Page 1 of 2
#1
With so much effort being made by Chinese sweatshops to make their guitars look exactly like the real thing, and so many of them missing the mark on so many details. (the shape of the headstock being an especially common area that the fakes botch)

Why don't the manufacturers of these fakes buy some actual examples of the real thing, and trace the dimensions of the guitar that way? Using photographs as a guide for copying these fakes obviously doesn't work, because otherwise where are these inconsistencies in their dimensions coming from? And it isn't like these sweatshops cannot afford to buy the real thing and ship it over to China, because they're relatively big businesses.

Some guitars I can understand them not being able to buy because they might be exceptionally rare and expensive, but what about getting something like a Gibson LP Studio used from some seller on Ebay, shipping it to China, tracing all the dimensions of the guitar, making accurate routing templates based on those dimensions, and you can make almost every single common Les Paul from that one template because most Les Pauls have very similar (if not the same) dimensions as one another. Nobody will be able to tell the fake from the real one in terms of the shape of the body, the headstock, the knob placement, the distance between the bridge and the tailpiece etc. because the dimensions are taken directly from the real thing and not just guestimated from photographs.

Same story for Ibanez JEM's. It doesn't even need to be an MIJ JEM. It could just be a cheaper Premium used off Ebay and it'll match the real thing.

Lots of pretty cheap MIA Fender Strats and Tele's used out there that share many of their dimensions to other legit models.

Same could be done with Jackson, LTD, the list goes on.

You'd think they would do that, but based on the vast majority of fakes I've seen, apparently not. Why not? It would make their fakes look a lot more convincing.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
#2
IMO, I think the fakes that are easy to catch are the ones you see.
There are better fakes, doing just that. ^

There are also companies better at marketing their fake guitars. Those are the ones that end up in retail stores.
Ones that are spot on until you take them apart.

The "budget" fake guitars end up on error filled websites
Jenneh

Quote by TNfootballfan62
Jenny needs to sow her wild oats with random Gibsons and Taylors she picks up in bars before she settles down with a PRS.


Set up Questions? ...Q & A Thread

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A/GB&C WTLT Lists 2011
#3
Because I would guess a lot of the factories producing these fakes are just using templates from whatever guitar company is using them at the time and don't bother making their own. It's close enough that most people can't tell the difference. Why bother spending extra time and money to go the extra step? Is it going to make corksniffers buy fakes because they get the shapes right? Probably not.


Like, why try and source an ABR-1 for a 59 RI copy when most of the people buying these fakes just want the name of the headstock and an open book? Bridge and knob locations don't really matter if that's what you're aiming for.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#4
Chinese knockoffs run full spectrum just like Lolex watches. Some are very good and some are just awful. I have a friend with a Chinese "Chickenbacher" 4001 bass and it is a lotta axe for $400. Trust your hands and your ears. Only suckers buy them on ebay without playing them first. They have zero pedigree.
"Your sound is in your hands as much as anything. It's the way you pick, and the way you hold the guitar, more than it is the amp or the guitar you use." -- Stevie Ray Vaughan

"Anybody can play. The note is only 20 percent. The attitude of the motherfucker who plays it is 80 percent." -- Miles Davis

Guthrie on tone: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmohdG9lLqY
#5
Chinese knockoff companies probably don't try any harder because they don't need to. Idiots and cheapskates all over the world are still buying their stuff, knowingly fake or otherwise. Sometimes they end up with accidentally good guitars.

Why bother spending extra time and money to go the extra step? Is it going to make corksniffers buy fakes because they get the shapes right? Probably not.


+1
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
Last edited by JustRooster at Mar 30, 2015,
#6
Why should they change anything by now.....

and some things can't be changed at their current pricepoint


they find enough uneducated dealhunters to buy it like it is

#7
Quote by JustRooster
Idiots and cheapskates all over the world are still buying their stuff, knowingly fake or otherwise.


I have a conspiracy theory about this.

1. Gibson makes NO money from sales of used guitars.
They ONLY make money when someone buys a new one.

2. They own one of the largest LP clone factories in China (okay, that's if we call Epiphone LPs what they are). In short, the knowledge and capability is certainly extant in China such that someone could build a bang-on replica with no errors in look or design.

So why are so many Gibson replicas showing up with obvious glitches, even when those glitches have been identified publicly over the last half decade and more?

