Monday, October 06, 2008

Are signature guitars worth the money?

Posted by Jon in • Cool Guitars

Ibanez JS1000
It used to be that you had to really earn a signature guitar by years of service to the music industry and by creating something unique. These days it seems you just need to be in a popular band in order to put your name on a guitar that is hardly any different to the original stock version. The guitar brands are cashing in, just check out Fender and ESP who have 25 and 22 signature guitars respectively.

So what makes a signature guitar worth buying? Well the original signature model was the Gibson Les Paul. Les Paul nailed his design so perfectly that in 50 years little has changed apart from hardware and production advances. The shape and finishes are still as they were. The only weird thing about the Les Paul is that it somehow became a model rather than a signature guitar which means that now you get signature Les Paul’s, a signature signature model! This is a way of Gibson constantly cashing in on the original by altering the neck profile or pickup selection slightly and brand it a Slash Les Paul, whack a nice fat price tag on it and watch the money pour in. So would I buy a Slash Les Paul, no probably not. Likewise with Fender, replace the pickups and scratch plate and call it a John Mayer Strat, bingo! Instant income from JM fans who could have bought an American strat and replaced the parts themselves and saved a few dollars.

Gibson Les Paul

What really makes a signature worth the money is when that guitar has been through a long development cycle with the guitarist yet isn’t just tailored to one individual. The Les Paul again is a perfect example of this, something that has been constantly refined for years and suits most guitarists and styles. What doesn’t make sense to me is a guitar such as the ESP Jeff Hanneman model http://www.espguitars.com/guitars_jeff.html which is basically a stock guitar with EMG’s and a fancy camo paint job, or maybe that is the point? Maybe the paint job IS the signature… some would probably argue this case, I personally think that this is a cop out. Similarly the Matt Bachand Ibanez signature really seems like a waste of money to me.

So why did I buy a signature guitar (pictured above)? Well for 2 reasons. Firstly I have been a fan of Ibanez guitars since I bought my RG550DX back in the early 90’s and secondly because I have been a fan of Joe Satriani for 20 years. AHA! I hear you say, you bought it because you were a fan, not because of the product development cycle! Wrong. That is exactly the reason I bought my JS1000. This guitar is something that has been refined for 20 years by Satch and used on tour year after year. Unlike Vai, Joe is happy to use new guitars not favour one old one in particular and this is the important factor. From the years of touring and studio recording Joe has sculpted what was once a humble Ibanez 540 Radius into something that is an incredibly versatile, comfortable and amazing sounding guitar. The multi-radius neck gives the guitar a vintage feel when you are playing in first position and yet makes shredding easy up the top end of the fretboard. The bridge pickup was designed by Joe. The ability to split the coils on both humbuckers enables all the clean and distorted tones you will ever need and if that wasn’t enough there is hi-pass filter when you pull the volume pot maintains high frequencies at low volumes which is a great feature. This guitar in my opinion is a perfect example of a Signature guitar and worth the money. In fact, they are actually pretty reasonably priced compared to the Ibanez JEM which in Australia will set you back $4,795.00!

In the end though it all comes down to personal preference and there are enough Dimebag and Randy Rhoads fans out there in order to keep Dean and Jackson flogging their signature models even after death. The Dimebag Signature series currently has 33 different models… I mean come on. I bet Fender are kicking themselves that they didn’t get a Jimi Hendrix Signature model out before his untimely death!

UPDATE: This article sparked quite a debate over at the Fender Discussion Page Forum where some very good points were made so I thought I would include a few that I agree with:

Fred132: The JM (John Mayer Signature Strat) had a combination of color & features not available elsewhere off the rack. - although you could modify a standard model this is a major point for a lot of people.
yellowrubberduck: if anyone buys or doesn’t buy a sig guitar because of the sig, they are not focused on the instrument - another good point, are you buying for the name or because you love the instrument?
A.M.G. You simply like the guitar the artist designed. - which comes back to the personal preference thing again.

A couple of people mention how they would buy their signature models (namely Jeff Beck and Robert Cray) even if they had no name on the headstock which is a sign of a great signature model.
Thanks to everyone over at FDP - Forum for continuing the discussion!

Recently on Guitar Noize

on 10/06 at 02:02 PM

I think the worst offenders are the Fender/EVH Frankenstein strat replicas that are around $25,000 (USD) new. A major selling point is that it includes a genuine 1972 US quarter. That’s great, where did the other $24,999.75 go?

It was kinda punk when Eddie did it, but what kind of poseur buys that guitar?

Jon on 10/06 at 04:31 PM

I know what you are saying Cam it does seem a lot of money for something that I think I remember Eddie referring to as a piece of crap and lets face it is but it looks cool. If money was no object then yeah I’d buy one but realistically money is always going to be an issue unless I win the lottery and just think how many nice guitars you could get for that much money!!

on 10/06 at 05:58 PM

I think your reasoning is sound, and agree that there are too many models out there that are basically paint jobs or decal/inlay variants.

As an aside and with respect to the JEM you mentioned, I think that model is sufficiently different from other Ibanez’s to be reasonable choice, pricing aside (I have one of these so I’m a little biased and perhaps overly defensive:))

Many of Ernie Ball’s signature range appear to be true to the classic idea of a signature guitar, in that their designs have been worked out to some extent with the artist (eg: Pettruci’s) or from the artist’s original instrument (eg: Morse’s).

