round the world lemon goodness NFGD

Sérgio said:
So you are assuming Derrig's guitars are in any way inferior in quality to Gibsons of that time.

And nothing I said about labor and mass production forgery matters in the equation.

Ok.

images
Click to expand...


I said nothing at all about the quality of his guitars. I've never played one.

But, yes, the cost of labour very much matters in the equation. I might go as far as to say that it is everything.
 
Ok, now off the debate about Chinese stuff. Just sharing info:

As far as I've researched and read about it since the 90s, a Derrig guitar wasn't much different in quality from a custom order Gibson Les Paul.

He had a shop (or at least worked at one) in Redondo Beach, CA, and built some Les Paul inspired guitars, actually not many (I think more custom orders). He used very good grade woods, and good quality electronics. Pickups varied, but the ones I read about (including Slash's Appetite) had Seymour Duncans on them.

The specs wen't exactly true as in historics, but it was a very good quality premium instrument...

I don't know for sure but my guess, given the facts I can gather, is that he never sold these guitars as "Gibsons", he made them fir people who ordered a custom spec Les Paul knowing what they wanted, and I don't think they were cheap.
 
Sérgio said:
I don't think they were cheap.
Click to expand...
No one said they were, in any sense, we just noted that they were fake. I'm now told that Slash paid about $4500 for his Appetite model, that's in line with Gibson costs. Slash is a real good player, so I will assume it's a real good guitar. So are some of the $500-1200 copies I see in boutique shops in San Francisco, with the builder's unique name on the headstock. Slash wanted you to think he was playing a '59 Gibson or at least an licensed ri. That's why he has it on the headstock, Gibson liked it so much, they make copies of the fakes and sell them for a couple of grand. While my personal stand may be to eschew counterfeits, Gibson brands is obviously more flexible.
 
gball said:
I don't know, I am unconvinced by that. I think any person who is well aware that they are purchasing counterfeit goods must have to go through some amount of rationalization to justify it, even if it just comes down to cost. They will always know it's fake, so obviously they have to be okay with that which questions whether the purchase is for them or to impress other people. If it's not for others what do you gain by having Gibson on the headstock if you know yourself it's not a Gibson? Spend your money on something honest. You mention the Rolex guys and I think that is just as weird: I own an expensive watch (not a Rolex but same quality level) and it would be inconceivable to me to buy a fake version of it just to impress other people when I don't want to wear it - I would know it was fake and that's all I would need to know. Plus, the guy who wants to steal the thing doesn't know it's fake so your danger of being robbed for it is just as high and you may get hurt in the process.
Click to expand...

For me it became a quest to see what I could get for my money. I have a new Chinese guitar on the way right now. It should be delivered this week.

I specifically ordered this one to my spec after buying on off the shelf to judge quality...it's just something I want to measure. As you can see I have
plenty of high end gear.

The new one has "Spectre" inlaid where Gibson should be and on the back it says "Made in Uranus" and serial number is 0000069...

I gave specific requirements and had pictures emailed throughout the process for my approval prior to the next step. I want to see how good
a $300 guitar can be made in China. It has nothing to do with trying to havd "Gibson" on the headstock even though the test guitar I bought first
for $188 does have...
 
Looks like a guitar----like all the others----
Gibson isn't stopping them -=-- from what I understand you can BUY one---- you just cant RESELL one....so if eSGEe intends to keep it-----whats the harm? OBVIOUSLY the headstock shape (mustache) is off a bit....it has an epi style bridge and as someone said the tuners are a little JACKED....and that cheap green OBVIOUS --screams fake material.
The stamped Made in USA is crooked and runs into one of the tuners.......wow....

I am told it is a risk to order these?
That many are confiscated at customs?

SO IMHO if you want to GAMBLE getting similar to Epiphone quality guitar----that says Gibson-- well, go ahead.

