Veneers hurting true flame

[clane04]

I know many covet a highly figured top, and I do think they are beautiful. I just see so many asian made guitars with figured veneers that (atleast to me) it takes away from the guitars that have a truly figured top.

Does any one else experience this?

I think this is part of the reason many guitarist buy asian over american guitars. Look at the price, then look at the guitars, and at first glance they look similar. Until of course you really see whats inside.

I don't know, just a crazy idea of mine. And just so no one can call me out on it, I AM A CORKSNIFFER.

[thedonutman]

Originally Posted by clane04

I don't know, just a crazy idea of mine. And just so no one can call me out on it, I AM A CORKSNIFFER.

Yes, yes you are.

The scary thing is, I can see exactly where you're coming from. I must be turning into a corksniffer too!

[Stonesy]

Do you think these veneers will last? On another thread they took the veneer off and the wood inside could have been coconut wood.

[dwagar]

I think most of them aren't even veneers, they are photoflames.

There's nothing wrong with a nice veneered guitar, PRS did some nice veneer work a few years ago, maybe they still do. And I've seen some nice veneer tops over 50's LPs to give them the flametop look.

A maple cap isn't on a Les Paul just for looks, it's there for tone.

Anyway, the guys that are buying Asian guitars aren't fooling anyone, except maybe themselves for a few minutes.

[drftrman]

There was a time when a nicely flamed or quilted instrument was the epitome of quality and class. With the influx of the Asian veneers the perception of these high quality instruments has been cheapened to a point where we see that look on everything. No matter the quality or price point.

At least that's the way I see it.

[kspeed]

PRS only uses veneers on their SE lineup, not their USA made instruments. Ibanez has use photo flames in the past, but is sticking with veneers now.

[dcooper830]

I see no value in being a corksniffer.

It's just a way to get on an internet forum and place yourself above others who haven't spent as much money on a guitar as you have.

I have Gibsons and Epiphones and they're all great guitars.

My veneered Epis look just as beautiful as my real flamed Gibsons to me.

Just my opinion, but I think it's ridiculous to suggest that a veneered Asian guitar detracts from the beauty of a real flame topped U.S.A. guitar.

[clane04]

Originally Posted by dcooper830

I see no value in being a corksniffer.

It's just a way to get on an internet forum and place yourself above others who haven't spent as much money on a guitar as you have.

I have Gibsons and Epiphones and they're all great guitars.

My veneered Epis look just as beautiful as my real flamed Gibsons to me.

Just my opinion, but I think it's ridiculous to suggest that a veneered Asian guitar detracts from the beauty of a real flame topped U.S.A. guitar.

I'm not trying to cut anyone down by putting myself above others. I have owned a variety of guitar brands as well. I was not always in a position to afford Gibsons (I am lucky to have came across the ones I have.) I know Gibson's are not for everyone. Gibson's just happen to be a guitar brand I am very fond of. I also am a big fan of Carvin, Mcinturf (though I have yet to own one personally), and Taylor guitars.

I also did not say that veneers were any less beautiful than real flame top.

I just think with so many manufacturers (usually Asian ) have put out so many veneered flamed tops that they now are common place and have detracted from the true beauty of real flame top guitars (whether it be Gibson or any number of other brands).

I still stand by being a corksniffer because I love the beauty and sound of Gibson guitars.

[dcooper830]

Originally Posted by clane04

...... I love the beauty and sound of Gibson guitars.

Well that's one thing we can agree on!! I'm with you a million percent there!




.

[dspelman]

Originally Posted by clane04

I know many covet a highly figured top, and I do think they are beautiful. I just see so many asian made guitars with figured veneers that (atleast to me) it takes away from the guitars that have a truly figured top.

Does any one else experience this?

I think this is part of the reason many guitarist buy asian over american guitars. Look at the price, then look at the guitars, and at first glance they look similar. Until of course you really see whats inside.

1. I don't think this has anything to do with asian over american guitars. Carvin uses MUCH better woods and has gorgeous tops (same thickness as Gibson) and kicks Gibson's butt with prices, even though each guitar is essentially custom. Taylor is another company that has some amazing (solid) woods in its guitars. Both very much american made.

