# Playable VS Don't Touch



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

When does a guitar cross the line of being a playable, working instrument and a work of art? It seems that many guitar companies are producing more and more "works of art" and people are buying them. I can't see some of these being used for gigging, or maybe not at all.

http://www.wildwestguitars.com/prs/pages/cu24_10th_ps_114337.htm


----------



## dwagar (Mar 6, 2006)

unless you end up with a vintage piece that is too expensive to take out or in many cases even play, to me a guitar has to be played. All the fancy bits they are adding are all just smoke and mirrors. Won't make it play or sound any better.


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

I'm not a fan of guitars like the one that you posted. It's far too ornate and not even good looking to me. Luthier masturbation, really. :tongue:


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

I agree with you, but apparently many do not. They would not put them out if there was no demand. Granted, some are really nice to look at... but I can't remember ever going to a concert and seeing a pro playing something like that.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

dwagar said:


> unless you end up with a vintage piece that is too expensive to take out or in many cases even play, to me a guitar has to be played. All the fancy bits they are adding are all just smoke and mirrors. Won't make it play or sound any better.


Vintage I could understand. But these new guitars... it boggles the mind really.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I love beautiful guitars! I also love beautiful women. With either of the two, if you can't play with them, at least you can look at them!


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

ne1roc said:


> I love beautiful guitars! I also love beautiful women. With either of the two, if you can't play with them, at least you can look at them!


Both can be very expensive. Is it worth it just to look though?


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

...give me a beat up "player" any day of the week. otherwise, there's no point. if i had a guitar that was purely a "looker" or a "collector", i'd swap/sell/donate it in favour of something useful.

-dh


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> I agree with you, but apparently many do not. They would not put them out if there was no demand. Granted, some are really nice to look at... but I can't remember ever going to a concert and seeing a pro playing something like that.


There's no accounting for taste. Some people just like garish stuff.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Gibson and Fender sneek in there too, with their signature models. Jimmy Page, Ace etc at $5000 or more USF. You might be getting a little nicer top on some of them but what else?


----------



## Robboman (Oct 14, 2006)

Nothing against these kind of guitars but IMO, they're not meant for players at all. They're for doctors, lawyers, executives, etc, with lots of money who are into guitars as a hobby and want to show off to their friends. All that extra candy to make it pretty sure won't help the tone, but might hurt it (excess inlays, curly maple neck (!). Pros know that, of course.

It's funny how you can spend a fortune on one of these shiny, candied up, flamed, inlaid and gold plated monstrosities.. but you can also spend a (slightly smaller) fortune on a brand new 'reliced' axe that looks completely trashed from 50 years of abuse.


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

Tons of ridiculous inlays and stuff is over the top, but I've always found quilted tops to be the worst. Whether the guitar is 10 grand or 100 bucks, it just screams "CHEAP GUITAR HERE!!!!" to me because that's what cheap guitar companies do to make their cheap guitars seem high end.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Both can be very expensive. Is it worth it just to look though?


If you can afford it, why not? 

I don't get why somebody wouldn't want a beautiful guitar? Overpriced? Too scared to get a scratch on it? 

I am confused by some of the replies here?
"It screems cheap, they are not meant for players, I'd sell it for something useful"? 

I know there are guys on this forum who drive some pretty nice cars that don't make them better drivers. I guess they are just showing off as well? 
:confused-smiley-010


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

I think there's a big difference between nice cars and ornate guitars. A more fair comparison would be someone that buys a Jetta that's painted metallic organe, has got gold leaf paisleys and intricate airbrushing all over it, flashy rims and pink coloured headlights. "Riced up" as the kids say these days. All show, no go. Well, just as much go as a regular Jetta, except it's "prettier".

And just like guitars, what you can afford to buy is no indication of your skills. Crappy players (like me) can own nice guitars and great players can own bad guitars. Depending on your views and/or skill level, either one is considered lame.


