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

[Thundersteel]

I am glad to hear from Bill Paige and confirmed by Jay that the boat is floating fine in rough waters!

 

 

That is good news, indeed!

[tulk1]

Personally, I liked the whole discourse on the headstock. Pro or con, doesn't really matter. It sparked one of the longest running posts in a very long time. Are we passionate? You betcha!! All in all, I thought the discussion to be very civil for an online forum of fanatics.

 

Now here's a kicker - when I was in Florida picking up my G&L Z3, the headstock came up in passing. FYI, our Florida guy has gotten different size headstocks for his special orders at times. Basic shape, but not exactly the same. Just thought I'd throw that in the fray --- 7 pages in.

[Jazzpunk]

I for one LOVE your passion. You have demonstrated (like most of us here) your love for Heritage guitars.

 

I tried to read every thread in this post, and haven't read (maybe I skim read a little too quick) any arrows slung specifically at you. I think it was more of the concept that "we need to change the headstock to be cool or to assimilate into other peoples cool perceptions of what a headstock needs to look like".

 

And now I am glad that you posted the above because I understand you were merely trying to help if the boat was sinking.

 

I am glad to hear from Bill Paige and confirmed by Jay that the boat is floating fine in rough waters!

 

Thanks Kuz! I'm always hyping Heritage guitars over on TGP and that can be a pretty rough crowd. My posting about the Heritage headstock was never meant to leave that forum and was just to satisfy my own curiosity.

 

I didn't take anybody's posts here personally. I was just getting frustrated as I didn't understand the responses in light of where I was coming from. However, if one is really attached to the headstock design I can see how my post might have been taken as a negative critique which is not how it was intended.

 

Now that we're on the subject though I will say that imo all of the headstocks should be bound and have MOP inlays as they really do make quite a statement! I have to admit my 575 gets a little jealous of that Johnny Rose headstock.

[mark555]

OK, my two pennyworth of comment on this great thread, I have really enjoyed it, I think it is very constructive and not negative.

 

first of all, I love my H555. I want to buy a 150CM.

 

I would prefer a more G style headstock but not particularly a copy of it. I don't want a stinger on the back of the headstock.

 

No, the current headstock does not put me off buying more Heritage guitars, but as I said, I wish he headstock was more pleasing to my personal eye.

 

So, I conclude that there is truth in the argument that the headstock (of any guitar) will affect sales of a guitar, I also would never ever buy a Tyler with that shovel end of a head, it's amazing that any body does.

[pcovers]

My headstock tweak wish list:

 

1. An ever so slight 1/8" increase in width top to bottom

2. Overall length shortened by 3/8" (taken from top)

3. Slightly less pronounced crown (leave the crown, just a fraction shortened at the pointy)

4. Bound, baby, bound

 

Not a big deal, not a Gibson look alike, not a radical departure from the fundamental design elements. A little tweak to width, height, and the pointy crown......then of course, that beautiful binding to set it off and give it a "presence".

[barrymclark]

My headstock tweak wish list:

 

1. An ever so slight 1/8" increase in width top to bottom

2. Overall length shortened by 3/8" (taken from top)

3. Slightly less pronounced crown (leave the crown, just a fraction shortened at the pointy)

4. Bound, baby, bound

 

Not a big deal, not a Gibson look alike, not a radical departure from the fundamental design elements. A little tweak to width, height, and the pointy crown......then of course, that beautiful binding to set it off and give it a "presence".

Maybe a SLIGHT contour to the straight sides?

[pcovers]

Maybe a SLIGHT contour to the straight sides?

 

That was the one I missed, but intended to include. Pretty simple.

[rjsanders]

1924 (Loar era) mando headstock

[Kuz]

1924 (Loar era) mando headstock

 

 

Yep, game is over!!!!

 

 

The Heritage headstock is a calumniation of HISTORY & FUNCTION.

 

This should stop all debates.....

[Thundersteel]

Someone mentioned on another thread that it looks like a Hamer headstock.

