Parts-casters the poor cousin of the guitar family

[JPOL007]

So I take my Tele build to show my teacher and get his feedback. This is the teacher who is instructing me with my RG build. He also sells equipment and guitars. A customer comes in while I’m there and notices my Tele. He asked if he could take a look because he really liked how it looked. Long story short he ended up playing it and was blown away at the way it played and sounded. There were lots of positive comments on the fit and finish that comes out of Fender’s custom shop. The Tele doesn’t have any markings that would suggest it was made in any Fender factory. I’ve never seen a neck on a custom Fender remotely looking like mine. He offers to buy it and I let him know how much I had invested in it. He comments that he would have expected it to cost a $1,000 more than my amount. That’s when I let him know it was a Warmoth body and neck that I had put together.
All of a sudden the value of the Tele dropped to pennies on the dollar amount he had stated minutes before. He still wanted to buy the Tele but was offering less money than I paid for the Stets Bar tremolo. I was polite and let him know it wasn’t for sell. How does a guitar drop so drastically because it is a “parts-caster” and not a real factory production? Part of me wanted to let this guy know where his head was located. I really didn’t want to cause my teacher any problems with his customers so I kept my colorful assessment to myself.
It really burns my behind that the parts-caster label infers some kind of defective situation.

 

[Rick]

That looks good!
Sad truth is put the right label on something and double the price.  Guy sounds like a nitwit, nonetheless.

 

[JPOL007]

That looks good!
Sad truth is put the right label on something and double the price.  Guy sounds like a nitwit, nonetheless.

Thanks...maybe I should start calling my builds JPOL customs. People seen to be very impressed with custom guitars assembled from the same parts. Take Valley Arts for example. They were Warmoth 7/8 th necks and bodies assembled by the guys at Valley Arts guitars. That doesn't effect their value at all and it rightly shouldn't.He was a serious guitar snob and really dim. I did make him admit to the awesome fit, finish and sound; since he already had bragged about those points. :laughing7:

 

[BigSteve22]

.....I kept my colorful assessment to myself....

You're a better man than I am...

 

[JPOL007]

.....I kept my colorful assessment to myself....

You're a better man than I am...

Trust me, if I wasn't worried about a negative impact to my relationship with the teacher...that assessment would have been shared with the "Richard Cranium" :evil4:

 

[Verne Bunsen]

It’s funny the things people say when they don’t know what they are talking about. Illegitimi non carborundum!

 

[aarontunes]

Some people are brand snobs. Not just with guitars, but with everything.


They see their possessions as status symbols, and without the proper logos in the proper places their status is not properly symbolized.


You think it's bad in the guitar world? Spend some time in a gym or yoga class.

 

[JPOL007]

It’s funny the things people say when they don’t know what they are talking about. Illegitimi non carborundum!

OK I had to google it... but well said sir ccasion14: My Latin doesn't extend much past some pasta dishes and a couple of body parts :doh:

 

[BroccoliRob]

Oh baby, from your mouth to god's ears! Brand snobs, shmand brlods. Iet them play in their ivory towers while I dunk on them with mad licks 'n' slick riffz. Who died and made THEM battletoad?

 

[mayfly]

You know, we can bad-mouth these folks all we want, but it's proof that folks like Fender... or Gibson... don't need to worry about their brand or sales being reduced by people making guitars that just happen to look like their products.

 

[JPOL007]

Some people are brand snobs. Not just with guitars, but with everything.


They see their possessions as status symbols, and without the proper logos in the proper places their status is not properly symbolized.


You think it's bad in the guitar world? Spend some time in a gym or yoga class.

We have some of those gym gremlins here at work. They swear by their under------ shirts and shorts. I’m not paying that kind of money for a t-shirt just to sweat in it. Hell…you could relic guitar hardware with my sweat :laughing7:. It would dissolve the fabric on one of those overpriced shirts.

 

[JPOL007]

You know, we can bad-mouth these folks all we want, but it's proof that folks like Fender... or Gibson... don't need to worry about their brand or sales being reduced by people making guitars that just happen to look like their products.

Gibson and Fender should worry about the level of talent I’ve seen on display in this forum. I’m sure they would let loose their lawyers on several of the guys who post here if they started selling guitars. I’d rather have some of these guys build a guitar for me than buy from Gibson or Fender.

 

[Seamas]

I find the whole thing very silly as a whole.

I think most of these people are thinking about resale value as opposed to the actual quality of the work, materials or how well the actual guitar plays.


My mind boggles at the entire "vintage" end of things.
Once upon a time "vintage" referred to years and eras of outstanding quality--pre-war Martin Dreadnaughts, etc.

I totally can understand that sentiment to Les pauls and Fenders from the '50s, etc, but over the last 20+ years people have been expanding the "vintage" label to just about any old guitar--even ones that were from very sub-par years. And to be "vintage" if has to be stock even if stock was crap.

The Fender Strat I have, I bought in a partial trade back in the 90s. It's a mid-70s body, with a mid 80s neck.
For a long time I really had no real love for it, it was very heavy for a strat, and I hated the finish.
So after I did my Warmoth build I set to fix what I didn't like about it. First thing was a long overdue fret leveling (which did wonders for playability), but the other thing I did reduced any value that it may have had--I removed the finish (to discover that it had decent looking grain), gave it some forearm contour (it virtually had none), died it slightly amber gave it a nitro gloss finish and changed the pickguard, tremolo, pots cap and wiring. It now plays better than I ever experienced, sounds better and looks much better (imho). But the value? I probably reduced its value considerably.