People do illegal things every day
lie on taxes
speed
eat grapes in the grocery store

You cant stop them
 
Sérgio said:
In my own understanding, the problem resides not in someone awarely buying such a guitar, like Adrian or Sp3ctre.

It's that these guitars are MEANT to deceive and fool. You guys are high level connoisseurs and know what it is and what it ain't, but that doesn't neuter the fact that this is a product of crime, near-slave work and harming of American -and Chinese, I doubt these workers make something like minimum wage- labor.

Either we see it so or not, it is an evil object and buying it DOES stimulate that cancerous network.

No, I am not and won't point my finger at the friends who buy and like one, but I won't tell them I agree or would do the same. It may be a pleasure, but it's certainly a guilty pleasure.
Click to expand...

This can not be considered slave work. They get paid based on the Chinese economy and are glad to have jobs. If all these places closed their doors these workers would be on the street homeless
and begging for a living. We are not going to change world economics by refusing to buy the products. Hell most of the goods you use on a daily basis are made in some foreign country where wages
are low...you want to stop that then you have to dismantle all the capitalist companies in the USA selling these good...
 
Sérgio said:
Ok, now off the debate about Chinese stuff. Just sharing info:

As far as I've researched and read about it since the 90s, a Derrig guitar wasn't much different in quality from a custom order Gibson Les Paul.

He had a shop (or at least worked at one) in Redondo Beach, CA, and built some Les Paul inspired guitars, actually not many (I think more custom orders). He used very good grade woods, and good quality electronics. Pickups varied, but the ones I read about (including Slash's Appetite) had Seymour Duncans on them.

The specs wen't exactly true as in historics, but it was a very good quality premium instrument...

I don't know for sure but my guess, given the facts I can gather, is that he never sold these guitars as "Gibsons", he made them fir people who ordered a custom spec Les Paul knowing what they wanted, and I don't think they were cheap.
Click to expand...

The Derrig guitar was made with the Gibson logo and was NOT made by Gibson...therefore it is a FAKE. Period...no giving a pass to a guitar because the maker is a quality luthier.

Let's just be clear...Fake is Fake no matter the quality! If you do not work for Gibson and make the guitar in a Gibson facility it is a FAKE!
 
Sp8ctre said:
The Derrig guitar was made with the Gibson logo and was NOT made by Gibson...therefore it is a FAKE. Period...no giving a pass to a guitar because the maker is a quality luthier.

Let's just be clear...Fake is Fake no matter the quality! If you do not work for Gibson and make the guitar in a Gibson facility it is a FAKE!
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't.

They just weren't meant to fool anyone, weren't made with cheap/slave labor and were custom ordered premium instruments, therefore a much different product compared to Chibsons.

But they were fake Gibsons indeed.
 
New ---so treading lightly here.....but the Indonesian and Korean and Chinese plants that Fender and Gibson "contract" through for the lower end guitars they sell do not use the same labor laws as AMerica, not at all.
So in buying a Squire made in Indonesia your promoting low wage labor in 3rd world countries. AND making Fender rich.

China has a massively GROWING middle class who are very successful and enjoying huge growth .......

I think I see what Sergio was meaning.
The large imports of such guitars to intentionally deceive the public for self gain by a few individuals is a problem. One or two folks buying to have is not really that bad.
 
goblin said:
New ---so treading lightly here.....but the Indonesian and Korean and Chinese plants that Fender and Gibson "contract" through for the lower end guitars they sell do not use the same labor laws as AMerica, not at all.
So in buying a Squire made in Indonesia your promoting low wage labor in 3rd world countries. AND making Fender rich.

China has a massively GROWING middle class who are very successful and enjoying huge growth .......

I think I see what Sergio was meaning.
The large imports of such guitars to intentionally deceive the public for self gain by a few individuals is a problem. One or two folks buying to have is not really that bad.
Click to expand...


You are right.

