MissouriPicker Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 I don't know if I'd ever want any autographs on my Gibsons. I guess it's a personal thing...... Here's Holly Williams and she's got four of them on a really nice-sounding Gibby. I can see Kristofferson, Prine, and Guy Clark, but can't read the fourth. Then again, if those guys offered, I might accept.......Her husband has a nice guitar too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 A good topic - not least because it immediately divides reflections in 2. Should it be done to raise the value of a guitar or simply because you like a certain artist to be 'present' while you play and sing your little songs. Count me out on #1, but leave a crack for me to slip through regarding #2. But it has to be a name I respect, who's music I lOVE. And please use black ink. There has been a Bird on the Bay for some time now with K. Costners signature in white tusch on the upper left bout. It costs a crystal palace and as I see it, goes far over the top. Might be an example of #1 being bought for #2 reasons. Might bang into reality at some point - and get 75 % cut off that tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EuroAussie Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 i never understood the appeal of 'autographs' in the first place .... hence seeing one on a guitar to me is closer to a piece of vandalism than anything of value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-minor7 Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 i never understood the appeal of 'autographs' in the first place .... Without in any way being a collector, I understand the aura of autographs. It's like a lasting handshake, , , it's a personal sign, a tag left for you to keep. If I visited you, I would bring a present. A little vase, a picture in a frame, a wooden pen or something. You would have that as a symbolic echo after I went home. The autograph is related to that. It's the person you admire's unique doodle - still of course you'ld prefer to be given an object. Imagine a wooden pen from Keith Richards - or maybe both the pen and the autograph, , , , plus the pick he used for the Angie intro or a drawing of that very Bird, , , with an autograph beneath. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliasphobias Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 An interesting perspective on this one from Em7, #2 of course. As for #1 I am not sure that it does. I don't collect these doodles but have ended up with a couple over the years. I wanted to talk with Guy Clark after seeing him in '89 and found asking for an autograph a way to break the ice. An interesting conversation ensued and the autograph has come to be a token reminder of the chat. I remember the chat well though I am not sure where the autograph is at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliasphobias Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 ....I should add neither is on a guitar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duluthdan Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 ......Her husband has a nice guitar too. Crumps... there goes THAT fantasy... Isn't it cool that a simple 4 chord song can do with the right lyrics. Saw her perform this a few years ago in a tiny venue - this song blew me away it was so good. The only way I'd let someone autograph a guitar is if they also posed for a picture with it to give it some credible provenance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparquelito Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 If I had an autographed guitar, signed by an artist that I loved and admired, I would cherish it and never let it go. Neil &/or Tim Finn, for instance. Elvis Costello. Jeff Lynne. Bonnie Raitt. George Harrison. Neil Young, even. I would apply carnauba paste wax over the signature, and I would keep it and preserve it from ever fading. A few layers of clear-coat, followed by the wax, might be warranted. But I would never sell it. If, however, I had a guitar with a signature on it from some other artist that I didn't particular care anything about, I would sell that beeotch just as soon as I could, and I would never look back. :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted November 29, 2015 Share Posted November 29, 2015 I don't know. To me, the only signatures I hold any value to are on the bottom of a check. A signature for no reason, well, has no meaning. Also, it kinda feels demeaning in a way. That one human has such value as to "tag" something for another implies one person is better than another. On the other hand, my uncle has Elvis' autograph on a business card of my grandfathers, which I just find...well...it's really something. I mean, the KING was there! It's not like I hate fame or people with fame, it's just that, say someone like Miles Davis: I could, and would, stand in awe at his musical abilities, and want to hear him play and hang on every note or word. But when not playing or talking music, he is just another man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scriv58 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 willie nelson is the fourth signature- i really like holly williams songs i saw a youtube interview, she said she wasn't going to do the autograph on guitars thing, but it happened Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modoc_333 Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Usually people have autographed guitars by flavor of the week people. That's always a bad plan. I think if someone signs the front of your guitar especially, then it should be someone you actually have a relationship of some sort with.... someone you actually know in some capacity. I still think that the front isn't a great place unless you plan to do the Willie Nelson plan and have all of your famous friends sign the front. That being said, I had Ren Ferguson sign the back of the headstock on my AJ. He used silver sharpie so it would show up. No regrets on that one at all. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MissouriPicker Posted November 30, 2015 Author Share Posted November 30, 2015 Aside from collectors, I don't understand the appeal of buying a guitar with an autograph on it. This discussion made me recall an American Eagle guitar (and it's still for sale at GC) I played over a year ago. It was sweet, Sheryl Crow had autographed it, but it was over 1600, while the others of the same year and condition were 1249-1299. I told them that if Sheryl had stripped naked and played that guitar that it still wasn't worth the difference in price............the guitar is still hanging on the wall at that GC. Here's the link. Check the date on the pic, and the current price. I bet the autograph is killing it. Not because it's Sheryl's, but because most people don't want an autographed guitar............ http://www.guitarcenter.com/Used/Gibson/2013-LG2-American-Eagle-Acoustic-Guitar.gc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliasphobias Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Dear MP, Sorry you feel that way, Cheryl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 One of a kind with a few autographs on it. It was a promotion one-off product one year for the Nashville Sounds. My nephew -- Chris Barnwell -- played there for a couple of years and for awhile in Milwaukee too. He got it for me wholesale ($95 I think), and got the whole team and coach to sign it -- three probable Hall of Fame eventual candidates there. AND -- it has a pickup! What is not to like? Let's pick, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliasphobias Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 Autographs at one time and place were rare. I would guess that very few, no matter the celebrity, are worth much. My mind goes to a picture of Pete Rose slumped over a table, signing for all he was worth.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smurfbird Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 I never understood autographs, except authors writing a personal note in a book where there are pages blank enough for them to do so. Back when there were album covers, I could see getting them signed for fun. But a guitar is a beauty unto itself and at such a cost that it looks pretty stupid unless it's Hank Williams, Sr.'s genuine autograph. I agree about the Pete Rose aspect, too. Any artist of any note these days has these professional autograph chasers who want them to sign all their merchandise so they can go on eBay and sell it for 10x as much. I wouldn't pay it and I suspect most everyone here wouldn't pay it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobouz Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 A signature on the front body of a guitar makes that instrument completely undesirable to me, regardless of who's signature it is - Sheryl Crow or one of the Beatles, it doesn't matter. The back of the headstock seems like a tolerable option, especially if the individual is legitimately connected to that particular instrument. All imho, of course! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickthemiller Posted November 30, 2015 Share Posted November 30, 2015 I don't mind autographs that are given when meeting a great guitarist, as a reminder that you met - that seems OK. It's the cheap guitars with lots of autographs that turn up on auction sites that I really loath Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fullmental Alpinist Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 A signature on the front body of a guitar makes that instrument completely undesirable to me, regardless of who's signature it is - Sheryl Crow or one of the Beatles, it doesn't matter. The back of the headstock seems like a tolerable option, especially if the individual is legitimately connected to that particular instrument. All imho, of course! Wow, exactly what I was thinking. This guy here is amazingly talented but the autograph on the guitar (Chet Atkins?) seems so out of place--amateurish. And the hat doesn't help either.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7MIaIain7I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tman Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Only on the back and only one of the 3 strumming Beatles. o/w not for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickthemiller Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 Only on the back and only one of the 3 strumming Beatles. o/w not for me. But one with all four would be worth much more, surely. In both sentimental and monetary value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frances50 Posted December 2, 2015 Share Posted December 2, 2015 I would never want anyone to sign one of my playing guitars. I have three "collectibles" that are signed. One each from the three guitarists in KISS (Gene, Paul and Tommy). And they're like works or art, displayed in a cabinet, not to be played. The best memory is the one from Gene. I was on the KISS Kruise and he held a Bass Master Class. Each participant got a signed bass and he spent an hour with each group of eight, teaching songwriting, technique, etc. I loved it. Got the guitar and the pictures to show for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.