Name copies that are actually slight (or big) improvement on original design

[Brian Krashpad]

I found my Hamer Special to be superior to the Gibby LP Jr. Special I owned. From what Bill Armitage has said here, some feel that way re Gibbies/Hamers across the board.

[Jkater]

I'm not a big fan of boutique knock offs or cheaper versions of original designs. I grew up drooling over Gibsons, Ricks, Gretsches, and Fenders that I could not afford. The Japanese junk that was on the market in the 60's was horrible. These days, I just want to own everything that I saw my heroes playing in the 60's and early 70's, so that means Custom Shop/Historic models of Fenders and Gibsons, and production line Ricks and Gretsches. I don't have the stomach--or the cash--for the vintage racket. You can keep your G&L's, Andersons, Tylers, Ibanzes, Tokais, ESP's etc. etc. Yeah, I'm a gear snob, but I spend a lot of time tracking down excellent examples of Les Pauls, Strats, Teles, etc. that would stand up to the best boutique guitars around. It's not easy to find a great strat or LP from the original manufacturer these days. There are LOTS of good ones and a few mediocre guitars from Gibson, Fender, etc. But the great ones--and by great I mean acceptable weight, perfect fit/finish, signature tone, and that elusive X-Factor--these are hard to find. You can increase your chances by focusing on Fender and Gibson's Custom Shop models, but even then, you have to know what you're after, especially in the tone department. It can be done though if you shop at the right places, like the venerable www.wilwoodguitars.com which is a short 35 minute drive from where I live.

 

I'm glad you're happy. You worked hard for it. I know that you have exquisite Gibsons. You looked long and hard to find the good ones (whether one should have to look that much when one is already paying big bucks is not the purpose of this thread). I also know that you are a player (as opposed to only being a collector) and that gives much credibility to anything you say. But Doc, you don't come accross as very aware that those who "keep their G&l's, etc.etc." are just as happy with their guitar as you are. They, also, have looked long and hard for A GOOD GUITAR and were not disappointed.

[Brewski]

Personally this thread is just a way to validate pyaing stupid money for a name guitar.

 

As some have stated they're are some modified versions of the original "classics" that do improve on them. To start, I don't believe in "classics" being better than today's stuff - this includes cars, guitars, you name it.

 

Right of the bat:

 

PRS, Ibanez updates to the Strat style - the RG series for metal kills the Strat, and oh my RG320 has a split bridge pup that sounds better than my strat at sounding like a strat. Easier access to the higher frets.

 

Les Paul - lots of single cuts guitars (too many to quote) that are more balanced, have better access to the higher frets. as far as tone, it' the su opf the parts and we all know you have to go through 20 Les Pauls before you hear that X-Factor.

 

Technology Updates

 

Floyd Rose Trems kill Fulcrum and Bigsby Type trems.

Graphite Nuts versus Plastic (Gibson) or Bone (Fender)

there's more - these are just near and dear to my heart

[Berndt111]

 

Personally this thread is just a way to validate pyaing stupid money for a name guitar. As some have stated they're are some modified versions of the original "classics" that do improve on them. To start, I don't believe in "classics" being better than today's stuff - this includes cars, guitars, you name it. Right of the bat: PRS, Ibanez updates to the Strat style - the RG series for metal kills the Strat, and oh my RG320 has a split bridge pup that sounds better than my strat at sounding like a strat. Easier access to the higher frets. Les Paul - lots of single cuts guitars (too many to quote) that are more balanced, have better access to the higher frets. as far as tone, it' the su opf the parts and we all know you have to go through 20 Les Pauls before you hear that X-Factor. Technology Updates Floyd Rose Trems kill Fulcrum and Bigsby Type trems. Graphite Nuts versus Plastic (Gibson) or Bone (Fender) there's more - these are just near and dear to my heart

 

 

Good post. Except for your opening sentence : it does not seem to me that this thread was about that. on the contrary, the thread starter appears to be a believer that you don't have to have a particular name on the headstock. He seems more proud of his Yamaha than he is of his signature Gibson. And his LP is no cheapo.

[Jkater]

 

... the thread starter appears to be a believer that you don't have to have a particular name on the headstock. He seems more proud of his Yamaha than he is of his signature Gibson. And his LP is no cheapo.