----------



## violation (Aug 20, 2006)

If I buy a guitar, it'll be played... unless it's been played and autographed by Zakk Wylde or Eddie Van Halen. That's the only way I would own a "show" guitar, lol.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 9, 2007)

It's like in Spinal Tap where Nigel shows off what appears to be a Fender Jaguar and he tells DiBergi, "don't touch it! Don't even _look_ at it! It can never be played, never!"


----------



## Baconator (Feb 25, 2006)

If it doesn't get played, what's the point? There doesn't need to be any wiring inside or magnets in the pickups :tongue:.

I certainly wouldn't spend $10-20,000 on a guitar because it looks nice, but then I don't have that kind of money to spend on . . . . anything except perhaps a car. If I was a corporate lawyer, surgeon or other medical specialist or even (gasp) a financially successful musician I might consider it. You can't take it with you and if it brings you pleasure, wth? God knows, I would love to have enough cash to throw down on a guitar like that PRS, but I'd prefer it to be spent in smaller packages - i.e. 5-6 really sweet guitars. I can't justify it, but I'd certainly love to have a stable full of boutique amps too - have you checked out some of the ones out these days? A lot of these companies (i.e. divided by 13, swart) certainly have spent a lot of effort making good looking amplifiers - at least they look good to me. Does that influence the tone? Of course not, but I'd pick an amp that looks good if it had the tone over a plain-jane black tolex box.

Just my .02


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

jroberts said:


> Still hate those quilt tops, though.


Amen, homey. For the reason I stated above. Plus, they're just u.g.l.y and they ain't got no alibi.


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

I think Baconator's really got it though. Guitars like that are a matter of taste. Personally, no matter how much money I had, I'd still own plain, but nice, guitars. Whereas some people would buy gold and diamond encrusted guitars. 

Chaqu'un à son gout.


----------



## elindso (Aug 29, 2006)

nine said:


> I'm not a fan of guitars like the one that you posted. It's far too ornate and not even good looking to me. Luthier masturbation, really. :tongue:


I agree 100%

Whee! Look what I can do:confused-smiley-010 

Diamond encrusted anything is silly in my mind. Unless it's a cutting tool.


----------



## ENDITOL (Feb 5, 2006)

It even says right in the ad that the wood was chosen for 'sound' as well as looks. If it sounds great why not jam on it? I'm not afraid to gig in seedy bars with my expensive gear, I just watch that shit like a hawk! Not as concerned about getting scratches on it etc., I think that adds a bit to the 'mojo'. :banana: 

On the other hand if some rich professional wants to hang a PRS dragon on thier wall instead of a painting or scultpure etc., it's thier money, enjoy! The only shame would be if the guitar sounded really good and never got played. :food-smiley-004:


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I guess most of you lack the appreciation (and funds) for what it takes to make a piece of art, which is what these types of guitars are. I personally understand the skill and patience to do this type of work so I guess I look at it from a different perspective? :food-smiley-004:


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

I guess it all comes down to the huge amounts of disposable income "some" people have these days, here in North America. The buyers are out there and they are paying big sums of cash for these guitars. So the makers will continue to produce them. Private Stock.... Corinthian Leather... call it what you may.


----------



## Lester B. Flat (Feb 21, 2006)

I really don't like guitars that look like my grandma's coffee table. I think a blackguard Telecaster is art, but that example posted is kitch. I wouldn't buy a guitar I had to be careful with playing even if I could afford one, even a '59 burst, it would be an overwhelming responsibility.


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

"When does a guitar cross the line of being a playable, working instrument and a work of art?"

for me it never does. guitars are meant to be played. period.

for collectors I guess there's a certain line....personally I don't see the point in buying a guitar you're just going to look at.


----------



## Accept2 (Jan 1, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Gibson and Fender sneek in there too, with their signature models. Jimmy Page, Ace etc at $5000 or more USF. You might be getting a little nicer top on some of them but what else?


I have an Ace, and believe me its the reason why I dumped all my other Pauls. It plays and sounds like no other Paul Ive ever had. Some of these guitars are show and go. The guitars I dont like are the ones coming out of 3rd world nations that are all show no go, with all kinds of inlay, and crap all over them, but they are so cheap, youd be scared to play it for fear it would fall to pieces............


