DPergo Guitars Questions!

[Longways to Go]

I have a really nice reliced partscaster that cost $800.
When I was shopping for a strat, I played everything in town that I could find & that's the one I took home.
Not made by a well known builder, I don't even think the guy is still in business anymore.
But the guitar plays like a dream. I have a hard time imagining extra $$$ could get me much more.

My favorite part of the guitar is the way he used a cork from a wine bottle to block the Floyd Rose

[jads57]

So thats why its so silly! Ken Parker already invented a way better mousetrap to Leos original iconic designs. Problem is most guitarists are still passionate for the 1950s designs quirks and all. I definitely get that as well since its what I grew up with.

Jim Soloway nailed it in his evaluation of value to actual function. And I agree when people buy or spend obscene amounts of money on luxury items, I find it way off putting as well!
Especially when it's main function is to showing off their status as both wealthy and status in society. This is what this all boils down to at least for me.
It really isn't about a tool or it's merits any longer as much as pecking order or place in our society.

So congratulations if you own an extraordinary instrument etc. But please use it first and mostly how it was intended as opposed to show off your status. Other wise loan it to someone who's a great player of your choice, to make great music.
That's what many Stradivarius owners do. It benefits the instrument,the owner, the player and most if all society.

[bluejaybill]

Planc de Plancs? I've visited quite a few guitars shows, and from the distance of one meter, most Strat or Tele clones claiming uniqueness, to begin with, are more or less indistinguishable. There are well trained, meticulous small-volume luthiers all over the world, probably more of them than ever before. Nothing wrong with that, but how could one stand out and make a product more valuable by multiples than the rest? I grant that tonewoods matter even in bolt-on guitars, but hardly that much. To take another angle, I'm not aware of boutique cabinet makers reproducing Ikea designs with more valuable raw materials and charging a fortune for them. Reproductions of antique artifacts cost a fraction of the originals.

Well, to be fair, there are a lot of boutique guitar makers that start with classic Gibson arch top designs, improve them as much as they can with better woods, parts, construction techniques etc, and charge a lot for them. And lots of folks (like me!) buy them. Because I think they are better. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I think what we are seeing here are some folks that are resentful because they feel the prices are either out of line or out of their budget. That's when we start hearing things like "non-professional guys like doctors and lawyers driving around in their Porsches are buying them". As someone said earlier, a lot of those "hobbyists" are keeping the boutique builders (solid, arch top and acoustic) afloat. If builders had to rely on just the professional market they would be out of business.

[Jim Soloway]

Well, to be fair, there are a lot of boutique guitar makers that start with classic Gibson arch top designs, improve them as much as they can with better woods, parts, construction techniques etc, and charge a lot for them. And lots of folks (like me!) buy them. Because I think they are better. No one seems to have a problem with that.

I think what we are seeing here are some folks that are resentful because they feel the prices are either out of line or out of their budget. That's when we start hearing things like "non-professional guys like doctors and lawyers driving around in their Porsches are buying them". As someone said earlier, a lot of those "hobbyists" are keeping the boutique builders (solid, arch top and acoustic) afloat. If builders had to rely on just the professional market they would be out of business.

That last sentence is very true. And while I've been knocked out the market as a buyer, I like that old friends and acquaintances have raised their prices to the point where they're not having to scuffle to make a living any more. Building a guitar may not really cost a lot of money but running a business sure does, especially in the US where it also has to cover your health care costs, your housing costs and the cost of sending your children to college some day.

[iim7V7IM7]

It seems that this thread has unfortunately devolved from commenting on a particular non-transparent, litigious, snake oil maker of bolt-on Leo derivative guitars to a class rant pitting “have nots” against “haves” and setting limits on what a tool to make music should be. This is most unfortunate.

It is difficult share an “obscenely expensive” instrument without off putting some members who either cannot afford them or view them as not worth their price. Is their main function of members sharing their instruments to show off their status to establish a societal pecking order or is it to simply share something appreciated by a small community of passionate people with a common interests?

Patrons of the arts, have historically been well-to-do individuals. Without these patrons of the arts, there are no artisans like John Monteleone or innovators like Ken Parker. While I understand and regret the societal unfairness of monster players gigging for a pittance playing an tool guitars. This is unfortunately not a new phenomenon. It extends to many undervalued portions of society beyond the arts like teachers as well. Additionally, I am friends with a number of luthiers and they are not living high on the hog. They live solitary, modest lives for the most part. There is no real retirement beyond their bodies failing them.

Given today’s manufacturing technology, well set up, electric factory instruments are more than adequate tools to create music. Small shop and luthier made instruments are purely about aesthetic material preferences, custom ergonomic preferences and a well set up/in-tuned instrument. In the acoustic realm it becomes more about sonic aspects as well.

We used to (and I hope continue to) spend time here celebrating the art of jazz guitars in terms of the beauty of their design, materials of construction and their tone. This forum was a place where we celebrated jazz guitars and were happy for other members who took the time to share their instruments or share a find, tip or woe. It is a mixed community of full time professional musicians, part time musicians and hobbyist players who share a love of jazz and the guitars used to make them.

My $.02

[Jim Soloway]

It seems that this thread has unfortunately devolved from commenting on a particular non-transparent, litigious, snake oil maker of bolt-on Leo derivative guitars to a class rant pitting “have nots” against “haves” and setting limits on what a tool to make music should be. This is most unfortunate.

It is difficult share an “obscenely expensive” instrument without off putting some members who either cannot afford them or view them as not worth their price. Is their main function of members sharing their instruments to show off their status to establish a societal pecking order or is it to simply share something appreciated by a small community of passionate people with a common interests?

Patrons of the arts, have historically been well-to-do individuals. Without these patrons of the arts, there are no artisans like John Monteleone or innovators like Ken Parker. While I understand and regret the societal unfairness of monster players gigging for a pittance playing an tool guitars. This is unfortunately not a new phenomenon. It extends to many undervalued portions of society beyond the arts like teachers as well. Additionally, I am friends with a number of luthiers and they are not living high on the hog. They live solitary, modest lives for the most part. There is no real retirement beyond their bodies failing them.

Given today’s manufacturing technology, well set up, electric factory instruments are more than adequate tools to create music. Small shop and luthier made instruments are purely about aesthetic material preferences, custom ergonomic preferences and a well set up/in-tuned instrument. In the acoustic realm it becomes more about sonic aspects as well.

We used to (and I hope continue to) spend time here celebrating the art of jazz guitars in terms of the beauty of their design, materials of construction and their tone. This forum was a place where we celebrated jazz guitars and were happy for other members who took the time to share their instruments or share a find, tip or woe. It is a mixed community of full time professional musicians, part time musicians and hobbyist players who share a love of jazz and the guitars used to make them.

My $.02

Just my opinion but I don't think it's quite as black and white as you're making it sound. I think it's possible and not functionally dissonant to both cheer for the successes of great instrument makers and admire their products while finding serious fault with the economic system that supports them.

[jads57]

Mainly I find both music and it's tools associated with it have been appropriated by amateurs and too many wannabe musicians.
I'm sorry to be harsh about it. And while it's always been so, today's society puts way too much stock,worth,credit in to things vs. actual accomplishments.

So both the luthier and musicians who create the iconic tones and music we all love so much. Its as though people want themselves to be in the spotlight so bad, they feel owning one of these guitars enables them to be noticed as such to others

I get it and always did as a kid from Michael Bloomfield, Peter Townsend, etc. But as a grownup I really prize their musical abilities the most. And realize Jeff Beck, Joe Pass could make a Hondo Guitar sound unbelievable!

So while I appreciate luthiers and players hopefully moving the bar forward. Let's not use Disney or The Wizard of Oz as descriptions. Rather appreciate true talent for what it actually is.

Thanks for letting me Rant!

[iim7V7IM7]

Mainly I find both music and it's tools associated with it have been appropriated by amateurs and too many wannabe musicians.
I'm sorry to be harsh about it. And while it's always been so, today's society puts way too much stock,worth,credit in to things vs. actual accomplishments.

So both the luthier and musicians who create the iconic tones and music we all love so much. Its as though people want themselves to be in the spotlight so bad, they feel owning one of these guitars enables them to be noticed as such to others

I get it and always did as a kid from Michael Bloomfield, Peter Townsend, etc. But as a grownup I really prize their musical abilities the most. And realize Jeff Beck, Joe Pass could make a Hondo Guitar sound unbelievable!

So while I appreciate luthiers and players hopefully moving the bar forward. Let's not use Disney or The Wizard of Oz as descriptions. Rather appreciate true talent for what it actually is.

Thanks for letting me Rant!

You are welcome (I hope that it made you feel better John)

[jads57]

Bob it did Thanks!

[Rwpierce]

Really don’t understand the negativity about both the builder and those that buy and really love his guitars.

You can include me in the latter category. Am I a professional? By no means but does that preclude me from be a discerning guitarist, I would argue not.

I own and have played many guitars in a fairly similar price range from other fantastic builders and the fact that I for the most part grab my Sig Ltd or Bakersfield whenever I go into my studio speaks for itself. I know conspiracy theorists are out questioning whether or not he actually builds his guitars etc, etc. etc.

All I can go by in life is my own personal experience. The guitars are absolutely phenomenal and and my dealings with the builder have always been nothing but professional, cordial and fair.

Ok, I’ve put it out there so hopefully not a lot of negative shots forthcoming.