Baby Boomers Coming Rocking Out of the Woodwork

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 11 Oct 2006 1:07 pm

They care about the market segment that ONLY WANTS GIBSON on the headstock.

Be that as it may, people are paying for the name.

Next tine PBS runs their fund raising show with 60's bands, check out the guitar the guy in Steppenwolf is playing.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

Leslie Ehrlich · Post by **Leslie Ehrlich** » 11 Oct 2006 2:17 pm

In the United States, the 'baby boom' lasted roughly from 1946 to 1961 - here in Canada it lasted up until about 1966. It is the early boomers who were born in the late 1940s and early 1950s who got to hear the Beatles when they first came to America, folk rock, psychedelic rock, blues inflenced rock stuff (i.e. Eric Clapton and Cream), and of course the Woodstock era.

Generation 'X' are the 'late' baby boomers who were born in the early 1960s. They were teenagers during the late 1970s. I am part of that generation. Us Xers had to put up with disco and corporate rock when we were teens.

The 'baby bust' generation was born after the 'boom'- in the late 1960s and early 1970s. These people were exposed to all the 1980s stuff - new wave, hair metal, electro-pop, Michael Jackson, etc.

The baby boom 'echo' are the children of the baby boomers. They grew up listening to grunge, dance, hip-hop, nu-metal, and some of the new country.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 11 Oct 2006 2:23 pm

American guitars cost more than imports because labour costs are so much higher here. IF you want Gibson, Martin or US-made Fenders, then you have to pay - it's still your choice.

RR

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 11 Oct 2006 2:25 pm

Leslie,

I was born in '43 - what category of 'boomer' do I fall into?

RR

Leslie Ehrlich · Post by **Leslie Ehrlich** » 11 Oct 2006 2:45 pm

Roger, you were born before the baby boom. People who were born during the Second World War got to hear Rock 'n' Roll when it was in its infancy (i.e. Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly). Honky-tonk country was dying out during the latter half of 1950s, and by the end of the decade the 'Nashville sound' was on the way in.

Rick McDuffie · Post by **Rick McDuffie** » 11 Oct 2006 4:06 pm

Most sociologists agree that the Baby Boom started in 1946.

Craig Stock · Post by **Craig Stock** » 11 Oct 2006 5:05 pm

Look at the Classic car market, a few years ago detroit muscle was a bargain, now a pristine Cuda can sell for 500 grand at the Barrett-Jackson auction. Same with guitars, everyone loves to re-live their past and when they get the money they will pay whatever for it.
Many of you lived what most of them only wished they lived, so take it as a compliment that they will pay big bucks to have a piece of what you already have.
Sure most of the Asian made guitars are excellent, whereas you can now buy a '69 Camaro totally brand new in kit form, but aren't you really longing to have had one when you were a kid.

------------------
Regards, Craig

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 12 Oct 2006 3:16 am

Thanks, Leslie - that's me exactly!

I'm old enough to regard the Beatles as young upstarts who've spoiled the music scene!

RR

Darryl Hattenhauer · Post by **Darryl Hattenhauer** » 12 Oct 2006 6:00 pm

Optimistic prediction: As geezers like me die off, more old instruments will hit the market, which will be good for buyers (though not sellers).

Mikes' right. If you blindfolded a thousand players and had them play a little of everything, they'd like a lot of things more than Martin, Fender, Gibson, etc.

I don't know if the next story is true, but it might as well be. An expert seller was trying to get a new player to buy Braz instead of Indian. The buyer tried both and then asked, "What's the difference?" The seller looked at the greenhorn with contempt and sneered, "They don't SOUND different, they LOOK different."

------------------
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruitflies like a banana." -- Groucho

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 12 Oct 2006 7:28 pm

Darryl: I don't understand your point.

Most of the posts here (mine included) have agreed that a lot of imports are very good guitars. I've also said that there have been poor Martins and Gibsons. The subject (more or less) was the entry into the vintage market of 'baby boomers' - they are going to want the real thing, because that is their criterion when trying to satisfy their nostalgic cravings. 'Professional' requirements are another thing entirely.

As for the 'Indian vs. Brazilian' thing, well, that's right - it's principally a matter of aesthetics (although some say that the Rio is a bit warmer, there are too many inponderables that can affect a guitar's tone for anyone to be sure). You could remove the '...contempt...' and '...sneered...', and the seller's point would be made, albeit with a very different nuance. The inescapable fact is, however, that Brazilian-bodied guitars continue to sell for a premium price, and the main reasons are: it's close to being unavailable, and it looks a bit nicer.

