaly happens after the string & note was struck..this is ideal for soloing,
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 22, 2009, 06:11:57 AM
Quote from: Letour on Kahapon at 12:45:47 PM My previous post quoting a great contradiction was erased. I just want to point it again so that new readers will see that this guys would rather have someone play his gear to cream a guy.
I DONT THINK IT WAS ERASED. THERE'S JUST AN ERROR THAT DOES NOT DISPLAY THE REPLY BUT WHEN YOU 'POST A REPLY' IT STILL IS THERE. IT HAPPENS TO ME TOO. YUP, SPECIALLY FOR GUYS WHO THINK THEY PLAY GREAT.
You still haven't answered the point of contradiction. Please explain how Rolexm has to play his gear to prove himself but you will ask someone else to play your gear to prove the same point? Then you say that erased posts occur to those who think they play great and your posts gets erased as well. Contradiction or admission?
One more thing, he has mastered technique of typing within a quote so that it won't appear in a quote. FYI.
In every forum, there is always a guy like him. He gets on everyone's nerve with his upward chin attitude. If we fuel his fix, he won't stop talking. It's a Catch 22. Know this, he was like this 3 years ago and he was banned for this keystrokes. Now he back doing the same thing. Will he ever learn?
I CAN PROVE MY POINTS JUST COME OVER. WILL YOU EVER LEARN THAT?
Mr. Gomez, I shall take you on this offer. Lets have that tone party! I will pay for the studio, even 3 hours if you want. I already know a top notch studio with professional grade interior design. Bring the gear you are always talking about. But I only have one condition. That session where YOU proved your points must be recorded both video and audio. Why? Because of the best evidence rule. There has to be evidence of what you say.
I nominate BAMF to set up the blind test rules. So, are you really up to the challenge or will just hide behind your keyboard again?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 22, 2009, 06:32:47 AM
I'm starting to believe firemodel55 is racist. :lol:
But then again, we don't deny that your guitars are REALLY GOOD. But you cannot deny that there are options that are cheaper and difference in quality is almost negligible.
As for playing, what's the point in owning something so beautiful if you can't make it sound good? Again, not denying your guitars sound REALLY GOOD would probably sound good in someone else's hands.
Is that practical? And, please stop misquoting and sidetracking because the point of this thread is to determine where the confidence level of the AVERAGE musician lies when it comes to practicality with the measures: QUALITY vs COST.
i like... :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pao2pao16 on August 22, 2009, 06:41:20 AM
Mr. Gomez, I shall take you on this offer. Lets have that tone party! I will pay for the studio, even 3 hours if you want. I already know a top notch studio with professional grade interior design. Bring the gear you are always talking about. But I only have one condition. That session where YOU proved your points must be recorded both video and audio. Why? Because of the best evidence rule. There has to be evidence of what you say.
I nominate BAMF to set up the blind test rules. So, are you really up to the challenge or will just hide behind your keyboard again?
I will agree to the studio challenge if: 1. There is no audio and video for the main reason that it will not capture the important elements that define good sounding equipment. 2. No BAMF blind test rules but rather invite 10 known guitarist to test my equipment against yours. Then you can video their review of the equipment.
That being said: You are still welcome to come over with your guitar and amp to my house.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 22, 2009, 07:34:24 AM
hmm no audio or video? audio at least i want to hear if that guitar has that same anomaly from what my friend adam(born in scotland but raised in sunderland england)..did with his guitars, the suhr is an s4 model
if the guitar cant..well..
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 22, 2009, 07:47:55 AM
(http://smileyicons.net/s/681.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 22, 2009, 07:53:53 AM
I will agree to the studio challenge if: 1. There is no audio and video for the main reason that it will not capture the important elements that define good sounding equipment. 2. No BAMF blind test rules but rather invite 10 known guitarist to test my equipment against yours. Then you can video their review of the equipment.
I knew it. Your conditions are unacceptable because the parameters are under your control. No blind test? No audio or video? Then whatever the "known guitarists" will say will be baseless. And we are not talking about my gear. Just yours. Why? Because I don't claim my gear as "expensive" AND at the same time bashing others.
And most of all - IT HAS TO BE YOU THAT PLAYS. You claim it makes certain tones. You have to make it come out. Because when the "known guitarists" will play, they will sound like them NOT like you.
You are what we call in the gaming parlance - EPIC FAIL
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 22, 2009, 09:39:11 AM
I knew it. Your conditions are unacceptable because the parameters are under your control. No blind test? No audio or video? Then whatever the "known guitarists" will say will be baseless. And we are not talking about my gear. Just yours. Why? Because I don't claim my gear as "expensive" AND at the same time bashing others.
And most of all - IT HAS TO BE YOU THAT PLAYS. You claim it makes certain tones. You have to make it come out. Because when the "known guitarists" will play, they will sound like them NOT like you.
You are what we call in the gaming parlance - EPIC FAIL
Bro, game na yan. let's make it 7 hours. I know a studio in c5. My brother knows the owner. We can lock out a whole afternoon with two weeks prior notice.
Or in Ortigas on a Sunday. Besides, he's already there. He might as well play. And this is going to be a very professional gear testing.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 22, 2009, 09:46:44 AM
whatever your suhrs and bakers sound, it will never sound better than my guitar, (not stock).
why? my ears says so. and i satisfy my ears. unless it has the tone that i like, which will satisfy me.
so, in my book, the best sounding guitars are the ones that i buy. because its the one that satisfied me, the ones that made my hands comfy, the ones that captured my tone and blah blah most of all its within my budget.
i can buy a more expensive gear like 3-4 times more expensive, yes i can, but if i get satisfied with a cheaper alternative, ill get that alternative.
some says suhrs and bakers are the best... maybe because: 1. they bought that guitar, IT SATISFIED THEIR EARS. just like my principle. its nice. or 2. jinujustify lang ung tone > everything kasi nga mahal. ahahaha!!
anyway in my experience, pag ako nakarinig ng gitara that satisfies my tone, my ears, and its cheaper, i think "shet sana un nalang binili ko, nainvest ko pa sa iba sana ung money" and yes, i can buy the expensive ones. but im not up to the name and all for bragging rights. i want a cheap gear/guitar that will satisfy my ears. if it satisfies my ears, it fulfills me and makes me happy even though other people says that their guitars are billion times more expensive. in the end, what i pick is what i want and what i want satisfies me, no matter how cheap.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: leech on August 22, 2009, 11:11:56 AM
Bro, game na yan. let's make it 7 hours. I know a studio in c5. My brother knows the owner. We can lock out a whole afternoon with two weeks prior notice.
Or in Ortigas on a Sunday. Besides, he's already there. He might as well play. And this is going to be a very professional gear testing.
that sucks.... I always have a hangover every sunday.... :|
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 22, 2009, 11:18:11 AM
whatever your suhrs and bakers sound, it will never sound better than my guitar, (not stock).
why? my ears says so. and i satisfy my ears. unless it has the tone that i like, which will satisfy me.
so, in my book, the best sounding guitars are the ones that i buy. because its the one that satisfied me, the ones that made my hands comfy, the ones that captured my tone and blah blah most of all its within my budget.
i can buy a more expensive gear like 3-4 times more expensive, yes i can, but if i get satisfied with a cheaper alternative, ill get that alternative.
some says suhrs and bakers are the best... maybe because: 1. they bought that guitar, IT SATISFIED THEIR EARS. just like my principle. its nice. or 2. jinujustify lang ung tone > everything kasi nga mahal. ahahaha!!
anyway in my experience, pag ako nakarinig ng gitara that satisfies my tone, my ears, and its cheaper, i think "shet sana un nalang binili ko, nainvest ko pa sa iba sana ung money" and yes, i can buy the expensive ones. but im not up to the name and all for bragging rights. i want a cheap gear/guitar that will satisfy my ears. if it satisfies my ears, it fulfills me and makes me happy even though other people says that their guitars are billion times more expensive. in the end, what i pick is what i want and what i want satisfies me, no matter how cheap.
That's great to hear. Could you kindly share the specs of your guitar and roughly how much you spent? Also, how is the reliability? How long have you had the axe? Any problems?
Thanks!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 22, 2009, 11:20:57 AM
I once said before too that the "hiyaw" test cannot be captured by a microphone, except maybe if its a stereo-head dummy mike and you'll re-listen with stereo cans.
But the grading sheets will be a sort of a record. Just like the previous tone party. Blind test dapat para the name on the headstock will not affect perception.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 22, 2009, 11:39:25 AM
If the Baker can be picked out from 10 Les Paul and Heavy wood guitars in a blind test. then I shall praise its name and sing to its glory all the days of my life. Amen. Yes, even if it's picked out only by the owner,but better if it can be picked out by a set of 10 guitarists and recording engineers, or more as the best effin sounding heavy wood guitar in the country.
Then let's repeat for strats and for shredders. Wala akong entry for shredders, but I have entries for both heavy woods and strats.
Time is ripe. Let's put things to rest.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 22, 2009, 01:03:50 PM
@rolexm its a prs se custom made in korea. yes its not even US prs but yeah im happy with it, so much. replaced pups into paf joe neck, and steves special bridge. stock tuners work for me, but i replaced it with sperzels. take note ako lang naginstall nun, binutasan ko gamit ng screwdriver. strings used, ghs boomers 10.
its mahogany back maple top with maple veneer, mahogany neck rosewood fretboard. 25 inch scale, 22 frets (i love waaarm sound pag neck pup ang gamit)
i know most have more expensive guitars, yeah. but i love this. loooong sustain, sings very well and has perfect intonation across the fretboard (based on my chromatic tuner)
problems with this? none. i just set it up on my own, my own set up.
this satisfies me. if ever someone will bash me for having a korean guitar, ok lang.. let me hear ur guitar. it may or may not satisfy me, but im sure the owner has got lotsa praises for his own axe, kaya nya nga binili un e. it may sound better than my guitar in his books, but my guitar sounds better for me.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 22, 2009, 02:27:21 PM
@rolexm its a prs se custom made in korea. yes its not even US prs but yeah im happy with it, so much. replaced pups into paf joe neck, and steves special bridge. stock tuners work for me, but i replaced it with sperzels. take note ako lang naginstall nun, binutasan ko gamit ng screwdriver. strings used, ghs boomers 10.
its mahogany back maple top with maple veneer, mahogany neck rosewood fretboard. 25 inch scale, 22 frets (i love waaarm sound pag neck pup ang gamit)
i know most have more expensive guitars, yeah. but i love this. loooong sustain, sings very well and has perfect intonation across the fretboard (based on my chromatic tuner)
problems with this? none. i just set it up on my own, my own set up.
this satisfies me. if ever someone will bash me for having a korean guitar, ok lang.. let me hear ur guitar. it may or may not satisfy me, but im sure the owner has got lotsa praises for his own axe, kaya nya nga binili un e. it may sound better than my guitar in his books, but my guitar sounds better for me.