 

 

You got that one right.

[zenbu]

 

 

 

[Bbreaker]

Ibanez Artist Bad that they are only producing cheapo versions of those nowadays

 

 

 

Those late 70's Ibanez Artist guitars were good.........

 

[zenbu]

and there are two new ones hanging in a local shop. Not cheap though.

[Knottyhed]

Nothing wrong with being a purist. Many feels a tele has got to be a non contoured slab and must bear the name Fender. Or that a Les Paul must keep its inherent design flaws (bad upper fret access, etc.) alongside its wonderful attributes (sounds great!). In this thread I would like to invite you to stay away from brand bashing but find examples of other manufacturers who have succeded in taking an original idea and taking it further to create guitars that (in your opinion) improve somewhat on those designs. Thanks!

 

I'd say the MusicMan Silhouette is better than a Fender Strat... (hence why I own one and not the other )

 

Same goes for the Yamaha SG1000 - it's better than any Les Paul I've played, but is basically the same idea (mahogany set/neck/hard tail/2xhumbucker).

[clarky]

a pal of mine has an early 80's Charvel Strat - the one with the guitar shaped logo like EVH's early guitars..

 

I must say it's a really lovely guitar..

really well made, well finished, sounds and plays fantastic

[Professor Tom]

The Gordon Smith GS-1 is a copy of a Les Paul Junior and is way better all the way. A few of the early 50's Les Paul Juniors may be better but not many of them and the GS-1 is $800 in England.

[Jkater]

Same goes for the Yamaha SG1000 - it's better than any Les Paul I've played, but is basically the same idea (mahogany set/neck/hard tail/2xhumbucker).

 

To me the best example of an idea being bettered (is that a word?) is the Yamaha SG2000. Everything a Les Paul should be plus a contoured back, through-neck construction and sleek heel for real access to the upper frets, flawless construction every single time (granted, some Gibsons are also flawless), much higher grade of material (no plastic inlays and nuts, ebony FB, etc.), TOM bridge that, I hear, was better, you name it.

 

The SA2200, on the other hand is not really that different from an ES-355 except for small details of design.The shape is more elegant to my eyes but that's just a taste. it shares the same flawlessness and high standards of material with the SG2000. It also shares the same headstock :

 

[Edward]

ISTM that whether one design is superior or not is highly subjective. On the one hand, there's a lot of folks who are beholden to the original designs for no better reason than they got there first - the same folks who spit blood over copies being the "wrong" woods / body shape / headstock / brand / etc would be equally vehement in the opposite direction had the "wrong" stuff come out first. On the flipside, you have the folks who assert that certain changes must be 'better' by design simply because they suit them better. To me, A superStrat type with a Floyd, HSH pups, flatter fingerboard radius and the works is a wholly inferior design to a 57RI Strat, simply because the Strat is what I prefer - it suits what I like the look of (age of the design is irrelevant to me) and the sound / playing feel of. I have no need of what a Floyd Rose can offer, and I find them ugly and inconvenient. That certainly doesn't invalidate them for those whose purposes they suit, but nor can those people point to the Strat and call it outclassed, or no use in general (as opposed to for specific applications). I've had this argument on here before, but to me it's all so subjective - even something like the chunky heel on a traditional Strat. I've had folks try to tell me that's objective inferior to a slimmed down design. Not true, IMO - I actually like having a bug chunky join up there. No different than neck profile preferences to me - some folks like wide / thin, some prefer narrower and chunkier - and all points in between. No one of them is inferior by design when looked at objectively and not coloured by individual playing preferences and requirements. Otherwise, it's like saying an SG is objectively a far superior guitar to a Martin Dreadnaught full stop.

 

where I think we can definitely start to make objective comparisons is when you look at questions purely of quality. Can Gordon Smith, for instance make a guitar that is as good as a Gibson or almost as good for half the price, say? Got to be a fairly objective consideration there - where it gets subjective of course is whether the Gibson is worth the extra money for the brand cachet, because it is the "original / real thing", or whatever.

 

Conclusion:

 

In terms of design alone, sure the big name classics can be improved upon - but only insofar as the individual player's subjective opinion finds the changes improvements.