I am amazed how some people will harp on the "sin" of changing out pots or caps or other rather minor (and reversible) mods.
I've seen comments on Youtube where someone is doing a setup or whatnot and guys wonder what kind of "idiot" mods a "vintage" guitar--when the mod was likely done 25 years ago on a 30 year-old guitar.

I also find it funny that a "expensive" guitar people obsess over is often not much different in price from a medium priced saxophone.

 

[aarontunes]

We have some of those gym gremlins here at work. They swear by their under------ shirts and shorts. I’m not paying that kind of money for a t-shirt just to sweat in it. hell…you could relic guitar hardware with my sweat :laughing7: . It would dissolve the fabric on one of those overpriced shirts.

Under _____ is one, for sure. I won't name the brand I was thinking of, but it rhymes with Fu Fu Femon. Crazy trendy in the yoga community. I've heard some studios will actually throw you out if you are caught not displaying that little "omega" logo on the knee-pit of your stretchy-pants.

 

[JPOL007]

I totally can understand that sentiment to Les pauls and Fenders from the '50s, etc, but over the last 20+ years people have been expanding the "vintage" label to just about any old guitar--even ones that were from very sub-par years. And to be "vintage" if has to be stock even if stock was crap.

You are so right. All of these "vintage reissues" don't make sense to me. You are paying extreme amounts in some cases for a copy of something that may or may not be the best thing ever. Don't let me go near the "relic" topic. Why pay more for something that has been artificially aged? I'm not impressed with fake road ware or the high price someone paid for the appearance. I apologize to anyone here that has a relic model guitar. My taste run toward new and shiny. Like to save money and put my own ware and tare marks on guitars.

 

[Seamas]

I totally can understand that sentiment to Les pauls and Fenders from the '50s, etc, but over the last 20+ years people have been expanding the "vintage" label to just about any old guitar--even ones that were from very sub-par years. And to be "vintage" if has to be stock even if stock was crap.

You are so right. All of these "vintage reissues" don't make sense to me. You are paying extreme amounts in some cases for a copy of something that may or may not be the best thing ever. Don't let me go near the "relic" topic. Why pay more for something that has been artificially aged? I'm not impressed with fake road ware or the high price someone paid for the appearance. I apologize to anyone here that has a relic model guitar. My taste run toward new and shiny. Like to save money and put my own ware and tare marks on guitars.

What I don't quite get about vintage reissues, is if that spec was really great (and many think they were) why not just make that the standard again?

As for relics, --which was top of mind them I posted*--while I do like the look of some worn-in guitars--imho Telecasters look really great worn in--like a pair of jeans. Something about the no-nonsense workman's instrument aspect of it.
But I would never buy a pair of new jeans that had been beaten and torn. I'll do that myself in time.
I don't see why having someone fake relic a guitar (and the premium one pays for it) would be preferable to just buying used, or used (and worn) parts.


* For relics, I would think that the custom/unique aspect of them would make them not hold value over time. In my mind they are akin to partscasters and custom / Warmoth guitars --so veryuniquely spec'ed  to the individual taste, that it will be hard to find a large market interest.

 

[Cagey]

I'm a new guitar kinda guy myself. I can appreciate some older stuff for auld lang syne, and even subscribe to "Vintage Guitar" magazine. I'm old enough to remember some of that stuff when it was new, or only gently used. But to pay money for some of that crap? Fuhgeddaboudit. The state of the art improves for a reason, and usually a good one.

 

[JPOL007]

You nailed it on the head :headbang:





I totally can understand that sentiment to Les pauls and Fenders from the '50s, etc, but over the last 20+ years people have been expanding the "vintage" label to just about any old guitar--even ones that were from very sub-par years. And to be "vintage" if has to be stock even if stock was crap.

You are so right. All of these "vintage reissues" don't make sense to me. You are paying extreme amounts in some cases for a copy of something that may or may not be the best thing ever. Don't let me go near the "relic" topic. Why pay more for something that has been artificially aged? I'm not impressed with fake road ware or the high price someone paid for the appearance. I apologize to anyone here that has a relic model guitar. My taste run toward new and shiny. Like to save money and put my own ware and tare marks on guitars.

What I don't quite get about vintage reissues, is if that spec was really great (and many think they were) why not just make that the standard again?

As for relics, --which was top of mind them I posted*--while I do like the look of some worn-in guitars--imho Telecasters look really great worn in--like a pair of jeans. Something about the no-nonsense workman's instrument aspect of it.
But I would never buy a pair of new jeans that had been beaten and torn. I'll do that myself in time.
I don't see why having someone fake relic a guitar (and the premium one pays for it) would be preferable to just buying used, or used (and worn) parts.


* For relics, I would think that the custom/unique aspect of them would make them not hold value over time. In my mind they are akin to partscasters and custom / Warmoth guitars --so veryuniquely spec'ed  to the individual taste, that it will be hard to find a large market interest.

 

[JPOL007]

I'm a new guitar kinda guy myself. I can appreciate some older stuff for auld lang syne, and even subscribe to "Vintage Guitar" magazine. I'm old enough to remember some of that stuff when it was new, or only gently used. But to pay money for some of that crap? Fuhgeddaboudit. The state of the art improves for a reason, and usually a good one.

We are on the same path man. I love the look of some of the older era guitars, architecture and gals. Hope the wife don't read this post :laughing7: It's just that it seems quality and beauty aren't factored in to design like it was is some time periods.

 

[Rick]

I'm with you.