What If <ConspiracyALERT>
...Gibson itself were, uh, "allowing these replicas to exist" with the thought that they will insert FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) into the used market. For a while, over on MyLesPaul, every third post was "Is This A Fake?" and a lot of them were.

If the only way you could be sure of getting an authentic LP was to buy a new one, this would work heavily in Gibson's favor, right? If the fakes are TOO good and someone really couldn't tell that they'd been had, people might be thinking, "Why bother getting a Gibson if this cheapo really doesn't give itself away?" People might also think, "What am I really buying when I pay the bucks for a *real* Gibson if there are no discernible differences?" Thus the need for "mistakes" in construction. If someone like Agile is capable of making a really good, really repeatable, surprisingly good quality guitar that's able to sell *at a profit* legally for $225, why then are we not seeing equally good fakes capable of selling for even less? Unless Gibson is actually supporting the crap fakes (either by turning a blind eye passively or actively promoting them under the table) and wants to have that FUD factor floating around the used market place, driving customers to seek new guitars...

Muhuwahahah!

</ConspiracyALERT>
Last edited by dspellman at Mar 30, 2015,
#8
Quote by dspellman

If the only way you could be sure of getting an authentic LP was to buy a new one, this would work heavily in Gibson's favor, right?


just messing around of course here,
but fyi, there have been a couple of local shops shut down for selling really good fake Gibsons. guitars that were so good they had to be checked by experts. (and I'm not talking guitar center experts here)

so I guess to be safe, the only ones considered real
are the ones walking out of the factory?
Jenneh

Quote by TNfootballfan62
Jenny needs to sow her wild oats with random Gibsons and Taylors she picks up in bars before she settles down with a PRS.


Set up Questions? ...Q & A Thread

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A/GB&C WTLT Lists 2011
#9
Quote by jj1565
just messing around of course here,
but fyi, there have been a couple of local shops shut down for selling really good fake Gibsons. guitars that were so good they had to be checked by experts. (and I'm not talking guitar center experts here)

so I guess to be safe, the only ones considered real
are the ones walking out of the factory?


Replicas are high end, using good quality woods and hardware etc.... May or may not use Gibson headstock designs. Correct cavity layouts, knob placements, woods etc... Older bartletts, monty, derrig/max, Corsa, Italian bursts etc... all make (or have made) high end replicas. You might even consider things like Momose and Navigator in this category. I mean they can be dressed up as a Gibson pretty easy.


Fakes are chinese junk. You could tell the difference straight away and aren't even in the same league.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
Last edited by H4T3BR33D3R at Mar 30, 2015,
#10
well, i'm guessing, if they are being passed off as gibsons, then people over at gibson would consider them fake.
Jenneh

Quote by TNfootballfan62
Jenny needs to sow her wild oats with random Gibsons and Taylors she picks up in bars before she settles down with a PRS.


Set up Questions? ...Q & A Thread

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A/GB&C WTLT Lists 2011
#11
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Because I would guess a lot of the factories producing these fakes are just using templates from whatever guitar company is using them at the time and don't bother making their own. It's close enough that most people can't tell the difference. Why bother spending extra time and money to go the extra step? Is it going to make corksniffers buy fakes because they get the shapes right? Probably not.


Like, why try and source an ABR-1 for a 59 RI copy when most of the people buying these fakes just want the name of the headstock and an open book? Bridge and knob locations don't really matter if that's what you're aiming for.

A large number of people who buy these fakes are aware that what they're buying is fake and they know what to look out for when buying a fake. Pretty much every single buyer of these fakes would rather have a counterfeit that's closer in dimensions to the real thing, no?

I cannot see it costing a lot more time or energy on the part of the factory to make the headstock the correct shape, the body the right shape, the inlays the right shape etc. The only difference is that one is using the correctly sized set of templates and the other isn't.
The manufacturing process itself hasn't really changed. They don't have to make the guitars to a higher quality, they just need to make each component the right size. The cost of making the template the right size is pretty negligible considering the amount of guitars they sell. They go to the lengths of producing this counterfeiting infrastructure and commission R&D teams (I know of counterfeiting sweat shops that actually do this) to analyse the guitars they've been commissioned to fake, why is any of that necessary when you can just buy the real thing and trace it?
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Mar 30, 2015,
#12
Quote by jj1565
well, i'm guessing, if they are being passed off as gibsons, then people over at gibson would consider them fake.



We're not people at Gibson though.


Sure, you can say it doesn't matter (and I agree with you) but there's a distinction that I thought I'd point out.


Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
A large number of people who buy these fakes are aware that what they're buying is fake and they know what to look out for when buying a fake. Pretty much every single buyer of these fakes would rather have a counterfeit that's closer in dimensions to the real thing, no?

I cannot see it costing a lot more time or energy on the part of the factory to make the headstock the correct shape, the body the right shape, the inlays the right shape etc. The only difference is that one is using the correctly sized set of templates and the other isn't.
The manufacturing process itself hasn't really changed. They don't have to make the guitars to a higher quality, they just need to make each component the right size. The cost of making the templated the right size is pretty negligible considering the amount of guitars they sell.



Then why do you think they aren't doing it?
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
Last edited by H4T3BR33D3R at Mar 30, 2015,
#13
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Then why do you think they aren't doing it?

Because they're dumb.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
#14
Logical.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#15


Considering that it takes very little effort to simply trace to dimensions off the real thing and make templates for those dimensions, its dumb not to do so in my opinion.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Mar 30, 2015,
#16
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
We're not people at Gibson though.
Sure, you can say it doesn't matter (and I agree with you) but there's a distinction that I thought I'd point out.



sorry, I reread, I just think i meant the really good gibson copies, with faked sn#s and such, not really guitars that are high quality extremely similar guitars.
Jenneh

Quote by TNfootballfan62
Jenny needs to sow her wild oats with random Gibsons and Taylors she picks up in bars before she settles down with a PRS.


Set up Questions? ...Q & A Thread

Recognised by the Official EG/GG&A/GB&C WTLT Lists 2011
#17
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE


Considering that it takes very little effort to simply trace to dimensions off the real thing and make templates for those dimensions, its dumb not to do so in my opinion.



Sure.


Now fix the rest of the stuff that makes it look wrong and keep it in the price range.


Quote by paruwi
Why should they change anything by now.....

and some things can't be changed at their current pricepoint


they find enough uneducated dealhunters to buy it like it is




Yeah, I'd like to see a drilled in abr, real MOP inlays, FEB, Klusons in the right color, no crappy looking amber tophats, a 1 piece back and 2 piece maple top for the same price these chinese fakes go for. I'd also like a flying pig and a couple of unicorns.


Quote by jj1565
sorry, I reread, I just think i meant the really good gibson copies, with faked sn#s and such, not really guitars that are high quality extremely similar guitars.



Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
Last edited by H4T3BR33D3R at Mar 30, 2015,
#18
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Sure.


Now fix the rest of the stuff that makes it look right and keep it in the price range.

For the Chinese factories?



If anything, they'd raise the prices of the guitars not because they're harder to build, but arguably because people are willing to pay more for a fake that looks more real.

To say the least, tracing the real thing is definitely a viable strategy.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Mar 30, 2015,
#20
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
For the Chinese factories?



If anything, they'd raise the prices of the guitars not because they're harder to build, but arguably because people are willing to pay more for a fake that looks more real.



Work that needs to be done by hand takes longer to do (therefor costs more to produce). Things like shaping headstocks, fretwork, wiring, correct finishing techniques, fret edge binding, drilling in bridges, extra QC work etc... I'd consider falling into that category and things that you would need to make the guitar look more legit. If the factory has a template all ready to go and people buy the things anyway what justifies the extra costs at making it look more legit? That's not even getting to sourcing the right woods, and parts...


Okay so now you say "well people are willing to pay a bit more if the fakes look real"


So what the heck is a Burny? What is a Tokai? Are they not "fakes" that have higher end parts and look more real? How are the Chinese supposed to compete with that when Japan does it already and ALREADY has lower end guitars being made in china (as well as mid tier guitars being made there like Edwards).


At the end of the day. People are buying these because they want a guitar that says Gibson on it for 200 bucks. From far away, you wouldn't be able to tell and most people can't tell anyway. That's enough for them.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
Last edited by H4T3BR33D3R at Mar 30, 2015,
#21
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Work that needs to be done by hand takes longer to do (therefor costs more to produce).


Who said that cutting the body out correctly, the neck out correctly the headstock out correctly had to be done by hand?

Sure sanding the edges smooth is a process of manual labour, but extremely cheap Chinese labour is well, extremely cheap. Even the cheap fakers do that sort of thing because the costs are so low.

Fret edge binding really doesn't add very significant cost to the price of the guitar, based on the videos of people I've seen and their experiences with buying the same model with nibs vs. those without. Again, ultra cheap labour means that additional features and areas that need attention, really don't cost the manufacturer very much more to reproduce.