The 'greenhorn' still has to learn this from someone....

RR[This message was edited by Roger Rettig on 12 October 2006 at 08:30 PM.]

Darryl Hattenhauer · Post by **Darryl Hattenhauer** » 12 Oct 2006 8:48 pm

Whoops. Sorry. I think we mean the same thing.

A lot of no-name guitars are as good as the big names. Twenty years ago when I could finally afford to have more than three instruments, I went through the axes I'd seen my heroes play: mastertone banjo, gibson mando, strat, tele, Paul, D28, and a Gretsch Double Annie ('cuz I couldn't afford a 6120). But I don't have any of them now because, dollar for dollar, I get more music from other brands.

My preference is just a result of my own combination of hands and ears. By judging with hands and ears instead of my eyes, I was surprised, and I think others would be too. On the other hand, I suspect that a blind pluck-off would still find Martin etc. near the top, just not as dominant as before.

I, too, generally prefer the look of Braz to the look of Indian, but some Braz is just so bizarre it gives me motion sickness. To me, the problem with Indian is that it looks like beef gravy.

I've paid more for Braz, but not because I can hear the difference. On the other hand, I suspect that experts like Gruhn can hear the difference even if the sound is coming out of a dashboard.

Hey, thanks for the comment, and I hope I'm clearer now.

------------------
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruitflies like a banana." -- Groucho

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 13 Oct 2006 4:37 am

Thanks, Darryl - I see what you're saying.

I started playing guitar in 1957 (in London) and in those days a cheap guitar meant an unplayable guitar! As I said earlier, almost everything now - even $100 acoustics - are playable and more-or-less in tune.

I wanted top-of-the-line instruments and would break the bank in order to have them. I still have a few Martins, my two Emmons D-10s, Fenders, etc, but my main electric is a G&L Asat Classic. This was not part of the master-plan, but I picked it up at a vintage show and just loved it - enough for it to displace my 'real' Telecasters. I know the G&L is not exactly an economically-priced guitar, but it was a watershed for me because it was not one of my boyhood icons.

If I was confronted with a major cash-flow problem, then I'd sell some guitars (NOT the G&L, though!) but, so far, I've been able to play for a living and still indulge my passion for great American instruments (within reason, that is.)

By the way, I love your description of Indian rosewood - 'beef gravy'! The Rio is a much nicer colour, but not worth a $2000+ premium, in my view. I had a Custom Shop 000-28 made two years ago, and had to opt for the 'pot roast' look....

RR[This message was edited by Roger Rettig on 13 October 2006 at 05:39 AM.]

Ron Page · Post by **Ron Page** » 13 Oct 2006 8:07 am

So you guys are in what we call vehement agreement.

Mike said,

Be that as it may, people are paying for the name.

Fair enough, but ask yourself why that is. It's not just for the logo. I drive a Toyota for the "name", because the name is synonomous with proven quality and reliability.

I won't go pull any more quotes out of the thread, but I seem to recall one description of the foreign models has having only 1 or 2 slight flaws in the finish. I wonder if Gibson would be allowed such lattitude, or if maybe expectations of them are higher.

I don't know one 6-string from another--other than by looks. But the bottom line is some products are worth a premium price and it is the preponderance of buyers who decide that. The quality is remembered long after the price is forgotten. Buy quality and you'll rarely regret it; can't take it with you.

------------------
HagFan

[This message was edited by Ron Page on 13 October 2006 at 09:08 AM.]

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 13 Oct 2006 8:28 am

The subject (more or less) was the entry into the vintage market of 'baby boomers' - they are going to want the real thing, because that is their criterion when trying to satisfy their nostalgic cravings. 'Professional' requirements are another thing entirely.

Precisely.

People know and trust the names Gibson and Fender and Gretsch. They don't know the names of the new Asian companies. But that has nothing to do with the quality of the instruments.

I do not mean to put the big American companies down. But the Asians have gotten their act together and are producing comparable guitars at a fraction of the price.

Just to be clear, I'm referring to the top of the line Asian imports like the Agile 3500 and the Ravenwest 350 (Solid body) and 450 (hollow body.) These are the guitars that sell in the $3-500 range. The Asian companies also their $79.00 cheapies, which are, well, let's just say that you get what you pay for.

Gibson has an advertizing line that says "Only a Gibson is good enough." Maybe some people believe that, but it's just not true anymore. The top of the line imports are thoroughly professional quality instruments more than capable of meeting the requirements of even the most demanding gigs.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

Ron Page · Post by **Ron Page** » 13 Oct 2006 11:12 am

Points well taken, Mike.

