Here is how Heritage could sell more guitars (Warning: another headstock discussion!)

[JeffB]

1# If you all spent more time playing your guitars than checking yourselves out in the mirror with your guitars slung over your shoulder the whole head stock issue would be a moot point.

2# Even my 12yr old daughter cares less about aesthetics and more about function than some of you guys.

 

Yeah, grumpy pills are working fine thanks.

[kbp810]

I love the look of the Heritage headstock, and greatly appreciate that it is different (and perhaps more functional) then that of a Gibson.

 

The only thing I might have against it is that photos of the full guitar often do not do the headstock justice... when you look at a slightly angled picture of a heritage, the headstock almost gets this overly long/narrow appearance (much like the headstock on seagul's); but when you see one in person I think it looks great... but seeing as how it seems a great deal of guitar seekers will be reduced to only finding/buying one online right now, this does sort of become a potential hinderance.

 

Strictly opinion here, and I could be wrong (speaking only for my own local area): I think what could help Heritage right now is a stronger distribution channel. I could not find any local shops in the area that carried Heritage (including some listed on Heritages website as a dealer) - a few said they could order one for me, but I for one am simply not going to commit to a purchase until I have played it and know it to be a good match. I for one will never (and I mean never!) buy a guitar I haven't played first.

[barrymclark]

KBP810 hit a nail on the head.

 

I think this is a HUGE problem. If I didn't already know of Heritage, I would have to travel out of state to try out a model. If I was just learning of Heritage, I would be VERY unlikely to plunk down a couple of thousand on a guitar I have never tried.

[barrymclark]

Let's say Heritage did get a bit more market visibility. Does Heritage have the means to produce with the possible demand? If not, Heritage costs will sky rocket OR...... demand will fall through the floor and all the work put into getting more guitars in stores would have been wasted.

[smurph1]

Gosh, so many opinions! I agree with Brent that the people who say they would buy a Heritage with a different headstock, are blowing smoke..It's really the economy that's hurting our boys, not the headstock design..Let's hope they stay afloat, stay small, and stay high quality..To Hell with the monkeys!

[Thundersteel]

Graham told me that the headstocks on the H150s with the mini-humbuckers are slightly larger than the headstocks on the "regular" H150s.

 

Like others here, I wasn't particularly fond of the headstock design at first, but they've grown on me.

[t0aj15]

I initially wasn't very impressed with the headstock on my 535 either but it became much less important over time especially after the headstock on my gibby LP cracked (as have the headstocks on so many other gibbys). The owner of the repair shop I took it to told me that "by far" the lions share of headstock repairs that he does are on gibbys. AFAIC things of this nature are much more important issues an iconic shape.

[TruckbodyJones]

How does the headstock affect the playability, tone or quality of the guitar?

absolutlly....I've seen some headstock designs I did not care for ....but to base a purchase on that ...or not , doesn't seem like a logical approach ....Lonnie

[smurph1]

When i bought my 140, I didn't even notice the headstock..I knew the history of the company and the beautiful sunburst caught my eye..Then, I plugged it in, and it was all over!..I would've sold plasma to get that guitar! LOL

[Gitfiddler]

Graham told me that the headstocks on the H150s with the mini-humbuckers are slightly larger than the headstocks on the "regular" H150s.

 

Like others here, I wasn't particularly fond of the headstock design at first, but they've grown on me.

 

Hold The Phone!!

 

Are you saying that there IS an optional headstock currently available from Heritage??!!

 

If the one you speak of is slightly larger than standard, what would THAT headstock look like with binding?

[pcovers]

Gosh, so many opinions! I agree with Brent that the people who say they would buy a Heritage with a different headstock, are blowing smoke..

 

Then you are denying people like me exist. I am telling as a fact, over a span of about 10 guitar purchases, I specifically stayed away from Heritage because of the headstock. I am not a big Gibson guy. As of now don't even oen one. I only decided to buy the Heritage because I was really jonesing for an LP Deluxe style and found no Gibson options I was satisfied with. Jay had the H150 w/lollar minis and I took the leap. I am overjoyed with the guitar and the headstock is growing on me. But it is just innacuare to think people do not buy guitars because of an aesthetic or design element that disagrees with them. In the case of Heritage, way too many have spoken that it is the headstock. To think otherwise denies my experience and the very clear and articulate and specific opinion of a whole lot of potential guitar buyers who are not buying a Heritage.

 

I have had others PM me with very similar experiences as me and TGP is full of non Heritage owners that express interest and praise for the guitars, but also headstock design aversion. We are free to think they are crazy or choose to not like what they say, but they are the buyers and that is what Heritage needs more of.

[SouthpawGuy]

My first strat was a 70s one with the big headstock and every other strat just looked wrong, even Fenders themselves. I learned long ago that the name on the headstock is no indication of quality or value for money. When Fender were producing planks in the early 80s I could pick up a cheap Aria made in the far east and be blown away by the playability, the hardware might not have been on a par with the Fender but at probably a quarter of the price you got what you paid for. There was still that nagging doubt in my mind that it "wasn't a Fender", also peer pressure from guys who "only played Fender or Gibson" was a contributing factor. It's the same for any type of merchandise, whether it be sneakers, jeans or mobile phones, people are swayed by peer pressure which is in turn influenced by marketing campaigns and fashion.