The more intricate details such as the wiring, the nut, the fret levelling, are not things that are obvious to a person who is only looking at a photo of the front and back of the guitar on a TradeTang listing, which is pretty much what all buyers of fakes are doing. They can make the wiring and shit as cheap as they like and the guitar will still look pretty darn convincing. I'm only concerning making the guitars 'look' right here, not making them necessarily higher quality.
Okay so now you say "well people are willing to pay a bit more if the fakes look real"

So what the heck is a Burny? What is a Tokai? Are they not "fakes" that have higher end parts and look more real? How are the Chinese superposed to compete with that when Japan does it already and ALREADY has lower end guitars being made in china (as well as mid tier guitars being made there like Edwards).

Again, I'm talking about just making the guitars look more correct, not actually making them play, sound or feel better.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
Last edited by T00DEEPBLUE at Mar 30, 2015,
#22
Yeah but it's not just the shape that makes them look wrong. Like I agree that you can make them look closer in shape and have the right sized cavities etc... But that's not the only thing that makes a guitar look legit. Hardware is a big part of it, finish is a big part of it, sometimes even construction differs.


Again, I still stand by the point that it doesn't matter to them, because people buy them anyway.
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#23
That my friend, is why you fake LP Customs. No trans finish to reveal how many pieces of wood are used to construct them.

I've also seen some pretty cheap fakes (About $250) with copies of the ABR1 bridge without the slots.

I agree that there are going to be people who simply don't care, but at the same time it doesn't require a whole lot of effort to make them look more genuine either.
Quote by TheSennaj
And well yes, I'll enjoy the carpal tunnel and tendonitis, because trying to get one is clearly smarter than any word you have spoken thus far.
#24
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE
That my friend, is why you fake LP Customs. No trans finish to reveal how many pieces of wood are used to construct them.



Yeah and why would you want to see that 8 piece balsa top anyway?
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#25
The whole point of making guitars is to sell them and make a profit doing so. The Chibson prices reflect the cheaper labor, materials and other costs of manufacturing. While they have improved a bit on some "tells" I don't think they are interested in investing in a real Gibson (or real other guitar maker's product) to use as an example.
In a country where the average minimum wage is $1.50/hr making a couple of hundred bucks per guitar is lucrative to be sure.
If the pics are decent there are many details they still screw up so I can (so far) always tell if it's a Chibson. Replicas (that cost thousands) on the other hands not so easy to tell but those guitars are aimed at a particular market and if the builder has any kind of reputation cost more than the real thing anyway.
Moving on.....
#26
Quote by T00DEEPBLUE

.........
Fret edge binding really doesn't add very significant cost to the price of the guitar, based on the videos of people I've seen and their experiences with buying the same model with nibs vs. those without. Again, ultra cheap labour means that additional features and areas that need attention, really don't cost the manufacturer very much more to reproduce.
...........



Just a few facts from some guy who worked at gibson for a long time


1) Binding material doesn't cost much, but it takes extra hours and hours to do it right. What you may not know is that the binding is painted over and then later hand-scraped off. It's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well and it's an elegant feature for a guitar.

Other Guitar brands shy away from biding bodies for this very reason

2) In the production facility for Gibson USA, there are 7 to 8 people dedicated just to neck binding. again, it's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well and it's an elegant feature for a guitar.

Other Guitar brands shy away from biding fingerboards for this very reason.

3) Binding material is actually inlaid into the guitar. This means binding channels must be cut to inlay the binding into. It requires extra steps, it's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well.

You guessed it, other guitar brands shy away from this because of the extra steps.

Binding doesnt HAVE to be on a guitar to be thought of as Elegant or Expensive...but having it does make a price difference.

I hope that helps explain why bound Gibsons cost more than Non-bound Gibsons
.
#27
i think that there are some assumptions that may not be correct. first off that the target market is the US, it isn't. they find their way over here anyways but we're not the people they are looking to sell to. people in other countries that have little hope of being able to afford a real gibson are the target. who better to seel to then folks that don't really have access to the real thing and most likely wouldn't have a clue as to it being fake. all they se are pictures.