Sweet. :-) Cost range?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 22, 2009, 02:28:58 PM
There's nothing embarassing there dude. My Epiphone LP MIK ended my quest for LP's. I'm not saying there are no better-sounding LP's out there, it's just that MY quest has ended.
@rolexm its a prs se custom made in korea. yes its not even US prs but yeah im happy with it, so much. replaced pups into paf joe neck, and steves special bridge. stock tuners work for me, but i replaced it with sperzels. take note ako lang naginstall nun, binutasan ko gamit ng screwdriver. strings used, ghs boomers 10.
its mahogany back maple top with maple veneer, mahogany neck rosewood fretboard. 25 inch scale, 22 frets (i love waaarm sound pag neck pup ang gamit)
i know most have more expensive guitars, yeah. but i love this. loooong sustain, sings very well and has perfect intonation across the fretboard (based on my chromatic tuner)
problems with this? none. i just set it up on my own, my own set up.
this satisfies me. if ever someone will bash me for having a korean guitar, ok lang.. let me hear ur guitar. it may or may not satisfy me, but im sure the owner has got lotsa praises for his own axe, kaya nya nga binili un e. it may sound better than my guitar in his books, but my guitar sounds better for me.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 22, 2009, 02:32:56 PM
There's nothing embarassing there dude. My Epiphone LP MIK ended my quest for LP's. I'm not saying there are no better-sounding LP's out there, it's just that MY quest has ended.
Akin nga RJ custom shop lang eh. However, no stock parts. Rolling bridge, bone nut, trim locking tuners, EMG 81-85. Black guitar with pearl bindings.. all GOLD hardware. Hahaha.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pao2pao16 on August 22, 2009, 02:43:58 PM
Bro, game na yan. let's make it 7 hours. I know a studio in c5. My brother knows the owner. We can lock out a whole afternoon with two weeks prior notice.
Or in Ortigas on a Sunday. Besides, he's already there. He might as well play. And this is going to be a very professional gear testing.
Is the studio the same place where the house of minis is located?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: itchybrain on August 22, 2009, 02:49:41 PM
I will agree to the studio challenge if: 1. There is no audio and video for the main reason that it will not capture the important elements that define good sounding equipment. 2. No BAMF blind test rules but rather invite 10 known guitarist to test my equipment against yours. Then you can video their review of the equipment.
Nope. I CAN. I'm into video production. Sagot ko video coverage. \m/
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 22, 2009, 03:37:39 PM
yun oh! :lol:
parang laban ni Pacman, dami mag aabang :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: IncX on August 22, 2009, 03:58:38 PM
I would include a fourth -- people who cannot hear and unfortunately they like to admit that they play thru crappy amps.
hey FATSO, what I'm tone deaf now? Talk is cheap! I challenge you to a guitar duel w/ my 13 yr old daughter. she'll be using a "cheesy" Pink Hello Kitty Strat & a "crappy" Marshall Lead 12. Mind ya... she can play Canon Rock... Blindfolded. (http://smileyicons.net/s/683.gif)
Now if you can beat her, then you've earn the right to challenge my 15 yr old son... w/c btw plays john pettrucci solos... while his right hand is texting his GF! (http://smileyicons.net/s/922.gif)
Let say you can "cream" both of my kids... then, & only then you are worthy to face me into a "Crossroads" Duel. Go bring your US$5k Baker & your Php200k Suhr, your Matchlees & Soldano Amps, & your hi-end boutique pedals for all i care... I'll just be borrowing the blind guitarist's Raon Strat & his crappy Karaoke Amp.
No closed door sessions. Open to the public. Now if you "chickened out" & need ten "known guitarist" to fight your battle... Bring it on!!! I'll just tag along 2 guys... the blind guitarist fm MRT & Minyong.(http://smileyicons.net/s/532.gif)
LETS GET IT ON FATSO!!!
You can even sell Instant Noodles for this event if you wanna make extra bucks... Bring in the sponsors! :-D :-D :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 23, 2009, 07:05:19 AM
Sir BAMF, tumpak na tumpak ka. exactly. un na un ang ibig ko sabihin.
number 2, as the tone that i love is generated by my brain, and as the tone that comes from my guitar through my amp that is being heard by my ears that travels to my brain and my brain tells me "thats your tone, thats what you love, thats you" ill never buy another guitar.
i may buy an even more expensive one, but thats just for "collection" purposes. NAHH. hindi praktikal. save ko nalang ang pera. better invest sa iba.
cost range? sa jb my price ung se custom 22.. plus sperzels from blue jem (luxury nalang to hindi necessary) tapos paf joe (from isang forumer, brand new, mura lang benta) and steves special (from bluejem).
btw i chose my pickups, to really define my tone. and i even reversed my steves special. yes, the dimarzio site was correct, one side is brighter, and the other one is warmer. i chose the warmer one coz its fatter.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on August 23, 2009, 07:39:11 AM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 23, 2009, 08:17:03 PM
I guess he chickened out.
Lets see, we have a studio, top notch video production, 4 hours of tweaking, 3 hours of playing and its still not enough?
Even before I thought of the challenge, I knew he would impose a condition that would cloud everything and therefore make it impossible. 10 known guitarists to test his equipment and tape their comments? If only half did like this equipment, he will most probably claim that the other half had an off day or didn't really move their right hand in a swirling motion by their heads.
No audio or video production will ever truly capture what he claims? Using that logic, then all the CD's and Concert DVD's I bought are all lousy then.
Lets face it guys, he will always hide behind his keyboard and computer monitor.
But my proposal for a tone party still subsists. Lets plan it.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 23, 2009, 08:31:03 PM
Lets see, we have a studio, top notch video production, 4 hours of tweaking, 3 hours of playing and its still not enough?
Even before I thought of the challenge, I knew he would impose a condition that would cloud everything and therefore make it impossible. 10 known guitarists to test his equipment and tape their comments? If only half did like this equipment, he will most probably claim that the other half had an off day or didn't really move their right hand in a swirling motion by their heads.
No audio or video production will ever truly capture what he claims? Using that logic, then all the CD's and Concert DVD's I bought are all lousy then.
Lets face it guys, he will always hide behind his keyboard and computer monitor.
But my proposal for a tone party still subsists. Lets plan it.
We've been doing it in small groups. :) NATIONAL GAS DAY IS NEARING!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 23, 2009, 10:08:53 PM
james hunter on the left, to me the neck is relatively similar to chinese LP necks especially the screw being too close to the nut(a real gibson has bit of a spacing between nut and screw..yes i know it says a sweden luthier built it..i just dont buy that)
anyway the point is, if its good for this well known guitar player..it all comes to self preference..
also we have Greg Howe on the right..the guy plays and has been with different guitar company's..we know he is with laguna.. i played one of those they sound and play great(even being indo made, it felt different than the indo ibanez's), the headstock was like a design i couldnt 'love'..
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on August 24, 2009, 08:58:55 AM
unSUHR pa ata :lol:
(http://smileyicons.net/s/275.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 24, 2009, 09:11:14 AM
well i hope it does, i have been quite amused with the clips my friend sent me so if his guitar could reproduce that anomaly then great..otherwise im left to conclude adam has better access to people who know how to HANDPICK guitars(world guitars uk), who can set-up a guitar (probably better knowledge as well),..and no magic involved..
magic...disneyland..etc
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Phil on August 24, 2009, 09:20:32 AM
.....Greg Howe on the right..the guy plays and has been with different guitar company's..we know he is with laguna.. i played one of those they sound and play great(even being indo made, it felt different than the indo ibanez's), the headstock was like a design i couldnt 'love'..
Greg Howe can play anything....he is just not happy with the companies he has been dealing with...... considering the recession right now...who would spend on sponsoring someone when nobody isn't buying.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 24, 2009, 09:26:28 AM
Greg Howe can play anything....he is just not happy with the companies he has been dealing with...... considering the recession right now...who would spend on sponsoring someone when nobody isn't buying.
yep pretty much, considering those were well known, its been a while i saw him with laguna, but i looked at laguna before i knew he was endorsing and those have really good alnico pickups, matched right...just the headstock which to me looks like sardinas over ice cream, i agree he can rip on anything..
question is, why do some of our countrymen...ay nevermind...the cycle never ends anyway...
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 09:31:23 AM
This is really ridiculous.
We all know for a fact that Alex CANNOT play as per what we define as a great player. I can easily kick his a$$ in the playing department, but I wouldn't say that I can getter better tone with my gear than if I play through his gear.
If we were to do a double blindfold test:
1. We should have at least 10 different folks of different playing skill and genre to play through your A/B/C/D... setup. 2. When we record the gear, good luck, even from a recording engineer's perspective, even the best preamps, A/D D/A converters, mics and acoustics can't be the best representation of a sound source. Try changing a guitar's tone knob from 10 to 9 and tell me you hear the difference in recording.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Phil on August 24, 2009, 09:39:55 AM
yep pretty much, considering those were well known, its been a while i saw him with laguna, but i looked at laguna before i knew he was endorsing and those have really good alnico pickups, matched right...just the headstock which to me looks like sardinas over ice cream, i agree he can rip on anything..
question is, why do some of our countrymen...ay nevermind...the cycle never ends anyway...
there's a bunch of Laguna's here in my local mom and pop music store (where my son take his guitar lessons)... looks nice and decent. Their acoustic is not half bad either.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 24, 2009, 09:45:56 AM
im interested if that anomaly which was shared by a friend of mine exists in the said guitars..if the guitars have it then im set in defining that i will get one..Suhr for Suhr
that's all i want no player bashing..people have different skill sets, its just the glorious praises that kept being repeated and as a player and likely consumer i need to get as much info as possible, between standard and modern..my local shop that use to have those closed down, all we have now is guitarcenter(3 locations) and 5 mom pops stores..
there's a bunch of Laguna's here in my local mom and pop music store (where my son take his guitar lessons)... looks nice and decent. Their acoustic is not half bad either.
your kids all grown up na? cool
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 24, 2009, 09:54:03 AM
We all know for a fact that Alex CANNOT play as per what we define as a great player. I can easily kick his a$$ in the playing department, but I wouldn't say that I can getter better tone with my gear than if I play through his gear.
If we were to do a double blindfold test:
1. We should have at least 10 different folks of different playing skill and genre to play through your A/B/C/D... setup. 2. When we record the gear, good luck, even from a recording engineer's perspective, even the best preamps, A/D D/A converters, mics and acoustics can't be the best representation of a sound source. Try changing a guitar's tone knob from 10 to 9 and tell me you hear the difference in recording.