 

 

In terms of a newer brand that improves on the originals, I would say we can objectively agree on Eastwood - the guitars they build are for the most part way better in terms of quality assurance than those that they copy.... That's quality improvement, though, not changes in design.

[Beckman]

Who is/was Daion and do you have pic or two of the Headhunter? I have several Teles that have a Tele body, but with all the Strat contours (belly cut, forearm cut and rounded edges like a Strat). One even has 3 pickups(the middle and neck pickups are Tele neck pickup sized and even have the chrome covers) and 5-way Strat switching. Very resonant guitar, a fat U shape 1-piece maple neck. I think it is due for new pickups; just for a change. gt5litre

 

Daion was a Japanese builder in the late 70's, early 80's, that was imported by a company from Texas. I have the Power Mark XX. It plays like butta. Some one a long the line cracked the upper horn where the strap button is screwedd in, but I don't notice any ill effects of this. IT was repaired and refinished, but you can see the crack and the chip in the Rosewood center layer.

 

[Puddlegum]

I think that Heritage really took the LP and just made it a heck of a lot better for the price. Those things are amazing to play and hold.

[Puddlegum]

Daion was a Japanese builder in the late 70's, early 80's, that was imported by a company from Texas. I have the Power Mark XX. It plays like butta. Some one a long the line cracked the upper horn where the strap button is screwedd in, but I don't notice any ill effects of this. IT was repaired and refinished, but you can see the crack and the chip in the Rosewood center layer.

 

That reminds me an awful lot of the Vantage VS series from the late 70's early 80's...

[Burgess]

The most obvious that come to my mind are Suhr & Anderson.

[paulintheuk]

I'm not a big fan of boutique knock offs or cheaper versions of original designs. I grew up drooling over Gibsons, Ricks, Gretsches, and Fenders that I could not afford. The Japanese junk that was on the market in the 60's was horrible. These days, I just want to own everything that I saw my heroes playing in the 60's and early 70's, so that means Custom Shop/Historic models of Fenders and Gibsons, and production line Ricks and Gretsches. I don't have the stomach--or the cash--for the vintage racket. You can keep your G&L's, Andersons, Tylers, Ibanzes, Tokais, ESP's etc. etc. Yeah, I'm a gear snob, but I spend a lot of time tracking down excellent examples of Les Pauls, Strats, Teles, etc. that would stand up to the best boutique guitars around. It's not easy to find a great strat or LP from the original manufacturer these days. There are LOTS of good ones and a few mediocre guitars from Gibson, Fender, etc. But the great ones--and by great I mean acceptable weight, perfect fit/finish, signature tone, and that elusive X-Factor--these are hard to find. You can increase your chances by focusing on Fender and Gibson's Custom Shop models, but even then, you have to know what you're after, especially in the tone department. It can be done though if you shop at the right places, like the venerable www.wilwoodguitars.com which is a short 35 minute drive from where I live.

 

I respect your collection Bb, but it is people with your attitude that allow Gibson to continue hiking prices and dropping quality, because only they "have the right name on the headstock".

 

They are just using it as an excuse to print money nowadays. And lets face it, modern Gibsons are as much copies as any Tokai/Edwards really. The guitars that your heroes played were mainly handmade, not churned out on a CNC machine

 

None of this applies to Rickenbacker, they have managed to maintain their credibility.

 

Edit: I think Blade did some very worthwhile, sensible and well-engineered upgrades to the Strat.

[fretmonster]

I found my Hamer Special to be superior to the Gibby LP Jr. Special I owned. From what Bill Armitage has said here, some feel that way re Gibbies/Hamers across the board.

 

I generally believe that. My 93 is made from Honduran mahogany with a beautiful orangish Brazilian rosewood board with Schaller tuners. It plays and sounds wonderful with a woody, throaty resonance, and can cop Fender as well as Gibson tones. I know of one G-base site that advertises "Hamer makes the best Gibsons."

 

Also on the Gibson theme, I prefer my 2001 Washburn Custom Shop P4 with its superior balance, Sperzel locking tuners, roller bridge (no it doesn't rattle or rob sustain), jumbo frets, sweet neck with an Ebony board, fine tuners and Buzz Feiten Tuning System to any LP I've laid my grubs on. Just a really fine sounding and playing instrument with great tonal complexity.