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I'm gonna have to be honest and say that I take huge offense to anyone who says a nice looking guitar is for showing off, or a non playing proffesional with lots of money. I can appreciate if its not your taste, but to put down the manufacturer or the persons that buy it is just wrong. 

Not what I expected from a bunch if Canadians.


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

ne1roc said:


> I'm gonna have to be honest and say that I take huge offense to anyone who says a nice looking guitar is for showing off, or a non playing proffesional with lots of money. I can appreciate if its not your taste, but to put down the manufacturer or the persons that buy it is just wrong.
> 
> Not what I expected from a bunch if Canadians.


Canadians have opinions too. No need to take it personally though. You like that stuff, some of us don't. No biggie.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

nine said:


> Canadians have opinions too. No need to take it personally though. You like that stuff, some of us don't. No biggie.


I like opinions........but many in this topic are judgemental?


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

I'm out of this thread before I'm accused of inadvertantly hurting someone else's feelings. 

Au revoir! :wave:


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

nine said:


> I'm out of this thread before I'm accused of inadvertantly hurting someone else's feelings.
> 
> Au revoir! :wave:


Wimp! None


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

It'a all about opinions and taste, everyone has there own. One is no better than the other


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> It'a all about opinions and taste, everyone has there own. One is no better than the other


 I'm sorry....I'm playing a little bit on the devils side today! 

You truly are a peace keeper ! :food-smiley-004:


----------



## elindso (Aug 29, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> It'a all about opinions and taste, everyone has there own. One is no better than the other


Except mine to me.:smile: 

I go to the store and don't come home with shiney stuff. 

I do have a Gold top but that's cause I liked the way it plays.

The makers make them and the players buy them. They wouldn't make them if they couldn't sell them.

Laser cutters make complex scrimshaw work easy. You just lay it out and the cutting is done automatically.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

elindso said:


> Except mine to me.:smile:
> 
> I go to the store and don't come home with shiney stuff.
> 
> ...


WTF???.........................................................................


----------



## SCREEM (Feb 2, 2006)

I love that guitar....will someone foot the bill for me?:tongue: seriously though that guitar at the very least plays amazing....it's a PRS  I also love butt ugly beaten up ol' bolt and plank guitars too


----------



## Baconator (Feb 25, 2006)

nine said:


> Amen, homey. For the reason I stated above. Plus, they're just u.g.l.y and they ain't got no alibi.


 

Man, hearing that expression really takes me back to 1987. Gawdaham, I'm getting old.


----------



## david henman (Feb 3, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...give me a beat up "player" any day of the week. otherwise, there's no point. if i had a guitar that was purely a "looker" or a "collector", i'd swap/sell/donate it in favour of something useful.
> -dh


...now that i see the direction this thread has taken, i have to say that i agree with the posters who say that's its fine if you, personally, don't like ornate guitars. as stated, i have no use for 'em, either.

putting down those who do, however, is just wrong.

-dh


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

A fluorescent orange Fender Mustang under a Black Light, in 1970, after you've taken a hit of acid. Now THAT is a looker.


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

david henman said:


> ...now that i see the direction this thread has taken, i have to say that i agree with the posters who say that's its fine if you, personally, don't like ornate guitars. as stated, i have no use for 'em, either.
> 
> putting down those who do, however, is just wrong.
> 
> -dh


 That is why I got offended and my ass got all tightened up. 

I would like to go on record and say that my favorite colour for a guitar is plain old white! I just appreciate the beauty of guitars like the PRS posted.


----------



## droptop88 (Aug 25, 2006)

I've played guitars like that PRS over the years, but never owned one. Never appealed to me. Things of beauty they are; mirror finishes, expensive woods, plush cases, lots of paperwork. I've found that they usually PLAY flawlessly - I guess if you are going to build something with that much attention to detail, you might as well get it right. But... They don't SOUND any better. I mean I've never picked up an ornate instrument like that and been so blown away by the sound quality that I just had to take out a second mortgage. So I guess it does come down to personal taste and disposable income - I find I don't keep anything unless it fullfills a need for tone and I've used it on a few gigs to bond with it -


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

jroberts said:


> And beauty, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. To me, this is beauty....