And I thought we were just getting this on Video. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 09:56:27 AM
AS TO HOW I CHOSE TO EARN A LIVING AND LIVE MY LIFE THATS MY BUSINESS, IF AND ONLY IF GIGGING COULD PAY ME MORE THAN WHAT I AM EARNING NOW THEN I WOULD GLADLY GIG THE REST OF MY LIFE.
may i just tell that you aint an authority when it comes to music.. you are not. hobbyist maybe?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 10:04:32 AM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 10:58:20 AM
the ones whose opinions aren't biased by pricetags, those who do not say "test your (insert guitar model) against my (custom expensive guitar)" those who have been into music for a long time and is very experienced, those whose ears are trained very well, those who can tell whether that this "magical sound" is produced by the guitar itself or the player itself. the ones that has proven knowledge in music, yes music is very broad, i mean, there are authorities when it comes to pedals, guitars, amps and stuff.
may naprove naba si mr firemodel besides sa mamahaling guitar?
in short, you can't bash others gears if you ain't an authority.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on August 24, 2009, 11:08:54 AM
I must admit that this is getting quite out of hand. And I will admit again that I started a challenge on this thread. But I know I am not the first.
In every "hobby", there is always 1 person with all the money to buy the most expensive gear. Golf, photography, cars, cycling, etc.
But does that same person have the skills to fully utilize the gear he bought? Sometimes it happens but most often not. They just spend the extra money so that they can hear "wow, pare ang ganda ng gear mo".
But in this Philmusic, its very different. This one guy we all know not only brags but at the same time he bashes, criticizes, maligns the manufacturer, and threatens that his gear (played by someone else of course) will smash his enemies.
In cycling, if you brag - show it on the road. In Golf, if you brag - show it on the course. Same goes for guitars and gear. You brag - you play.
In the real world, you got to back up what you say, personally. We want to respect and admire his capacity to "buy" the gear. But we can't give him that respect and admiration if he continues on what he does know best. And we all know what he is really good at.
I can't accept other people to substitute for a test. This is not F1 where drivers are hired to drive the best cars. This is not the NBA where casino owners pay tall athletes to play for them.
Whether a $5000 guitar or #55 will give the best tone, I don't care anymore. Since as they top people say, their uniqueness will never be captured on video or audio. Using that logic, there can never be evidence of a claim. If a claim cannot be proved, then that claim must fail.
If I say that my $100 EPI can sound a whale driving a BMW, will you believe me? All I have to say is that no audio or video will truly capture that sound. The audio will just make it sound like the whale is driving a Benz.
Time to move on... The challenge is now moot.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 24, 2009, 11:48:10 AM
I must admit that this is getting quite out of hand. And I will admit again that I started a challenge on this thread. But I know I am not the first.
In every "hobby", there is always 1 person with all the money to buy the most expensive gear. Golf, photography, cars, cycling, etc.
But does that same person have the skills to fully utilize the gear he bought? Sometimes it happens but most often not. They just spend the extra money so that they can hear "wow, pare ang ganda ng gear mo".
But in this Philmusic, its very different. This one guy we all know not only brags but at the same time he bashes, criticizes, maligns the manufacturer, and threatens that his gear (played by someone else of course) will smash his enemies. Â
In cycling, if you brag - show it on the road. In Golf, if you brag - show it on the course. Same goes for guitars and gear. You brag - you play.
In the real world, you got to back up what you say, personally. We want to respect and admire his capacity to "buy" the gear. But we can't give him that respect and admiration if he continues on what he does know best. And we all know what he is really good at.
I can't accept other people to substitute for a test. This is not F1 where drivers are hired to drive the best cars. This is not the NBA where casino owners pay tall athletes to play for them.
Whether a $5000 guitar or #55 will give the best tone, I don't care anymore. Since as they top people say, their uniqueness will never be captured on video or audio. Using that logic, there can never be evidence of a claim. If a claim cannot be proved, then that claim must fail.
If I say that my $100 EPI can sound a whale driving a BMW, will you believe me? All I have to say is that no audio or video will truly capture that sound. The audio will just make it sound like the whale is driving a Benz.
Time to move on... The challenge is now moot.
There is a significant difference between bragging and bashing rights. :-)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 11:57:58 AM
I must admit that this is getting quite out of hand. And I will admit again that I started a challenge on this thread. But I know I am not the first.
In every "hobby", there is always 1 person with all the money to buy the most expensive gear. Golf, photography, cars, cycling, etc.
But does that same person have the skills to fully utilize the gear he bought? Sometimes it happens but most often not. They just spend the extra money so that they can hear "wow, pare ang ganda ng gear mo".
But in this Philmusic, its very different. This one guy we all know not only brags but at the same time he bashes, criticizes, maligns the manufacturer, and threatens that his gear (played by someone else of course) will smash his enemies.
In cycling, if you brag - show it on the road. In Golf, if you brag - show it on the course. Same goes for guitars and gear. You brag - you play.
In the real world, you got to back up what you say, personally. We want to respect and admire his capacity to "buy" the gear. But we can't give him that respect and admiration if he continues on what he does know best. And we all know what he is really good at.
I can't accept other people to substitute for a test. This is not F1 where drivers are hired to drive the best cars. This is not the NBA where casino owners pay tall athletes to play for them.
Whether a $5000 guitar or #55 will give the best tone, I don't care anymore. Since as they top people say, their uniqueness will never be captured on video or audio. Using that logic, there can never be evidence of a claim. If a claim cannot be proved, then that claim must fail.
If I say that my $100 EPI can sound a whale driving a BMW, will you believe me? All I have to say is that no audio or video will truly capture that sound. The audio will just make it sound like the whale is driving a Benz.
Time to move on... The challenge is now moot.
that's what im tring to say. prove yourself before you criticize and bash, prove yourself and prove your points.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 12:24:05 PM
If I throw the question back at us, "has anyone of us proven anything?"
And to be more specific, "has anyone of us proven we have great tone?'
Skill-wise, I already lost count seeing 'credible' people in terms of skill... but tonewise, bilang na bilang sa daliri. And the irony of it is, the people whom I have met with the best tone are those who can barely brag about a hit record, and people who have never seen the stage.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 24, 2009, 12:37:15 PM
But does that same person have the skills to fully utilize the gear he bought? Sometimes it happens but most often not. They just spend the extra money so that they can hear "wow, pare ang ganda ng gear mo".
Attorney, bakit yung Callaway golf clubs ko, which are custom-measured to me and even have whippin carbon-fiber shafts...can't make shoot straight ? Lagi pa din akong sssslllliiiiccceeeee....
Quote
Time to move on... The challenge is now moot.
Agreed. Medyo kung saan-saan na napunta pati "who's the authority" issues. There is no "authority" except "personal authority". In the same way that there is no Jesus, only a "Personal Jesus". There is no truth if it's not a personal truth. And yadda yadda yadda.
Unless the challenge is taken up of course. Let's move on na Rolex. And have that Tone party with or without the Baker. Now I think you should whip up your Excel sheet and get our responses to get your statistical data.
Here's mine, my comfort level Had my Epiphone LP been acquired at market value, its cost would have been from 18-25 k. Lets use 25k. After all, they're vintage. They're wearing EMG-HZ pickups. One set of those costs 7k. Then the crystalcore scal, P500 then the preamp, had I not made it myself would have cost me 1k.
So adding that up...thats Php 33.5 thousand.
But here's the caveat here and I don't know if you read about it already. Among several guitars of the same line, a lot of them will be duds and there will be only a few gems. There is no 1:1 correlation between cost and quality or cost and "magical sound". Among several Gibson Les Pauls, you're lucky to find 2-4 good ones for every 20 that you test. Even the most accomplished luthiers still have the "chamba" factor and do not have a 100% "magic" rate.
There's this kwento that Arie told me. There's this luthier that found a 50-year old ash slab and they proceeded to make 10 guitars out of it. Only 2 of the 10 sounded good.
Which also corresponds to a different experience I had. One day at the Pier, I accompanied our bassist who was looking for a 2nd bass. Having nothing to do myself while waiting, I just sifted through and played through the many guitars there. Most of them were junk (literally) then my eye caught this Juno strat. I played through it and my eyes widened. Uy ! Uy ! I said to myself. Teka...I was plugged into a marshall v65, so I requested for a smaller "shyttier" amp...an Ibanez 10 watter. Uy! Uy! Maganda talaga as in !
So without even plans of getting a new guitar, I brought that Juno home. Then guess what. When I inspected it closer...pok...PLYWOOD ! Mahogany ply but it sure shattered all preconceptions about tone and plywood (yes I'm willing to showcase this guitar in the next tone party if anyone asks).
So forget about tone is in the wallet and tone is in the fingers thing. I propose a new credo. Tone is in the ears. Di ba ? Then there's the next question now. Whose ears ? Yours of course.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 12:46:35 PM
Mga parekoy, I think we have to bear in mind the prevailing paradigm in this country.
Pag birthday mo at nilibre mo buong opisina ng McDo, WOW GALANTE.
Gawin mo sa US yan, ANG CHEAP MO. Similar na nanlibre ka sa karinderya dito (not to say di masarap sa karniderya).
The reason why there is so much controversy here is because Alex is actually trying to stimulate us to defend our perceptions about tone. Call it wrong, but the a-hole is very much needed here as an alt POV.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 24, 2009, 12:59:07 PM
Mga parekoy, I think we have to bear in mind the prevailing paradigm in this country.
Pag birthday mo at nilibre mo buong opisina ng McDo, WOW GALANTE.
Gawin mo sa US yan, ANG CHEAP MO. Similar na nanlibre ka sa karinderya dito (not to say di masarap sa karniderya).
The reason why there is so much controversy here is because Alex is actually trying to stimulate us to defend our perceptions about tone. Call it wrong, but the a-hole is very much needed here as an alt POV.
Says you !
Here, read these up :
James 3 (especially verses 17-18)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 01:04:28 PM
Attorney, bakit yung Callaway golf clubs ko, which are custom-measured to me and even have whippin carbon-fiber shafts...can't make shoot straight ? Lagi pa din akong sssslllliiiiccceeeee....
Agreed. Medyo kung saan-saan na napunta pati "who's the authority" issues. There is no "authority" except "personal authority". In the same way that there is no Jesus, only a "Personal Jesus". There is no truth if it's not a personal truth. And yadda yadda yadda.
Unless the challenge is taken up of course. Let's move on na Rolex. And have that Tone party with or without the Baker. Now I think you should whip up your Excel sheet and get our responses to get your statistical data.