What makes me dislike Chinese knockoffs (not only guitars, ANY knockoffs) is that most of them are built not by regular Asian employees that make a lower minimum wage than in America. Counterfeits are often built by underpaid workers (and I mean underpaid according to Asian standards and laws), that's why I'm using the expression slave work. Some of these "companies" are even less respectable, they don't get their profit only from harmless fake guitars, if you know what I mean. :unsure:

So whenever someone buys a fake Rolex, a fake guitar, any kind of counterfeit, this fellow often has no idea what he's financing with those few dollars.
 
Last edited:
Biddlin said:
Fakes don't bother this guy:
slash+kris+derrig+les+paul.jpg

I believe one of these Kris Deerig "fakes" just sold for six figures.
Click to expand...
Nor did they bother GIBSON -- hell they started making copies of the FAKES.........uhm---what??!?!-- EXACTLY

I am not importing 10,000 to sell on the black market --- I have been "Chib-curious" for years.....price was finally low enough I figured---WTF--- lets see what I get. IF I GET at all....


ANd as stated initially you can TELL.....unless your an idiot....... its not a GIBSON

Like Goblin said--- the "stamp" on the back is off......its rough as a cobb...and was done AFTER the finish was applied.....not BEFORE like a Gibbo.
the tuners (crap) they are 4.00 ebay tuners at best...
The bridge is straight Epi
and the top post was doing this when I first opened the box
chibby5.png

Now to be fair --- with string pressure and the lovely WET swampneckistan humidity today it looks like this
chibby 6.png

it drew in a bit!!! lol

When I change the strings I think I can drop a dab oh glue in the hole and PUSH it in......but

you would not mistake this for a Gibson ......not in your hands ... not if you have ever held a real one.

I do see your point Sergio--- and yes....part of my 188.00 may be assisting illegal activity--- however the Mob owns waste management here in the U.S> and the Teamsters union....so by getting anything delivered by truck or by having my trash collected---I am helping organized crime..... not trying to start an argument just pointing it out----- its there either OPENLY as in the case of the Chibson ---or hidden behind "nice" buildings and billing statements--- crime---evil-- is always there....
 
Shall I hone this razor to an even finer edge? Or, blur the lines?

Okay. I shall.

It could be argued, that there is a difference between a "fake" as in a guitar meant to fool someone into believing it is something else, and a "replica," meaning a guitar meant to recreate the details of a particular instrument. Now, this if course begs the question whether "fake" is anything other than the original, or if "fake" is to be used only with the intention of misleading.

I think we normally use the term "fake" to denote something intended to mislead, as in this definition:

"
fake1
fāk/
adjective
  1. 1.
    not genuine; counterfeit.
    "fake designer clothing"
    synonyms: forgery, counterfeit, copy, pirate(d) copy, sham, fraud, hoax, imitation, mock-up, dummy
noun
  1. 1.
    a thing that is not genuine; a forgery or sham.
    "the painting was a fake"
    synonyms: forgery, counterfeit, copy, pirate(d) copy, sham, fraud, hoax, imitation, mock-up, dummy, reproduction;
    informalphony, rip-off, knockoff, dupe
    "the sculpture was a fake"
https://www.google.com/search?q=fak...69i57j69i60.1362j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

So, the idea behind "fake" is a counterfeit - something that is intended to deceive. However, the Peter Max 1959 replica Les Pauls, and the Kevin Derrig replica Les Pauls are a different animal. They are not intended to counterfeit; they are intended to recreate minute details of a particular model. They are built, marketed, and sold as replicas and the builders of instruments such as these take pride in the fact that they are NOT Gibsons. Their selling point is that they have out-Gibsoned Gibson. People willingly pay the incredibly high prices for the Max Les Paul and the Derrig Les Pauls knowing full-well what they are because they want what they believe to be a very special Les Paul design...the 1959...and they feel Max and Derrig have successfully recreated that.
 
smitty_p said:
Shall I hone this razor to an even finer edge? Or, blur the lines?

Okay. I shall.