Me too. I got more wood than the fence in the background just looking at it. :tongue:


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

ne1roc said:


> That is why I got offended and my ass got all tightened up.
> 
> I would like to go on record and say that my favorite colour for a guitar is plain old white! I just appreciate the beauty of guitars like the PRS posted.


Clearly, there is a lot of workmanship in some of those guitars. The chinese machined guitars with all the ornate additions are most likely not in that category. But stuff like that PRS and some Zemaitis guitars, are truly works of art and can be appreciated for that. Owning one is a whole different thing though.


----------



## Robboman (Oct 14, 2006)

jroberts said:


> And beauty, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. To me, this is beauty....


That is HOT!!! Blackguard and a tweed amp... ooooh.. makes me want to play! If thats a vintage original and if it was for sale, it might be worth as much or more than that PRS. Which one would I buy? No contest!

It really is a matter of taste. No doubt there are lots of guys who can't afford ornate, megabuck guitars and put them down because they're jealous or whatever. Then there's guys like Keith Richards, who could afford to fill several mansions with flametops if he wanted to.. what does he play? 










I'm with KEEF!


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

Unless you've been to Keith's mansion, that comment may not be accurate.
Judging by the lines on his face, you may be right though! With the amount of drugs in his system over the years that plain old guitar probably looks alot more colourful thru his eyes.


----------



## Jim Jones (Sep 18, 2006)

Quilt tops likely freak him out...can see faces staring out at him. :smile:

Everybody's got their own bent but I'm with the quilt-haters on this one. They're plain fugly in my opinion. As mentioned earlier, the cheap imports with the quilt veneer probably lead to my personal feelings on the quilt-tops.

Jim


----------



## Skoczylas (Mar 27, 2007)

if I buy a guitar it is going to be played no matter how pretty it is. I would get that guitar and play it live, home and what not if I liked the feel and sound.


----------



## Chito (Feb 17, 2006)

Robboman said:


> I'm with KEEF!


And if you notice from that pic, he only uses 5 strings too! No low E String :rockon2: :rockon2:


----------



## jcayer (Mar 25, 2007)

Do I need glasses or he only have 4 strings on his guitar :confused-smiley-010 

evilGuitar:


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

I see 5 but he only knows how to play 4.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 9, 2007)

Robboman said:


> Then there's guys like Keith Richards,


I guess it IS right that Keef plays with just 5 strings. Stones I read that recently.


----------



## jcayer (Mar 25, 2007)

ne1roc said:


> I see 5 but he only knows how to play 4.



You are right I now see 5 (after putting my glasses on... :zzz: )


----------



## hoser (Feb 2, 2006)

I thought he took the low e off for his open g tuned guitars.


----------



## nine (Apr 23, 2006)

hoser said:


> I thought he took the low e off for his open g tuned guitars.


Darn straight. 

Either that, or his guitar tech likes to mess with his head.

"Hmmmmmmm. Which string shall I take off for tonight's show?"


----------



## fretboard (May 31, 2006)

Guess I've got a couple opinions on this thread;

1) I take the low E string and saddle off my Godin TC a couple times a year to chugg away like Keith and it just plain rocks. If your saddles allow them to come off one at a time, give it a shot. Weirdest part for me is having to look at the tuners - if I don't, I'll start with the low E tuner...

2) As for the "too pretty to play", I've got a couple PRS and one is an all out player - it's got some dings & dents to it, and it's lucky that's all at this point in it's life. It's still got the dipped in glass flamed maple top and the birds and it's exactly what I wanted when I bought it - and it has had it's share of sweat dripped all over it. The other gets played more - but mainly sitting down while I'm recording - and I honestly don't think I've ever strapped it on while wearing a belt buckle out of fear of scratching or denting the back of it. For the amount I paid for it - I'm gonna keep it well taken care of.

I look at them like alcohol - sometimes I wanna just drink and get drunk (lovingly used and abused PRS) - other times, I'll spring for "the good stuff" and just have one or two and actually enjoy it and be able to tell the difference from the "regular sauce" - for those occasions, the pretty PRS comes out.

