It is currently Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:56 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:12 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:57 am
Posts: 13164
Location: Peckham: where the snow leopards roam
lomitus wrote:
Ceri wrote:
OK, so what's your intention with this logo repaint? What do you hope to achieve by it? In what way will it satisfy you...?

In this case, aesthetics. Logo issues aside for a moment, why do you choose the color you choose for your guitar (car, kitchen...or anything else color related for that matter)? Why is one person partial to red when another is partial to blue and yet another likes yellow?

Etc - above.

Hi again: but in this case we're talking about a brand logo, not a body colour.

Don't you think the appropriate word in terms of the psychology of the situation is "authenticity" rather than "aesthetics"? Isn't what's going on here that we are acculturated to find the gold-&-black logo more authentic than the plain black one?

At which point the psychological conflict that arises is that adding the gold where the company didn't put it is in fact fundamentally inauthentic, even if you skillfully manage to do it so well that nobody but you knows.

If we really want to think about the psychology of all of this (which you said you did) then that seems the most interesting point. These threads are always smothered in people saying they've faked a logo - but it's OK because they'll never sell the guitar, nobody's going to be conned, it's only for their own pleasure. But then why would they find a fake logo, which they know to be inauthentic, more pleasurable than the real one? The wilful self-deception involved in that is what's fascinatingly revealing about human nature.

Meantime:
lomitus wrote:
Let's say you buy a Mighty Mite or Warmoth neck with a plain headstock...regardless of the body or other parts, how many are apposed to putting a Squier logo on it instead of Fender? Obviously we're not talking about any serious sense of fraud here as with few exceptions, most Squiers (particularly now a days) aren't really high dollar instruments. In other words, it's not like you're going to slap "Squier Strat" on that headstock and have any chance of turning around to sell it for $1500 or anything. Again we're talking about creating a look...and aesthetic. What if I chose to put the name "Whirlpool" on my headstock...that's a trademark...do folks here have issues with that?

Comments?

I wouldn't put either Whirlpool or Squier or Fender on a Warmoth or MM neck, because it's none of those things. That's how the psychology of authenticity plays out in my particular head.

Cheers - C

_________________
Image


Top
Profile
Fender Play Winter Sale 2020
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 7:09 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 1598
ZZDoc wrote:
Great to have him back. 8) He's never been short on words. :wink:



What can I say...I learned from Asimov :-)


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:38 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 1598
Hey Ceri...I'm gonna take these point by point simply because I haven't had my coffee yet this morn and anything else would confuzzle my poor wittle brain :-)


Quote:
Hi again: but in this case we're talking about a brand logo, not a body colour
.

So you don't see those gold or silver fills essentially as a color? Gold isn't a different color than silver? Obviously black is the lack of color...or all colors depending on whether we're talking and additive or subtractive scheme...

Quote:
Don't you think the appropriate word in terms of the psychology of the situation is "authenticity" rather than "aesthetics"? Isn't what's going on here that we are acculturated to find the gold-&-black logo more authentic than the plain black one?


No...aesthetics is -exactly- the term I intended to use and I believe it's perfectly appropriate in regard to my comments. It's not a matter of authenticity in my case here at all...again I simply like the gold or silver text stroked in black better than the plain black. Black text looks nice, stroked text looks nicer to me.

On this note I will expand just a bit...again I'm also an artist, specifically a digital artist (I do draw and paint some but my main "canvas" is my computer monitor and my main "pencil/brush" is my mouse and graphics tablet). As such, I do a great deal of graphics design and have a particular interest typography. Aside from my freelance work in these areas (I've been doing freelance graphic design for over 15 years), as well as my college studies (in addition to a specific typography class, raster, vector, 2D design, etc ALL address issues of typography), my father worked for a major Cleveland newspaper for well over 40 years...I grew up with type and typography, both as a way of communicating information and as a graphics element.

So yes, I was referring to aesthetics.

Quote:
These threads are always smothered in people saying they've faked a logo - but it's OK because they'll never sell the guitar, nobody's going to be conned, it's only for their own pleasure.


Ok...yes, I easily acknowledge that there -are- people who will do such things with the exclusive purpose of conning others...to try and make a quick buck. That said, again this portion of the thread isn't about the legitimacy of faking a logo, it's about the look...the visual appeal. As such, why exactly does that have to be a factor in your mind? Again, the fake that I built myself, I did for my own personal pleasure. I have no intentions of selling it and I'm certainly not trying to con anyone...I did it for me because I like "the look" (and I suspect many others do it for the same exact reason).

