Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed422
Kind of in the order asked...
No, but lowest common denominator is about the best one could expect... until we start going into higher end entries. There I expect QC issues (including setup out of the box) to be better. Some of the higher end factory guitars (Martin, Taylor, Collings, etc.) are priced right there with small shop builders and I'd expect them to compare in workmanship and materials.
The retailer as knowledge source, yes. Except "we" as a customer base have collectively accepted the "best price" model. The manufacturer with higher QC, yes. Except "we" as a customer base... ...model and have proven that
Retailers who are passionate and still in business, yes. They are there but woefully far and few between.
I don't know the real numbers so these are just speculation, I'd bet the cheap low end guitars (sub $1000) equal (in dollars) the mid to high end guitars (i.e. over $1000) sold. The customer/player has spoken and the "system" has answered. Sadly.
ps: not arguing or saying it is right, just stating how I see it.
Ed
|
Sure.
My basic premise in all of this is to simply get things right.
A partial-fix is not a fix, and don't ask me to believe that it is, or to agree with anyone that good-enough is indeed good enough.
My opinion is that any guitar with a full retail of five-hundred dollars or more ought to come in better-than-good condition structurally, and to be able to take a fairly wide range of set-up preferences.
Mocking the need for full and proper set-ups? Denigrating a retailer that cares, that goes out of his way to get cool guitars in peoples hands? Please, don't bring that stuff to a guitar-forum.
On-topic: For the sake of the guitar-community, and in always hoping for cool, well-made guitars, I hope that Peavey does indeed get it right.
That's how I see it.