The Godin TC - while also one of "those" highly flamed maple cap guitars, looks way better now with half the gold plating worn off the bridge and the look and feel of a guitar that has been played hard.

I've got no problem with the pretty gear if you actually play them - I find I scratch my head more at people that constantly buy and sell gear without really knowing what they want. I'll drop the coin if it's what I'm after.


----------



## jcayer (Mar 25, 2007)

*About Keith Richards*

This is what I found here:
http://guitar.about.com/library/weekly/aa090401a.htm

"Musically, Keith has drawn from a wide variety of influences, to create a unique, and influential guitar style. After learning about the intricacies of tuning his guitar to open G (thanks to input from Ry Cooder), Keith began to explore this alternate tuning extensively, creating from it a whole style of guitar playing. *Richards even went so far as to remove the low E string from many of his guitars, as he found it a hindrance when playing in open G.* Although he doesn't always play in this tuning, if you study Rolling Stones tablature, and listen to their music, you'll begin to understand just how often it is used. "

You can look as well here: http://guitar.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://members.tripod.com/~Blue_Lena/guitar.html

It figures... :rockon:


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

fretboard said:


> Guess I've got a couple opinions on this thread;
> 
> 1) I take the low E string and saddle off my Godin TC a couple times a year to chugg away like Keith and it just plain rocks. If your saddles allow them to come off one at a time, give it a shot. Weirdest part for me is having to look at the tuners - if I don't, I'll start with the low E tuner...
> 
> ...



Very well said! :food-smiley-004:


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

You have to figure that the guys that make guitars get bored making the same thing day in, day out. The guitar in the initial post is not that different than any other PRS except for the type of wood used and the inlay work. It is obviously a little more refined than one of the standard models, but I'm sure it plays just like any of the others.

That being said, some of these types of guitars I think only builders and collectors can appreciate. To me, some of them look like chicks that wear too much make-up - they have that creepy clown face thing going on.

In my opinion, vintage guitars that live in glass cases are a far worse phenomenon - it's like caging a bird that was once free. I don't feel so bad for the new ones as they pretty much started life 'domesticated'.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Accept2 said:


> I have an Ace, and believe me its the reason why I dumped all my other Pauls. It plays and sounds like no other Paul Ive ever had. Some of these guitars are show and go. The guitars I dont like are the ones coming out of 3rd world nations that are all show no go, with all kinds of inlay, and crap all over them, but they are so cheap, youd be scared to play it for fear it would fall to pieces............


I bet you picked up that Ace for well below original retail. They are a nice guitar for sure, but there were alot of them around for a long time. Lot's behind glass cases too.


----------



## Accept2 (Jan 1, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> I bet you picked up that Ace for well below original retail.


I only wish............


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

There was one that was at a guitar store in Michigan that I go to all the time. It was in a glass case there for a real long time. I would love to have picked it up, but they were asking a bundle for it. It eventually sold, or at least it is not there anymore. They are most likely very nice guitars.


----------



## Lowtones (Mar 21, 2006)

I personally like quilt top guitars. Matter of fact my next guitar will be a quilt top. I think reliced guitars look like crap. I think the PRS posted has too much decoration and is way too expensive. But I really like the look of PRS guitars in general. Here is what I think it boils down to. If it plays good & it sounds good then it is a good guitar. If you really like the look of it then even better. If you can afford thousands of dollars for a guitar, good for you. If you are happy with what you get for what you paid even better. But guitars are made to be played. Diversity is a wonderful thing. What a boring place this world would be if everyone had the same tastes. So guys, what ever guitar floats your boat is good as long as it makes you happy.:banana:


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

It seems to me quite a few of the people in the "world of guitars" think that for some reason that using a superb piece of figured wood, or some inlay work makes the guitar shit. You can certainly have your opinions..

But personally, I can find beauty in many guitars from a classic bare bone stele to many of the quilted and flamed, bound and inlayed beauties of today.

They are all guitars, all capable of being played and whatever I will personally be able to afford, I will play just like any other guitar I own.

