Pick Two

Hemisaurus · September 27, 2011, 12:10:48 PM

I was originally going to ask what is more important to you, form or function, but then realised that was kind of silly, I don't think anyone gets functionless gear, so I realised it was the age-old out of three choices you can have two debate.

This is purely for my own curiousity, I'm interested in the majority outcome, facebook will not track your data, well not anymore than it already is doing, and everyone knows I'm a cheap bastard, and as long as it's holding together and doing what I want, I will play the ugliest gear around, in fact I tend to revel in it, but then when you think about it, stuff like Sunn and Acoustic was probably considered ugly when the Marshall's, Mesa's and Fenders started taking over.

I originally had Tone, Looks, Cost as the choices, but then realised some people always go for the most expensive thing, and some people go for the ugliest thing, so I had to differentiate. Maybe should be 3 out of 6?

VOLVO))) · September 27, 2011, 12:16:52 PM

Sounds good + cheap. It doesn't have to look pretty, but it definitely can't be a gigantic piece of shit... I like my gear to be somewhat cosmetically pleasing, but long as it sounds good, I'm good. That being said, The most expensive thing I've ever bought was my Model T, my next most expensive purchase was at 300 bucks for my tele. So, I got all my good lookin' shit for cheap... Just sayin'

Hemisaurus · September 27, 2011, 12:20:06 PM

I'm always nervous of pristine items, a few dings helps ease my mind.

justinhedrick · September 27, 2011, 12:42:54 PM

i know that we are all birds of feather, but i want tone over looks. this plays into the fact that my head is missing tolex and my 2x15 is a carpet covered piece of 80s eyesore. but it sounds good, and i know that someone probably won't walk off with it.

Corey Y · September 27, 2011, 12:52:55 PM

Sounds good & cheap. I really don't care about looks when it comes to music gear, apart from not liking really flashy stuff. I'm more picky about the look of guitars and basses, but just to my taste (which is pretty plain), but I really don't care at all about the looks of amps and cabs. Evidenced by the amount of Peavey gear I've owned and gigged with over the years.

bass sic · September 27, 2011, 01:21:51 PM

I chose sounds good looks pretty. The pretty part for me doesn't mean pretty, just that I have to appreciate the look. It can be all beat down but if it's not a body style or look that I like im not interested. As far as cheap, I've never had luck with cheap. I'd rather wait till I can afford what I want.

Discö Rice · September 27, 2011, 01:29:47 PM

Yeah I don't see an option for "functions properly", so in that case I might go with pretty over cheap.

moose23 · September 27, 2011, 02:37:20 PM

I like my guitars/basses to look good and be functional (and ideally cheap) but for amps and pedals it's sounds good, cheap and then looks. In fact at this stage I think I prefer my amps and cabs to look wrong.

xayk · September 27, 2011, 03:18:44 PM

Not looking pretty is actually how I afford good-sounding things. I, too, get nervous if something is extra-shiny.

Metal and Beer · September 27, 2011, 06:47:57 PM

Sounds Good
Cheap

johnny problem · September 27, 2011, 08:42:45 PM

Sounds Good and Cheap.

Ranbat · September 27, 2011, 09:20:35 PM

Cheap. After that I guess looks interesting, but not pretty. Sounds interesting but not necessarily good. I had an SX Strat copy with a Mighty Mite Motherbucker that, on it's own sounded like ass. But, within a band with a big bass sound I dug the hell out of it.

RacerX · September 27, 2011, 09:23:25 PM

WTF? I can't pick "looks pretty" twice?

Wattaripoff.

Hemisaurus · September 27, 2011, 09:24:19 PM

Quote from: Ranbat on September 27, 2011, 09:20:35 PM
Cheap. After that I guess looks interesting, but not pretty. Sounds interesting but not necessarily good. I had an SX Strat copy with a Mighty Mite Motherbucker that, on it's own sounded like ass. But, within a band with a big bass sound I dug the hell out of it.

That is a major point in tone-setting, way too many people forget that there are (in some cases) other people in the band, what sounds good on it's own can sound like ass when everyone else plays. Unfortunately this usually only becomes apparent when you start trying to record things.

rayinreverse · September 27, 2011, 10:45:29 PM

Look of a guitar mattters. Id probably never play some super pointy battle axe guitar no matter how cheap it was,or awesome it sounded.
But ugly and stupid looking are two different things.

bitter · September 27, 2011, 11:52:12 PM

1

Volume · September 28, 2011, 03:54:17 AM

If it sounds good and looks good I want it. If I can afford it, I buy it.

... if sounds and looks extraordinarily good I might buy it even if I can't afford it.

justinhedrick · September 28, 2011, 09:20:24 AM

to me, tone is most important. what i mean by that is i have to sound like "me". i've worked hard to carve out a tone for myself since i was 17 (i'm almost 29 now) and it just so happens that i have found my sound using "cheap" gear: lm308 rats that no one wanted, peavey heads that no one wanted, and cheap speaker cabs.

so, i guess if i had more expensive gear to start out with i would like that?

Pundan · September 28, 2011, 02:00:10 PM

Sounds good, is cheap. I wouldn't buy something butt-ugly, it has to be somewhat pleasing to look at.
Who wouldn't choose "Sounds good"?

strangelight · September 28, 2011, 05:13:40 PM

i was gonna pick sounds look/is cheap, but i'll be honest... i've bought hella expensive shit back when i didn't have my own bills to pay, and even now i don't go quite the bottom dollar route. it's still not about looking pretty, but i'll pay more for pedals made of metal instead of plastic or something. and i did blow a little more money than i planned to on sony 7506s 'cause they had the coil cable.