If we must continue to invoke the con issue however again here, at what point do we, as a culture, stop blaming the con man and start blaming the ignorant who allow themselves to get burned? I said it before...if someone's going to spend $1000 or more on something like a guitar, particularly if they are going to do such business thru facilities such as Ebay and Craigslist which are NOTORIOUS for people perpetrating fraudulent activity, shouldn't they at least do a degree of research to educate themselves before they spend their money?

Let's consider the fake SRV threads that have rolled thru here (and I know there have been a few). There are PLENTY of people (including myself) that have spotted fake instruments on these boards...and this is just one single resource. There's LOTS of information out there regarding these instruments (as well as many others regarding this same topic). So how exactly does one feel sorry for an idiot that soooooooo easily allows themselves to get burned? That's like a old woman I once saw standing at a pharmacy check-out with her purse wide open and all of her money and credit cards plainly in view...while she babbled on and on to the cashier about coupons. It would have been nothing for an unscrupulous individual to reach down and take everything she had. Have you ever gotten one of those e-mails that says "I am the price of (whatever) and would like to do (something something) in the US. If you will deposit $1000 into my private account, I will reward you with $10,000 for your efforts..." (feel free to change the wording around...there's plenty of variations). Did you respond to it? Did you send them that $1000? I doubt it...I think you're smarter than that. BUT...some people do get taken with such scams...not because of the scammer, all because of their own ignorance.

How do you feel sorry for people who are so unwilling to protect themselves even in the slightest? If we as a culture expect others such as these scammers to take responsibly for their actions, should we not take start taking responsibility for our own? It's -EASY- to sit there and point fingers and say "it's his fault...he conned me", but that's just NOT the issue at all.

Quote:
But then why would they find a fake logo, which they know to be inauthentic, more pleasurable than the real one? The wilful self-deception involved in that is what's fascinatingly revealing about human nature.


Quote:
I wouldn't put either Whirlpool or Squier or Fender on a Warmoth or MM neck, because it's none of those things.

Ahhhh...you see this assumes that the pleasure derived from something MUST be based on it's "authenticity"....but for many, if not most people, that's often just not the case at all, is it? Can beauty not exist simply for it's own sake?? Is visual appeal not something completely separate from concepts such as authenticity?

Having just done a short research project on the styles of the 50's for college a while back (and having been accused of creating a PBS documentary since the project was supposed to be 5 minutes long and mine was a video almost 15 minutes, LOL!), let's consider this; how many products are on the market today that reflect the given style of a specific era? Ever seen one of those "bubble juke boxes" sitting in a bar that plays CD (or now a days purely digital media)? If "authenticity" were the primary concern, those things should have 78's or 45's in them...but they don't. What about the proliferation of vintage styled radios that play CD's and such? Maybe some folks here even have one in their living room or garage or something. How many of them even use vacuum tubes?

The term I'm dancing around here is "retro styling" and it can be found in everything from bathroom faucets to furniture to clothes to popcorn makers to cars to computers.....it's about a visual style that has little or absolutely nothing to do with authenticity beyond the look...the visual aesthetic.

In this case, the Fender logo is...let's face it...cool to look at. Again it has become more than a person's name or a company trademark, it has become a cultural icon. Otherwise so many of us wouldn't wear those t-shirts or hats or buy those keychains and mouse pads and fridge magnets, etc.. Think about it...do you really wear that Fender t-shirt because you're solely trying to promote the company or do you wear it because damn...it just looks cool! Nothing says "I'm a guitar player" like a Fender t-shirt, huh? Regarding Strats, we can even apply this thinking to the guitar itself...how many other companies over the years have produced guitars that essentially look exactly like Strats? Heck, I even just got a miniature wooden guitar (even came with a miniature case, a miniature stand as well as a wall mount) from a local gift shop over the holidays that...well gee...it wasn't made by Fender at all, but it looks like a Strat...and looks pretty cool sitting on top of my studio monitors. In fact it's sitting right in front of my little Strat shaped neon light that I got at Walgreens for $10 :-)

Perhaps this is a bit subjective, but beyond the legal issue (which clearly isn't what I'm talking about here), I think it's simply our pride and passions as musician and Fender loyalists that say "this must be authentic"...such and such logo must match such and such specific instrument. But when you take that away, ALL you're left with is "what it looks like". Say a person doesn't play guitar at all (hey...there's more of them than there are of us...A LOT more). Perhaps said person has seen people like SRV, Eric Clapton or David Gilmore playing something that they have heard others refer to as a "Strat" or a "Stratocaster". Do you really believe people such as this would have the slightest clue as to which logo goes with which guitar? Do you think they even care.........? How many guitar players on these forums really just don't know the difference (beyond people such as ourselves who have researched it for our own purposes)? Here we can even take the visual aesthetic away. How many people on these boards (Ceri, I -know- you've seen them) will go out and buy an SRV or Clapton sig series, simply because it bears that artists name with little or no regard to the instrument itself? Is it not true that a few of these people (perhaps a lot of them) will buy said instrument (off Ebay, etc) without ever having played one first? In fact, isn't that how many of these people get burned in the first place by the scammers out there...they didn't want "a guitar", they wanted "a name"? Seriously...think about it.