 

Between the original Bakers, Hamers, Max, Edwards, etc., etc., there are alot of fine LP types without the Gibson mark IMO. Actually, my favorite Gibson is the 335 which I don't believe has ever been improved upon.

[steve_man]

If imitation is the greatest form of flattery, then the Strat, Tele, and LP should all be blushing. Why does every other guitar brand out there try to copy these great guitars? Because they are great guitars. Yeah, some folks have to be different. However, I don't understand trying to reinvent the wheel. Fender and

Gibson both make some killer guitars. Buying a cheap Ibanez copy of the Les Paul only seems like a good idea for a budget-level player.

 

There is a reason why the top pros keep coming back to Fender and Gibson. They have a corner on the market when it comes to great sounding gear. Carvin, PRS, G&L, Ibanez, etc. can all make whatever they want. However, none of them will ever be a Strat. If you want that unique Strat sound and feel...NOTHING replicates it.

[geddins81]

I don't think there IS a copy that is "better" than the original...if it were, it'd not be a "copy". There may be some mutants out there that are better in some people's minds though....remember...all this "better" talk is extremely subjective. If we all had the same tastes and likes and financial wherewithall we'd not be unique.

 

Live and let live, I say...play what you love, and love what you play.

[Hard Truth]

I consider my American Deluxe Telecaster to be a significant upgrade to the traditional Teles due to the low noise pickups and the contours. When I was buying I tried and seriously considered several G&L and Fender teles, but the Fender American Deluxe was the one i bought and kept.

[Drock]

Suhr, Anderson, Mike Lull

[RockRocket]

 

If imitation is the greatest form of flattery, then the Strat, Tele, and LP should all be blushing. Why does every other guitar brand out there try to copy these great guitars? Because they are great guitars.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that those are not great guitars, but it does not really matter, they copy it just because those are the most famous guitars, and something based on that is what will sell the most..

[Edward]

If imitation is the greatest form of flattery, then the Strat, Tele, and LP should all be blushing. Why does every other guitar brand out there try to copy these great guitars? Because they are great guitars. Yeah, some folks have to be different. However, I don't understand trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

I disagree somewhat with this.... the real reason there are so many copies is the inherent conservatism in the marketplace. Even among folks who aren't beholden by loyalty to notions of tradition / heritage / "the original" / etc that cause them to refuse anything that is not a fender / Gibson / whatever, look how many of them will still look down on the alternatives, no matter how well made, how well they play or how good they sound, because they have the "wrong" body or headstock shape... Rock and roll and guitar players might like to think of themselves as societal rebels, non-conformists, or whatever, but the reality is that the majority of the guitar buying market is hideously conservative and wants only more of the same, not anything new.

 

Fender and Gibson both make some killer guitars. Buying a cheap Ibanez copy of the Les Paul only seems like a good idea for a budget-level player.

 

There are many makers out there producing "copies" that are every bit as good as the big brand originals - they're not all budget pieces. Cheaper, often, yes - but that's not necessarily a sign of lesser quality. In many cases all it means is you're not paying the premium that a brand name like Gibson can command.

 

 

 

There is a reason why the top pros keep coming back to Fender and Gibson. They have a corner on the market when it comes to great sounding gear.

 

Total, unadulterated nonsense.

 

 

Carvin, PRS, G&L, Ibanez, etc. can all make whatever they want. However, none of them will ever be a Strat. If you want that unique Strat sound and feel...NOTHING replicates it.

 

You must be a marketing man's wet dream.... In any case, what exactly is "that unique Strat sound and feel"? Leaving completely aside the absurdity of the notion that only Fender can recreate a specific sound, last I looked, Fender had dozens of Strats in their catalogue, all very different. Are you telling me that there is nothing other than cosmetic difference between those, and they all sound the same - like a Fender Strat? Or which one of them has the right "unique sound"? If they do all sound as different as the many combinations of hardware and pups Fender produces allows, then only one of them can be right, so to follow your logic, even Fender get it wrong more often than they get it right.

 

Nothing comes close to a great Strat, that's true (well, aside from a better tele, maybe ).... and I've played a fair few. Not all of them had "Fender" written on the headstock. Funny thing is, no two of them sounded quite identical either, though some sounded more alike than others. There was no correlation whatever between those that sounded closer to each other than others and the presence of the Fender brand.