Anyone else bored to death by mainstream guitars?

Kittyfrisk

koneguitarist said:

bloomer said:

Millimetric do some interesting things: https://www.instagram.com/millimetricinstruments/

Ugly as sin though. This is where so many fail, instrument may be amazing but we still buy form over function. The Parker Fly was another fantastic guitar, but it's looks put so many guitarists off so they made them out of wood.
make a Strat out of composite materials so it's as light as a Fly, pick guard should be able to snap in and out to change pickups configuration, no need for 11 screws,materials could be made with shielding properties. Keep it all in same shape package etc so guitarists will buy it! 

Interesting that you say  'The Parker Fly was another fantastic guitar, but it's looks put so many guitarists off so they made them out of wood.'
If it was the looks that put people off, why did they always look the same, regardless of their composition?
Edit:  I really love my P-36, wood or not. Just sad that I couldn't afford the 'real' composite thing 

jeztone2

I’m bored with mainstream guitar bands. The instruments are fine. It’s the players I find so conservative. 

TINMAN82

lysander said:

TINMAN82 said:

As others have pointed out, it does seem rather like what @lysander wants is basically a charvel with “fender” on the headstock. Pretty irrelevant given Fender own Charvel. I’d find that far more boring than looking at charvel as a sub-brand with their own identity.

Not at all, I think you missed my point completely  .
It just happens that Charvel has very recently started building affordable guitars which I like.
But you’ll be lucky to find one in a shop.

My point was that I find it’s a shame that the main brands do nothing to improve the baseline or average guitars.
See my comment about neck joints for instance - there’s no reason to keep building them like in the 50s and there’s a long list of similar things.

I get your point. I think what you’re asking for has already been done up to a point though (and beyond that point marketability suffers). US Elite/deluxe strat- contoured neck heel like you ask,  noiseless pups, 2 point trem etc. Even the US pro/std range isn’t strict 50s - poly finish, wider nut, flatter radius. Then there’s Gibson 2015 with all the modern updates I’m sure you’re already familiar with (that bombed). If you want a more extreme redesign of the “s-type” than the above you’re basically looking at a super strat which is well catered for by various other companies, some of which are owned by Fender anyway.

Moving the volume knob on all strats would probably be popular but there would be plenty of complaints too!

Kittyfrisk

thegummy said:

I think the real reason it's boring to browse guitar shops is standardisation and the internet.

I look back romantically to the 60s/70s where you could be in another town and visit the guitar shop to find a completely different range of guitars to the one in your local shop and it would be exciting to see what you could find; like a treasure hunt.

Now every guitar shop has the same stock, all the Fenders and Gibsons as well as all the Ibanez, Schecter etc. that are more modern. But it's the same range of models in every shop. And they're all available to browse online.

When I pop in to a guitar shop, it's just everything I've been looking at online. It's nice to go in every once in a while and see all the new ones in person to see what they really look like, even play a couple. But it's not exciting.

While the old days seem romantic where everywhere has different stock and you have to travel to find interesting treasure, we're actually so much better off. We can browse everything that's available at home and go to any shop to play and buy the exact one we want.

On what basis are you able to state this?

hollywoodrox

Strat’s in neon green,pink,orange and yellow choice of floyd or 2 point standard bridge . Seymour Duncan jb or dimarzio sd . No Pickguard  body mounted pickups and a sustainiac in the neck , lumiglow markers . Locking Gotohs on the standard bridge  and a mono gig bag /sleeve .
retail price £499.  

roberty

The problem that guitars had is that they were quiet compared to other instruments. Someone invented the truss rod and we had steel string guitars and they were louder but they still weren't loud enough for a concert hall. So at around the same time a bunch of people invented electric guitars and solved that problem. The best designs have endured and the guitar is loud enough now

Lewy

koneguitarist said:

lets make it simple, guitarists are pretty stupid, opinionated and short sighted.

Is it those things, or is it just emotional...wanting an instrument to give them even a small connection to an aesthetic that inspires them, or a musical continuum of which they aspire to be a part? Given that we're supposed to be engaged in an activity with emotion at it's core, I can't quite grasp why that should be a source of exasperation to anyone really.

thegummy

koneguitarist said:

lets make it simple, guitarists are pretty stupid, opinionated and short sighted. 
Bassists have gone modern years ago, 5 and 6 string custom made bases with active electronics from a huge variety of wood and composites the norm now as opposed to 4 string fenders.
We will buy a  Mex 60's Strat, then pay double to have same thing made across border in California, then pay double again to have it made in custom shop in same factory, then pay more again to have it beaten with chains and keys till it looks old!
Even Violinists in orchestras use composite instruments. 

An the worst thing we cant tell what its made from anyway. we still buy our guitars on looks rather than sound and function. 

While modern basses do exist, 90%+ of records still use either a Jazz or a Precision.

Yesterday, actually, I skimmed through 3 seasons of Jools Holland noting what bass each band was using (I have my reasons lol) and there was about 4 non-Fender basses used, only 1 of which was the modern active pickup type. Every other band on all of those shows used either a Fender J or P.

thegummy

roberty said:

The problem that guitars had is that they were quiet compared to other instruments. Someone invented the truss rod and we had steel string guitars and they were louder but they still weren't loud enough for a concert hall. So at around the same time a bunch of people invented electric guitars and solved that problem. The best designs have endured and the guitar is loud enough now

Nice, I like that.

I watched a documentary about the history of the piano earlier and that was also the reason that was invented - its predecessor wasn't loud enough.

Litterick

In other news, your Gibson Firebird X is now vintage and rare. This is what happens when you try to innovate.

