#1
when i first got more seriously into acoustic guitars, i avoided yamahas. i believed they were low quality, not worth a look guitars. of course, it turns out that they made the best sounding all laminate guitars, excellent lowest priced solid tops, and their build quality, finishes and hardware are better than most of their competition. but i see people on boards all the time who believe as i did that yamahas are crap, when in reality their all lams smoke the competition bigtime.

then there's blueridge. a lot of people say that they're poorly constructed. i've played over 40 blueridge guitars, and while a few had very very minor issues the same as most guitar brands, none were poorly constructed. they had tight seams, everything was placed right. they're made as well as any other in their price ranges or above, and better than many.

i could go on and on with more brands of guitars, but basically i got to wondering how these bad and undeserved reputations even happen, and how they become so prevalent that they come up again and again. what do you think?
Quote by Skeet UK
I just looked in my Oxford English Dictionary and under "Acoustic Guitar", there was your Avatar and an email address!
#2
Competing companies planting bad reviews to make their products look superior in comparison.
Check out my band Disturbed
#3
1) people who have a lot of knowledge about a subject they discuss tend to be more mature.
2) people who are more mature are less inclined to make sweeping generalisations
3) sweeping generalisations are more memorable and often more persuasive

add those 3 factoids together, and what do you get?
Quote by mr.happyman
so she took off my pants and was gonna give me dome (head). fukk yeah, free dome (head) (i'm used to hiring prostitutes).as she inched her head closer to my pen0r, she pulled her hand outta nowhere and sandpapered my mini mr.happyman!
#4
a company makes a genuinely bad guitar so people find it easier to brand that whole company as crap rather than actually bother to check out their other guitars, thats what has happened to bc rich, people assume all their guitars are just crap pointy "metal guitars" because of the horrible low end warlocks, which isnt true at all
My Gear:
BC Rich Gunslinger Retro Blade
Vintage V100 Paradise + SD Alnico Pro Slash APH-2's
1963 Burns Short Scale Jazz Guitar
Dean Performer Florentine
Bugera 6260
Orange Micro Terror + cab
Digitech Bad Monkey
Zoom G2G
#5
A lot of times, a company will release a bad product at some point in time if they change factories they are using, or come out with an unpopular model, etc., and it will hurt their reputation for a long time. I know a lot of people who hate Marshall now because of the MG series (which isn't really all THAT bad), even though Marshall's other series of products are the same as they've always been. I know with Squier for instance, a lot of people hate them because they bought them in the mid to late 90's through the early 2000's, or people love them that bought them when they were made in Japan, or more recently people bought newer models and they are all like oh yeah, this isn't great but a decent instrument for the price...but the opinions are catching. When I first started playing, I didn't know good gear from bad gear really, but I had a lot of friends who were willing to enlighten me on what was good and what was crap, and it takes years to get this out of your system even when you are actively working on it.
#6
they bitch about gibsons all the time on agf, but they don't talk about the gimmicks on their electrics. jeez, 6 months ago gibson had convinced the hollywood sam ash to get a bunch of robot 2 guitars *shakes head in disgust*
Quote by Skeet UK
I just looked in my Oxford English Dictionary and under "Acoustic Guitar", there was your Avatar and an email address!
#7
they convinced them or they forced them to? Gibson does require authorized dealers to get a bit of everything. That's why you see so many brand new Gibson's on eBay that are $400 below retail. The dealers will move them at cost and say in the ad "I got this from a dealer friend of mine. Bought some of his overstock."

That's also the reason you don't find any Gibson dealer selling just J-45's, Hummingbirds and Les Paul Standards.

Anyway Yamaha gets a bad rep I think because they make so many different things. people assume a company that makes lawn equipment and blenders couldn't possibly make good guitars. I once even had a guy who had a Yamaha R1 (totally bad ass motorcycle) tell me Yamaha can't make good guitars lol.

I will add that some of the finishes on their acoustic guitars tend to be kinda ugly, like the red ones for example. maybe that has something to do with it!
Check out "thelastplaceyoulook" on YouTube, iTunes and [url="http://facebook.com/thelastplaceyoulook
"]Facebook
#8
Yamaha has been around for a long time; my first guitar was a little cheap Yamaha purchased about 1975. Back then, things "Japanese" were still thought of as being cheap and of low quality. Japanese cars and motorcycles were just entering the market, and people were very suspicious of them at first.
It was thought that all the Japanese could do was copy... They would even copy flaws in original designs.
It's very hard for manufacturers to overcome "bad press", and now with the internet it's even worse.
A lot of folks never seem to read anything, much less technical articles or reviews from certified experts.....
So a misspelled, poorly-worded comment on a forum will carry a lot of weight. "Uh, Yammies sux, dude!"
Such is editorializing.....
#9
I don't know but when I put a Yammy in my hand, it just feels right.
Yamaha FG700S
LTD EC-1000 MGO
Agile 3k
Laney Cub 15w Head with 2x12 cab
Vox VT 20+
#10
In 1980 I purchased an FG340 for my wife for about $250 new. This guitar sounded incredible. Everyone who played it wanted to buy it. I tried to buy it from her recently (divorced) but she didn't want to sell it. So I've been on ebay and found one in mint condition for $200 and should have it in a few days. I also bought a DW5s recently and was disappointed. (made 1996-1998 MSRP $649) It had good playability and balanced tone and was loud. But the finish was really poor. Plus the neck angle went bad which there are those that say you have to be careful with Yamahas. Well I can confirm. I just bought a Silver Creek D170 which has a way better finish than the Yamaha. It has a really nice warm tone but does not project the way the Yamaha does. And playability is hard on the SC. I changed the saddle to a Tusq and lowered the action to 3/32 at the 12th fret and while playability is better, it is still hard to play. You really have to press hard to get clean tone out of it even with extra light strings. But I do like the tone on it.

Yamaha made incredible guitars in the 60's & 70's. Their lam's sounded great. That's why there is a demand for them. As far as quality lately, I can't say because I haven't played enough of them. As with all acoustic's it is always better to try out before buying so you can A/B them.

I am a big Yamaha fan. I've owned a studio acoustic piano, DX5, DX7 & Motif ES keyboards, AW1600 DAW and a host of other stuff. However, I will be more careful when choosing my next acoustic guitar. You will always find bad guitars with every company. Some more than others.