 

Nowadays my opinions have shifted, when I see a Gibson I think ... that's a strange quirky old fashioned headstock >> Heritage is now my reference point for that style of guitar.

 

Same for Fender, when I take out one of my Strats to play I think ... what a quaint little shape that is ! >> G&L is now my reference point for tele and strat style guitars.

 

Oddly enough I've never been bothered either way by the EBMM or Ibanez headstock shapes, (and I own both), they're each very different to the "traditional" designs anyway so a comparison was not an issue.

 

Guitar players are a fickle bunch !

[smurph1]

Then you are denying people like me exist. I am telling as a fact, over a span of about 10 guitar purchases, I specifically stayed away from Heritage because of the headstock. I am not a big Gibson guy. As of now don't even oen one. I only decided to buy the Heritage because I was really jonesing for an LP Deluxe style and found no Gibson options I was satisfied with. Jay had the H150 w/lollar minis and I took the leap. I am overjoyed with the guitar and the headstock is growing on me. But it is just innacuare to think people do not buy guitars because of an aesthetic or design element that disagrees with them. In the case of Heritage, way too many have spoken that it is the headstock. To think otherwise denies my experience and the very clear and articulate and specific opinion of a whole lot of potential guitar buyers who are not buying a Heritage.

 

I have had others PM me with very similar experiences as me and TGP is full of non Heritage owners that express interest and praise for the guitars, but also headstock design aversion. We are free to think they are crazy or choose to not like what they say, but they are the buyers and that is what Heritage needs more of.

 

Point well taken..I stand corrected!

[Spectrum13]

For those that think the Heritage headstock is ugly, have you ever seen the one on a Tyler? It's horrible!

 

 

Think I just threw up in my mouth, thanks T-Steel!

 

Big difference between a "design" needing to be different and just so happens to be, IMO done in bad taste and Heritage.

 

The thread on the Eagle and L5 made an excellent point in that Heritage does these "tweeks" to improve the classic designs. Marv & company knew what they were doing from 56 to 84 and rightly figured out if they built em with the best practices from the McCarty days making the functional tweeks and improvements learned from 50 years of experience, they would build a superior product at a lower price point. They realized they would never be making three piece, CAD, green wood high unit production selling based on name recognition but just made them as good as they knew how. If that means 17 degree angled headstocks with superior tuning stability, less weight from a larger than needed glued on wings looking like a 1920's style G, that sounds like a functional inprovement. Did not know till Kuz pointed it out that PRS, Hammer and others changed their designs based on Marv, Jim and JP's. You can choose between copies which LOOK like the original, an original name not made like the original or something made like the original and improved upon (that just might play and sound better- because). What makes sense to some people might be this or they could buy what the headstock looks like or what name is on it.

 

It's a free market!

[DreamKing]

Then you are denying people like me exist. I am telling as a fact, over a span of about 10 guitar purchases, I specifically stayed away from Heritage because of the headstock. I am not a big Gibson guy. As of now don't even oen one. I only decided to buy the Heritage because I was really jonesing for an LP Deluxe style and found no Gibson options I was satisfied with. Jay had the H150 w/lollar minis and I took the leap. I am overjoyed with the guitar and the headstock is growing on me. But it is just innacuare to think people do not buy guitars because of an aesthetic or design element that disagrees with them. In the case of Heritage, way too many have spoken that it is the headstock. To think otherwise denies my experience and the very clear and articulate and specific opinion of a whole lot of potential guitar buyers who are not buying a Heritage.

 

I have had others PM me with very similar experiences as me and TGP is full of non Heritage owners that express interest and praise for the guitars, but also headstock design aversion. We are free to think they are crazy or choose to not like what they say, but they are the buyers and that is what Heritage needs more of.

 

To you and your pals at TGP I say this: you have an extremely superficial preference for guitars. The majority of people might think that the Heritage headstock is not as "perfect" and "pretty" as Gibson's, but I think Heritage's is unquestionably a good looking headstock. I mean, look at the below pic. You really think it's that hideous? As bad as the Tyler's? So bad looking that it'll prevent you from buying a Heritage? C'mon man.

 

To be honest, I don't think Heritage wants to nor should try to appeal to this market of people whose interest in guitars is so juvenile. Gibson's headstock might be a little bit better looking, but you're going to base your entire guitar buying decision on something so seemingly trivial as a headstock shape? "Well, this headstock is a wee bit better than that one, so ... " Does that kind of reasoning not seem ridiculous to you?

 

Most of us here like Heritage's headstock. We play Heritage's because they're some of the best guitars in the world. For us, sound and feel are most important. Heritage guitars' beauty only supplements our substantive love of the guitars.

 

 

 

[barrymclark]

Like it or not, the public at large like shiny, sparkly things. More importantly, even as nice as that headstock is, Joe Perry, nor Jimmy Page, nor Angus Young, nor Tony Iommi, nor Peter Frampton (the list goes on) was pictured with this headstock. That is a powerful, powerful thing. Call it superficial. It is. That is also the reality of the market. You can either spend your time calling them names or learn to roll with it. One is a waste of energy. I spent years selling guitars to people. Trying to sell them a 'better' built guitar when they have Zakk Wylde in their head is losing battle.

