Whoa! Guitar Player Reviews Agile Harm 1 Semi-Hollow FG

[fuzzy4dice]

Yeah, you're right Polaris.

 

I think everyone is just frustrated that the Agiles, and SX's are carrying the cross for the wishes of "bad reviews".

 

But, again, the Agile review wasn't even that bad.

 

If you want to blame someone, blame whoever is sending these things out for review with bad playability.

 

Kurt?

 

(gasp)

 

I mean, I don't care. It's not my brand of guitar, and I'm not making money off of it. But if he knew they were going out for review then they should have been painstakingly set-up by his in-house set-up guys.

 

And if they were, then those guys are not doing a good job.

 

Then it should have been packed in 8 boxes, and buried in baby's breath and silken shrouds.

 

I mean, a review in GP is that important. And, to blow it is a big waste.

[ExtraGum]

I'd like to say that I'm against having a "pro setup" done on guitars prior to review.

 

Can you imagine the disappointment when people rush out and buy the guitars you review and they don't play nearly as well as reviewed? To tell consumers to get a "pro setup" to match the instrument as reviewed is beside the point--I'd say many, if not most players do not have access to a trustworthy and competent tech--certainly not one who can tackle fret-dressing on a $300 guitar at a price that makes economic sense.

 

So I think accuracy and honesty demand you review instruments as received.

[fuzzy4dice]

 

Originally posted by ExtraGum I'd like to say that I'm against having a "pro setup" done on guitars prior to review. Can you imagine the disappointment when people rush out and buy the guitars you review and they don't play nearly as well as reviewed? To tell consumers to get a "pro setup" to match the instrument as reviewed is beside the point--I'd say many, if not most players do not have access to a trustworthy and competent tech--certainly not one who can tackle fret-dressing on a $300 guitar at a price that makes economic sense. So I think accuracy and honesty demand you review instruments as received.

 

 

+1

[Mr. Brady]

I agree with ExtraGum. I want to know if the guitar plays good out of the box or if I should expect to need to pony up and get a setup after I buy the guitar.

 

I think if a guitar being reviewed needs a setup that should be stated in the review, but I would also like to know how it performs once setup correctly. In my personal experience a poorly setup guitar that is difficult to play alters my perception of the instrument far more than anything else.

 

In the end it's probably impossible to keep some bias completely out of any article or have a completely objective rating scale. Guitar tastes and tone preferences are very subjective, but if you only stick to the quantifiably measurable performance of a guitar you'd likely end up with a useless review to most folks as well. What's more you have completely different expectations when buying an Agile vs a Gibson Historic reissue. I'd rate my Agile high for the money I paid for it, but a $2500 Gibson better be damn perfect to get the same rating or better.

 

A good mix of the objective and subjective performance would be the most helpful review with clear ways to distinguish the reviewers opinions formed from experience and music tastes and measurable performance of the guitar, such as action, fit and finish, intonation, and tuning stability.