Here's mine, my comfort level Had my Epiphone LP been acquired at market value, its cost would have been from 18-25 k. Lets use 25k. After all, they're vintage. They're wearing EMG-HZ pickups. One set of those costs 7k. Then the crystalcore scal, P500 then the preamp, had I not made it myself would have cost me 1k.
So adding that up...thats Php 33.5 thousand.
But here's the caveat here and I don't know if you read about it already. Among several guitars of the same line, a lot of them will be duds and there will be only a few gems. There is no 1:1 correlation between cost and quality or cost and "magical sound". Among several Gibson Les Pauls, you're lucky to find 2-4 good ones for every 20 that you test. Even the most accomplished luthiers still have the "chamba" factor and do not have a 100% "magic" rate.
There's this kwento that Arie told me. There's this luthier that found a 50-year old ash slab and they proceeded to make 10 guitars out of it. Only 2 of the 10 sounded good.
Which also corresponds to a different experience I had. One day at the Pier, I accompanied our bassist who was looking for a 2nd bass. Having nothing to do myself while waiting, I just sifted through and played through the many guitars there. Most of them were junk (literally) then my eye caught this Juno strat. I played through it and my eyes widened. Uy ! Uy ! I said to myself. Teka...I was plugged into a marshall v65, so I requested for a smaller "shyttier" amp...an Ibanez 10 watter. Uy! Uy! Maganda talaga as in !
So without even plans of getting a new guitar, I brought that Juno home. Then guess what. When I inspected it closer...pok...PLYWOOD ! Mahogany ply but it sure shattered all preconceptions about tone and plywood (yes I'm willing to showcase this guitar in the next tone party if anyone asks).
So forget about tone is in the wallet and tone is in the fingers thing. I propose a new credo. Tone is in the ears. Di ba ? Then there's the next question now. Whose ears ? Yours of course.
+1 sa tone is in the ears, as i suggested sa previous post ko, yeah. we satisfy our ears.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 01:51:08 PM
Call it wrong, but the a-hole is very much needed here as an alt POV.
I totally agree that he has a POV. And I agree that he has an ass (you said it, not me) But his POV is that "yours doesn't measure up because it's not boutique/$5K/luthier." We will all concede his gear costs more than a house. But do we need to hear that all the time?
At the same time that his POV is launched, there is an artillery of bashing that follows. We don't need that.
Many here give their opinions - you need better strings, your setup is too high, your mids are too low, your EQ is off, etc. That we can take.
Mr. Gomez is a nitpicker. He will wait for statement in a paragraph, bash it, twist it and stomp (pun intended) on it. But he will ignore the theme of the whole paragraph from which the statement he targeted is a minor part.
I am still waiting for his reasons on his contradictions which I have boldly pointed out.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 24, 2009, 03:15:26 PM
Diba si Christ din nagsabi, ang salitang dala niya ay TABAK? I wouldn't have the balls during his time to speak against the Pharisees.
And good Lord, Alex is probably laughing his ass off now while we quarrel amongst ourselves.
Yeah kaya nga di ako nagpapaniwala dun. How can who they call "The prince of peace" bring "tabak"? How can someone who says "love your fellowman as you love thyself" say that he will set mother against daughter, father against son, brother against brother ? Labo di ba ?
At least Gautama was very consistent hehehe.
Besides, it's not about Alex. He can laugh his ass all he wants (lol) but as long as no scientific or at least a quasi-scientific method to prove any claim is performed, it's NOTHING :-D .
Saka I'm not fighting with you bro. Kiss pre hahehehe. Eh sabi ni Kristo, love your FELLOW MAN, di ba ? Mwehehehe labyu pare.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 03:31:06 PM
no quarrels naman e.
walang problema naman kung walang "yours is crap mine is ________________________________________________!!", "try it against my _______________________________________________!!!" and all
yes its his opinion, nothing against his opinion, but to talk SHEET about others?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 24, 2009, 03:35:42 PM
Yeah kaya nga di ako nagpapaniwala dun. How can who they call "The prince of peace" bring "tabak"? How can someone who says "love your fellowman as you love thyself" say that he will set mother against daughter, father against son, brother against brother ? Labo di ba ?
At least Gautama was very consistent hehehe.
Besides, it's not about Alex. He can laugh his ass all he wants (lol) but as long as no scientific or at least a quasi-scientific method to prove any claim is performed, it's NOTHING :-D .
Saka I'm not fighting with you bro. Kiss pre hahehehe. Eh sabi ni Kristo, love your FELLOW MAN, di ba ? Mwehehehe labyu pare.
i guess kaya tabak kasi it will pierce through your heart, and marami masasaktan dahil He says the truth and yeah, the truth hurts, for most people.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 24, 2009, 04:19:49 PM
If I throw the question back at us, "has anyone of us proven anything?"
And to be more specific, "has anyone of us proven we have great tone?'
Skill-wise, I already lost count seeing 'credible' people in terms of skill... but tonewise, bilang na bilang sa daliri. And the irony of it is, the people whom I have met with the best tone are those who can barely brag about a hit record, and people who have never seen the stage.
+1
Sure, people in the insdustry don't have crappy tones but there are so many hobbyists that have marvelous tones.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 24, 2009, 04:34:35 PM
The reason why there is so much controversy here is because Alex is actually trying to stimulate us to defend our perceptions about tone. Call it wrong, but the a-hole is very much needed here as an alt POV.
His opinion will always be valid beyond reasonable doubt. However, he should learn to put things that do not offend other people. Especially when his opinion is not directly related to the topic being discussed.
Can we stop sidetracking? I think we proved the point that there is no correlation between quality and cost. You may have an expensive guitar or a cheap guitar that can sound amazing or crappy.
The general assumption though is that you just need to know how to use your ears regardless of price. If you can find something more "practical" for you, then good. It definitely wrong to ASSUME without data that is presented to all involved parties. If you share you experience, that's good. But do not discredit anyone's.
In addition, quality control is a performance indicator that is never 100% sure unless you CHECK every single component which is rarely done for MASS PRODUCED products. No matter what brand you have, if quality control is not good, then you can never be sure. I appreciate Alex's story about emailing the makers of his guitar and their honesty about telling him that the guitar he wants from them is not worth it (that particularly newly built one). However, I know a lot of us would appreciate if he would comply to the tone party because I'm sure only a few would actually want to prove him wrong but MOST would want to learn from these blind tests.
Finally, to conclude this topic: QUALITY and COST no direct correlation. You just need to know how to tell if it's worth it which is also relative.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 08:45:04 PM
Finally, to conclude this topic: QUALITY and COST no direct correlation. You just need to know how to tell if it's worth it which is also relative.
I would beg to disagree man. Because if that were true, all of us would be happy with Behringer stomps. :-D
There IS a correlation between quality and cost, but it is not at all linear. AT one price point (very cheap) the quality of a piece of gear can be so poor, with some "sleepers", but as you increase the cost of production (can be because of materials or money spent on research), the quality becomes better, in general. At the corksniffer price points, you are spending an extra $2000 for something that can yield a hairline difference, say, a titanium tailpiece and titanium bridge/saddle assembly for a Les Paul. One very small step forward for something you don't know if 98% of the population can hear, which costs more than an average Pinoy's yearly earnings.
Just to make things clear, I don't like personal attacks. However, I digress that sometimes intellectual trolling stimulates a good discussion, however, they can yield some unfavorable reactions.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on August 24, 2009, 08:52:19 PM
Besides, it's not about Alex. He can laugh his ass all he wants (lol) but as long as no scientific or at least a quasi-scientific method to prove any claim is performed, it's NOTHING :-D .
I'll always quote Zach Lucero on this one: "Funny how people want to measure what they can't hear, and hear what they can't measure..."
Sometimes, it is a pain to argue about tone. You cannot argue with taste... and you cannot argue with science either.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 24, 2009, 08:55:40 PM
I would beg to disagree man. Because if that were true, all of us would be happy with Behringer stomps. :-D
There IS a correlation between quality and cost, but it is not at all linear. AT one price point (very cheap) the quality of a piece of gear can be so poor, with some "sleepers", but as you increase the cost of production (can be because of materials or money spent on research), the quality becomes better, in general. At the corksniffer price points, you are spending an extra $2000 for something that can yield a hairline difference, say, a titanium tailpiece and titanium bridge/saddle assembly for a Les Paul. One very small step forward for something you don't know if 98% of the population can hear, which costs more than an average Pinoy's yearly earnings.
Just to make things clear, I don't like personal attacks. However, I digress that sometimes intellectual trolling stimulates a good discussion, however, they can yield some unfavorable reactions.
Emen? EMEN !!!! Perfectly stated.
Then why push a piece of gear whose advantage cannot be heard, di ba ?
Parang dati kami ni Anton, we A/B'ed his Nobels (or was it a LaGrange)cable with my P20/m cable. I strained, but I heard it. There was a difference. It was not night and day, but it was there.
Then the next question, is it worth buying a 2,000 peso cable as opposed to a P200 cable to get a very clean signal, only to dirty it up when it gets to the pedals and further on ? Oh I don't know, now the answer to that varies with the owner-cum-user, depending on what his shyt tolerance threshold is. Sometimes pa nga shytty cables are desirable as they tame shrill frequencies of some guitars. Ask Hendrix. Ooops, he's dead na nga pala...
Don't get me wrong, there is always a market for high end stuff. But if it's not what the common man wants or needs, don't expect him to break his bank to save up for it.
Fini.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 24, 2009, 08:56:58 PM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on August 25, 2009, 03:26:18 AM
@bryanarzaga
Hey bro, I heard the clips that your friend sent you regarding the "hiyaw". It is a fundamental sound transitioning into feedback. IMO and experience ANY guitar can do this as long as you have enough gain & volume to generate feedback. That's the exact sound I was getting when I still had my fernandes sustainer but at any volume, even when the guitar was unplugged! If you listen to the Suhr clip, he is bending the E note (9th fret, G string) a whole step but there's a part in there where he bends a D note and it doesn't make the hiyaw. That tells us that not every note on his guitar can make that sound at that moment ( actually he can, he just need to turn up his amp and position himself better to the amp ). You mentioned that your guitar cannot do that so do me a favor and try this, first position yourself in front of your amp. Now set a high gain sound and play the lick that your friend did on the clip. Your pickups should be directly facing the speaker, around 2 feet should be enough if not move closer or turn up the volume higher. You should be able to get that sound. Note that the farther you move away from the amp the more volume you need! Lemme know if works out for you bro.
Guys, wag nyo na lang pansinin si firemodel. When I first joined GC at thought cool, filipino musicians can help one another and hopefully improve ourselves and then I read his posts and I said oh great, another talangka w/ I'm better than you attitude, since I played/owned most of the gear he's bragging about and know/ dealt w/ the people he constantly namedrops, I'll give him a tap. In the end it's a waste of time, all he's got is his words. After all, isn't the point of what we call "better" gear is to inspire us to play better and make better music? After seeing his video I don't see any benefit of the QUALITY nor the COST of his gear.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 25, 2009, 03:40:46 AM
Hey bro, I heard the clips that your friend sent you regarding the "hiyaw". It is a fundamental sound transitioning into feedback. IMO and experience ANY guitar can do this as long as you have enough gain & volume to generate feedback. That's the exact sound I was getting when I still had my fernandes sustainer but at any volume, even when the guitar was unplugged! If you listen to the Suhr clip, he is bending the E note (9th fret, G string) a whole step but there's a part in there where he bends a D note and it doesn't make the hiyaw. That tells us that not every note on his guitar can make that sound at that moment ( actually he can, he just need to turn up his amp and position himself better to the amp ). You mentioned that your guitar cannot do that so do me a favor and try this, first position yourself in front of your amp. Now set a high gain sound and play the lick that your friend did on the clip. Your pickups should be directly facing the speaker, around 2 feet should be enough if not move closer or turn up the volume higher. You should be able to get that sound. Note that the farther you move away from the amp the more volume you need! Lemme know if works out for you bro.
i like your observation! :-)
-here is the thing, the amp is facing away from him when he was doing this, so it was not feedback, since the guitar was not the facing him nor the guitar was facing the speaker, the speaker was facing the wall -the volume is @ not even close to 9 o'clock, so it wasnt that loud, the mic used was a sennheiser e609 cab mic(awesome for toms too)
-how do i know because... i was the one doing it lol, its two guitars(usarg30 and rx60,using the ewave DG5H amp)
Quote
Guys, wag nyo na lang pansinin si firemodel. When I first joined GC at thought cool, filipino musicians can help one another and hopefully improve ourselves and then I read his posts and I said oh great, another talangka w/ I'm better than you attitude, since I played/owned most of the gear he's bragging about and know/ dealt w/ the people he constantly namedrops, I'll give him a tap. In the end it's a waste of time, all he's got is his words. After all, isn't the point of what we call "better" gear is to inspire us to play better and make better music? After seeing his video I don't see any benefit of the QUALITY nor the COST of his gear.
YESHH!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on August 25, 2009, 04:12:10 AM
-here is the thing, the amp is facing away from him when he was doing this, so it was not feedback, since the guitar was not the facing him nor the guitar was facing the speaker, the speaker was facing the wall -the volume is @ not even close to 9 o'clock, so it wasnt that loud, the mic used was a sennheiser e609 cab mic(awesome for toms too)
-how do i know because... i was the one doing it lol, its two guitars(usarg30 and rx60,using the ewave DG5H amp)
Hey bro, so those clips were not really the high end guitars nor your friends, I knew it! :-D As you have probably noticed I don't buy that hiyaw crap. I recommended to get close to the speaker so can EASILY get feedback but you don't necessarily have to do that like in your case. Some setups do the feedback thing easily w/o the high volume, some do not. Yours does it easily but there's no such thing as (magic)hiyaw. You probably noticed that you do not get that on every note on your guitar as evident on the clip but man, turn it up and you will! Another thing is if you really dig that sound then try a sustainer equipped guitar. Unlike feedback where it is note dependent and always go into octaves or fifths the sustainer can hold a fundamental sound at ANY volume. Sorry sa OT folks!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 25, 2009, 05:28:01 AM
Hey bro, so those clips were not really the high end guitars nor your friends, I knew it! :-D
lol yeah
Quote
As you have probably noticed I don't buy that hiyaw crap.
i just want audible information..
Quote
I recommended to get close to the speaker so can EASILY get feedback but you don't necessarily have to do that like in your case. Some setups do the feedback thing easily w/o the high volume, some do not. Yours does it easily but there's no such thing as (magic)hiyaw. You probably noticed that you do not get that on every note on your guitar as evident on the clip but man, turn it up and you will! Another thing is if you really dig that sound then try a sustainer equipped guitar.
lol another one for hiyaw, but anyway sustainer pickups arent my thing, its not the sustaining factor im after..its the way that note does it. its less distinctive with the lower strings more like just a fat muff, but i can do it on 14 frets below, any higher than that it doesnt ring the same thing
sorry for the OT
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 25, 2009, 08:44:29 AM
just my thought:
im happy to be satisfied with my tone for 1/4 the money that other people dig from their pockets.. some people needs $5k to be happy and satisfied while most of us here achieve that contentment at a lot less money.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 25, 2009, 09:04:12 AM
I would beg to disagree man. Because if that were true, all of us would be happy with Behringer stomps. :-D
There IS a correlation between quality and cost, but it is not at all linear. AT one price point (very cheap) the quality of a piece of gear can be so poor, with some "sleepers", but as you increase the cost of production (can be because of materials or money spent on research), the quality becomes better, in general. At the corksniffer price points, you are spending an extra $2000 for something that can yield a hairline difference, say, a titanium tailpiece and titanium bridge/saddle assembly for a Les Paul. One very small step forward for something you don't know if 98% of the population can hear, which costs more than an average Pinoy's yearly earnings.
Just to make things clear, I don't like personal attacks. However, I digress that sometimes intellectual trolling stimulates a good discussion, however, they can yield some unfavorable reactions.
Just to clarify: no direct - could also mean not linear (not 1:1). I'm actually leaning to believe that it's exponential. Haha.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: markv on August 25, 2009, 09:05:51 AM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 25, 2009, 09:13:20 AM
@ bryan & hmn8:
Thought so... That hiyaw was just amp positioning and maybe the acoustics of the room? Maybe it's some pysch-marketing that we create our own satisfaction when we justify the things that we bought, cheap or expensive.
Nonetheless, if you can't make it sound good then it's not for you. Hehe.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 25, 2009, 09:20:26 AM
i might as well ask, my guitar has got hiyaw, and i mean its like harmonics and it just happens at the note A. yeah even i mute the strings its got that A harmonic which i learned to like. it happens on every strings A note
i brought it to arie to diagnose if theres an uneven frets which causes the harmonic and he says wala daw and i dont need to spend money at all for that. he says its desirable daw and also kung uneven frets daw un eh di sana putol agad ung tunog pag nagbebend ako but it has a long sustain daw. he also mentioned overtones and stuff and explains me many things,
can anyone tell what causes that or possibly what causes that?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: bryanarzaga on August 25, 2009, 11:08:07 AM
Thought so... That hiyaw was just amp positioning and maybe the acoustics of the room?
nope, i had the amps' cab facing the wall, as hmn8 states its just the guitars' setup and i agree with him. thats how i set up my guitar, well to me since i setup all my guitars and even refret,level,crowning,polish i know what i want when it comes to the feel and playability of my guitars,
Quote
Nonetheless, if you can't make it sound good then it's not for you. Hehe.
or you still have to look for something else and learn how to justify how the instrument is matched(setup,hardware and other guitar factors)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 25, 2009, 02:16:47 PM
nope, i had the amps' cab facing the wall, as hmn8 states its just the guitars' setup and i agree with him. thats how i set up my guitar, well to me since i setup all my guitars and even refret,level,crowning,polish i know what i want when it comes to the feel and playability of my guitars,
or you still have to look for something else and learn how to justify how the instrument is matched(setup,hardware and other guitar factors)
I see. Many factors talaga. Haha.
Given the premise that you can make something sound good. :roll:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on August 25, 2009, 04:40:38 PM
After reading bryan and jerome's post regarding hiyaw, it seems that I misunderstood what you guys meant. When I first read about it I thought a guitar that has hiyaw makes that sound on ANY note on the guitar at any volume so I thought "no way a guitar could do that no matter how expensive", I thought it was something like this but w/o the gadget:
After reading jerome's post it's all clear to me now. It is just another mysterious byproduct of the guitar's properties. Any guitar has that quality but it is different on each guitar. Mine does it on a G note, Brian's on the E note and Jerome's on the A note. Brian's right, it's was not feedback, even if he unplugged his guitar and hit that note it will still make that sound, the amp was merely amplifying the sound from the guitar. That explains to me why it didn't sound the same when he hit the D note. By the way, @pitongjerome, your guitar has it on every A note and you don't want it? Well then that's not hiyaw, that A-yaw! (sorry, had to do it :-D)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 25, 2009, 05:00:46 PM
After reading bryan and jerome's post regarding hiyaw, it seems that I misunderstood what you guys meant. When I first read about it I thought a guitar that has hiyaw makes that sound on ANY note on the guitar at any volume so I thought "no way a guitar could do that no matter how expensive", I thought it was something like this but w/o the gadget:
After reading jerome's post it's all clear to me now. It is just another mysterious byproduct of the guitar's properties. Any guitar has that quality but it is different on each guitar. Mine does it on a G note, Brian's on the E note and Jerome's on the A note. Brian's right, it's was not feedback, even if he unplugged his guitar and hit that note it will still make that sound, the amp was merely amplifying the sound from the guitar. That explains to me why it didn't sound the same when he hit the D note. By the way, @pitongjerome, your guitar has it on every A note and you don't want it? Well then that's not hiyaw, that A-yaw! (sorry, had to do it :-D)
yeah at first i thought it was a defect but a luthier checked and there was no problem daw. tama i can hear it even though walang amp. pero pag amplified na, lalo na pag high gain, yes rinig na rinig.. before, naiinis ako kasi gusto ko kontrolado ko ang harmonic, like pinch harmonic... pero ngaun, dahil sa alam ko na ang A note ang "sweet" spot ng gitara ko, pag aus ang A note sa chord, well i let the guitar sing by itself. A-yaw!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 25, 2009, 05:29:28 PM
I thought that the "hiyaw" factor was hype too. Until Arie showed me.
See, he had no stake in it, he was not selling me anything. He told me what to look for. The guitar gets louder as you bend a string and there's a swirling effect in the head. Aside from that, there is this "head rush" that you feel as the note bends up. Yes I detected what he meant. I don't think any microphone can detect it, but I have some hopes if your microphone were a head dummy (with elements in the ears). Kasi from previous disciplines I've dabbled in, this is what's called a binaural beat. Its a swirl or sound that happens inside your head- literally. It cannot be recreated unless you use stereo mikes and preferably a human head dummy.
But that's Arie, and that's his criteria of what makes a great guitar. We may subscribe to it...or not. Di ba ? But there's no use dissing this information just because you don't like Alex di ba ?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 25, 2009, 05:56:59 PM
I thought that the "hiyaw" factor was hype too. Until Arie showed me.
See, he had no stake in it, he was not selling me anything. He told me what to look for. The guitar gets louder as you bend a string and there's a swirling effect in the head. Aside from that, there is this "head rush" that you feel as the note bends up. Yes I detected what he meant. I don't think any microphone can detect it, but I have some hopes if your microphone were a head dummy (with elements in the ears). Kasi from previous disciplines I've dabbled in, this is what's called a binaural beat. Its a swirl or sound that happens inside your head- literally. It cannot be recreated unless you use stereo mikes and preferably a human head dummy.
But that's Arie, and that's his criteria of what makes a great guitar. We may subscribe to it...or not. Di ba ? But there's no use dissing this information just because you don't like Alex di ba ?
i also heard his tele, he keeps on bending it and bending it.. its nice.. and mind you all, unplugged, it was buzzing real bad! the reason he showed me that was because i complained on buzzing on an unplugged guitar, my dear guitar. then he showed me his tele, his rip roaring bend heeeeeeeyoooooooooooooooooooowwwwwww!! and he told me mine does it too, well i could hear it naman, he even compared my prs se to a US prs, and i was lucky daw sa guitar na napili ko (sa pagbili ko, i was just testing kung ung intonation ko eh 100% all throughout the fretboard). and all is well im then happy and contented with my guitar, arie just lowered the slots on my nut and off i go.
that tele was buzzing real hard unplugged, but on amp, it was damn great. kaya ako bender ngayon dahil dun sa experience ko ngayon. my licks almost always include bends. even my pinky can bend a full note easliy lol.
so if that hiyaw is really that hiyaw of arie's guitar, well i think marami din naman guitar ang meron nun? and he also mentioned that he tried different guitars na walang hiyaw til he came across his tele.
my conclusion: maybe that hiyaw can be experienced by any guitar even though its not 5k guitar with the greatest wood there is and all of that. sa pagkakabuild ata un.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Poundcake on August 25, 2009, 06:19:00 PM
This discussion is pointless.
A high-end guy who won't appreciate low-end gear.
Low-end guys who can't accept that insanely priced equipment are priced as such for a reason other than capitalizing on the brand name.
This crappola has been discussed a zillion times and you guys still don't get it? Come on, guys!
Don't gang up on Alex. He sure as heck can't play at gigging-level proficiency but tonewise, he knows what he's talking about (or at least the people around him know what they're talking about). I also used to be an Alex-basher but after trying out and owning the same brands that he has been "bragging" about, I was convinced that while there are really great sounding mass produced guitars out there, the chances that you'll be able to get a great guitar are much higher as your price point goes up. Here's an extreme case: it is almost impossible to find a Sta. Mesa-made Ibanez replica (guitar A) to sound as good as an Ibanez Prestige guitar (guitar B). That gap would certainly decrease as guitar A's price and quality goes up but there would still be a difference no matter what. This has been discussed already, right? So why bother to fight about this yet again? Geez!
Also, I am convinced that great sounding mass produced guitars can reach the quality level of standard boutique guitars BUT exceptional boutique guitars can sound even better. I've tested a lot of crappy Suhr and Tom Anderson guitars and I've also tested several killer G&L or Fender Strats and Teles. But say if I compare a great production Fender with a great Suhr, chances are I'll like the Suhr more because they use better raw materials (i.e. wood) and have a stricter quality control process. That doesn't rob the the good sounding production guitar of its "goodness" tonewise, but most of the time, using better components simply gives better results. Yet another thing that has been discussed previously, right?
For those who think that buying uber-priced gear is outrageous, then that's your opinion. But you might want to try some more high end guitars first so that you'll know what Alex means.
As for Alex, tone down the gear bashing. You've already made your point so don't rub it in. People will really get pissed off if you continue to post such remarks.
TONE IT DOWN, GUYS (no pun intended). Stop the immature mudslinging/name-calling/etc. Ang tatanda nyo na, yung iba meron pa kayong mga anak na naggigitara na rin. Mahiya naman kayo sa mga batang members dito. Nagiging perya na naman tong Guitar Central e. Thanks.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 25, 2009, 06:38:52 PM
Well, I did tell rolexm that he was going down a long and slippery slope lol.
So let's end this and just spread the love. Yung chix rolex ha. Sa national gas day hehehe.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 25, 2009, 06:43:19 PM
I have a theory. It's "love".
Like have you noticed how sometimes the same restaurant, that operates off the same exacting recipes, doesn't always have food that tastes good ? Good maybe but there are days when a bite would just make you close your eyes and thank God Almighty for the bounty he has brought you, through those God-bless-them chefs ?
Then in a cooking show which I can't remember which one, the chef said "never cook when you're in a bad mood, your food will just taste bad no matter how well you cook it".
So it's "love". It's "energy". It's the mood of the luthier as he crafts his product.
i might as well ask, my guitar has got hiyaw, and i mean its like harmonics and it just happens at the note A. yeah even i mute the strings its got that A harmonic which i learned to like. it happens on every strings A note
i brought it to arie to diagnose if theres an uneven frets which causes the harmonic and he says wala daw and i dont need to spend money at all for that. he says its desirable daw and also kung uneven frets daw un eh di sana putol agad ung tunog pag nagbebend ako but it has a long sustain daw. he also mentioned overtones and stuff and explains me many things,
can anyone tell what causes that or possibly what causes that?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on August 25, 2009, 07:12:48 PM
i honestly believe that love can be an ingredient in crafting things.
sa bagay kaya pala ibang paintings may buhay ung iba wala?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: rolexm on August 25, 2009, 08:10:47 PM
Well, I did tell rolexm that he was going down a long and slippery slope lol.
So let's end this and just spread the love. Yung chix rolex ha. Sa national gas day hehehe.
Hey. I believe in the goodness in people. :roll: Haha.
Yup, I'll have a set present. Haha.
I want to hear this hiyaw. Could it be playing as well? :D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: siore on August 25, 2009, 08:19:57 PM
Quote
In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face, is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But there are times when a critic truly risks something, and that is in the discovery and defense of the new. The world is often unkind to new talent, new creations, the new needs friends. Last night, I experienced something new, an extraordinary meal from a singularly unexpected source. To say that both the meal and its maker have challenged my preconceptions about fine cooking is a gross understatement. They have rocked me to my core. In the past, I have made no secret of my disdain for Chef Gusteau's famous motto: Anyone can cook. But I realize, only now do I truly understand what he meant. Not everyone can become a great artist, but a great artist can come from anywhere. It is difficult to imagine more humble origins than those of the genius now cooking at Gusteau's, who is, in this critic's opinion, nothing less than the finest chef in France. I will be returning to Gusteau's soon, hungry for more.
One day the average joe will understand that he gets what he pays for, but even more significant is when the critic finds a truly great guitar, from somewhere where he least expects it.
For now, if a guitar is special to you, don't let anyone take away the satisfaction of playing it.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: masterchoxter on August 25, 2009, 08:22:01 PM
One day the average joe will understand that he gets what he pays for, but even more significant is when the critic finds a truly great guitar, from somewhere where he least expects it. For now, if a guitar is special to you, don't let anyone take away the satisfaction of playing it.
and this ended it all... i love the last part... kudos to you siore!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 25, 2009, 08:24:16 PM
Hey. I believe in the goodness in people. :roll: Haha.
Yup, I'll have a set present. Haha.
I want to hear this hiyaw. Could it be playing as well? :D
I achieved it (IMHO) on my Squier Strat. It's not here in the studio but the "head rush" and swirl and binaural beat experience has already been made. I haven't brought it again to Arie's for a 2nd round of tests but I think it will hold its own against his made-in-heaven MIJ strat.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on August 25, 2009, 08:30:34 PM
Hey. I believe in the goodness in people. :roll: Haha.
Yup, I'll have a set present. Haha.
I want to hear this hiyaw. Could it be playing as well? :D
Actually what I meant was the quality vs. cost thing, the entire point of this entire thread :-D. Time and time and time again this has been discussed, re-discussed, beat to death, actually some of us are already sick of it :-D . But I indulge, for the sake of the newcomers and those who have been "out". :-D
Please refer to Poundcake's post :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on August 25, 2009, 09:04:25 PM
Copy that sir Poundcake. No more OAS bashing. (http://smileyicons.net/s/96.gif)
I thought that the "hiyaw" factor was hype too. Until Arie showed me. See, he had no stake in it, he was not selling me anything. He told me what to look for. The guitar gets louder as you bend a string and there's a swirling effect in the head. Aside from that, there is this "head rush" that you feel as the note bends up. Yes I detected what he meant. I don't think any microphone can detect it, but I have some hopes if your microphone were a head dummy (with elements in the ears). Kasi from previous disciplines I've dabbled in, this is what's called a binaural beat. Its a swirl or sound that happens inside your head- literally. It cannot be recreated unless you use stereo mikes and preferably a human head dummy.
But that's Arie, and that's his criteria of what makes a great guitar. We may subscribe to it...or not. Di ba ? But there's no use dissing this information just because you don't like Alex di ba ?
I hope I didn't sound like I was dissing the hiyaw sound. I'm not saying that it doesn't exist, as what you've all stated I know it does but its just a bit overrated IMHO. Like I said before, that "sound" is a guitar's (un)natural characteristic and every guitar has it. Based on the posts, we have various guitars from various manufacturers within a very wide price range, from very cheap to the very expensive all exhibiting the same characteristic. So what does that tell us? IMHO basing a criteria on what makes a great guitar on this factor alone is like saying all guitars sound great. But hey, that's just my opinion base d on my experience and people can subscribe to it or not like you said. To add to that there's also no use of not accepting the real facts just because the guys you like told you otherwise di ba?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on August 29, 2009, 03:34:33 AM
I hope I didn't sound like I was dissing the hiyaw sound. I'm not saying that it doesn't exist, as what you've all stated I know it does but its just a bit overrated IMHO. Like I said before, that "sound" is a guitar's (un)natural characteristic and every guitar has it. Based on the posts, we have various guitars from various manufacturers within a very wide price range, from very cheap to the very expensive all exhibiting the same characteristic. So what does that tell us? IMHO basing a criteria on what makes a great guitar on this factor alone is like saying all guitars sound great. But hey, that's just my opinion base d on my experience and people can subscribe to it or not like you said. To add to that there's also no use of not accepting the real facts just because the guys you like told you otherwise di ba?