Ovidiu - Guitar|Flame.com on 10/06 at 06:26 PM

I think we can speak about 2 different things here, and I say this because when I started to read the article my mind slipped to “signed guitars” not “signature guitars”. So…signature guitars, yes, I agree with you that such a guitar has a value due to the fact that a professional player added to it those features that he liked and in most of the cases such features are good! Not like a signed guitar, my first thought, where I would not pay the money just for the fact that somebody famous signed it. But hey, that’s another story…

GLW on 10/06 at 10:16 PM

One word: Marketing.

Gregor on 10/07 at 03:48 AM

Here is a good example of signature guitars done right: The Carvin H2 and H2 Fatboy, designed for Allan Holdsworth. It’s not a special version of any other guitar. It is completely unique in almost every way. There is no non-Holdsworth version of it. Oh, and the price is extremely reasonable.

Sammy on 10/07 at 05:08 AM

When it comes to signature models, I always ask myself the same two questions:

1) Is it materially different than another model in the manufacturer’s line?

2) How much would it sell for if So-and-So’s signature was not attached? In other words, how much would I be giving to the namesake on the guitar - to whom I’ve already given money, assuming I’m a fan and have purchased his music over the years.

Yes, it’s safe to say I’ve never bought a signature model (except for a Les Paul, but at this point, I don’t think that really counts).

Jon on 10/07 at 08:41 AM

Hi Gregor, thanks for the comment. I think anything designed for or by Allan Holdsworth is going to be worth the money and that goes for any guitarists who have been professionally active for years because they know exactly what they need for live situations and studio recordings. I think even without knowing this was a Holdsworth guitar it would still sell well because of the tele style body.

Sammy, I think the Les Paul has gone beyond a Signature model too, but that is a unique case.

che of teak furniture on 10/08 at 02:29 PM

I think it is sad if they are doing this just for marketing.

Eurostar Suite Reforma on 10/13 at 12:41 PM

Well for me it’s worth every penny if you really love music and you have the best quality of the guitar.

-M from Mexico

on 10/14 at 08:58 PM

A very interesting discussion. I’d like to add a few details, nothing more.

1. There’s often a mess-up of words. Endorsed, Signature, Limited Edition, to me that sounds like ‘played by’ (1), ‘designed/altered by’ (2) and ‘inspired or autographed by’ (3). But in real life, those terms just get messed up.

2. The first signature guitar (as in ‘co-designed by and then named after a famous player’) probably was the acoustic Gibson Nick Lucas in 1924, a slightly smaller but deeper flattop L1, with a wider fretboard. Another early endorser was Roy Smeck, who did electric guitars as well for Gibson and Harmony. He took it even one step further, by not only not co-designing them, but not even playing some of the instruments carrying his name.

3. There has always been discussion about who designed the Gibson Les Paul. According to Ted McCarthy Paul only designed the tailpiece, according to Les Paul Gibson only put on the maple top.

4. Of course from the manufacturor/distributor’s point of view, it’s marketing. The only reason McCarthy put Les Paul’s name on the new guitar, was because he had scores two #1 instrumental hits the year before. Names sell.

5. From the buyer’s perspective, it’s can be different things: special requirements (a purple SHH tele with a V-neck and locking nut - is that stock?), rarity (there’s only 321 ever made, so it’s really special!), collectabilty (‘it’s not for playing honey, it’s an investment’) or simply idolatry (I wanna be like him…)

6. List prices are essentially meaningless. No-one pays them, it’s the street price that counts. I’ve seen list prices trice the amount of the list price - which again is marketing: it’s a mighty expensive guitar, but look at that 66% discount!

Jon on 10/14 at 09:23 PM

Hi Karl and thanks for your comments, you obviously know your history I’d never even heard of Roy Smeck until the debate continued over at the Fender Discussion Forum and I haven’t heard of Nick Lucas, I’ll look into both! I had no idea there was dispute over the Les Paul design, that’s very interesting! By the way, can you point me in the direction of some 66% discounts please, xmas is coming! smile

on 10/15 at 12:17 AM

Hi there Jon,

Besides some obvious typos, list prices can be three times more than STREET prices, of course. Without pointing my finger too much, Martin and Gibson have adopted a strict price advertisement policy in the recent years. The Martin 5K ukulele for example is listed for $5.199, has a ‘minimal advertised price’ of $1000 less, but reputedly is sold somwhere at $3000. Which is still a lot of money. The 66% discount was some two years ago, but believe me, it wasn’t a bargain.

The history of the Les Paul guitar can be found in several sources, but I recommend http://www.ultimate-guitar.com/columns/the_history_of/the_history_of_les_paul.html. “The only reason that Gibson approached Les was to give the new guitar they had already designed and built added credibility by having it associated with a famous player.“

Jon on 10/15 at 05:53 AM

Hi Karl, yes Gibson aren’t alone with over inflated RRP’s “warehouse” sites like Sweetwater.com often sell instruments for way cheaper than listed but I think this is across the board rather than directly associated with Signature models. I’ll check out the history of the Les Paul, it makes sense why Gibson approached Les Paul but I’m disappointed if Les didn’t really design it!

Jan on 10/24 at 12:33 PM

I think a good guitare must cost money and a cheap guitare is not a good alternative to make good music.

NJ Painter on 11/04 at 07:55 AM

I think in the long run yeah they are the same,but I think when you get a custom job it is just that custom. So you are getting a bit more of personal attention. I have never had the cash to get a real custom paintjob. Maybe someday, but until then Ill just shred!!

Page 1 of 1 pages

Post a comment

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below: