Lunch Report - Wednesday 10 July

Back working from home in Exeter today. For lunch, I decided to make myself a toasted sandwich with bratwurst, schinkenwurst, edam, rocket, pickled gherkins and a dash of naga chili sauce. The latter is the latest addition to my growing collection of hot sauces. African: really hot, but kind of sweet and fruity too as it’s got a lot of peaches in it.

So my G&L topic for the day – and this might be contentious, or just misinformed, but I’m going for it anyway – is this:

Why aren’t G&L more popular? Certainly in the UK they’re pretty obscure – most people that see mine have never heard of them and, amusingly, often think it’s some no-name Fender knock-off.

In many ways I see them as a well-kept secret, and I’m quite happy they’re not as commonplace as Fender, Gibson, et al. Apart from anything else, I’m pretty sure they’d stop being as good if they ever got to that level.

Fingerpicking good

And finally, one for you fingerpickers and jazzers out there. I’ve lately been inspired by an amazingly good busker we have here in Exeter to learn some solid, classic tunes in arrangements that carry the melody and bass.

I’ve hardly ever fingerpicked in 20 years of playing, so I’m on the foothills here. I’ve been working on a Chet Atkins inspired arrangement of Mr Sandman. It’s starting to sound good, but I’m some way from mastering that kind of “two-guitarists-in-one” sound.

[youtube]n-c66SJPuUI[/youtube]

Any tips on style, or suggestions for easy-ish repertoire gratefully received.

Why aren’t G&L more popular?

Worst thing is this, head reshaped and G&L logo removed:




Instead of being proud, someone did this to that previous fabulous neck. If I was the owner, I would try to order a replacement neck.

Phooey, good question for the day. I did not know about G&L until 5 years ago. I trade a Tele for my first Legacy and that is when I started looking into them. The quality was stellar. I live in a large metro area and there were virtually no dealers who stocked them although a small dealer here had a couple. In the last 5 years we have a major G&L dealer who really pushes them. The small dealer who sold them no longer stocks them. Even if I were a small dealer I would stock a bunch of Tributes as they are superior to most of the junk you find in the stores catering to students. They continue to be the best buy on the planet, especially used. I don't see that changing anytime soon but it is changing. I initially owned many Fenders and was focused on them. I now have 16 G&Ls and they are the largest population by brand of my guitars. I have many brands and the G&Ls cannot be beat for the money. It was an interesting discussion on Monday about the price of the vintage SC-2. Opinions vary a lot but in the end, you have to find the buyer. I am not into vintage instruments anyway as I believe the market became extremely inflated in the 90s when times were good. There is a vintage guitar store in Minneapolis that will tell you that the market has really crashed. The vintage instruments are very cool but I prefer the new models. They are more refined and consistent in my opinion.

Chet was a master finger picker and so is Mark Knopfler. I have been working on finger picking and have developed to the point where it is becoming natural and then it becomes easier to learn the good finger picking stuff. It is a challenge than many guitarist haven't accomplished. The guys I mentioned were and are terrific pickers. If you really look at the good pickers, they all seem to have their own style. -- Darwin

That's interesting. I had the impression they'd be much more well known on your side of the Atlantic, if not exactly a household name.

In addition to the quality (especially when considered relative to cost), they produce some of the few instruments that have a really distinctive tone. Usably distinctive, too; not just weird. A friend of mine had an L-2000 and, just like my SC-2, it had some upper mids mojo I can't quite put my finger on and haven't heard anywhere else.

Well, Joe Public's loss is our gain.

Why aren’t G&L more popular?

Worst thing is this, head reshaped and G&L logo removed:

That's terrible. Pointless, and looks a mess too.

Nice LR phooey love ya work..
A year ago I still viewed a G & L as somewhere between a squire & a fender standard.all that changed since coming to this board & being taken under the wing of some of the boys here.through their selfless sharing of knowledge with me to having my first G & L safely in my grasp I've reappraised that viewpoint to such an extent I now rate a G & L custom as pound for pound the best guitar on the market.
I couldn't agree with Darwin more & like Louis can't possibly conceive even Leo himself pushing out better planks than the boys are making today.granted I've only cradled a couple early era G & L's in the early 90's but if they were as good esthetically &/or sonically as the WR I would defineately remember them more clearly than I do today.in around a decade once the dust settles on major troutage you'll be lucky to pry that sucker out with a '52!
Being a massive fan of the Emmanuel brothers & having played country for a living I'm half ok at boom chick style for a former rocker the two guitarists at once thing is attainable for most mere mortals with a bit of diligence,however a GOOD Chet aficionado will make it sound like three.i still can't get that little "chord" sound the experts get on the 2 & 4 Thumb independence is the key..

Good luck with it phooey, cheers mate!

