System for objective evaluation of guitars

[jdrnd]

The subject of this thread is to suggest that it would be useful to have an objective system to evaluate and describe guitars.

My experience with my first professional guitar was less than satisfactory in part because I didn’t understand the types of sound qualities out there and that comparing a Fender Mustang to a Hamer Artist Korina P-90 is like comparing Granny Smith apples to Nathan’s Frankfurters. But more importantly it was problematical because there are no objective criteria to determine guitar quality. It’s true, that some instruments just sound better, but among the better sounding ones how does one choose. We all get biased by our own rhetoric and our belief that we got a good deal.

When I was trying to figure out what guitar to buy, I started checking various forums, the Hamer fan club being one of them. But I also scanned the Fender forum, the Gibson forum, the Les Paul forum, Harmony Central user forum, and guitar.net. I checked review sites such as Wholenote, harmony central (again), Guitar Gearheads, ultimate guitar, guitar review archive, even Epinions. I went to my local music stores, including Daddy’s junky music, the guitar center, and a local store called Daren’s (where I finally bought my guitar). Each Salesperson, floor associate, resource person, consultant (whatever you would prefer to call them), and forum member had a different bias. All were pretty adamant about their advice.

The owner of Daren’s felt that for the money I was willing to spend I would get the most bang for my buck with a Hamer. The 18 year old expert at the Guitar Center having played for 4 years said there is nothing like a Gibson, but that the $800 used Artist Korina (2003) natural finish with “soap bars” was an okay guitar (If I had know then what I know now…). He did try to push a Gibson Les Paul on me. The guitar "expert" at Daddy’s Junky Music thought I would be happiest with a Fender Strat... he thought Gibson was overpriced, PRS too exotic and everybody plays Fender. He didn’t know much about Hamers but said they had a great reputation. I went with the advice of my local Music Store. No one could give me (nor did they even try) any advice based solely on objective “playing” characteristics of the guitar. Although I was told that dovetailed neck to body attachments are superior to bolt on necks. Since buying my Hamer I have found 3 sites that question this notion (excluding Ed Roman's site). Where is the scientifically obtained data to show which is better? Does such data exist? And if it does shouldn’t this be part of the technical specs of each instrument?

Review sites are also incredibly poor at giving objective evaluations. For example if you go to, a particular review sites you can actually get a user review of a Squier Strat rated with 5 stars (on a 5 star scale), and in another review on the same site get a review of a Gibson Les Paul classic with a rating of 4.5. I appreciate that the person rating the Squier is comparing it to the guitars he’s play and the person rating the Gibson is comparing that guitar to a different class of guitar.

I’m NOT proposing that there be a universal 5 or 10 point rating system based on the opinion of the player (these always have a subjective component) But rather a “description” based on the objective measurable qualities of the instrument.. This would require real scientific research. Perhaps this has already been done.

For example, instead of reading in a review that the action of a particular guitar is very low, or “is as smooth as silk”, or “plays like butter” (is that “real butter” or “I can’t believe its not butter”) wouldn’t it be better to read that it takes 6 oz of pressure (I pulled this number out of a hat, I haven’t a clue how much pressure is needed) to push the first string to the fret bar at the first fret and 5 oz at the 10th fret. The research could also find out the pressure below which guitar players associate with the experience of an easy action. This could be reported for each guitar as action-pressure for each string at standardized frets. This could be compared across the board for every guitar. Maybe the Squier Strat does have an easier action than the Gibson Les Paul. We would know, it would be beyond opinion.

In another example, sustain could be quantified with real numbers. So instead of a reviewer reporting that this instrument has a great sustain. He might report there is 12 second sustain for the Low E string and a 9 second sustain for the B string. The “sustain” quality might be quantified using (a yet to be invented standard string plucker) that applies a standardized pluck. The time during which the sound is sustained until at drops below some standardized volume (for example 2 Db amplitude) could be measured. This test could be standardized for each string at open, 5th, and the 12th fret. Instruments with longer sustains might turn out to be more desirable, or the research might find that there is an optimum sustain (perhaps if the sustain is too long it interferes with the next note).

There are any number of characteristics that can be objectively measured and compared to what “experienced” (this excludes me) guitarist’s think of each instrument.

Let me anticipate the number one objection. That would be “How one feels about a particular guitar (or bass) is subjective. That is true. But in comparing instruments it may turn out that some of our subjectivity is hype (maybe even self applied) and after we learn about the true characteristics of some guitars, the price we pay for each instrument may normalize. Maybe a Gibson Les Paul Supreme is no better than an Epiphone Les Paul or (and I can hear the moans) maybe a $6000 Artist ultimate is no better than a $2000 Monaco Elite. If the difference cannot be quantified are you still willing to pay thousands of dollars more?

