Jackson Prices vs. Peoples attitude

[Guitardude86]

I agree completely. but...

We live in a day and age where status seems to be more important then substance. It's not a matter of how much money to actually costs to make a great guitar, it's about how it's percieved. I think do to the Ed Romans, and Gibsons, have made people think that to get a quality instrument you have to pay 3k for it or else you're playing something that's below everything else. I by no means think it's right, like I said I don't think the price tag makes the guitar.

And again a disclaimer - I'm not saying Ed and Gibson are bad, they are a business and need to make money to stay in business.

Hey dude, when I said "you" I meant people in general, not YOU personally Just felt I had to clear that up

[Special-K]

Big money = good guitar?.... you= STUPID!...

Also a cheap guitar can be a good guitar...
Not always...but, in the price range from $400-$600 the differences
aren`t so big in my opinion...

I think by Jackson, you get what you pay (or even more)...
Gibson you basically pay almost 40% of the price for the name (GIBSON)..
So Fender, by Fender maybe even more than 40%...
ESP/LTD...what can I say... I don`t know...The signature models are
way overpriced!...

[ABSOLUT CHARVEL]

my window of high end guitars never happen. when i was young, didn't have the money. got married, so the funds went to buy a house. then the kids arrived, and private school, braces, sports, dresses, etc... Now I get to look forward to collage and weddings. i guess when they are all gone, i will sell the house to down size so they can't move back in and move next to Fett in a trailer so build my guitar collection.

[Gartron]

I think price definatley adds to prestige when you start out, my first decent guitar was a Charvel model 3 , I bought that because i desperatley wanted a Jackson but couldn't afford one and too me Charvel was to Jackson what Squire was to Fender.

Much as I love my PC 3, I still think the Jackson name lost some of the wow factor when it started producing entry level models, however as a business decision it was probably very smart.

[tanpsi]

For alot of products people assume the more something cost, the better it is, so if you were a manager at Jackson, you might want to look into raising prices.

But I'm sure most people here hope Jacksons stay the good values they are now.

[GuitarWizard]

I will spend more money to get something more unique, I don't want the same guitar every kid on the block has, but there's a limit. Personaly I think Jackson is devaluating there product by having all the cheap imports ( I am refering to the JS 30 and such ) , when I picked up my first Jackson there was no import models Charvel was the cheaper alternative and they weren't that cheap. If you want to charge big dollars for your brand name then you shouldn't whore it out on junk.

[eakinj]

Hey dude, when I said "you" I meant people in general, not YOU personally Just felt I had to clear that up

Hehe, I figured

[Robert Burns]

I see alot of middle-aged guys like myself into higher-priced guitars.
As a rule there is more disposable imcome and at this age we really don't give a sh*t about what our wives think anymore.

I always wanted good guitars as a young'un but couldn't afford them- and now I'm lucky to be able to get (most) of those guitars.

It's a trend I think will continue as we turn into old farts too.

*************************
Right ON Strat God! If i can muster up the nerve later...i'll show this
post to my wife! :-0 (but your right...its just more disposable income)

[slayer]

Well, this middle aged Fart isn`t going to give more of my hard earned money to Jackson just becasue their corporates think I will give more just because I and others can They can try that all they want, but I ain`t falling for it Jack.

[xenophobe]

Obviously you are just looking to start an argument.

No I'm not.

Quality does not equal playability.

As has been noted above, a cheap guitar with poor workmanship, lack of labor intensive features and options can play much better than a really labor intensive and expensive guitar.

Model series Charvels are some of the best players out there. Many of them play better than USA Jacksons, which have higher quality wood selection, better finishes, and better components. The price difference is justified. The playability factor may not justify the price, but the price is justified for what you are actually purchasing.

Some people might say a Ferrari is no different than a Geo Metro, because both have four wheels and will get you to and from work, and hey the Geo is cheaper, more fuel efficient and cheaper to work on, so you're saying that the Geo is higher quality?

EDIT:

Let me add, binding or even binding over the frets (which is a substantial upcharge) is a feature that is not necessary, but adds to the overall quality of a guitar, even though it does not add or detract from the playability. Same can be said for real Mother of Pearl or Plastic inlays, or JT-6 over an Original Floyd Rose, neither one or the other will change playability, but will change the quality of the instrument...

[ABSOLUT CHARVEL]

Some people might say a Ferrari is no different than a Geo Metro, because both have four wheels and will get you to and from work, and hey the Geo is cheaper, more fuel efficient and cheaper to work on, so you're saying that the Geo is higher quality?

A Geo will not get you laid like a Farrari can ,,,,

[VitaminG]

Geo has more room inside for getting laid though.

[ABSOLUT CHARVEL]

but with the Geo, you can only get the fat chick .... so it is a wash..

[deeaa]

I've owned and own a lot of different guitars from authentic Gibsons to jap Charvels etc. and played a lot more, and honestly, these days I don't think quality equals price in many many cases.

You can't expect a 200-dollar new 'contemporary' guitar to be excellent usually, but you will always be finding 'pawnshop prizes' at really low money and great quality. In new ones you are usually looking at 500 bucks or so to get a decent instrument like Epiphones etc. and hope to find a good specimen. Still might need PU upgrades or so.

JCF side, I have a jap Jackson that rivals ANY guitar I've ever played at least when it comes to playability (upgraded pickups and put in a tremsetter) and a Charvette-based project that has excellent woods and one of the best necks I've seen...both better guitars than Charvel 1 and 3 were.

Otherwise, I have a Fenix strat body that sounds divine and I had a luthier build me a great neck for it (140), and I often come accross great guitars in 120-350 dollar range. For instance I saw am excellent Yamaha SG (those Les Paul doublecuts) the other day...was truly exceptional, blew away my Paul any day...at 350.

Guitars are no magical creatures; if they are built of good wood and to measurements, it's a question of fret filing and adjustments plus electronics to make them great guitars. I see no sense in dumping 1000+ dollars for any kind of guitar because at that price I can already have a luthier build me one exactly to my specs and I can partake and watch the process all the way through. And it will definitely be as good or better or ANYTHING available in stores. Hell, I could build a guitar myself that would be quite a nice instrument, but that'd take ages. Best left for professionals.

[PittJitsu]

A point to remember when any Co or its products increase or decrease is price is the clientèle, and the reputation that follows. I don't think anyone thinks of a BMW or Mercedes, and visualizes a long hair in mechanic blues driving it home after a long days work, greasy hands included. You think of a Wealthy person. Same goes with Guitars. Anyone here have a vision of a guy playing on the street for change holding a PRS with bird inlays? When When you Take the availability of Charvel Jackson Guitars out of the hands of "regular Musicians" and make them the tool of studios, trust fund babies and weekend warriors that do most of there shredding as lawyers, your in effect hurting the memory reputation of the company's. No longer with Megadeath, and Anthrax come to mind. Not unlike the Strat head division, the guitars will be thought of as those where then, and these are now. Nothing positive IMO