Henrytwang

koneguitarist said:

If you can't play it on a tele, it's not worth playing it

I think that you’re probably right. A classic design that just goes on and on, you can modify it with different pickups and even add a tremolo but the basic concept will last for ever.

crunchman

thegummy said:

koneguitarist said:

lets make it simple, guitarists are pretty stupid, opinionated and short sighted. 
Bassists have gone modern years ago, 5 and 6 string custom made bases with active electronics from a huge variety of wood and composites the norm now as opposed to 4 string fenders.
We will buy a  Mex 60's Strat, then pay double to have same thing made across border in California, then pay double again to have it made in custom shop in same factory, then pay more again to have it beaten with chains and keys till it looks old!
Even Violinists in orchestras use composite instruments. 

An the worst thing we cant tell what its made from anyway. we still buy our guitars on looks rather than sound and function. 

While modern basses do exist, 90%+ of records still use either a Jazz or a Precision.

Yesterday, actually, I skimmed through 3 seasons of Jools Holland noting what bass each band was using (I have my reasons lol) and there was about 4 non-Fender basses used, only 1 of which was the modern active pickup type. Every other band on all of those shows used either a Fender J or P.

I much the prefer the sound of a traditional passive P to all these active ones.  I do like a 32" scale though, which is non-traditional and hard to find.  I've managed to find an 80's Japanese made Squier P with a 32" scale.

prowla

I went into PMT Portsmouth last weekend and I remember seeing a matt-black Rickenbacker bass and a Squier Jag short scale; there was a wall of Fenders I didn't look at (apart from a brief glance at a Tele the same colour as one I made from parts) and some other stuff I don't particularly recall.

I'm probably going to go to the Guitar/Bass Show in London (next month?), but I expect I'll not even pause at a lot of the samey-shmamey stands.

darthed1981

guitars4you said:

I suppose the Bond Guitar was futuristic and one of the biggest flops within the guitar industry - For one reason or another 

It probably didn't have the expected ejector seat and machine guns?

p90fool

OP must be like,12 or something. I can remember countless innovations from Fender and Gibson, even Strats exactly as he describes, and they all flopped. 

It's like moaning about Harley Davidson persisting in making Electraglides because you want a Honda CBR1000RR. 

Just buy the bloody Honda!

fields5069

I went into my local PMT recently and looked around. Then I looked around again, and then I walked out. Every guitar seemed to blend into the one next to it, just walls of bland. I like stuff which is a bit different, but that takes basic cues from established designs. That's why I too like Reverend, at the moment I have an orange Ron Asheton V with 3 P90s and I love it.

lysander

p90fool said:

OP must be like,12 or something. I can remember countless innovations from Fender and Gibson, even Strats exactly as he describes, and they all flopped. 

It's like moaning about Harley Davidson persisting in making Electraglides because you want a Honda CBR1000RR. 

Just buy the bloody Honda!

I find it funny that many seem to get so prickly at the slightest suggestion of change or evolution - you’re gonna insult me for that, really ? Just lol.

p90fool

lysander said:

p90fool said:

OP must be like,12 or something. I can remember countless innovations from Fender and Gibson, even Strats exactly as he describes, and they all flopped. 

It's like moaning about Harley Davidson persisting in making Electraglides because you want a Honda CBR1000RR. 

Just buy the bloody Honda!

I find it funny that many seem to get so prickly at the slightest suggestion of change or evolution - you’re gonna insult me for that, really ? Just lol.

Ok, maybe you're a pensioner, I have no idea, but if you think Gibson and Fender haven't been doing exactly what you're asking for decade after decade then you're not paying attention. 

merciful-evans

guitars4you said:

thegummy said:

- it's just that people really do like guitars as they are. 

Agree with 'bold' comments

-

So we as guitar players do tend to be a flock of sheep 

I broadly agree with both comments (apologies if quoted too far from context). 
Much of the time we are in agreement on this thread.

The biggest difference is some of us are content about this state of affairs while others are grudgingly tolerant. Obviously I am in the 2nd category. 

I also agree as has been stated that looks form a massive part of what we like. Maybe even more than sound/tone? It might even play a part as to why people are not more curious about 'different' guitars: as in 'hell no, I'm not going to try that perfectly ergonomic 26 fret guitar weighing 5lb, it's ugly'. If I'm right, that challenges the assertion that we are making informed choices.

I have always thought Tele's were ugly & I never even bothered to try one for more than 40 years. I acquired one this year because I wanted the sound of a Tele, but I still think they're ugly. I wouldn't pose for a band picture with it. But had I liked the looks, maybe I would have used one 40 years ago. 

The 80s superstrat styles did move things forward a lot. Practical and sensible innovations incorporated into good builds. I used  Jackson Soloist myself exclusively for 16 years, even though I never played metal. PRS incorporated most of these features into his designs. But he was clever. He never moved too far from tradition, and his guitars are essentially a synthesis of Fender & Gibson aesthetics. 

I like and use these old designs myself, but I regard them more as something quaint from the past; a bit like using an old 50's film camera. For a critical gig or recording session I'll reach for something a bit more modern. 

MichaelWatts

When it comes to acoustic guitars I am wary of the "latest advances" from mass production brands that don't have their foundations in solid luthiery. Conversely I do find it hard to get enthusiastic about certain older ideas and vintage instruments too. 

When it comes to electrics I have as much love for the Les Paul Junior and the Gretsch White Falcon as I do for the Teuffel Birdfish and the Parker Fly. I find them all beautiful.

I guess across the board I am most interested in sound and feel (in that order) and the aesthetics have to back up the intent with which the instrument was created. Which is different in each case. 

Really the only things I'm truly pig sick of are shouty marketing, lazy design and manufacture and dead strings...