It could be argued, that there is a difference between a "fake" as in a guitar meant to fool someone into believing it is something else, and a "replica," meaning a guitar meant to recreate the details of a particular instrument. Now, this if course begs the question whether "fake" is anything other than the original, or if "fake" is to be used only with the intention of misleading.

I think we normally use the term "fake" to denote something intended to mislead, as in this definition:

"
fake1
fāk/
adjective
  1. 1.
    not genuine; counterfeit.
    "fake designer clothing"
    synonyms: forgery, counterfeit, copy, pirate(d) copy, sham, fraud, hoax, imitation, mock-up, dummy
noun
  1. 1.
    a thing that is not genuine; a forgery or sham.
    "the painting was a fake"
    synonyms: forgery, counterfeit, copy, pirate(d) copy, sham, fraud, hoax, imitation, mock-up, dummy, reproduction;
    informalphony, rip-off, knockoff, dupe
    "the sculpture was a fake"
https://www.google.com/search?q=fak...69i57j69i60.1362j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

So, the idea behind "fake" is a counterfeit - something that is intended to deceive. However, the Peter Max 1959 replica Les Pauls, and the Kevin Derrig replica Les Pauls are a different animal. They are not intended to counterfeit; they are intended to recreate minute details of a particular model. They are built, marketed, and sold as replicas and the builders of instruments such as these take pride in the fact that they are NOT Gibsons. Their selling point is that they have out-Gibsoned Gibson. People willingly pay the incredibly high prices for the Max Les Paul and the Derrig Les Pauls knowing full-well what they are because they want what they believe to be a very special Les Paul design...the 1959...and they feel Max and Derrig have successfully recreated that.
Click to expand...

Thanks. So by these definitions the Chinese guitars are not fake either, since clearly there is no intention to make people think they are buying a real Gibson. Had that been the intention, they would be priced at a couple of thousand, not $300.
 
DonP said:
Thanks. So by these definitions the Chinese guitars are not fake either, since clearly there is no intention to make people think they are buying a real Gibson. Had that been the intention, they would be priced at a couple of thousand, not $300.
Click to expand...
NOw your just arguing for the sake of arguing................

is this the full argument or just the 10 minutes?
 
DonP said:
Thanks. So by these definitions the Chinese guitars are not fake either, since clearly there is no intention to make people think they are buying a real Gibson. Had that been the intention, they would be priced at a couple of thousand, not $300.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...that is an interesting angle...
 
Sérgio said:
You are right.

What makes me dislike Chinese knockoffs (not only guitars, ANY knockoffs) is that most of them are built not by regular Asian employees that make a lower minimum wage than in America. Counterfeits are often built by underpaid workers (and I mean underpaid according to Asian standards and laws), that's why I'm using the expression slave work. Some of these "companies" are even less respectable, they don't get their profit only from harmless fake guitars, if you know what I mean. :unsure:

So whenever someone buys a fake Rolex, a fake guitar, any kind of counterfeit, this fellow often has no idea what he's financing with those few dollars.
Click to expand...

Having lived in Korea when it was still 3rd world I can tell you that the fakes were coming out of the same factories that were making the real deal on many occasions...

...sometimes they were seconds and sometimes just the Korean company taking a Name Brand out the back door and selling it for what it was REALLY WORTH...still wrong of course...

However back in the day you had to BE IN Korea to buy the fakes...the exports were less common...
 
DonP said:
Thanks. So by these definitions the Chinese guitars are not fake either, since clearly there is no intention to make people think they are buying a real Gibson. Had that been the intention, they would be priced at a couple of thousand, not $300.
Click to expand...

No, their intention is for people to knowingly purchase a counterfeit in order to fool others into thinking they bought a real Gibson. They are 100% fake.

And guess what? I don't care if they ship these things in by the boatload as long as they are properly identified as what they are (under the moniker/trademark of the builder). I do care that they are using the Gibson logo and that here is no reason to do that other than to deceive - these are clearly not intended as "replicas" when you consider the materials, methods and appointments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top