Maybe its my furniture background.. but for me, something like an exquisit piece of burl, curl or quilt screams classy. I have worked on antiques with the most figured, beautifull wood imaginable and every time I think how beautifull that would look on a guitar..

AJC


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

elindso said:


> I agree 100%
> 
> Whee! Look what I can do:confused-smiley-010
> 
> Diamond encrusted anything is silly in my mind. Unless it's a cutting tool.



Well, after all they are luthiers... and yes, they are probably trying to do something a little more ornate and special than the norm. Its there job, and they are showing you what thye can do. If you dont like it, dont buy it. SOmeone else obviously is. Guitar building is of course a business.

AJC


----------



## ajcoholic (Feb 5, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> It'a all about opinions and taste, everyone has there own. One is no better than the other



YEs, that is the 100% truth.

However rarely do you read of guys saying "oh geez, I cant believe he bought that ugly plain thing... what was he thinking, a black tele with a black guard and plain maple neck? Ugh!" 

You often read about the dislike for figured wood, and inlays and shiny finishes, etc etc. 

I would like ot know why so many assume a (for lack of a better word) "fancy" guitar is not made to be played but a plain one is?

Same reason probably that I have no issue taking my $3000 PRS into the bar and playing the shit out of it while someone else may feel unsure bringing a $300 guitar to the same bar. Its all perspective. If I made $200K a year I would buy a $10,000 guitar and play the hell out of it too. WHy not?

AJC


----------



## ne1roc (Mar 4, 2006)

ajcoholic said:


> YEs, that is the 100% truth.
> 
> However rarely do you read of guys saying "oh geez, I cant believe he bought that ugly plain thing... what was he thinking, a black tele with a black guard and plain maple neck? Ugh!"
> 
> ...



*Halleluiah!*

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Luke98 (Mar 4, 2007)

Martin made a Million dollar guitar, the millionth one they ever made.
They aren't selling it yet though, but a few 100,000$ guitars celebrating the event were also made.

The million dollar guitar has crazy ebony inlays, with more ebony all around the front 'round the sound hole, as know not I do the correct term .

Plus the back has a history of martin in ebony designs. 
Sorry no pic, can probably google it. I saw it on TV


----------



## rhh7 (Mar 14, 2008)

*The Holy Grail*

This is the holy grail for me!...If I were a millionaire, I would like a partscaster that looked exactly like this...should cost from $500-$900, using top quality components!




jroberts said:


> And beauty, of course, is in the eye of the beholder. To me, this is beauty....


----------



## bluezombie (May 7, 2007)

I could never imagine paying a couple thousands for a guitar that i don't feel comfortable to even touch...


----------



## guitarzan (Feb 22, 2006)

that custom 24 is flashy, not really my cup of tea. i find that specific guitar to be a bit over done. with the lines of the body accented with abalone and natural binding, the extra decorative stuff on the edge is crowding it. sort of like the maker didn't know when to stop. but that is my personal view. sometimes even an artist has to draw a line when to stop.
the top on that is a fine piece of wood with a nice deep finish. i find the flowers and scroll work distract from it's beauty.
my personal view is if a piece of wood looks that good you need to tread lightly as to allow the grain to be the focal point.
but it isn't an ugly guitar. i am sure there are those that think it needs more. thank god we all think differently or we would want the same thing.


----------



## guitarzan (Feb 22, 2006)

rhh7 said:


> This is the holy grail for me!...If I were a millionaire, I would like a partscaster that looked exactly like this...should cost from $500-$900, using top quality components!


that is a work of art in it's natural beauty. the colour and texture of wood is unique to each piece and offers plenty to marvel at.


----------



## Lemmy Hangslong (May 11, 2006)

IMHO guitars are instruments first and foremost.


----------



## Scuzzy (Nov 16, 2007)

Ok before I start my little rant I just wanna state that this is my opinion and only my opinion.