Good question, Phooey. The brand just didn't succeed, even though it was tied to two legendary names. It should have worked. I think it didn't for two reasons: marketing and innovation. Leo Fender seems to have believed that he would succeed if he could improve certain aspects of guitars that he had already invented and produced. Obviously, the production process and high quality craftsmanship were parts of the plan. It wasn't enough. This took place in an environment of rapid innovation in electric guitars in terms of shape and electronics in an effort to cross the Gibson and Fender feel and sound. Many tried the new stuff, and some of it is very good (PRS). Fender still makes a respectable guitar at a decent price; Gibson less so. Regardless, it's a lot more fun to find bargain G&L's than Gibsons or Fenders.

Tim,

Great video Sir. Carl Perkins was great. Whats weird is that I have that exact same outfit on right now.

Around here (Chicago) G&L's are respected and well known. It wasn't always like that but it seems everyone knows G&L now. These are known as a better guitar, plain and simple. Pre- b.b.e. or new, folks here get it. I am not a huge internet guy but from what I read, G&L's have caught on. In my business (wood finishing) we use the terms consumer grade and professional grade to describe the quality of products. One is sold to the masses at big box stores and the other is G&L.

Take care,

y2kc

That's interesting. I had the impression they'd be much more well known on your side of the Atlantic, if not exactly a household name.

In addition to the quality (especially when considered relative to cost), they produce some of the few instruments that have a really distinctive tone. Usably distinctive, too; not just weird. A friend of mine had an L-2000 and, just like my SC-2, it had some upper mids mojo I can't quite put my finger on and haven't heard anywhere else.

Well, Joe Public's loss is our gain.

Yeah, knowledgeable guitarists know about G&Ls, but they're aren't that many dealers for them (which makes it hard to try them out before you lay down cash for one). The only dealer we have in the Milwaukee area, doesn't have a very good selection of them, and a guy who works there told me that they've had to knock down prices quite a bit, on more than one occasion, to get G&Ls to sell. I wonder if too many people see them as a Fender redux - which is true, since G&L was formed by Leo Fender.

Chet - I also belong to the GDP (Gretsch Discussion Pages) - I've had Gretsches off and on since 2002. Along with Duane Eddy, and Brian Setzer, Chet Atkins is viewed as being a superstar on that forum. He was a great player, and he really helped Gretsch develop it's guitars in the 50s & early 60s. The FilterTron pickupo was developed at Chet's request in 1957/58, due to his dislike of how Dynasonics sounded. He actually wanted Gretsch to put a variation of Gibson's PAF pickups in his 6120, but like many guitar companies at the time, Gretsch didn't want to be a "me too", when it came to Gibson's guitars. They also didn't want to have to have to buy PAFs from Gibson, or pay a licensing fee to Gibson, for making PAFs. So, they got Ray Butts to develope the FilterTron (which is also a humbucking pickup), which was designed differently, and sounds different than a PAF.

i have known about g&l's for a long time, and there was a dealer just down the street from me. he stocked many g&l's. i bought many guitars, amps, pedals from that dealer, but i never even touched a g&l, because i hated the headstock. wasn't until many moons later that i started looking at them, by then the dealer closed and there is nobody around here that stocks g&l's now. the closest would be fender ave, but no showroom there either. so living 20 minutes from fullerton is no better than wisconsin as far as trying out different neck profiles and features.

i have known about g&l's for a long time, and there was a dealer just down the street from me. he stocked many g&l's. i bought many guitars, amps, pedals from that dealer, but i never even touched a g&l, because i hated the headstock. wasn't until many moons later that i started looking at them, by then the dealer closed and there is nobody around here that stocks g&l's now. the closest would be fender ave, but no showroom there either. so living 20 minutes from fullerton is no better than wisconsin as far as trying out different neck profiles and features.

Your post has me thinking, Louis.

Why not a shop-front store on Fender Ave. where folks can come in and check out G&L guitars right where they are made? Maybe I'm crazy, but given the paucity of dealers in the area, this makes great sense to me from a marketing perspective. Hmmmm.... - ed

Why aren’t G&L more popular?

Good question indeed. I had heard about G&L in the Netherlands just by virtue of being a teenager in the early '80s and devouring any guitar magazine available in those days. Given the availability of funds in those days, all you could do is either window shopping or read up on the stuff. So I do recall some reviews of G&L instruments, a F-100 in particular. Then I moved to a town that happened to have true believers in G&L: The Zobrist, a small mon and pop store, where I bought my first ever G&L. Mistakenly assuming that you officially registered your guitar through this website's Registry, you got to know many other G&L aficionados. In short, in my world G&L was 'always' known and popular and in some self-centered sense that is all that counts. Another question would be whether I like other people to know G&L too? Well of course, but it will take a certain willingness of them to look beyond the major brands just like I was willing to forfeit the lifelong dream to own a Gibson LP and tried my hands at a (Transparent Orange) ASAT Classic at the Zobrist first. Should G&L advertise more? Yes! I for one am always on the lookout for a G&L ad in all my guitar periodicals. But there must be a certain return of investment and if it turns out that word-of-mouth and/or dedicated shop owners like James at the Seattle Guitar Store works as well (or better) to fulfill everybodies sales quota, I don't blame G&L of not going all-out.

Great Chet and Carl vids. And did you all see a very similar Gretsch model show up in ellengtrgrl's post in yesterday's LR?

- Jos

I've known about G&L since the very beginning. I've owned a Fender-made guitar since I was 16--1966--nearly my entire playing career.

I think their advertising is very weak.

I do some fingerpicking, more in the style of James Taylor and Paul Simon than Chet. I love Chet and deeply appreciate those who can play like him, but I've never aspirired to that...voice being my main instrument.

You should also check out Taylor clinicians Chris Proctor and Doyle Dykes.

I'm old school in that I use a large Dunlop, National or Golden Gate thumbpick and Dunlop nickel or brass fingerpicks in .0225 gauge.

Bill

i do finger picking, and i am amazed how many people don't have the basics. they pull up instead of driving across the string. i use acrylic nails, as my own wear too fast. speaking of chet, here are my teachers ( studied with the 3 on the right) playing chet.

[youtube]rBQGrcOxe8U[/youtube]

and another one showing their versatility. from reggae to latin, to jazz, bluegrass, funk, flamenco and hard rock.

[youtube]foS5JdjIEo8[/youtube]

and here is a lesson with everything you need to know about finger picking.

[youtube]z1zlTyl74Bk[/youtube]

Why aren’t G&L more popular?

if i may offer an opinion, the problem is a combination of mostly visual things.

1. the name "g&l" looks/sounds like a company not a specialty instrument
2. the look of the logo on a headstock using that particular font doesn't work
3. the clunker looking guitars they began with were not easy to promote
4. the pointy elements of the headstock shape are unpopular with significant numbers of people.

once they abandoned the clunky designs and turned to strat and tele style designs, their quality and the two principals behind the guitars should have and could have been enough but they still had the name, logo and headstock.

it didn't matter who the "g" and "l" were, people still had to find out what the letters stood for and then decide whether the obscure reference represented an obscure product. going by g&l ruined their chance at instant recognition and association with a proven track record of quality and success.

the way g&l fans think of tributes in relation to usa made g&l's is how a lot of people think of g&l in relation to the more widely respected brands. it is handicapped by being perceived as a well made product at a great price in a limited category instead of a desirable instrument of high quality. there is a difference.

i don't know who sells more but people think of many hand made custom guitar builders with high regards. price keeps them from buying their product. with g&l people seem to consider weaknesses compared to fender instead of thinking of it as a high quality product. people don't think "but it's not a fender" when they consider many of the boutique guitar brands. somehow g&l tends to lose that game even though the "l" is the fender of fender himself.

edit- in addition to being 10 years younger they would benefit from being more in touch with the times or relevant or "in." they might have seen a trend toward boutique and could have packaged the company as a boutique product line with a more stylish logo and things would have turned out different.


fingerpickers: there is such a high concentration of intimate interaction involving bare finger, touch and movement on the strings that personality has a greater chance to come through.

i think james taylor is one of the best at fingerpicked phrasing. his guitar has a suitably beautiful tone as well.

I do some fingerpicking, more in the style of James Taylor

Thanks once again all for some informative and interesting responses.

1. the name "g&l" looks/sounds like a company not a specialty instrument
2. the look of the logo on a headstock using that particular font doesn't work
3. the clunker looking guitars they began with were not easy to promote
4. the pointy elements of the headstock shape are unpopular with significant numbers of people.

I think it's hard to judge the brand name. The Gibson name, for example, is of course imbued with years of history as a leading guitar manufacturer, but stripped of that history has no more or less to do with instruments than does G&L. There's also the problem of wildly successful, young companies like ESP and PRS that have equally anonymous sounding names.

I must say I think the current headstock shape isn't great, and personally agree with you that the logo looks wrong on it. The old headstock shape, though, looks awesome to me.

Can definitely see how they struggled with marketing and promoting, especially given the point someone made further up about how they focussed a lot on refining existing Leo designs rather than doing something new.

The old headstock shape, though, looks awesome to me.

Really? In my opinion it's just how long it takes until you get used to it. The extra pointed element of current head stock shapes did never disturb me much. In the meantime I really like it and it looks better to me, than the current Fender Strat-Headstock or Tele-Headstocks.

The old style used on the F-100 and SC-2 I've got. looks very clumsy to me and I'm happy my S-500 already has already that pointy element.

F-100 1981:


SC-2 1983:


S-500 1985:


Legacy 1194:


Comanche Tribute 2008:

The old headstock shape, though, looks awesome to me.

Really?

Really. I can see why others may disagree.

I don't mind the new head stock , it makes it easier to identify the G & L's on stage from other brands


why G & L 's aren't more popular ?.......

1.... lack of Advertising to make G & L synomous with George and Leo , the two cats that started it all

2... Lousy salesman at the guitar stores , amazing how clueless some of the sales people are ..... to me it would be a easy sell for me to convince someone that G & L is the "real Fender" still made on Fender avenue by the same people and same place that started it all

Anyone want to try doing this?? LOL!! I bet not!

Check it Out:

phpBB [video]

Regards,

Tim

I can't get my Peavey T-27 to do that!