Uh oh, has anyone seen this yet?

[emperor_black]

Well, alot of people have raved about their Agile LP copies, so they can't ALL be terrible. I think you have to say toward the more expensive ones, though.

...and Gibson inturn have been trying to copy off of Agile LP copies. You see all those bad fretwork and poor workmanship in the newer gibson guitars...Copycats! its a never-ending cycle.

[mattsmusiccenter]

[slayer]

They are kinda close on this. Make it a more classic King V style, get rid of the chrome hardware for all black and tweak the headstock a little. Actually, when Rondo first brought out the cheap SX guitars, they were horrible in quality, but looked great. Now they are afraid to copy anything and they look worse, but the quality has gone up, at least on the Agile stuff. I owned one of their original LP, Tele and Explorer knockoffs. They had the look, but the quality was very iffy.

Jack

[slash-ed]

I think that looks pretty cool except for the headstock. The inlays are cheesy? Tell that to Tony Iommi

[JetFixxxer]

They are having a sale at rondo?

http://www.rondomusic.com/al2000te.html

http://www.rondomusic.com/al2000spalted.html

Thought these were a 100.00 bucks more.

[skorb]

+1

[Flametop]

Agiles from a few years back were pretty decent guitars for the money. Then they seemed to go to crap. I think they started having FMIC make them or something...

[jaydog]

pos

[charvelguy]

wow, that is freakin bargain for those features. I use quite a few Korean made guitars as I tend to bang em up anyways when they're out getting used.

I can imagine its probably Samick quality overall, but ya never know, I do find some exceptional cheapos from time to time.

[zeegler]

wow, that is freakin bargain for those features. I use quite a few Korean made guitars as I tend to bang em up anyways when they're out getting used.

I can imagine its probably Samick quality overall, but ya never know, I do find some exceptional cheapos from time to time.

Samick used to build pretty much all the Ibanez guitars ya know.

I've played a few of the guitars from Rondo. A friend of mine bought one of the original Ghost models (Explorer shape). Other than a small sag in the paint, the guitar was of remarkable quality, considering it was $200. The frets were finished nicely, and it played well. I would say that the worst thing their lower end guitars suffer from is cheap hardware. I have a couple of their super cheap SX guitars that I bought to play around with. The tuners were iffy, the pickups sounded cheap, and the pots were all bargain basement too. Once I switched some parts, they both became very decent guitars.

I'm sure this V, having EMGs and Grover tuners, doesn't suffer from that same problem. The Floyd looks cheap, but it's probably no worse than what you would get on a Jackson in the same price range.

I think the inlays are fucking cool.

[zeegler]

Garbage. You get what you pay for...

So you've played one then?

Didn't think so. You're saying that because it doesn't say Jackson on the headstock, or some other supposedly high end guitar company. Elitism in its truest form.

You definitely don't always get what you pay for. Somtimes you do, but brand names are the great un-equalizer. Take 2 identical guitars, put a no-name logo on one, and a Jackson/Gibson/Fender/etc.. logo on the other, and I guarantee you can sell the name branded one for more. Plus, many idiots will percieve the branded one as a better quality guitar.

[Rich#6]

I love it! except for the double cross inlays at 12 and 24.

[CharvelRocker]

I would love one of those, but the cross inlays totally kill it for me. I could even get past the trem as long as it would last long enough for me to buy an OFR to put in it.

[Coyote]

So you've played one then?

Didn't think so. You're saying that because it doesn't say Jackson on the headstock, or some other supposedly high end guitar company. Elitism in its truest form.

You definitely don't always get what you pay for. Somtimes you do, but brand names are the great un-equalizer. Take 2 identical guitars, put a no-name logo on one, and a Jackson/Gibson/Fender/etc.. logo on the other, and I guarantee you can sell the name branded one for more. Plus, many idiots will percieve the branded one as a better quality guitar.

#1.

I put together a Fender and it's not printed Fender on the head stock and a friend of mine he said it's just a piece of Junk and it's just a squier just because it's not printed Fender it's the dumbest thing I've ever herd just because it's not a name brand means it's junk I think new Gibson's are junker then any thing else you can buy.

But that just might be me but I don't think so.


I'd go for it looks great to me.

[Racerx2k]

So you've played one then?

Didn't think so. You're saying that because it doesn't say Jackson on the headstock, or some other supposedly high end guitar company. Elitism in its truest form.

You definitely don't always get what you pay for. Somtimes you do, but brand names are the great un-equalizer. Take 2 identical guitars, put a no-name logo on one, and a Jackson/Gibson/Fender/etc.. logo on the other, and I guarantee you can sell the name branded one for more. Plus, many idiots will percieve the branded one as a better quality guitar.

Amen, Zeeg, Amen.