To further clarify, HIYAW is usually followed by the other desirable qualities in an electric guitar such as the presence of sustain, tonal balance, responsiveness (not being stiff sounding and easy to play), the ability to cut thru a band mix and unpredictability. I would say that only 3-5% of guitars have the property with a higher percentage for the high end luthiers. Also, among the 3-5%, they vary in the amount of HIYAW. So I don't know whether you may like this desirable quality but I can sure tell you that its a noticeable difference that makes you classify other electric guitars as dead sounding.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: deltaslim on September 02, 2009, 06:16:55 PM
Hey bro, I heard the clips that your friend sent you regarding the "hiyaw". It is a fundamental sound transitioning into feedback. IMO and experience ANY guitar can do this as long as you have enough gain & volume to generate feedback.
You are close. I've said this ages ago. Unless Alex is hearing something else, I think that quality is simply 'harmonics'. Certain notes have fundamentals that die out and whilst the harmonics keep sustaining. So it seems that the harmonics are getting 'louder'. But not all guitars can do this; there are dead guitars. Basic requirement is decent wood and good sustain.
@ Letour: Para ka talagang nago-oral argument sa court, attorney!
"IT HAS TO BE YOU THAT PLAYS. You claim it makes certain tones. You have to make it come out. Because when the "known guitarists" will play, they will sound like them NOT like you."
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: turiguiliano on September 03, 2009, 12:23:18 AM
epic thread is epic.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on September 03, 2009, 12:33:18 AM
You are close. I've said this ages ago. Unless Alex is hearing something else, I think that quality is simply 'harmonics'. Certain notes have fundamentals that die out and whilst the harmonics keep sustaining. So it seems that the harmonics are getting 'louder'. But not all guitars can do this; there are dead guitars. Basic requirement is decent wood and good sustain.
Yes you are right. If you read my post after that I stated that I misunderstood what they were referring to and finally concluded that it was a fundamental transitioning into a harmonic overtone. Like I also stated only certain notes exhibit that but I think all guitars can do it, it's just a matter of finding which note on the fretboard does it. The real question to people is.. so what if you found out that the D note on the 7th fret does this? Are going to write all your songs around that note just to show off that sound? You can use it in a song or two but after that it becomes overbearing especially when it is done on the same note. The actual benefit of it in a musical situation is very slim. The only benefit it has on a person is if he goes to every kid he meets whose had about a month of guitar playing experience going, " Can your guitar do this? No? Well cause my guitar's all that ". Its like the blind leading the blind.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on September 03, 2009, 01:03:24 AM
me thinks this thread refuses to die... so I'm bringing out the... (http://smileyicons.net/s/433.gif) (http://smileyicons.net/s/423.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/429.gif)
I think the topic itself was dead long ago, it's just "we" never learn. If Alex insists that the hiyaw quality is different from a sustaining harmonic, he has every right to his opinion. It's his personal belief and if he doesn't even have to convince anyone else. But since it seems that he's on a crusade to 'enlighten' or 'convince' everyone, of course people would ask for proof. And as I argued ages ago, and Letour postulated better than I did, if has to be something Alex can reproduce on his own because he says he can hear it in his own bedroom. But the rules of evidence has never been established and agreed on. It's an impasse. Ergo, topic is dead... for now.
To Alex's credit, he always says, "come hear it for yourself". So if you don't accept his invitation or have never heard the guitar in person as played by others, you have no right to keep on whining. OTOH, it's better if Alex will actually provide proof in a public setting and verified by many ears, not just one. That wouldn't actually settle anything cuz people will still walk away with different impressions ("Wala naman e", "Meron nga", "Di ako sure... nabingi ako e.", ie, the Rashomon-effect). But at least there will be more "witnesses" and people can argue on the basis of what they see and hear, not hearsay.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: hmn8 on September 03, 2009, 08:45:58 AM
I think the topic itself was dead long ago, it's just "we" never learn. If Alex insists that the hiyaw quality is different from a sustaining harmonic, he has every right to his opinion. It's his personal belief and if he doesn't even have to convince anyone else. But since it seems that he's on a crusade to 'enlighten' or 'convince' everyone, of course people would ask for proof. And as I argued ages ago, and Letour postulated better than I did, if has to be something Alex can reproduce on his own because he says he can hear it in his own bedroom. But the rules of evidence has never been established and agreed on. It's an impasse. Ergo, topic is dead... for now.
To Alex's credit, he always says, "come hear it for yourself". So if you don't accept his invitation or have never heard the guitar in person as played by others, you have no right to keep on whining. OTOH, it's better if Alex will actually provide proof in a public setting and verified by many ears, not just one. That wouldn't actually settle anything cuz people will still walk away with different impressions ("Wala naman e", "Meron nga", "Di ako sure... nabingi ako e.", ie, the Rashomon-effect). But at least there will be more "witnesses" and people can argue on the basis of what they see and hear, not hearsay.
People in this forum will never learn because all the things you read here are opinions only. It doesn't matter whether you believe one person or the other, it doesn't matter if you believe yourself only, your opinion is as good as the next guy. If you can't stand people posting their opinions on any topic whether you think its dead or not, stop reading it. Don't whine about it because like you said, everybody has every right to their opinion.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on September 03, 2009, 08:54:53 AM
Deltaslim,
Thanks for the compliments. I appreciate it.
No more comments from me... Its COSTING me QUALITY time every time I open this thread. :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: jimy james on September 03, 2009, 09:06:02 AM
I think the topic itself was dead long ago, it's just "we" never learn. If Alex insists that the hiyaw quality is different from a sustaining harmonic, he has every right to his opinion. It's his personal belief and if he doesn't even have to convince anyone else. But since it seems that he's on a crusade to 'enlighten' or 'convince' everyone, of course people would ask for proof. And as I argued ages ago, and Letour postulated better than I did, if has to be something Alex can reproduce on his own because he says he can hear it in his own bedroom. But the rules of evidence has never been established and agreed on. It's an impasse. Ergo, topic is dead... for now.
To Alex's credit, he always says, "come hear it for yourself". So if you don't accept his invitation or have never heard the guitar in person as played by others, you have no right to keep on whining. OTOH, it's better if Alex will actually provide proof in a public setting and verified by many ears, not just one. That wouldn't actually settle anything cuz people will still walk away with different impressions ("Wala naman e", "Meron nga", "Di ako sure... nabingi ako e.", ie, the Rashomon-effect). But at least there will be more "witnesses" and people can argue on the basis of what they see and hear, not hearsay.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on September 03, 2009, 11:10:10 AM
maniniwala naman ang madaming tao pag may proof eh...
ung aapprove ang maraming tao.. kasi kung isang tao lang ang magjjudge eh hnd mashado reliable.. pero kung maraming ears ang magsasabi nun, mas malaki ang percentage na tama ang isang tao..
demo please!
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: IncX on September 03, 2009, 11:37:36 AM
thats why i like this guy...
feature=related
he backs his talk with demos.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: vhunter on September 03, 2009, 11:49:19 AM
I think theres a threshold. Craftsmanship and quality can be measured. Youll see the difference in the finish of a 500 dollar guitar and a 2k guitar but the diff of 2k to 5k is more subtle. Its like a regular Yum VS a Big Brothers burger. They both do the same things but no one can argue that a Yum is of less quality than a BBB because it can be measured by the meat, condiments, type of bread etc. Doesnt mean the BBB is better than the Yum coz we all have diff tastes but FOR SURE, you cant get a BBB for the price of a Yum. Suwerte nalang yung guy na masaya sa 500 dollar guitar if thats his preference but definately Quality comes at a Cost.
Ill go order my mc chicken. Hahahha
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: leech on September 03, 2009, 12:03:52 PM
I think theres a threshold. Craftsmanship and quality can be measured. Youll see the difference in the finish of a 500 dollar guitar and a 2k guitar but the diff of 2k to 5k is more subtle. Its like a regular Yum VS a Big Brothers burger. They both do the same things but no one can argue that a Yum is of less quality than a BBB because it can be measured by the meat, condiments, type of bread etc. Doesnt mean the BBB is better than the Yum coz we all have diff tastes but FOR SURE, you cant get a BBB for the price of a Yum. Suwerte nalang yung guy na masaya sa 500 dollar guitar if thats his preference but definately Quality comes at a Cost.
Ill go order my mc chicken. Hahahha
I'd go for wham! miks. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on September 03, 2009, 12:17:33 PM
I think theres a threshold. Craftsmanship and quality can be measured. Youll see the difference in the finish of a 500 dollar guitar and a 2k guitar but the diff of 2k to 5k is more subtle. Its like a regular Yum VS a Big Brothers burger. They both do the same things but no one can argue that a Yum is of less quality than a BBB because it can be measured by the meat, condiments, type of bread etc. Doesnt mean the BBB is better than the Yum coz we all have diff tastes but FOR SURE, you cant get a BBB for the price of a Yum. Suwerte nalang yung guy na masaya sa 500 dollar guitar if thats his preference but definately Quality comes at a Cost.
Ill go order my mc chicken. Hahahha
Oh no, the debate has shifted to the Burger Wars..... Sana Abalos is a member here. :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 12:28:19 PM
I think theres a threshold. Craftsmanship and quality can be measured. Youll see the difference in the finish of a 500 dollar guitar and a 2k guitar but the diff of 2k to 5k is more subtle. Its like a regular Yum VS a Big Brothers burger. They both do the same things but no one can argue that a Yum is of less quality than a BBB because it can be measured by the meat, condiments, type of bread etc. Doesnt mean the BBB is better than the Yum coz we all have diff tastes but FOR SURE, you cant get a BBB for the price of a Yum. Suwerte nalang yung guy na masaya sa 500 dollar guitar if thats his preference but definately Quality comes at a Cost.
Ill go order my mc chicken. Hahahha
Which points to arguments like "WHY ARE DUMBLES SO EXPENSIVE?" Is it because they are rare? it because of Alex Dumble's "crystal lattice yadda yadda impressive speech?" Is it because Robben Ford and Joe Bonamassa uses them?
Consider geting a Dumble clone (i.e. Two Rock, Fuchs) and it still costs way too much for the average joe, "because it was modeled after a $25k original, so they're making one for 10% the price." :?
IMO, the real argument here is determining AT WHAT PRICE POINT DOES A GUITAR START TO YIELD LESS IMPROVEMENTS? (I think we made a thread eons ago re: the law of diminishing returns and guitars).
FACT: I've seen rich folks here whining about buying some really expensive guitars (>$3k) and not publicly admitting they hate the purchase simply because they lose the 'mojo' effect on people.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 12:39:47 PM
maniniwala naman ang madaming tao pag may proof eh...
ung aapprove ang maraming tao.. kasi kung isang tao lang ang magjjudge eh hnd mashado reliable.. pero kung maraming ears ang magsasabi nun, mas malaki ang percentage na tama ang isang tao..
demo please!
Ngayon ko narealize kung bakit mas malaki ang binabayad ng mga kumpanya sa endorsements and advertisements kesa sa pag-improve ng mga produkto nila with better materials. Dahil yan sa mga ganitong klase ng comment.
