Guitar's appearance important?

I think looks are important, at least initially.

I'd say it's a little like dating. You are initially drawn to someone based on looks. After you get to know them you fall for their personality. Looks become less important.

Guitars, IMO, are a lot like that. I was drawn to my Epi because of the way it looked. I didn't know any better. Luckily, I picked well, but now that I know the instrument a bit better, looks aren't as important. I'd much rather a guitar that plays and feels great.

Jason

to some looks are not important at all. like Neil Youngs "Old Black" shown here.

altho many top artists surely can afford as many guitars as they wish and have great collections, when they hit the stage they stay with what sounds and feels best to them.
it's all about the tone at some point i think

i remember a thread a while back when Wes posted like a thousand pictures of guitars that were well loved, like willie nelson's martin. that martin is ugggggly, but obviously, it's best for willie, so i'd say he's ignoring the appearance nd going for tone. good choice, i'd say.

Well, Neil Young's and Willie Nelson's guitars look like that because they have been playing the same guitar for over 30 years. And they play all day, every day.

I am not that hung up on looks. My Danelectro 56 U2 guitar looks like a plank of wood.

Danelecro 56 U2

It is a plank of wood. Actually it is a plywood frame covered with masonite. So it is not a solid body guitar as it looks. It has a very warm tone and plays pretty well. I would have no problem playing this in front of a crowd.

But I can't play a guitar that looks like a rocket ship. :D

Yeah I have that same problem with them Ray :lol:
Seriously though, if you want to hear a good reason to buy a Gibson Explorer Listen to any of Johnny Winters early solo stuff, like 2nd Winter, Still Alive and Well or Saints and Sinners to hear the wicked tones these babies can produce

My bad it's a Firebird he plays. Never could keep those 2 straight

Ah, but Rick Derringer -- frequently associated with Johnny -- often played an Explorer.

You know, we've discussed this a number of times. And, in my brief time on GN, I've stated a few times about quality, price, economics or guitars, etc... and specifically I've also talked about sounds, tone, woods, etc... Some of you agree with me, others disagree.

I think this thread fits in with that discussion. Why? Because the look of a guitar IS important. Why do people in country music play a Telecaster? The sound?? Come on. They play them because the Tele is associated with country music. With the amount of digital processors out there now (for under $100) you can make ANY guitar sound ANY way you want. Yes, a Tele plugged into a regular amp with no processing will sound traditionally country-like. It is based on the pickups. I don't buy into the "my guitar sounds like this because it is a Koa top..." - nah, the electronics of an electric guitar, the elctronics of the processor, and the electronics of the amplifier (or tubes) dictate some of the sound. The rest comes from the PLAYER.

Hey, Explorers rock the house. So do Flying V's. No question. They usually come with "hot" pickups. They are associated with heavy Classic rock bands, and late 80's metal like Metallica. Hmmm... the same pickup set comes in a Les Paul Classic. Would you associate a Les Paul with Metal? No, probably not, but they probably sound the same.

Anyway... my point is that people play a certain kind (shape, brand) of guitar because of what the guitar (usually) is marketed/related to... I saw earlier in this thread - maybe it was Wes - who said he wouldn't be caught dead with a Jackson RR guitar. I don't blame him. They are "out". They are not popular because every "popular" rock band is playing Les Paul guitars. If you are into "nu metal" you are probably looking at Ibanez or ESP. He made a great point that the crowd's expectation of someone with a RR flying V is that this guy is GOOD. He is a fast player with crazy chops.

In fact, this happened to me (not playing!). I went to my first Iron Maiden show fully expecting flying Vs, Explorers, Kramers and Ibanez guitars. You know what I got? Black and white Fender Strats and a Les Paul. Go figure.

Old Black is a sweet guitar. There's a point where that guitar and Willie Nelson's has so much history and became so important to the individual artists that the guitars are like unique individuals too (i know each guitar is unique, but these ones are like soldiers who've been through d-day). The battle scars portray what TwistedLefty said, a guitar that's proven itself with ability. That being said, my Ibanez is way too shiny.

The Dali Lima

Yeah, it was me who said I wouldn't play one of those Randy Rhodes guitars. But not because they are not the popular guitar right now. But I do agree there is peer pressure involved. Back in the 80's I went out and bought a Kramer with the single pickup because that's what Eddie Van Halen was using. It was a good guitar too. But I liked the look of that guitar, especially the headstock.

But the Randy Rhodes guitar is just too far out for me. That thing looks like a rocket ship.

It may be wrong, but the look and even the brand of guitar matters to me. I have owned dozens of the less expensive guitars. I liked them all. But I always wanted the "name" brands. I don't think the pros are using these guitars because of peer pressure, they use these guitars because they consider them the best. I have been playing a long time and I want the best gear I can afford because I want to sound the best I can. So I go for the name gear. And I have found there is something to it. The higher priced guitars almost always sound and play better. And they last. That is important if you plan on playing a guitar for years.

Wes, I hear ya. The kind of guitar can color the way you play in some respects. I'm a big believer in buying the most guitar for the money.

I have three guitars, all different looking. They all have rosewood fretboards and two humbuckers. I honestly never even really thought of the fact they all three have rosewood fretboards until someone here recently asked about sound differences. I now have an SX 57 on the way. Reason why I am buying it. It is a different color from what I have already and it has single coils instead of humbuckers, and also has a maple fretboard. I don't care so much how a guitar looks, but how it sounds is important. If it is cheap and decent looking, but sounds great, then all is well. To be honest, there are guitars out there that are not all that attractive. I bet the Parker Fly is a great instrument, but that head stock is just not right in my eyes. I love the body of the "Mockingbird", but I feel the SX version is better than the BC Rich because of the headstock. I plan on getting some "pretty" guitars in the future, and some real "ugly" guitars, too. Just as long as they sound good or I can make them sound good.

I dont know if this has been said before, but looks are important. And think of the Neil Young, or Willie Nelson guitars. You guys were saying that they don't care about looks. But! Maybe thats the look they like, or the look they want to have, signifying they've been at it for awhile. The guitar has been trusty, and with them for their careers. If one of my guitars was like that, because I played it in that much, I think that would look real cool.

I dont know if this has been said before, but looks are important. And think of the Neil Young, or Willie Nelson guitars. You guys were saying that they don't care about looks. But! Maybe thats the look they like, or the look they want to have, signifying they've been at it for awhile. The guitar has been trusty, and with them for their careers. If one of my guitars was like that, because I played it in that much, I think that would look real cool.

i see your point but i seriously doubt it.

i think that its all about feel and tone that they play what brought them to where they are reguardless of the "look".
like someone stated earlier,that you can make anything sound like anything thru electronics.
But why go to all the trouble to make a LP or Strat sound like a Tele when you can just play a Tele?

Looks are important to some.....as has been previously stated, you tend to buy the guitar that catches your eye....

I look after my guitars - I clean them regularly, but that's the fretboard and p/u's - I don't bother polishing the top or anything...but when restringing, I never cut the ends - I leave them long, and coil them till they're about 3/4" diameter - just because I once saw it on a pic, and done it ever since....

Looks were never important to some guitarists - remember Rory Gallagher's battered green Strat? Looked like it might fall apart any second...but maybe he liked that look - old and well-used....

I don't know how anyone could call explorers ugly though - to my eyes, they're a design classic....

The guitars I think are ugly? Back in the 80's, there was a craze for guitars with no headstock - I used to hate the look of those, they just didn't look like "proper" guitars to me....

At the end of the day though, it's the sound coming out of the guitar that matters....as Pete Townshend once said, "I don't have a love affair with the guitar - I don't sit down and polish the bloody thing...."

:D :D :D

Vic