Rasmus_m Posted April 28, 2009 Author Share Posted April 28, 2009 anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted April 28, 2009 Share Posted April 28, 2009 Looks great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MI_Canuck Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 Hello everybody. I'm thinking about buying a used SG Standard form '98. Is this considered a good production year? I've heard some talking about some present quality issues which is the reason for my question. I picked up a used '98 Standard last year... SUPER happy with mine... awesome awesome neck' date=' fantastic tone, great build quality... and they still had the ABR-1 bridge in '98 - i think that's a bonus vs the nashville bridge... some may disagree, others may not even care... [img']http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3144/2809589563_ef63480103.jpg[/img] overall i'd say it's a good year... not gonna say it's the best year, since i think mid '90s ones are well regarded, and i think 2000-2004?? '61 RIs also... if the price is right, you can't go wrong with a '98... just my experience and opinion... oh and they came with the brown pink lined case... kinda funky in a cool way... i like mine... obviously has no impact on the guitar itself... just a cool bonus imo... :- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rasmus_m Posted April 29, 2009 Author Share Posted April 29, 2009 What's the difference between the ABR-1 bridge and the newer bridge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heymisterk Posted April 29, 2009 Share Posted April 29, 2009 I've been reading this thread with great interest. I love my '07 SG Classic, but it did have a minor finish flaw. My '96 SG Standard wasn't BAD per se, but it did not have the quality one would expect for the money. My contention is that for the premium Gibson charges for its name brand, there should be very few quality control issues. When you consider you can buy a new Hamer or Heritage (and my favorite RIP company, Guild) or whatever built in what is essentially a custom shop for the same price as your run-of-the-mill Gibson,...well, that's not really fair. And it confirms what critics of Gibsonphiles say: we're buying it for the name. We might be, but we have the right to expect very high quality for the cash we're shelling out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geff Posted April 30, 2009 Share Posted April 30, 2009 I have found, in life, that "you get what you pay for" is only true if you buy really cheap **** - then you get junk. The pursuit of prfection is expensive and ultimately pointless. Value for money is lost exponentially with expense. If you pay a lot - for just about anything, expect to be disappointed. The more you pay, the less likely you are to be happy that you got a good deal. This is true of guitars just as it is of cars, motorbikes, hookers and anything else money can buy. We have the right to expect very high quality at Gibson prices but we are not going to get it! A good example from Epiphone is maybe 95% perfect. How much better do you think a Gibson can realistically be. You spend 300% more to chase that elusive 5% improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.