 

Well, to me, anyway, it looks like, um, well, uh, anatomy, if you get my drift!

[big bob]

Someone mentioned on another thread that it looks like a Hamer headstock.

 

Well, to me, anyway, it looks like, um, well, uh, anatomy, if you get my drift!

if you turn it sideways it looks like a humuhumunukunukuapua'a

[Jazzpunk]

1924 (Loar era) mando headstock

 

That's really cool. Dig the inlay!

 

It would be awesome if Heritage had a signature inlay for all of their guitars ala the Eagle. Really adds a nice touch of class imo.

[Callaway]

I really don't think a change in headstock would make all that much of a difference to the people who are looking for a reason not to buy a product they will find something else to nick it over, if a guitar plays balanced and isn't top or bottom heavy trying to fall off a strap, tone, quality and playability is there, and has that elusive "it" factor I can overlook a lot of things mods are never taken off the table. I've had a few older Fenders Strats late 50's & early 60's supposed collectors items now were not then but my favorite of all time that I've ever owned is as early 70's maple neck it sounds the best, plays like a dream running through a pair of old black faced Deluxe Reverbs will hold it's own with almost anything, it might not be the Fender connoisseur's favorite era but it's a great guitar and it has the "it" factor. You can make them pretty as hell but a wretch to play or you can make them play like a dream and sound great I'll take the later if I have a choice everytime.

[Jazzpunk]

I really don't think a change in headstock would make all that much of a difference to the people who are looking for a reason not to buy a product they will find something else to nick it over,

 

As this thread won't die and as my original intent was long ago forgotten I'll go ahead and link to the thread on TGP:

 

http://www.thegearpage.net/board/showthread.php?t=631557

 

You'll see I was specifically targeting people who are looking for more affordable options in a Gibson inspired guitar. Great showing for folks who like the headstock but the heart of my poll is the 64 out of 88 people who said they were looking for a more affordable Gibson inspired option but were not considering Heritage because of the headstock.

 

That's what inspired me to post this thread topic when I read the rumors that Heritage was in dire straits.

 

I've grown to like the headstock shape though I would really like to see a signature mop inlay on the headstocks for all of the Heritage models as it really adds a touch of class imo. I like a little bling with my form and function!

[Spectrum13]

You'll see I was specifically targeting people who are looking for more affordable options in a Gibson inspired guitar. Great showing for folks who like the headstock but the heart of my poll is the 64 out of 88 people who said they were looking for a more affordable Gibson inspired option but were not considering Heritage because of the headstock.

 

would not 100% of Heritage owners would take function and balance over marketing conciderations?

 

I've grown to like the headstock shape though I would really like to see a signature mop inlay on the headstocks for all of the Heritage models as it really adds a touch of class imo. I like a little bling with my form and function!

 

Agree. As well as MOP "the heritage" over the painted on. But that would increase costs and we can custom order MOP don't know about signature mop inlay.

[pro-fusion]

A thought came to mind about this whole issue. Isn't guitar (specifically electric guitar) pretty much the only instrument where aesthetics are a consideration for buyers?

 

I mean, no one buys a violin or a saxophone based on the way it looks, as far as I know. Some rich folks might buy pianos on that basis, hence the existence of those gaudy white pianos that look like they belong at Liberace's house, but real pianists buy strictly based on the sound and the action.

 

I'm always amused when I see supposedly macho rock guitarist dudes getting all girly-girl and arguing about colors and headstock shapes.

[rjsanders]

A thought came to mind about this whole issue. Isn't guitar (specifically electric guitar) pretty much the only instrument where aesthetics are a consideration for buyers?

 

I mean, no one buys a violin or a saxophone based on the way it looks, as far as I know. Some rich folks might buy pianos on that basis, hence the existence of those gaudy white pianos that look like they belong at Liberace's house, but real pianists buy strictly based on the sound and the action.

 

I'm always amused when I see supposedly macho rock guitarist dudes getting all girly-girl and arguing about colors and headstock shapes.

 

well, now that Gibson had its way w/Baldwin:

 

[rjsanders]

well, now that Gibson had its way w/Baldwin:

...

 

'nother fun link:

 

http://www.luxist.com/photos/baldwins-wacky-pianos/

[barrymclark]

A thought came to mind about this whole issue. Isn't guitar (specifically electric guitar) pretty much the only instrument where aesthetics are a consideration for buyers?

 

I mean, no one buys a violin or a saxophone based on the way it looks, as far as I know. Some rich folks might buy pianos on that basis, hence the existence of those gaudy white pianos that look like they belong at Liberace's house, but real pianists buy strictly based on the sound and the action.

 

I'm always amused when I see supposedly macho rock guitarist dudes getting all girly-girl and arguing about colors and headstock shapes.

I think that may have something to do with some guitarists having more money than talent. haha. Gotta show off something.

 

Sure, I have more talent than money, but being broke as hell, that isn't saying anything. If I won $20, I would have to buy really nice guitars cause then I would have more money than talent.

[barrymclark]

'nother fun link:

 

http://www.luxist.com/photos/baldwins-wacky-pianos/

Everybody back off. The zebra one is mine.

[Jazzpunk]

I'm always amused when I see supposedly macho rock guitarist dudes getting all girly-girl and arguing about colors and headstock shapes.

 

Isn't 'macho rock guitarist' an oxymoron?! Guess I should wiki the word macho and see if it's been updated to include hair products and make up.

[FrankV]

I recently bought a 535, and I was at a pretty large independent music store in New York State, to pick up strap locks and a nice strap to go with it. I mentioned my new guitar to the owner, he was curious because I had been looking at some of his Gibson's. In fact, Gibson had a huge trailer up there, with a display of guitars, and you could play them, and compare models, etc. A pretty ambitious and expensive marketing deal. The trailer crew travel from store to store doing their thing. Anyway, I told him about the Heritage H-535, and was telling him what a nice guitar, etc., maybe he should consider selling them. He was familiar with them, agreed they were nice, but for him the deal breaker was that the re-sale value of a Heritage is not as high as a Gibson. And that was pretty much it. Headstock shape never came up. He agreed they were, at the least, the equal to Gibson. But the resale value was the only reason he would not sell them. It struck me odd, as he sells all kinds of crap as well as his high end stuff. Also, while I was there, two guys came in and bought 7 or 8 guitars, all costing over $3,000 each. That was a mind blower!

[rjsanders]

xlnt anecdote

 

...A pretty ambitious and expensive marketing deal...

 

zackly why G's cost more than they're "worth" ('cept maybe for some of the imports). advertising, marketing "lifestyle", weird & expensive acquisitions...

[pro-fusion]

Isn't 'macho rock guitarist' an oxymoron?! Guess I should wiki the word macho and see if it's been updated to include hair products and make up.

 

 

I think most of that went out of style by about 1991, but those guys were definitely into the macho posing, in between doing their hair and make-up.

 

 

He agreed they were, at the least, the equal to Gibson. But the resale value was the only reason he would not sell them. It struck me odd, as he sells all kinds of crap as well as his high end stuff.

 

If he's only selling new gear, what does he care about the resale value? Almost every electric guitar without a Gibson or Fender logo has poor resale value. I wouldn't say that Heritage is any worse that way than Hamer, for example.

 

Argh! I'm sure glad I don't have to make a living figuring out how to get instruments into the shops.

[yngwie308]

I asked myself the same question when I first saw Gary Moore with his Heritage's, but as time has gone on I like the Heritage headstock, it is distinctive and I always thought it reminded me of a late twenties L-5 "The Gibson" and I thought Heritage used the "The Heritage" as a throwback to the Gibsons of old, I like the snake head stock and my GM's with the stingers on the back of the headstock look awesome!

Don't change stay the same please!!

yngwie308