If they can build jet engine parts using lower cost labor they can probably manufacture guitars.

------------------
HagFan

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 13 Oct 2006 1:41 pm

Yes, Mike, but the point I've been trying make here is that ONLY the American stuff is going to satisfy the nostalgia freak (or 'collector', to give him - and me - a more dignified moniker).

We want the guitar that was on such-and-such an album sleeve in 1958, etc, etc.

I have a confession....

This thread has been of particular interest to me this week, as I've just succumbed to a major guitar-purchase.... Ever since I was a 17-year old, I've lusted after a cherry-red Gibson ES-355 with gold Bigsby tailpiece, ebony fingerboard, L-5 style block pearl inlays and the classic split-diamond head embellishment. Gibson, in their wisdom, dropped this model some years ago in favour of the BB King signature 'Lucille' model, but there's been a limited-edition reissue of the ES-355, and I'm happy to report that mine is on its way from Memphis to Mandolin Bros as I type.

I know I could have had several high-quality imports for the $3,360 that I'm paying, but they're not what I wanted....

....and I'm a 'pro' player who's supposed to be above such nostalgic yearnings, and who only thinks rationally about buying new equipment

!

I seem to recall that a new ES-355 (I'll never forget the coloured Gibson catalogue photo of Tony Mottola playing one!) in 1960 was around three hundred Pounds Sterling - I bet that's approximately $3300 these days, so I didn't lose anything by waiting...

RR

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 13 Oct 2006 1:49 pm

Just to make it a bit clearer...

I have absolutely NO need for a new guitar - I have Teles, Gibsons and Martins aplenty - but I always wanted one of these.

Expect to see a pristine Gibson 'Lucille' in red finish available on 'Instruments For Sale' any time now....

[This message was edited by Roger Rettig on 13 October 2006 at 07:19 PM.]

Mark Eaton · Post by **Mark Eaton** » 13 Oct 2006 2:28 pm

This stuff in some ways, is all relative.

Back in about 1975, I knew a guy that after not making it as a rocker in California, was going to move back home to North Carolina.

For food and bus fare, he offered me his 1954 Tele for $120. I wanted to buy it in the worst way, but I couldn't come up with the dough.

I have a lot more money than I used to, but two things have remained constant: I couldn't justify buying that '54 Tele back then, and at today's vintage guitar prices-I can't justify buying one now.

------------------
Mark

Bob Smith · Post by **Bob Smith** » 13 Oct 2006 3:09 pm

Yeah, This is a perfect time to buy a Korean guitar. bob[This message was edited by Bob Smith on 13 October 2006 at 04:32 PM.]

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 14 Oct 2006 4:04 am

Roger, The 355 is a great guitar and I hope that it brings you much happiness.

I'd love to have a guitar like that, but I'm unwilling to spend that kind of money for one. To be honest, when I go the the NAMM show, I do notice there is some difference in quality between the $3-4,000 guitars and the $3-400 ones, but the difference in quality is not reflected in the difference in price.

I would like to compare my Aslin Dane 335 copy with your 355. It would be real interesting to play them side by side and hear and feel the differences between them.

On a scale of 1 to 10, with your 355 being a 10, many of the top of the line imports are 9s. At worst they are 8.5s.

It would be nice to drive a Rolls Royce, but my Camry gets me where I need to go.

Another consideration is that guitar in clubs sometimes get damaged or stolen. There was an incident here about 30 years ago where a fellow had a 355 just like the one you bought, and during a break somebody walked up to the bandstand, grabbed the guitar right off the stage and ran out the back door into a waiting getaway car.

For that reason, many players around here are buying imports to take to gigs and leaving their more valuable guitars at home.

At any rate, I hope that some day either you come to Los Angeles or I go to your neck of the woods and we can meet in person.

------------------
Warning: I have a Telecaster and I'm not afraid to use it.
-----------
My web site

Tony Prior · Post by **Tony Prior** » 14 Oct 2006 4:44 am

Mike, again I think what pretty much everyone is saying is that they AGREE that the Korean Guitars are nice, and the quality is very good or even excellent..

But the issue is not about quality, never was, never is...

It's compeletly about what a player/person/individual wants..

IF soemeone WANTS a Gibson and has the resources to acquire one, thats what they are gonna get, there is NO Korean Guitar alive that will change there minds because it is not about the Guitar alone, it's about it being a GIBSON Guitar and the desire to own it.