Personally to me a guitar is like a person in the way that to me the really beauty in a guitar is the stories and battle scars it has. I mean it doesn't matter how beautiful the person is but if they don't have any battle scars or good stories they are really boring and ultimatley not very beautiful. Now bare with me on this but I'm going to use paris hilton for an example, Yes she is very beautiful physically but she has no personality because she doesn't have alot of real life experiences if you catch my drift. (This comparison has tons of holes in it I know).

To me the guitar is exactly the same there is nothing wrong with buying a beautiful guitar but to me that guitar should still be played and achieve its own personality. This summer I plan on buying a brand new Gibson Les Paul classic in honey burst because I think that is a beautiful guitar. I also plan on playing the crap out of it and it might get buckle rash and it might get dropped once or twice (not saying I'm going to intentionally beat it up but shit happens). In fifty years I hope to have the same guitar but that guitar will be so different then the one that a bough from gibson In 2008.

Thats why If I was given slash's Les Paul after Guns N' Roses did their first reunion tour :banana: I would never touch it because that guitar would have plenty of personality and battle scars. 

Thats just my two cents on the topic but like I said if you have the funds and want to spend money on a beautiful guitar by all means do it there are alot worse things money could be spent on.:rockon:


----------



## keeperofthegood (Apr 30, 2008)

LOL there is ornate and then there is steampunk:

http://www.carbonchamber.com/steampunk/villanizer.htm

I personally have no feelings at all on this. I think its like underwear; what feels comfy is whats going to get used.... but on them nights when special company is over....


----------



## Archer (Aug 29, 2006)

I'd still play it.










They are guitars, I wouldnt care who owned it or played it or how much it costs.


----------



## Edutainment (Jan 29, 2008)

I think a guitar should be played. Any guitar used as a display piece is just a sad waste of wood.

I'm not really a fan of guitars like that though, all quilty and archtopy. When I look at one I think it's pretty but I can't see my self owning and playing one. Maybe one day when I can afford one I'll change my ways.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

well..that's a double edge sorta question realy. Been someone with a normal income, no way in hell would i pay say 6 or 7k for a guit like that and just leave it there. Hell no...

BUT, say i'm worth a few millions..or i win the 6/49 jackpot, trust in that i would surely buy a few collector's dream..a oringal LP 59 for exemple...and you know what!..I STILL WOULD PLAY IT..hehe...maybe i'de be more carefull with her, i mean it's IS a 250 000$ guitar after all. 

In the end, they are instrument..and instrument are made to be played. If you could afford a Ferrari F50 at over 500 000$..would you just let it sit in the garage?...i would'nt...


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Wow, for $120,000 you could outfit a five piece band with all new gear, put together a decent project studio and pay them all three months salary to record a CD.... 

I can see that there is a point where a guitar either works for you or it doesn't, but I don't thnk you should have to spend over $1000 these days to get one.

My son tried to convince me to buy him a $150 hockey stick last season - I told him that it wouldn't make him play any better than the $30 stick would, so I guess I'm cheap....


----------



## Peter (Mar 25, 2008)

If I can afford to buy it, you can bet your ass I'm gonna play the hell out of it. And that doesn't just stand true for cheap guitars.

:rockon:


----------



## danbo (Nov 27, 2006)

Tune it up & Play it! :banana: :rockon2: :food-smiley-004:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> Wow, for $120,000 you could outfit a five piece band with all new gear, put together a decent project studio and pay them all three months salary to record a CD....
> 
> I can see that there is a point where a guitar either works for you or it doesn't, but I don't thnk you should have to spend over $1000 these days to get one.
> 
> My son tried to convince me to buy him a $150 hockey stick last season - I told him that it wouldn't make him play any better than the $30 stick would, so I guess I'm cheap....


Welcome to my world.


----------



## Coustfan'01 (Sep 27, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Welcome to my world.


If we were in freddy versus Jason , you would have said that at least a thousand times.

I can see the point of not gigging with an expensive guitar , and maybe buying a very expensive vintage axe as an investment... but it's a bit sad to see great guitars that will never get played.

I think a beat up guitar looks cool , but I'd be more careful not to break anything if I gigged with my prs(probably wouldn't spin it , slide it across the floor and things like that)


----------