I'd bet a great salesman with shredding skills can talk a kid into getting a Marshall MG50 over telling him to go to the Philmusic Buy and Sell forum and snag a vintage Fender SF Twin. They cost the same btw...
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on September 03, 2009, 12:50:59 PM
Ngayon ko narealize kung bakit mas malaki ang binabayad ng mga kumpanya sa endorsements and advertisements kesa sa pag-improve ng mga produkto nila with better materials. Dahil yan sa mga ganitong klase ng comment.
I'd bet a great salesman with shredding skills can talk a kid into getting a Marshall MG50 over telling him to go to the Philmusic Buy and Sell forum and snag a vintage Fender SF Twin. They cost the same btw...
what im telling is, if he claims something, prove it. iba un sa endorsements.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on September 03, 2009, 12:54:47 PM
Which points to arguments like "WHY ARE DUMBLES SO EXPENSIVE?" Is it because they are rare? it because of Alex Dumble's "crystal lattice yadda yadda impressive speech?" Is it because Robben Ford and Joe Bonamassa uses them?
Consider geting a Dumble clone (i.e. Two Rock, Fuchs) and it still costs way too much for the average joe, "because it was modeled after a $25k original, so they're making one for 10% the price." :?
IMO, the real argument here is determining AT WHAT PRICE POINT DOES A GUITAR START TO YIELD LESS IMPROVEMENTS? (I think we made a thread eons ago re: the law of diminishing returns and guitars).
FACT: I've seen rich folks here whining about buying some really expensive guitars (>$3k) and not publicly admitting they hate the purchase simply because they lose the 'mojo' effect on people.
Haaay. Let me change hats now and yes, I teach Principles of Marketing as well. Salamat sa MBA and I'm not a simple cost-bound techie geek.
There are many models of pricing. The most basic is the cost-plus where you get the cost and add your margin. But this usually applies to commodities like rice, sugar, instant noodles and China made guitars.
Then there's the prestige or "luxury" pricing, which has no direct bearing on the cost of the product. You're maintaining a certain "status" and "exclusivity" and that's why you select a price range that's relatively beyond the reach of the masses.
Like, do you honestly believe it "costs" a Porsche so and so number of dollars then they add a small amount as margin ? BS. They shelf the product into a certain price range, almost independent of the cost of the product itself. Of course by default there must be greater quality in this product than the average corners-cut-mass-produced car. Rich people don't get rich by being stupid you know.
Then let's see this case I had in Strama...from the early 90's. It says "It takes 100 Corollas to reach the profit margin of 1 Lexus". Does it mean that Corollas don't have positive profit margins ? I don't think so or Toyota would be non-existent today. It just means that the profit-to-cost ratio of a Lexus is many times more than a Corolla.
So, Pricing and Quality are never linearly proportional (as many commenters have already pointed out) because...and I'll put this in bold text there are other things that you're paying for apart from the actual cost of the product.
Lemme share Jobet's definition of Marketing, which is not in the textbooks but I teach my students anyway.
"Marketing is the study and manipulation of the purchase psychology to influence the outcome of transactions, or create profitable relationships. "
So pricing (and I might get killed for this) is not always based on COST. It is sometimes based on PERCEIVED VALUE. How a marketer studies and manipulates the purchase psychology to raise the perceived value...well...that is the essence of a guitar product marketer's job.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 12:57:05 PM
what im telling is, if he claims something, prove it. iba un sa endorsements.
Actually, that pretty much is the geist of what I am saying.
Alex is no Steve Vai who can endorse a Jemini which is essentially a knockoff of a TS9 and DS1 while I can demise that it is highly probable that he owns a COT, TC Boost or some other boutique pedal, which he prefers more to the Jemini, which he will never publicly admit...
And his license... HIS FINGERS.
On the contrary, Alex is no pro player. Far from it. But I think it is an irony that some seasoned pros 'cannot hear' what Alex hears. It's either poverty makes you a bit deaf or prosperity enhances your metaphysical senses. :D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 01:05:37 PM
So, Pricing and Quality are never linearly proportional (as many commenters have already pointed out) because...and I'll put this in bold text there are other things that you're paying for apart from the actual cost of the product.
Exactly BAMF. I think I never really mentioned that pricing and quality is linearly proportional. (I think I mentioned that earlier). Maybe Gene Baker's sig (because of his acquired skill and knowledge) costs $3500/guitar while the actual cost is somewhere around $1000? :D
But then again I cannot discount the scams of jumping into the name game. I've heard stories of HANDPICKED SIGNATURE GUITARS coming out far from impressive.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on September 03, 2009, 01:08:09 PM
Exactly BAMF. I think I never really mentioned that pricing and quality is linearly proportional. (I think I mentioned that earlier). Maybe Gene Baker's sig (because of his acquired skill and knowledge) costs $3500/guitar while the actual cost is somewhere around $1000? :D
But then again I cannot discount the scams of jumping into the name game. I've heard stories of HANDPICKED SIGNATURE GUITARS coming out far from impressive.
Of course dodj, I know you understand :-D. For the benefit of lang, kumbaga :-D
Lemme jump from here lang :
Quote
IMO, the real argument here is determining AT WHAT PRICE POINT DOES A GUITAR START TO YIELD LESS IMPROVEMENTS? (I think we made a thread eons ago re: the law of diminishing returns and guitars
All my blah blah is just saying that THERE IS NO FIXED PRICE POINT WHERE A GUITAR WILL START TO YIELD LESS IMPROVEMENT (no rudeness meant dodj) because Pricing policies vary wildly and can be very "arbitrary". For instance, who's to say that Gene Baker is "worth" 2,500 of labor fees ? He arrives at that conclusion by himself either from experience, hearsay or what not. Otherwise he won't be charging that much in the first place.
If we further nitpick the essence of the question and attempt to add more precision, "how much less" improvement will define that point ? Parang Newton-iteration method baga...what level of error is acceptable. What amount of "less improvement" will fix that "converged point"? Hehehehe. Tama na nga maka-layas na.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: pitongjerome on September 03, 2009, 01:08:33 PM
if he really does something with his guitar, im sure many would hear it. we dont believe everything our guitar hero says right? ewan ko sa iba.
i dont have anything bad about his guitar . yes if you say he's not a pro player but he claims he can make that "sound" then let people hear. kung ung iba tinry nila pakinggan at wala sila naririnig, its either:
1. bingi 2. nagbibingibingihan 3. inggit sa expensive stuff at ayaw magpatalo
my point, let people hear what you are claiming, let them decide kung totoo nga un.
kasi ako, i may be hearing something that others dont, and they may be hearing something i dont. pero, hindi naman siguro sobrang malalayo ang mga pandinig natin diba? if i have the chance to listen to his nice guitar, i would love to. i praise something kung totoo ito and kapuri puri, hindi naman ako matakaw doon e.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: deltaslim on September 03, 2009, 01:26:58 PM
So pricing (and I might get killed for this) is not always based on COST. It is sometimes based on PERCEIVED VALUE. How a marketer studies and manipulates the purchase psychology to raise the perceived value...well...that is the essence of a guitar product marketer's job.
And if you look at auctions, the price of a product is however much a buyer THINKS it's worth. indeed, price or value is a reflection of the value system of the buyer, not an innate quality of the product.
Let's summarize: - Production cost, craftsmanship, and physical quality are tangible and objectively verifiable attributes, and therefore less likely to be argued about - Price is relative to the buyer. It's not directly correlated to production cost, craftsmanship, or physical quality of the product. - Tone is intangible, subjective and hard to verify. As a result, this is often argued about. It's useless to hope for agreement on "tone quality".
I hope we avoid un-necessary discussions that rehash misconceptions about these issues.
Good stuff, guys.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on September 03, 2009, 01:43:36 PM
I thought we shifted to the YUM vs. Big Brothers vs. Burjer?
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 01:45:17 PM
Ya know, I used to love Brothers Burger until I tasted CHARLIE'S Handcrafted Burgers in Kapitolyo.
handcrafted... kaya pag kinagat mo, nag hihiwahiwalay yun patty... lols the chilidog is good though :-)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Kulas on September 03, 2009, 01:57:19 PM
have you tried bite club? madaming mods yung burgers nila dun eh, hehe.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: vhunter on September 03, 2009, 02:06:27 PM
Best burger for me is the chillis mushroom swiss with added bacon strips.. hahaha.. followed by brothers, bite club then wham!. But yung guilty pleasure ko is the double Yum with cheese.
BTW guys, dont confuse aftermarket pricing with regular pricing. Its a whole different argument there. Of course rarity, wait lists, endorsements. Yup BAMF is right! Im glad your taking your MBA it will be a valuable tool. Alot of other things go into pricing than just the product. Thats why theres such an appeal with botique stuff. Basically they steal someones design, tweak it, patent it, add better components and resell it. That way they don't go through the regular channels of high cost R and D. Plus marketing is at a minimum because of the internet! So when you buy botique you are infact buying quality.
Pricing strategy is a whole different issue.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: BAMF on September 03, 2009, 02:30:04 PM
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: arkeetar on September 03, 2009, 03:50:01 PM
ako ito lang (http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)(http://smileyicons.net/s/443.gif)
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: skunkyfunk on September 03, 2009, 03:57:12 PM
Are you enrolled in UP for your PhD? Dito ba yan sa UP-TMC? If so, daanan mo naman ako sa office ko next door. Kape tayo. :)
Nah didn't even think of UP. I'm doing it at the Tunay na UP. TUP ! Hahehehe. Close enough, inexpensive enough and no strings attached (unlike if I continue @ La Salle daming kundisyones)
But let's do the kape anyway, bluesman. No prob. My pleasure as always.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: .bong. on September 03, 2009, 06:08:34 PM
Aba..Kagutom- gutom na 'tong thread ah :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Poundcake on September 03, 2009, 06:40:10 PM
Alright guys, unless the topic shifts back from burgers to guitar equipment quality/cost, this thread will be locked and then nominated for "Most Memorable Thread" at the 2009 Guitar Central awards :lol:
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: ierofan on September 03, 2009, 08:10:01 PM
Alright guys, unless the topic shifts back from burgers to guitar equipment quality/cost, this thread will be locked and then nominated for "Most Memorable Thread" at the 2009 Guitar Central awards :lol:
i will surely vote this. :-D
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: Letour on September 03, 2009, 09:11:06 PM
Poundcake's motion is heard. I second the motion and make manifestation that quality burgers are costly. The yeas have it. The motion is carried. Lock thread.
Title: Re: QUALITY vs COST
Post by: saijo on September 03, 2009, 09:25:19 PM