Some folks may personally think that the person spending $2500 for a Gibson 335 is a fool, thats not our call.

One thing is for certain, put a Gibson 335 on a Guitar stand next to a Korean 335 , ask a Guitar player to pick one of them up and jam along, guess which one 8 or 9 out of 10 will pick up....( maybe even 10 out of 10 on a given day )

thats what we are talking about here...not quality...

Jim Cohen · Post by **Jim Cohen** » 14 Oct 2006 5:06 am

In business all that 'extra' that Gibson has that a Korean knockoff doesn't is called "Goodwill" and people pay Big Bucks for goodwill. Why? Because other people value it. Sounds circular? It is!

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 14 Oct 2006 6:29 am

Hi, Mike,

Tony P. has nailed it. I bet my ES-355 (I don't actually have it yet, 'though it's paid for) probably won't leave the house. As for it bringing me happiness - well, we'll see. As I said, I've lusted after one since I was a youngster - the reality has little chance of living up to my forty-six years of anticipation, so I'll probably affect a pose or two in front of the mirror, play a few plummy extended chords on the neck pick-up, and only get it out to show people. I'll NEVER touch the Bigsby, but I had to have one, 'cause that's how I remember them.

I have no more justification than that. I've had a good year with nine months out of twelve of well-paid music employment, so I'm treating myself.

My faithfull G&L ASAT Classic (with a Glaser B-Bender) will do any job extremely adequately, even though steel guitar accounts for 90% of my work. I don't need this guitar, but I'm unaccountably excited at the prospect of having it.

I guess I'm really buying it for that 16-year old schoolboy who spent countless hours with his nose pressed against the window of Selmer's in London's Charing Cross Road as those first exotic Gibson guitars trickled into the UK; I'm as excited as he would have been....

RR

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 14 Oct 2006 6:53 am

I know, I know - enough, already!

....But I had to add that my wife has given her blessing (even 'though she didn't find out until it was too late

), as long as I adopt our accepted tithing principal: I have to offer another guitar for sale to make amends. (We had to institute this system when I was buying '0' scale locomotives - I still have all of those, though

!)

With respect, cars are a bit different, Mike. Most of us could, with varying degrees of sacrifice, find a way of buying almost any new guitar (you managed to pay for a Millenium, didn't you?) A Rolls-Royce would be my first choice (not a new one, but a '1963-1965 Silver Cloud 111 with drophead bodywork by Mulliner-Park Ward in midnight-blue) but the sacrifice involved would put me and Susie out on the street, so it's a used Town Car for me - I really like armchair-like seats and a V-8!

Anyway, I'll be sure to call if I get out to LA - not to compare guitars, but just to say 'Hi' (and to try your MSA!)

Jim C. nailed it, too!

RR

[This message was edited by Roger Rettig on 14 October 2006 at 08:12 AM.]

Rick McDuffie · Post by **Rick McDuffie** » 14 Oct 2006 9:34 am

Roger, I hope you like your ES 355. I, too, have wanted (another) 335 for many years. I had a cherry-red 335 in the late 70's (w/ Bigsby) and thought I had to have another one. I came across a nice mid-80's tobacco sunburst 335 last year and grabbed it, thinking I finally had the Holy Grail. I did enjoy it a lot!

Trouble is, I also have an unusual Epiphone Sheraton. It's a blonde maple guitar, and was made around 1980 in Japan, I think (it's not a Sheraton II). The oval sticker inside the guitar only says Epiphone- Gibson- Kalamazoo, Michigan- no mention of Japan anywhere on the guitar, so it's hard to say. It's definitely not a Korean guitar, and I've not been able to get any info. on this particular dispensation of the Sheraton.

Anyway, the Epiphone plays just as well as the 335 (maybe even a little better!), sounds as good or better, and I consequently have found myself taking the Sheraton to my jazz gigs and leaving the 335 at home. I needed to raise some cash, so I sold the 335. It was good to scratch the itch, though... now I don't want another one... unless I happen to come across a 1962 sunburst w/ a Bigsby in mint condition

and it would have to be "affordable".

Let me put in another way- if I could find a 335 that I liked as much as I like the Sheraton, I'd buy it (assuming I could afford it). But things are kinda inverted when an Epiphone becomes the yardstick, aren't they? Never thought I'd see the day.

I can see why you're springing for the red 355. I've always wanted one, too. Let us know if the reality is as good as the dream![This message was edited by Rick McDuffie on 14 October 2006 at 01:34 PM.]