Okies...I'm off to get more coffee and some practice time in, then I need to run out to the East side and see my father for a bit. Since Dad can't talk right now, I've been reading to him...today we start the epic of "Gilgamesh" :-)

Peace,
Jim


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 8:50 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 1:20 pm
Posts: 9640
Location: Indiana
I don't know much about psychology, but it seems quite telling about someone who will blame the victim. :roll:

_________________
---> "The amp should be SWITCHED OFF AND UNPLUGGED before you do this!" <---

Por favor, disculpe mi español, no se llega a la práctica con mucha frecuencia.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 9:05 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 4:57 am
Posts: 13164
Location: Peckham: where the snow leopards roam
lomitus wrote:
So you don't see those gold or silver fills essentially as a color?

Of course.

But I'm making a different point. I'm suggesting that when it comes to a brand logo on a guitar headstock its meaning as a signifier is psychologically greater than its prettiness as a colour. I've a strong (unprovable) suspicion that if Fender's original logos had been all black then that's what people would find most "aesthetically" pleasing. In other words, I'm putting forward the entirely mainstream idea that aesthetic feeling is in large part directed by other types of meaning that we attach to things.

One different issue:
lomitus wrote:
at what point do we, as a culture, stop blaming the con man and start blaming the ignorant who allow themselves to get burned?

Never. To blame the victim instead of the conman is to make excuses for the perpetrator.

Definitely, people would always be well advised to take any measures they can to protect themselves. But blame always belongs to those who set out to cheat their fellows and it can't be diluted or excused.

Cheers - C

_________________
Image


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:20 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:26 am
Posts: 238
lomitus wrote:
johnjaypl wrote:
I've been thinking the same thing ever since Leo left the company but I don't think they're going to stop.



I find it difficult to address that comment without being a bit snide...please take these comments as being rather tongue in cheek to prove a point.

So by your logic here, when Louis Chevrolet died in 1941, the company should have stopped using his name, correct? When Colonel Adolphus Busch died in 1913, they should have changed the name of the beer to something else, right? Charles Dow has been gone since 1902 and Edward Jones since 1920...perhaps it's time the stock market address that, yes? Milton Hershey died in 1945...too bad for all the chocolate lovers out there...not to mention the folks who live in Hereshy PA....better change the name of the city to Cavityland or something.............

Starting to sound rather stupid huh??

Those issues aside, Leo didn't "leave the company", he sold it...lock, stock, barrel and -NAME-. That said unless you own pre-'65 instruments from this company exclusively, can you really imagine that CBS logo on the headstock of your Strat? Be honest.... Perhaps when the employees bought the company back in '85 they should have changed the name to ""EOTCFKAF" (Employees Of The Company Formerly Known As Fender)...wouldn't that look funky on a headstock. It wouldn't change the quality or sound of the instruments a lick...but would anyone here really be trying to defend the name at all?

For better or worse, Leo Fender not only created an icon that bore his name (a few in fact), he also created a company...a business, that likewise bore his name. He could have called it "Guitars and Amps -R- Us" or "Loud Noise Inc", but he didn't. While it goes without saying that our passions as guitar players run high regarding such issues, one must also except a degree of rationality regarding this too.

To quote Peter O'Toole, "A rose by any other name would wither and die".


I'm not following you here, I have no idea what car compainies have to do with guitars - beer might be a bit more on point. My comment stands, nothing stupid about it. Given the product they put out the Hereshy name should go too.


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:22 pm
Offline
Roadie
Roadie

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:26 am
Posts: 238
Ceri wrote:
lomitus wrote:
johnjaypl wrote:
I've been thinking the same thing ever since Leo left the company but I don't think they're going to stop.

I find it difficult to address that comment without being a bit snide...please take these comments as being rather tongue in cheek to prove a point.

So by your logic here, when Louis Chevrolet died in 1941, the company should have stopped using his name, correct?

Hi lomitus: I don't think that's what johnjaypl meant. I think he also was speaking with his tongue in his cheek and in fact was implying the same thing as you.

Cheers - C


Thanks for explaining me!


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:10 pm
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
johnjaypl wrote:
Thanks for explaining me!

Isn't it "Splain me, Lucy. 'Splain me"????? :wink:

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:14 am
Offline
Amateur
Amateur
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:56 am
Posts: 141
I've wanted to interject, but I have little opinion of relogoing stuff. I've never done it but I have no problem if someone else does it as long as they're not counterfeiting. People purposely faking guitars should get jailtime, IMO. That being said...