[jmc7581]

....To be honest, I don't think Heritage wants to nor should try to appeal to this market of people whose interest in guitars is so juvenile.

 

I don't know, DK. I think there are a fair number of folks, maybe especially non-pros, for whom some part of the gestalt of owning and playing a guitar is its visual appeal. Just another one of the senses - you glance across the room, see it on its stand, and love how it looks. Some people love certain finishes, and might not buy a guitar because they think the color is ugly. Some like highly figured maple, and others really don't; and for the latter, guitars with highly polished super-figured exotic woods might be off-putting enough to keep them from buying. I agree that these things are not central to the guitar's reason to exist, but I gotta admit I still care about some of them. I like the headstock, but it's one of a dozen things that play into how the thing grabs you. It's more important to some than to others.

[Thundersteel]

Are you saying that there IS an optional headstock currently available from Heritage??!!

 

I'm not sure if it's a "one-off" or not. I just know that Graham told me the prototype mini-bucker H150 has a slightly larger headstock. Whether or not it's currently available, only Heritage and Jay/Graham would know.

[pcovers]

To you and your pals at TGP I say this: you have an extremely superficial preference for guitars. The majority of people might think that the Heritage headstock is not as "perfect" and "pretty" as Gibson's, but I think Heritage's is unquestionably a good looking headstock. I mean, look at the below pic. You really think it's that hideous? As bad as the Tyler's? So bad looking that it'll prevent you from buying a Heritage? C'mon man.

 

To be honest, I don't think Heritage wants to nor should try to appeal to this market of people whose interest in guitars is so juvenile. Gibson's headstock might be a little bit better looking, but you're going to base your entire guitar buying decision on something so seemingly trivial as a headstock shape? "Well, this headstock is a wee bit better than that one, so ... " Does that kind of reasoning not seem ridiculous to you?

 

Most of us here like Heritage's headstock. We play Heritage's because they're some of the best guitars in the world. For us, sound and feel are most important. Heritage guitars' beauty only supplements our substantive love of the guitars.

 

 

 

 

Okay, this is how things go awry and this internet thing becomes worthless. You are responding to me specifically. Yet you are referencing thing I did not say, do not believe, and have not done. I never said I liked Gibson headstock, yet you suggest that is what I want a Heritage headstock to look like. I never said I think any Heritage headstock is hideous, yet you suggest I did. I own a Heritage, so I obviously do not make my guitar buying decisions solely on the headstock design. Another thing you suggest people do. The internet works best when people respond to what is being said, not when exaggeration is used to try to reinforce a point.

 

I cannot think of any optional consumer product (guitar, car, watch, shop machinery, etc) where the consuneer does not take into account aesthetics when they buy. To suggest that a guitar buyer would not consider whether they like the looks of aspects of a guitar or not when they buy seems to be disconnected from reality. Of course buyers do. If Hertitage was the only great guitar out there, then no matter what it looked like, people proably would buy it. But Heritage knows they are just one of quite a few great guitar makers our there and the buying public has a wide array of choices that are all pretty much equal in quality but different on looks.

 

If this were a club where liking the headstock design was a requirement for entry, I suppose I would not be allowed. Good thing it isn't. That many do not like the Heritage headstock design is just a fact. I happen to think Heritage could increase sales with a slight modification. They don't appear to think that or care to address that market. I can respect that. I don't get my feathers too ruffled when any number of people happen to not like a thing that I like.

[brentrocks]

what is not desirable about this?????

 

 

or this....

 

[TalismanRich]

Trying to sell them a 'better' built guitar when they have Zakk Wylde in their head is losing battle.

 

Now THERE's a butt ugly guitar. I wouldn't even buy a Heritage with that paint job on it! There are some things that just can't be overlooked.

[bolero]

this post is kinda like Haiku....

 

 

 

I really like Heritage guitars

 

 

I don't see them turning their back on their established headstock shape to try & bring in more sales....it is their brand identity

 

 

a bunch of other high-end gtr makes are using similar tapered headstocks & seem to be surviving...functionally the strings are more inline, which probably helps tuning stability

 

 

it's cool NOT to have a gibson, like everyone else seems to

 

 

however I have to admit I prefer a meatier headstock

 

 

a guitar is an instrument, a tool, and art combined...obviously how it looks is a big factor to those who buy

 

 

you can't please everybody, so why even try? just do your thing, do it well, and if it's good people will catch on

 

 

however if they had a few headstock options it would be cool

 

 

I really like Heritage guitars

[SouthpawGuy]

I found this one in the gallery, it belongs to pressure ... a Johnny Smith model

 

 

waaay cool !

 

[brentrocks]

I found this one in the gallery, it belongs to pressure ... a Johnny Smith model

 

 

waaay cool !

 

 

 

oh yeah...that headstock is so ugly...i'd be ashamed to own that.

[Dick Seacup]

So, then the nun says, "Pass me the banana."