2. Most folks buy flame/quilt tops for the looks anyway. You actually get a better book match with a veneer than you do with a 3/4" top carved down to the shape of a LP top. You really only run into a problem if you need to refinish your guitar.

3. Tone really isn't an issue -- Gibson uses maple tops mostly because it always has and because some customers expect it. Plain maple tops are often a different (denser) species of maple than figured tops. More important to tonal concerns *has* to be the wide open spaces underneath that top. You mentioned "after you see what's inside." In a Gibson LP, it's often airspace.

4. Gibson charges silly money for its tops and gives you little in return. Agile will make you a guitar in solid mahogany with a veneer top. Or it will make you a guitar with a solid 3/4 maple top (with a veneer over that) for an extra $100. Give them $100 more and that 3/4" maple top will be figure all the way though. Carvin's CS6 (with a full 20mm figured top) is $280 more than their plain top CS4, and that top will be kick butt stunning gorgeous and the whole guitar will run you $1349 and will likely play better out of the box than a gibson LP. I asked for a really good tight flame top on an Axcess and was told the total would be $5760 (I could have a standard Axcess for around $2300 less).


5. What it boils down to is this: Asian and other American guitar builders *both* charge what a flame (or quilt) top (or veneer) is truly worth. I think the question you *should* have posed in the original post is "How did I get suckered into paying so much for a hunk of flamed maple when clearly no one else in the guitar industry thinks it's worth that much?"

Cork sniffing is its own reward. You get to pay more money for less guitar and have less cash left in your pocket.

The ultimate cork sniffers are the ones out there spending their asses off buying just the right authentic-looking hunk of plastic to tack onto just the right authentic-looking hunks of wood and steel that will NEVER BE AUTHENTIC. It will never be the real thing. I understand the collector market -- I have three LPs that are collector items, and they're treated as such. They're the real things, like rare Barbie dolls or letters from Jefferson to his slave/mistress. But building a replica guitar, car,etc., while an interesting end in its own right and a worthy thing to do, *can* get expensive, and NO one has ever claimed you see the money back from your endeavor. It's never the real thing, after all.

But watching cork sniffing around a company like Gibson that's made 100 different models of its cash-cow LP, that spends HUGE amounts building, marketing and protecting rock and roll myths just tickles me. I keep thinking of the story of The Emperor's New Clothes. And I keep thinking of PT Barnum.

[clane04]

Perhaps, I have the wrong definition of corksniffing then. I think there are great companies out there that surpass Gibson in some regards as Dspelman had pointed out. I do think Gibsons are beautiful instruments, but I have not bought a "brand new" one nor would I justify spending huge amount of cash on one if the purchase couldn't be justified. I also have only one with flame, just a regular standard.

Im not trying to defend flame tops, all I'm trying to say is that for me personally flame tops don't carry the high regard that many put on them, and I believe it is because I have seen so many manufacturers put out veneers and such. Just seeing if anyone else feels the same.

[guitarfish]

What's the difference between a veneer & a photoflame?

[The_Sentry]

OP: Is the implication of this thread: "The faux flames look so nice..it detracts from my real flametop?"

[dennistruckdriver]

Veneer is fine, as long as it is placed over a QUALITY top! Veneer over particle-board is not acceptable!

[snaredrum]

Originally Posted by clane04

I just think with so many manufacturers (usually Asian ) have put out so many veneered flamed tops that they now are common place and have detracted from the true beauty of real flame top guitars (whether it be Gibson or any number of other brands).

I still stand by being a corksniffer because I love the beauty and sound of Gibson guitars.

i'd always agree that a gibson sounds better, but as an owner of several asian flame guitars, they're usually the chevron pattern that isn't what a great flame gibson looks like anyway. i don't think a detraction takes place, and i'd argue that it's the opposite.

[snaredrum]

Originally Posted by dennistruckdriver

Veneer is fine, as long as it is placed over a QUALITY top! Veneer over particle-board is not acceptable!

i feel proud to give dennis the first

+1

i've ever given him. best time to do it as well, apparently

[BurstAddict]

I'm assuming these aren't even veneers, they're most probably "photo flames", basically just pictures with a clear coat, judging by how "perfect" they look for being relatively cheap.

[Jason]

I've always associated flames with cheap guitars. I can't help it, all the guitars that I first saw with flames were imports with veneers or cheapo photoflames. They were also usually in very bright, unnatural colors.

[dennistruckdriver]

Originally Posted by snaredrum

i feel proud to give dennis the first
+1
i've ever given him. best time to do it as well, apparently

Awww....

[clane04]

Originally Posted by Jason

I've always associated flames with cheap guitars. I can't help it, all the guitars that I first saw with flames were imports with veneers or cheapo photoflames. They were also usually in very bright, unnatural colors.

This is what I was trying to get at, just went about it the wrong way. Flame tops are considered by many to be classy, but to me with so many out there on such a variety of guitars I think it loses its initial appeal.

[snaredrum]

Originally Posted by dennistruckdriver

Awww....

de nada

[Jason]

Originally Posted by clane04

This is what I was trying to get at, just went about it the wrong way. Flame tops are considered by many to be classy, but to me with so many out there on such a variety of guitars I think it loses its initial appeal.

I agree. Some pretty flameage is not a guarantee of quality. If I think about it a little more though, I think some of it is also because of the TYPE of cheap guitars you see them on. They're often very pointy and flamboyant "metal" guitars, that are just tacky looking to me.

[River]

I missed the whole flamey-cheap-guitar period, yet I still find major flameage less appealing than subtle - the kind you can see in this light but not in that.

But if I did covet it, I wouldn't really care if it were veneer or solid. If I wanted a thick-maple topped guitar with great flameage and could only get it with veneer, fine. Some of the finest, most expensive woodwork in human history has been crafted from veneer.



If I wanted a flat or carved mahogany top instead of maple, but still wanted flameage, I'd be fine with a beautiful veneer over the mahogany.

My only problem with veneer is having to use a coaster.

[Jason]

Good perspective, River. Speaking of fine artistic uses for veneers... Marquetry is pretty cool:

[clane04]

Originally Posted by River

My only problem with veneer is having to use a coaster.

I believe that should sum it up.

[docadillac]

Originally Posted by dennistruckdriver

Veneer is fine, as long as it is placed over a QUALITY top! Veneer over particle-board is not acceptable!

You make an excellent point Dennis. I have seen good quality veneers on top of good quality woods last for many years. There are poor quality woods and veneers which just don't last. I do understand the OP's point of view with regards to the photo and veneer tops diminishing the value of a true flametop. It should be the opposite however I think as the real deal should become ever more valuable as imitations flood the market.

[River]

Originally Posted by dennistruckdriver

Veneer is fine, as long as it is placed over a QUALITY top! Veneer over particle-board is not acceptable!

But acceptable for what? I've seen and heard a great guitarist (Kim Simmonds) play paint over particleboard and kick (most of) our asses from here to the goal line and back again.



It's not acceptable as a rip-off substitute when someone believes they're paying for something "better", but that doesn't make it unacceptable for making great music. If Jimmy Page can play Danelectro and Kim Simmonds can play WalMart - I can play veneer. As long as I get what I paid for, I'm cool.

[weirdotis]

To me, a veneer always meant that you can't find wood that has flame on it, so you use particle board and .00005 inch veneer. But I'm now realizing that who cares as long as ALL the wood is quality?

[Jason]

All you guys who are saying "Who cares, as long as the wood is good?" are missing the point. The discussion was intended to be about whether or not the widespread use of veneers has made solid flame tops seem not so special anymore. The intent was not to argue whether or not veneers are cool. Not trying to be a dick... just sayin'...

[River]

Originally Posted by Jason

All you guys who are saying "Who cares, as long as the wood is good?" are missing the point. The discussion was intended to be about whether or not the widespread use of veneers has made solid flame tops seem not so special anymore. The intent was not to argue whether or not veneers are cool. Not trying to be a dick... just sayin'...

Point taken, spoilsport.

You can't be a Dick - your first name's not Richard. Being a Dick takes qualifications - can ve see ur paperz? Und zay must be orrrriginalz!