joezakkwaldrianifan Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Well...this is those Gibson vs Epiphone threads. But this time question IS NOT which one is better so please read a bit more... Question arises from Zakk Wylde buzzsaw guitar. Epiphone http://www.thomann.de/fi/epiphone_zakk_wylde_lp_ai.htm 645 euros Antique Ivory, 2x EMG HZ H4 humbuckers Gibson http://www.thomann.de/fi/gibson_les_paul_zakk_wilde.htm 3966 euros Black & white, Pickups: EMG-81 and EMG-85 As you can see and read there are small differences in looks and components and huge difference in prise. And now I fail to see any sane reasoning to have different components in Epiphone version. If you buy Epi version and then put in same components that are in Gibson version it will cost you 200 euros most ( If you are able to sell original Epi components ). And if you are not able to do switching work by yourself I am sure that somebody can do a nice job in 1000 euros. So you would still end up like Gibson replica but less than half of the prise. Only thing left being different are color and logo. So what is the point that Epiphone guitar has different component than Gibson? Pickups from both guitars are aftermarket parts so there shouldn't be much reason for those being different. Is there any logic in this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWANG Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 The primary argument would be the quality of the wood, and the american craftsmanship. I know it pops a bubble for some folks, but in my experience there is almost as much variance in 'good' wood and wood called not so good. Take a reasoned look at what the classic great guitars are made of.. and what many new guitars are made of.. there are lots of different kinds of wood. Saga guitar kits, often made of Basswood, are often criticized for that choice. But if you read any catalogue, MF, etc.. you find some very pricey guitars played by famous players made of Basswood. Original les pauls were mahogany.. not maple capped. Les himself still prefers all mahogany. Is your tele ash or alder? Is your strat one piece, or four? Are laminated guitars always worse than solid wood guitars? What is a tonewood, and how/why is it chosen? For tone? For hardness? For price? What role does reputation and collectibility play? Do you or do you not pay for the name? How much? A good deal of what passes as knowledgeable criticism of epiphones is simply not backed up by real world experience. I have serious doubts that some could tell the difference by hearing them, blindfolded, in many cases. I have serious doubts that every top of the line of any brand, with the logo removed and no marketing or peer pressure coming into play would be a lot of folks first choice. Now there are woods coming from all over the world.. and there is not guarantee or even accurate description-often, of where the woods came from, or even if they are 'true' mahogany, etc. I've heard tell that a large percentage of Fenders wood comes straight from china and even some used in usa plants and mexican plants. No doubt the clarification of this will have two effects.. one, it will drive the price of older guitars even higher.. and two, it will begin to seal a solid reputation for the newer models as well. Manufacturers not only have copies to deal with competitively, and fakes, and other brands, but their own lower/upper tiers. People with the money to blow on four thousand dollar guitars will get all they want. Collectibility, bragging rights, and a very very good guitar in almost every case. People without that money, or people not concerned about resale value, will find really sweet guitars able to hold their own with anything out there-at decent prices. And never the twain shall meet.. as we see in here, probably too often. tWANG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 333 Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Original les pauls were mahogany.. not maple capped. Les himself still prefers all mahogany Good points. I just want to clear up the sentence above for those not familair with LP history: the first Les Pauls were indeeed maple capped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWANG Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 I thought the original lps were mahogany. then considered too heavy and maple capped? no? TWANG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joezakkwaldrianifan Posted December 7, 2008 Author Share Posted December 7, 2008 Thanks TWANG about explaining wood issue... First correction that guitars are not buzzsaws but bulls eye models. Anyway in this case it is diffucult to know if woods and manufacture are same or not. Only thing certain are components and looks. So why Epi is selling something that looks almost as Gibson bulls eye model but then chooses components which will make it certain it is not a cheaper version of bulls eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 I've owned several Epiphones and have recently bought my first GIbson. It is a Signature Johnny A made in Gibson's custom shop. All of the EPi's had equal craftsmanship. The fit and finish is superb. The hardware, tuners, bridges, tail pieces all seemed fine, they all stayed in tune. But the pickups, jacks, and tone controls on the EPi's were garbage. But the original point is valid. For a few hundred bucks you can change all the electronic parts and you are getting pretty close to a Gibby. The Johnny A happens to be a unique build that suits me perfectly and is not duplicated by any other guitar. And I got it for a steal off e-bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntelligentAl Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Why is the Epiphone a different colour to the Gibson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWANG Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Thanks TWANG about explaining wood issue...First correction that guitars are not buzzsaws but bulls eye models. Anyway in this case it is diffucult to know if woods and manufacture are same or not. Only thing certain are components and looks. So why Epi is selling something that looks almost as Gibson bulls eye model but then chooses components which will make it certain it is not a cheaper version of bulls eye? well..things like the emg pickups were part of the artists choice. and set the guitar apart from other models, even of gibson. they've done that with a few guitars from artists. they do want to get as close to the look, and sometimes the sound of the gibson models, too.. that helps people choose them. They know they can't sell a gibson to everyone, but an epi of the same model, for less money.. will, they hope, lead to a gibson later on. but NOT if it sucked or was too different.. that would be working toward cross purposes.. bottom line versus customer satisfaction. TWANG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snookelputz Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 Perhaps a quick explanation, and a mathematical formula the formula is: X + Y = Z Where X = some number between 1 and a reasonable production run of people who will pony up for a Gibson; and, Y = some other number of people who want a Gibson but can't afford it - and, seeing the similarities between Epi and Gibson (as the advertising is intended to point out), will buy an Epiphone; leaving, Z = snobs who can't tell the difference but argue about it endlessly. Seriously, the reason is to create a dream, and then make it available to anyone. Doesn't stop with Epiphone, you know. There are real Gibsons lying on the shelves in Walmart and Target right now...and they look very similar to both the Gibson and the Epiphone, but for a Hondo price. Like I said, they'll sell you the dream for however much money you have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.