MakeShift
As a young Lad, I played what ever guitar I could afford and get my hands on. Now I play what guitar feels the best in my hands and gets me to my tone the quickest, price is not as big a deal. Give me a Fender, Gibson, PRS, and what ever amp you like; I will still dial in my tone.....even if I have to stick a pedal in front of it.

...and THAT is the truth !!!!
J

Those are nice guitars there though, tbosco!

 
Too good for me I suppose though.
 

jbow
However, no matter what guitar I play or what amp I play use, I still sound like me.

Reminds me of the story where Eddie Van Halen and Ted Nugent were both set up somewhere (don't recall if it was for a concert or in a studio).  Regardless, each tried out the other's setup and both ended up sounding exactly like they normally do!  I also remember a story Walter Trout told me about how SRV started out playing through one amp (a Fender Twin?) then evolved to this complex combination of ten(!) different amps and yet he ended up sounding pretty much the same as he did with the one amp.  Heh.

So if tone comes from the fingers, then Iommi is doing more with less, ya?

That's Django, ya?

I am curious. If you are buying a Fender or Gibson, especially the expensive ones, are you buying because...
 
1) They are just better guitars?
2) Your guitar hero plays one?
3) Your non-guitar playing friends/fans have at least heard of Gibson and Fender?
4) Resale value?
5) ?
 
I don't think there is a right or wrong answer, I am just curious as to what the fascination with these brands are.
 
I have played a Strat in a store a few times and I just played on my first Les Paul a few weeks ago. Nice guitars, I just don't own any of them.
 
BTW I am not in the music business and am not conducting market research for anyone lol :-)

>As for now, I completely agree that Gibson's popularity has dropped a lot but IMO that's easily due to their over-inflated prices and underachieving quality control!<
 
A sure recipe for bankruptcy! (We'll never die! We're too much in love with ourselves!) 
 
>what a sweet sound of seventies... "This era was so awesome, even the instruments smoked..."<
 
The 60s and 70s were phenomenal times musically for reasons I am not allowed to divulge here (sworn to secrecy), and will never be repeated. It's a shame that they were the foundation for the ____ we have today.

I don't know, I think the prices between Fenders and Gibson's is all relative. Epiphones pretty much cover the Fender Squire and MIM Fender market. Lower end Gibson LP Studios are about equivalent to the American and American Deluxe Fender USA models. I would expect Gibson LP Standards to be a little higher price because of the mahogany wood in the bodies and necks, the maple cap wood on the bodies, binding, inlays and neck through construction. There is more expensive wood in a LP and more labor involved in this style of production. I have seen Custom Shop Strats that go for 2-3K.

I bought my first Gibson LP Standard back in 1982, seems like I remember paying right around $1,000 for it new back then. Today that guitar sells new for $2,500. What doesn't sell for more now 30 years later? Houses have at least doubled in price. Cars, boats, motorcycles, etc, have all gone up in price in the last 30 years.

How ever, if I still owned that LP Standard that I bought in 1982 today, I bet I could get almost twice what I paid for it today. I bought my Rickenbacker Bass 4003 for $950 new back in 2001 and the are selling for $1,800- 2,000 new today. That's the advantage in my mind to buying a quality instrument. They become vintage in time.

The best bang for your buck these days is buying that high end instrument on the used market. I have seen a lot of steals out there lately if I just had the extra cash on hand, this is a used buyers market right now.

And I think a few months ago someone put up a link to plastic guitars made with not a solid plastic body but designed bodies that cost at least $3500 some probably more. So cherish that wood, because there may be only 3-d printer guitars in the future that still cost $5000 or more or whatever due to whatever like living on this Planet.

 
Plastic!
 

Really? Wood will cost more, since plantation wood and trees to be good need 25 years to grow first. (usually  I think that is what they hope for).
 
And how many guitars do you think they make in a year? Report has it that 220 guitars are made a day, only 40 for the hollow-bodies or semi-hollow bodies guitars. Yearly that is somewhere around 120,000 guitars of all the models made in a year.
 
http://www.guitardaterproject.org/gibson.aspx
 
Now, I suppose Epiphone would perhaps make more a day, but the wood used in any made guitar has to be only certain wood, not any ol' wood.
So, I am sure the facts can be looked up somewhere, but when the Big Arm of the we-all-know-who says it is a limited resource and will have more laws of that effect (like the Lacey Act) then perhaps things will change.
 
No, I do not know the future and wood is used for many, many, many things and still there is plastic also in the furniture world and other things making the furniture instead of just wood, and that still leaves the question of the quality of wood and how guitars will be made. Sure it may not add up to all the total amount of wood used in the world and only a small part, but then 2x4's I don't think would make a quality guitar.
 
http://www.guitardaterproject.org/factoryList.aspx
 
Perhaps more like a 100,000 guitars if that (50,000) in a year.
 

The Strat sound is very thin and crisp, single coils tend to accentuate the upper range.
LP - Humbuckers are thicker and fatter, so as everyone said...it's a matter of the sound
you're after.
 
i.e. No one would argue that David Gilmour's sound was bad...he had an incredibly BIG sound (due to his
FX chain) coming out of his strats...

Same with LP's....there are myriads of players and examples of GREAT SOUND from them.

The increase in popularity of a Guitar is directly reflect by "who" is endorsing them at the moment,
to a great extent, but not always.  And also, in the case of used, who "owned" them.

That being said....Gibsons and PRS's are OUT THERE in price...as much as $15,000
Strats are less expensive, (still can be as much as $5,000) still do the job, howbeit just differently.

Guitars have an "enigma" that drives price...just as "Diamonds" or "Gold" or anything else...while technically they're
only worth as much as they cost to make...we attach "intrinsic" value based on our "perception"
It's called "marketing" and it IS quite the "Racket"....

And, as Paul Harvey says, THAT is the rest of the story...

As previously mentioned, Fender guitars can be found in the same price range as Gibson. Here's a strat selling for close to $9000.
 
http://www.musiciansfriend.com/guitars/fender-custom-shop-1957-stratocaster-relic-gold-hardware-electric-guitar-master-built-by-dale-wilson/h78394
 
Sweetwater had a Telecaster selling for $9600 earlier this week.
 
 
I think that the "overprice" stigmata comes from the fact that the basic "flagship" guitars tend to be less expensive on Fender's side. A Standard American start goes for what these days? $1000? Whereas a Les Paul Standard will probably cost you $2500.
 
Now, that's just my opinion, but, it isn't really fait to compare a standard Tele with a standard Les Paul, w/ its carved top, the binding, the set neck, etc... Comparing it to a SG would already be a bit more fair. And the price of a SG is already closer to that of a Tele. (you can grab a standard SG for a bit more than $1000 right now).
 
Nevertheless, I must have half a dozen friends who cut their teeth building Teles, and some of them got very very good and could build me one for a few hundred $. Only one of them builds SGs and he is an actual luthier. Les Pauls I haven't seen.

I have to agree with Spacey that the...which is better...Fender or Gibson, question is a silly agruement.  They are both very fine instruments (tools) in the hands of any professional musician.  They are 2 flavors in which to choose from.  Up until a couple of years ago, I owned both and used both based on the needs.  I traded my American Deluxe Strat straight up for a Gibson LP Studio, so that tells you right there that they are equivilant instruments.  I miss the Strat often, but Gibson's 24-3/4 scale works better for me, my hands and my tone.  It's like asking which ice cream is better, vanilla or chocolate. 
 
I have been under the ussumption through out this thread that we are talking about electrics; because its no contest with acoustics.  I am not, by the way, a fan of Gibson acoustics.  I'm a Martin guy all the way there. 
 
What I don't agree with, is when people say Gibson's are over priced.  I think they can get what the market bears.  I have seen them lower their prices lately because of the poor economy.  They do have brand recognition, similar to PRS or even Rickenbacker for that matter.  I think it is humorous that Les Paul's (the man) first electric guitar that he produced was called "The Plank", or something like that. It was litterally a plank of wood with stings and a pick up.  I bet the materials in that guitar were not very expensive.  I do guess that a lot of time went into the R&D side of that "Plank", however.
 
Spacey may say that I am wrong, and I would stand corrected, but I would venture to guess that more expensive materials go into a Standard Les Paul as compared to a Standard Strat and that there is more labor required to build the Les Paul.  The LP has a mahagany body with a thick maple cap.  It has a carved face to the top of the body and has inlay and usually book matched maple.  The necks are more intricate with the trapezoid inlays, binding, and often inlayed Gibson logos.  The solid body, neck through construction has to be a little more time consuming than a bolt on neck.  I have worked around and managed Carpenters for over 30 years; I often have to estimate the projects that they work on.  I know that I would estimate a Gibson Les Paul to require more expensive woods, labor and CNC tooling than a typical Fender Strat.
 
If you were to look at it this way.  If the instrument sells for $2,500 and you want to make a 50% cost margin on the job.  Your total cost to produce the instrument would have to be $1,250.  If you say that $625 of that cost is for materials and $625 for labor, break that down.  If you as a Luthier were to make $20 and hour, you could put 31.25 hours into the build.  Painting the guitar alone has to take some time and that does n't even include dry time...what about sanding between multiple coats.  How many coats...5..6...8?  What about materials, 2 humbucker pickups would be a couple hundred dollars.  The reason that MIM Strats and Epiphones cost less is because they have gone to cheaper labor in other countries, along with cheaper materials.  The pickups that are in an Epiphone LP are not of the same sound quality that are in actual Gibson pick ups.  Same with Fender pick ups.  The pick ups that come in a MIM are not equvilant to Fender Noiseless pickups.  It comes down to cost of materials, cost of labor and profit margin.  Gibson, Fender, Taylor, Martin, Rickenbacker, etc... are all in business to stay in business and to make money.  All have longevity in a tough competative market.
 
And as I mentioned earlier, me personally, I buy instruments somewhat for the brand recognition because they are easier to sell or trade and get value back out of the instrument.  I have owned Carvin guitars and amps.  Great stuff, high quality...but they don't have the same type of resale value.  Unless you buy one that has been in the hands of some one famous...like our own Danny D. 

Why is bacon less popular than becan these days?

 
Turkey becan is definately less popular with me. 
 
Here is something related to musical instruments that I am struggling with myself right now.  My daughter plays violin and is pretty good at it.  She keeps making ALL City honors and other awards.  She starts highschool next year and she is already being tutored by the highschool music director.  He has said she had by far out grown the $500 violin she is currently playing.  We went to the "fiddle shop"...oh how my daughter hates it when I call it a fiddle...and they sent us home with 3 instruments to try out.  The low range is $2,200, the middle one $2,400 and the best sounding one on the wall, though not the most expensive, is $2,699.  Tell me you don't look at that tiny little violin and say...how can a fiddle cost $2,699. 
 
The highschool teacher happens to be a luthier and makes violins and cello's.  He has offered to build us one at cost, for $1,500 that he said would be every bit, worth the 1,500 cost and a better instrument.  He said that he does this sometimes for his students that are very promising talents and he doesn't really build violins to make money.  He is known for his cellos and sells them to some of the local music stores.  We borrowed one of his and had it looked at.  They said is was a very fine instrument.  I am leaning towards the custom build at cost, but here again the question has come up between myself and my wife....what about resale?

I don't know much about violins, but if they're anything like guitars, paying for brand name is not as pointless as people make it seem. And not just in terms of resale value.
 
When you buy an instrument from a well established brand like Gibson or Fender, not only can you count on resale value, but if the guy who put your Les Paul together is hit by a bus tomorrow, it won't make a difference for you. Operations will go on, you warranty will still be valid, replacement parts will probably still be available.
 
If you move to a different state or even to a different country, you're likely to be able to find an authorized reseller if you should need - unless you're moving to the little town where I grew up. ;)
 
This is in no way meant to put down custom instruments as there are also many reasons why one might want to go custom instead. But there's more to "paying for the name" than just throwing away your money.