I do own a bunch of 'infringement' type strat body guitars with Fender's Strathead trademark. I love strats, but if it's a strat body it should have a strat headstock. Luckily, if you find guitars built that weren't originally destined for US Sales, the Strat headstock can be legally copied in Japan or other parts of the world.

I need to do an updated picture, this is old... but there are 3 unauthorized Strat headstocks, a MIJ Charvel partscaster with a non-US market strathead. The other two, one is a custom ESP made in 2009, the other a custom shop USA Jackson that was built on or before 1989 (which now would be a non-issue since Fender has owned Jackson since 2002).

Anyway, sorry for going off topic, but for your entertainment:

Image


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 6:26 am
Offline
Professional Musician
Professional Musician

Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 1598
Ceri wrote:
I've a strong (unprovable) suspicion that if Fender's original logos had been all black then that's what people would find most "aesthetically" pleasing. In other words, I'm putting forward the entirely mainstream idea that aesthetic feeling is in large part directed by other types of meaning that we attach to things.


I understand the point that you're trying to make here and I even agree with it to some degree. And on that specific note, I'll even go so far to say that if people do attach meaning to such things beyond basic aesthetic, perhaps one of the reasons the black logo is "undesirable" is perhaps due to the 70's Strats in some small way. Even today there is still a stigma attached to 70's era CBS/Fender (some of it justified, some not) as just being cheap junk.

That said...beauty obviously is in the eye of the beholder. Obviously this is subjective as well and can't be proved, but I suspect that if those early 50's and 60's Strats had of had black logos as you suggest and Fender later developed the outlined logo, I suspect that most folks would likely find the outlined logo's more desirable. My reasoning behind this is simple...beyond a pic or two on the internet or perhaps seeing Hendrix's white Strat at the Rock Hall, I suspect that the greater majority of Strat players out there, particularly the younger players, have never even seen a genuine 50's or 60's Strat, let alone examined the headstock in any serious detail. I would argue that it's difficult to attach additional meaning to something such as aesthetics when the object of that meaning just isn't all that common place any more.


Ceri wrote:
To blame the victim instead of the conman is to make excuses for the perpetrator.
Quote:

shimmilou wrote:
I don't know much about psychology, but it seems quite telling about someone who will blame the victim. :roll:


Ok...perhaps I worded this wrong. Maybe the question I should have asked here is "At what point should people start taking responsibility for their own actions?"

Either way, I have to stand behind my original sentiment here in that many, if not most people allow themselves to be victimized. When people make it -that easy- to allow others to rip them off...particularly because of issues such as greed or laziness (oh...I didn't ask because the auction was ending in 5 minutes and it was such a good deal, I didn't want to let it get away!)...again how do you feel sorry in the slightest for such a "victim"? We're not talkin' about the 60's or the 70's here where resources regarding information on things such as guitars was at a premium...quite literally, information, including this forum, is just a mouse click away. We see it enough around here...how hard is it really to post "Is it a fake?" and get some reasonable, well informed information BEFORE you buy? And again this forum is just -one- single resource among a virtual plethora these days.

Again I would reiterate that the problem isn't really the scammer...because there's always someone willing to lay their money down on the table to play "the shell game", even KNOWING that the guy shuffling those cups just stuffed the ball in his pocket. To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever FORCED anyone to buy a fake guitar...someone had to make a conscious decision to spend that money. If a person is soooooo willing and eager to blow $1000 or more without educating themselves in the slightest about what they are buying...sure that person is ALWAYS going to blame someone else, but is that person really a "victim" of anything other than their own greed and stupidity?

A simple -fact-: con men only exist as long as there are people willing to allow themselves to be taken advantage of. So I ask again, at what point do we as consumers start taking RESPONSIBILITY for our own actions?

Jim


Top
Profile
Post subject: Re: Does he have a point?
Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:42 am
Offline
Rock Icon
Rock Icon
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 1:10 pm
Posts: 13467
Location: Palm Beach County FL
Image[/quote]
As long as these instruments are not represented as other than what they are, there's really no issue.

Fernandes once produced a dimed copy of the Stratocaster. Apparently Carlos Santana had one. I saw a guitar, attributed to him, displayed in the Sony Pavilion in mid-Manhattan about 20 years ago. All it would have taken was a careful change in the logo on the headstock to pull the ruse.

There's also story about that Fender once had a shipment of these guitars seized on the West Coast and had all the headstocks removed. That headstock is trademarked. As noted elsewhere..copyright and trademark law is quite different abroad than it is domestically, and therein lie some of the difficulties.

_________________
"Another day in paradise!"


Top
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 56 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

All times are UTC - 7 hours

Fender Play Winter Sale 2020

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: