Epi SG - Sustainer, Nailbomb, Korg KP2 Multi-FX, Killswitch!

[Jonny]

This seemed interesting just looking at it..

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/EPIPHONE-SG-KORG-KP2-CUSTOM-GUITAR-MULTI-EFFECTS_W0QQitemZ270222006828QQihZ017QQcategoryZ33037QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

And for those lazy people who don't like to click things:

[TwilightOdyssey]

That's exactly the kind of guitar I would never own.

Not that I don't like the idea, I think it's great and REALLY well executed.

But I prefer single pup directly to jack with no volume control, tone, etc.

[Fikealox]

Looks like the guy's taken a lot of time and care to make it... but I hate Epiphones, and would rather just plug a guitar through a pod and have a longboard or something, lol.

You've got to laugh at his ebay name though :D "Arserammer", haha!

[FELINEGUITARS]

Very neatly done
I'm more alarmed that he calls himself "arserammer" on ebay

[Mr Ed]

That looks amazing... but, to me, the kaoss pad is a step too far. Never really seen the point in them unless you have a thing for Matt stinking Bellamy.

Adding the sustainer, a hot bucker and killswitch is damn-near perfect for me. The phaser sounds like a quality touch although I personally would rather have a pedal than having to twiddle a dial while attempting to play. Is the killswitch an actual SWITCH or is a button? Buttons are way better.

And the fact that it's an Epiphone really, really puts me off.

[RadioElectric]

I think it looks ace.

What have you guys got against Epiphone?

[Ian Price]

I'm more alarmed that he calls himself "arserammer" on ebay

I laughed out very loud when I saw this. So loud in fact that it woke my daughter up. :lol:

[Jonny]

I think it looks ace.

What have you guys got against Epiphone?

I like Epiphone.

*hides in a room to avoid a barrage of abuse*

[maverickf1jockey]

I think it looks ace.

What have you guys got against Epiphone?

They are never going to be quite the same as a proper Gibson (and that's not the slightly suspect stuff that is known to sometimes come out of the Nashville factory nowadays) in terms of build quality and choice of materials.

Because they have to generate such a vast number of guitars for each order, at economical rates, there are certain aspects of the finishing and quality control that can go awry.
Also, being owned by Gibson, they are required to be inferior (in the western market anyway), regardless of the quality of the luthiery. This means that all the best examples probably find their way into the Asian market along with a number of other clone brands, which are often superior and cheaper alternatives.

I am trying not to sound like a snob here as I actually love cheapo guitars; they have a certain charm that more expensive models often fail to replicate, but only if you get a good one.

Back to the subject I think that the guitar would be vastly improved without all the gadgetry and just set up properly, with a couple of factory errors, around the frets for example, cleaned up and sold as an instrument and not a supercomputer.

[RadioElectric]

I think it looks ace.

What have you guys got against Epiphone?

They are never going to be quite the same as a proper Gibson (and that's not the slightly suspect stuff that is known to sometimes come out of the Nashville factory nowadays) in terms of build quality and choice of materials.

Because they have to generate such a vast number of guitars for each order, at economical rates, there are certain aspects of the finishing and quality control that can go awry.
Also, being owned by Gibson, they are required to be inferior (in the western market anyway), regardless of the quality of the luthiery. This means that all the best examples probably find their way into the Asian market along with a number of other clone brands, which are often superior and cheaper alternatives.

I am trying not to sound like a snob here as I actually love cheapo guitars; they have a certain charm that more expensive models often fail to replicate, but only if you get a good one.

Back to the subject I think that the guitar would be vastly improved without all the gadgetry and just set up properly, with a couple of factory errors, around the frets for example, cleaned up and sold as an instrument and not a supercomputer.

I'll agree that an Epiphone that'll be as good as the "ideal" Gibson would be very rare, but then "ideal" Gibsons are very rare too. I've played some terrible Gibson Les Pauls, the only decent ones I've played are from the 70s. At least the quantity of Epiphone models makes the odds of finding a good one higher.

As for quality of construction and parts, isn't there a Slash signature Epiphone that has a long neck tenon that you can't get on low-end Gibsons? I'm sure I've heard people raving about that.

I'm not saying that there are no advantages for buying Gibson (and so there should be for that money), I just don't feel that something that costs less than a grand should be classified as a "cheapo" guitar.

[Philly Q]

As for quality of construction and parts, isn't there a Slash signature Epiphone that has a long neck tenon that you can't get on low-end Gibsons? I'm sure I've heard people raving about that.

I don't know about the Slash sig, but there are certainly Japanese Epiphones with long-tenon neck joints.  They're pretty hard to find (except on eBay), but the quality is fantastic.

As for this particular Epi SG, it looks very impressive, but it's not something I'd want to own.

[Sifu Ben]

I'm not saying that there are no advantages for buying Gibson (and so there should be for that money), I just don't feel that something that costs less than a grand should be classified as a "cheapo" guitar.

It's not that they're not as good as Gibsons, no-one really expects them to be, it's that they're not generally as good as Washburn, Ibanez, Dean, Cort, Agile or any of the numerous other brands at that price point. A good Epiphone is a decent enough guitar, but QC is almost non-existent, so you end up with sloppy finishing, dodgy frets, poorly cut nuts, sharp saddles, seriously iffy electrics........ and that's just on mine!!!!!!!  
 Epiphones are relatively expensive for what they are, yet they tend to just feel cheap. A £350 Dean or Ibanez is a serviceable, gig worthy guitar, and a solid platform for upgrading to something really tasty, whereas you'd be lucky to find an Epiphone where that was the case (they do exist, they're just few and far between).
 To be fair, in the past year or so Epiphone do seem to have been getting their act together a bit more with regards to spec, just have to see what happens with QC.

[maverickf1jockey]

I feel I must clarify: by 'cheapo' I meant a guitar that is cheap in manufacture to the point where it negatively affects the quality control. However, some great examples get through. This is why I have a soft spot for them.
Where a guitar is cheap but the QC is to a reasonable standard this is value for money IMO.

For example:
Epiphone = 'cheapo'
Edwards = Value for money

[Reeven]

I think it looks ace.

What have you guys got against Epiphone?

I like Epiphone.

*hides in a room to avoid a barrage of abuse*

Haha, I like Epiphone too. Reason being: Gibson is waaay out of my price range, and Epiphones are close enough, but for a fraction of the price.

[Jonny]

I don't really see cr@ppy construction in Epiphones. Unless it's pointed out of course. The whole 'shite fret dressing' hasn't popped up yet.