2nd and this had been mentioned is tooling etc. this is expensive so people making fakes aren't likely to want to sink any real money into this. if they can buy preexisting tooling etc and a couple of little things get by so what.

as for Dspellman's theory there actually may be some validity to it. certainly gibson, fender and ibanez have the funds to go after these people or make it hard enough to import them into the US (or japan etc) that it's no longer worth it. they really don't put up more than the occasional token effort which makes me wonder.

my brother lives in china and the fakes aren't really sold there as the people over there know that you can't get a real american guitar for cheap. not to say they don't turn up but he has run across very few.
#28
Quote by paruwi
Just a few facts from some guy who worked at gibson for a long time


1) Binding material doesn't cost much, but it takes extra hours and hours to do it right. What you may not know is that the binding is painted over and then later hand-scraped off. It's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well and it's an elegant feature for a guitar.

Other Guitar brands shy away from biding bodies for this very reason

2) In the production facility for Gibson USA, there are 7 to 8 people dedicated just to neck binding. again, it's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well and it's an elegant feature for a guitar.

Other Guitar brands shy away from biding fingerboards for this very reason.

3) Binding material is actually inlaid into the guitar. This means binding channels must be cut to inlay the binding into. It requires extra steps, it's a pain in the ass, but Gibson does it so well.

You guessed it, other guitar brands shy away from this because of the extra steps.

Binding doesnt HAVE to be on a guitar to be thought of as Elegant or Expensive...but having it does make a price difference.

I hope that helps explain why bound Gibsons cost more than Non-bound Gibsons
.


Meh. An Agile AL-2000 is single-bound on the body and (I'll have to check) the neck. $225. An Agile AL-3000 is multi-layer on the body and headstock and single-bound on the fretboard. That guitar was running about $375 with an ebony fretboard, jumbo hand-filed frets and real MOP inlays. Wait, does Gibson still do ebony fretboards?

Gibson doesn't do it that well; it's the source of a lot of their customer complaints regarding finish. Taylor does it extremely well, but so do a lot of other companies (Schecter, for example) for a lot less money. For that matter, the folks that the Qindao Epiphone plant do a pretty good job on the binding as well, and for a lot less money than what Gibson charges.
#29
Quote by dspellman
Meh. An Agile AL-2000
.........

For that matter, the folks that the Qindao Epiphone plant do a pretty good job on the binding as well, and for a lot less money than what Gibson charges.


The process how the binding is done is quite different on an Epi.....
yeah, and the wages are cheaper, too


oh, and Agile.........meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh
#30
Quote by dspellman
I have a conspiracy theory about this.

1. Gibson makes NO money from sales of used guitars.
They ONLY make money when someone buys a new one.

2. They own one of the largest LP clone factories in China (okay, that's if we call Epiphone LPs what they are). In short, the knowledge and capability is certainly extant in China such that someone could build a bang-on replica with no errors in look or design.

So why are so many Gibson replicas showing up with obvious glitches, even when those glitches have been identified publicly over the last half decade and more?

What If <ConspiracyALERT>
...Gibson itself were, uh, "allowing these replicas to exist" with the thought that they will insert FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) into the used market. For a while, over on MyLesPaul, every third post was "Is This A Fake?" and a lot of them were.

If the only way you could be sure of getting an authentic LP was to buy a new one, this would work heavily in Gibson's favor, right? If the fakes are TOO good and someone really couldn't tell that they'd been had, people might be thinking, "Why bother getting a Gibson if this cheapo really doesn't give itself away?" People might also think, "What am I really buying when I pay the bucks for a *real* Gibson if there are no discernible differences?" Thus the need for "mistakes" in construction. If someone like Agile is capable of making a really good, really repeatable, surprisingly good quality guitar that's able to sell *at a profit* legally for $225, why then are we not seeing equally good fakes capable of selling for even less? Unless Gibson is actually supporting the crap fakes (either by turning a blind eye passively or actively promoting them under the table) and wants to have that FUD factor floating around the used market place, driving customers to seek new guitars...

Muhuwahahah!

</ConspiracyALERT>

Interesting train of thought. I'm not a conspiracy theorist but it's plausible from a certain point of view.

As far as why they don't get the shapes and the details right, I think for the most part, they don't care. They don't need to. I figure people who are buying these things directly from China have GOT to know they're not legit (either that or they're missing a chromosome) and in some sizable chunk of the purchases people are buying them because they either don't know what details to look for themselves or because they are more interested in giving others (non guitar players who might have only heard of the name) the impression that they bought a top shelf instrument. And of course there are those who buy the things thinking they'll tweak them into great guitars on the cheap. Maybe. If I wanted to go that route I'd rather go pick up a used epi LP or PRS SE off CL or GC. The warranty would be the same (none) the price would be similar, maybe slightly higher, and I wouldn't have as severe a set of doubts about the quality or deal with possible customs seizure.
#31
I own some Chibson fakes. I bought my first about three years ago to tear apart and use as the basis to learn how to repair and modify specifically Les Paul's. The first one I got has been changed from top to bottom, all the hardware (pups, pots, tuners, switches and wiring and extensive fret dress). That one took a lot of work and is a four piece body with a small maple cap and veneer top but the finish looked good. It was very instructional for me and that's why I bought it to begin with and I learned a great deal.
The second one I bought about a 10 months ago to do the same thing again only now I wanted to try my hand at refinishing a guitar also. The second one was almost perfect in all respects. The hardware was decent, the tuners and pups work well and the finish is way too good to mess up so I'm leaving it as is. The point is, they have gotten better and better. This one is a two piece body and when I opened the pickup cavity I found a full maple cap. I think they are a crap shot and you take a chance. One person gets a nice guitar and another a piece of junk that needs a lot of work to just be OK. I think the real difference is the quality control. I think that the Chinese factories don't really have a good quality control so everything goes out no matter how it was made as long as it looks OK. I was in Hong Kong last year and was hoping to find a music store that was selling these Chibson knock offs so I could spend and hour or two playing them and finding a good one to ship home but in my limited time there I never found one.

I think monwobobo has it right. These things may be meant strictly for export.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
Last edited by Rickholly74 at Mar 31, 2015,
#32
to add to what i've already said here is a little known fact about doing business in china. products made for foreign companies (like Gibson) are considered products of that country. in china you can't just buy say an epiphone straight from the factory. the guitar literally has to go out of the country and be imported back in. the gov't makes money on the import fee. dealers have to be able to show they paid the import fee or the gov't comes down hard on them. this is why you don't really find fakes in china all that much.
#33
Same thing in Korea too. I remember not being able to find any Nike's there in the late 80's despite every one of them over here saying "Made in Korea." And my cousin gets pissed when I tell her what I pay for a Galaxy phone vs what she pays (she lives there).
#34
I think it's because the target market for the super cheap fakes aren't actual dedicated guitar players. The target market is people who want a guitar that says "Gibson" on it, and doesn't cost them anything. That is to say, posers who want their friends and/or small audiences to think they have a fancy guitar, and don't give a shit about anything beyond that. Actual players, who care about the sound and feel of a guitar, would realize that the logo on the headstock does not affect that, and would just buy a better cheap guitar, from a company that's not lying about what they produce.
Guitars
Schecter Hellraiser C-1FR, C-1 Classic, Hellraiser Hybrid Solo-II, Special Edition E-1FR-S
Orange Rockerverb 50 212
Basses
Yamaha RBX374 and Washburn MB-6
#35
I don't know about how China handles their exports but I know that the above post about Korean exports on electronic products is correct. I have been to Korea four times and have never seen any electronic equipment (phones, tablets, laptops, DVD, CD or other) cheaper than you can get it in the U.S. I was told that the Korean government subsidizes the electronic exports thus making them able to offer the products at significantly lower prices to U.S. distributors. This helps the South Korean economy because it creates jobs but the Korean people can't buy those products in Korea at the prices we pay in the U.S. I have several Korean friends whose relatives come for visits to U.S. and buy stuff in the U.S. to take back home to Korea because it's so much cheaper here. It might be the same in China.
Yes I am guitarded also, nice to meet you.
#36
Quote by paruwi
The process how the binding is done is quite different on an Epi.....
yeah, and the wages are cheaper, too


oh, and Agile.........meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeh


It is? I was there. Looked pretty normal to me. What did you see "quite different?"
#37
WTF did someone highjack my account ? ponyfan links to my info when i clicked on account.
this is monwobobbo and i see that when i post it coems up this pony fan BS.

oh april fools. hope the guy that came up with this gets gelded.
Last edited by monwobobbo at Apr 1, 2015,
#38
Looks like somepony woke up on the wrong side of the rainbow!
Sturgeon's 2nd Law, a.k.a. Sturgeon's Revelation: “Ninety percent of everything is crap.”

Why, yes, I am a lawyer- thanks for asking!

Log off and play yer guitar!

Strap on, tune up, rock out!
#39
Quote by dannyalcatraz
Looks like somepony woke up on the wrong side of the rainbow!


send the ponies to the glue factory. yeah having one of those days
Page 1 of 2