The most important objection is who pays for the research? It can’t be the guitar companies, they’re biased. What if you find out that your guitar is inferior; you certainly wouldn’t publish your results. There is no supervising organization or code of ethics that any tester is required to answer to. You could just lie and make your instrument (at least on paper) sound invincible. I’m sure the guitar dealers cannot afford to pay for it. I’ve heard that the entire annual budget for the entire music equipment industry is not even as much as the first quarter income for Wal-Mart. And Namm probably doesn’t want to piss off any of its most important members which include the guitar manufacturers. So we’re left with subjective evaluations, word of mouth, sound bites, etc.

Does anyone have any thoughts about the above?

Jeff

[atquinn]

There are already objective ways to evaluate guitars including:

Number of strings

Scale length

Fingerboard radius

Fret size

Construction type (bolt-on, set-neck, neck-thru, etc.)

Woods used

Bridge type

String gauge

Electronics (ie pickups and pot values)

Once you get past this stuf, most of which is easy to find for any guitar, it's all subjective and/or greatly influenced by technique or signal chain (ie, what pedals and amps you're using). As far as trying to relate pricing to quality when it comes to what is basically a luxury good (which is to say, most guitars aren't sold to people who are using them to make money), good luck with that .

-Austin

[Matt Mattson]

greatly influenced by technique

Hmmn. I always thought to play to the next higher level you simply needed another guitar . . .

After just wading through Steve Petrucci's anyone can play rock dvd where I learn to change a 9th to an 8th (or was it 11th) on the fly while going up and down the fretboard (guess I'll have to learn a few more notes too) at mind-numbing speed while halving a metronome set at 66 into 16ths, 32'nds, 64ths, 128ths, 256ths, etc., I think I'll just take up brain surgery as a hobby.

Whatever buying guide you guys come up with is fine with me. Gives an excuse for another purchase!

[jdrnd]

Atquinn,

None of the above items objectively describe how the instrument sounds. Its assumed that some of the measurements that you listed have some association with the quality. But there are no objective measurements that they do. None that I could locate on the internet. Even though I am not using the guitar to make money, I would like to get my money's worth. Why would I spend $2000 for a guitar when (after eliminating the hype) a $1000 guitar has the same sound.

Jeff

[princeofdarkness56]

I just like to look at them first. Then I plug in and if the vibe "feels good ", ring it up. Vibe and feel. Plus a little mojo. Not very scientific, but it works for me.

[atquinn]

Even with the same specs, 2 guitars will sound different and I don't believe there is a way to quantify that difference so that it would be useful to potential buyers. Also, since things like string gauge and brand, how you sound the note (fingerstyle vs. pick, type of pick), and where you sound the note (close to the neck, close to the bridge) affect the tone, even if there was something to measure, how would you measure it in a way that would be meaningful? In my opinion, it's better to just:

1. Play a guitar before you buy it, that way you'll know what you'll be getting. If possible make sure you play it through your setup with your strings (this can be facilitated by buying from someplace with a 30 day return policy). Don't let the sales staff make your decision for you. If you as a buyer don't know more than they do about what you're looking for, something is wrong.

2. Get a feel for a brand after playing a number of guitars and buy that brand used. That's what I generally do with Hamers. I've played enough to have faith in the quality and to know that their guitar fit me well in terms of ergonomics and I know enough about what I'm looking for (at any given time; what I'm looking for changes from time to time) to buy them used based on specs. Also if you buy used, you might lose money if you decide to get rid of the guitar, but you won't totally get your a$$ handed to you like you would if you were selling a new guitar, which makes value for the money less important (although you do have to know the market for the guitar brand you're buying to make sure you're not grossly overpaying when you buy).

Also, I think the only way you will be able to determine if a given $1000 dollar guitar sounds the same as a $2000 is if you play them. And even then, how do you know you're not just playing a mind game on yourself because you want to believe that the $1000 you can afford is just as good as the $2000 one you can't? Even if the $2000 one really does sound better objectively, maybe that's something a $100 pickup swap on the cheaper guitar would fix. How would you know? It's easy to get lost down the rabbit hole with this stuff, which I think basically functions as a way for people to convince themselves that, if they had the ultimate guitar, they would be awesome players. At this point, I know enough about myself to know that I sound pretty much sound the same through any guitar I play; I just like playing different guitars because I appreciate the subtle differences between them and I have enough money to own more than one.

-Austin

[jdrnd]

Atquinn,

Some of my comments stem from my adventures in buying my guitar, but some are triggered by some of the polls on this and other forums that ask whats your favorite shredder, or hamer. or whats the "best" gibson. The polls are very entertaining (I always take part...when I can) but they are not representative of a diverse enough group to have any meaning. I believe that there is an objective reality independent of the observer. And the clearest way to find the BEST guitar is to test it objectively, not take a poll. We all get influenced by the people we surround ourselves with. And none of us are immune to marketing. I just want to eliminate the marketing that companies do to push their product. Objective data would help to a certain extent. I agree with all you have said. Our arguments are not mutually exclusive. I just want to include more data in the guitar buying decision. There is no obligation on anybodies part to utilize this information, but I bet the existence of the information would lower the cost of guitars in general because I don't feel the difference between guitars is as great as we're led to believe.

jeff

[atquinn]

I don't feel the difference between guitars is as great as we're led to believe.

jeff

I certainly agree with that! And I believe that's one the barriers to objective guitar evaulation. By the time most people are ready to spend big bucks on a guitar, they're convinced, first of all, that they have to spend big bucks to get something that will satisfy them and, usually they're convinced that the only reasonable options are the big 3.

-Austin

[jettster]

Ouch...... My head hurts after reading all this. I don't believe that it's possible to take a one size fits all approach when describing guitars. A paul may be the best choice for one player where a strat may be the best choice for another. To me it's simple, you have to spend time with a guitar, to decide whether or not it's right for you. For one thing, tone is completely subjective. I don't care how much someone raves about a guitar, it doesn't influence me in the least. If it did, I probably wouldn't be playing Hamer models that have been discontinued for the better part of a decade. Besides if I spent too much time thinking about it, I would most likely have even less time to practice, than I already do. lol

Off to practice.

[jdrnd]

Atquinn,

Since we probably agree on more things than we disagree on, by what means other than objective evaluations would you propose to explode the promoted idea that there are dramatic differences between certain guitars? As I was reviewing this thread the thought popped into my mind that even if this premise is true (which is something we both suspect), there may be some people in the industry who would oppose exposing this notion since it might depress overall guitar prices.

By the way is the your big three Fender-Gibson-Gretsch, or Fender-Gibson-PRS

Jeff

[BadgerDave]

Does a $20,000.00 Rolex perform it's essential function any better than a $10.00 quartz Timex?

I guess that depends on what you beleive the essential function of the watch is. For some, it's simple - a watch tells time and for them, a Rolex is an incredible waste of money. For others, a watch is a piece of jewelry and the Rolex is worth it's price. Others admire craftsmanship, history, mechanical precision, or even the image projected by a certain brand.

Guitars are much the same. They are purchased by a wide variety of individuals who have diverse preferences, not only in how their guitars look, but also in how they sound and feel. You apparently do not like P-90 pickups. I, and many others, prefer the sound of P-90s over even the best humbucking models. Why? because they sound better! Disagree? Great, you buy what you like and I'll buy what I like. Which is better? What are you going to measure? noise? sustain? If so, the humbuckers win, hands down. I still think the P-90s sound better.

Is low string pressure better than high string pressure or is medium string pressure best? Stevie Ray Vaughn played long scale guitars with huge strings and high action. Satriani and Vai play light strings with very low action. Which is "right"?

My point is that, beyond basic quality control measurements, I don't believe there are any objective measurements that can add significant value. Every guitar player with a few years of experience learns that a Les Paul has easier action and longer sustain than a Telecaster. We also begin to understand that every guitar has significant diffferences in tone and feel, even if we are comparing two Les Pauls that came off of the assembly line on the same day.

So, to answer your question: No

[jdrnd]

Badgerdave,

Clearly one cannot compare humbuckers to P-90s. But one can compare humbuckers to humbuckers, P-90s to P-90s, 24 fret guitars to 24 fret guitars, etc. And for closely matched guitars that sound similar, if the price difference was significant (like more than $1000), but objective specs were equal, you would have objective criteria not to "buy the expensive jewelry" and opt for the less expensive instrument. Over time if more people bought guitars with their head and not their heart, the price of these jewels would come down since it would be apparent that they are no better than their less expensive rivals. I agree with you there are some of us who will always go for the perceived jewels. Marketing is designed to create this need. I have to confess I bought those "Pet Rocks" in the 1970's. I lost the box it came in but I still have the rock. By the way since I mostly play the Artist Korina p-90. My single coil mustang sounds like a toy when I play it (and the SC hum drives me crazy). In other words the P-90 has grown on me. I keep trying unsuccessfully to sound like Def lepard's "too late for love". But thats a story for another thread in the future.

You mentioned that ..."Every guitar player with a few years of experience learns that a Les Paul has easier action and longer sustain than a Telecaster." Just by you and other guitarists mentioning it over and over it becomes fact. So why not actually measure the action pressure. Maybe its not true, its just we all believe its true because its repeated so many times.

Jeff

[kurtsstuff]

It's simple...the best guitar in the world is........"THE ONE YOU LIKE"!!!!!

[sw686blue]

Guitars are way too subjective. A lot of people here on the forum do not like the sound of Duncan P90s. They find them too hot, too rude, etc. Guess what? I love them. Why? Because there are hot and rude. In my Artist Korina they sounded amazing for ZZ Top, AC/DC, George Thorogood type tones. To each their own.

I've bought several Hamers and sold several Hamers too. Not one was a dog. My first one and only one that I actually tried was a Diablo. The rest I bought without ever playing them. The ones I kept were the ones that spoke to me in a special way.

I feel sorry that your first experience with a Hamer was not as good as you expected it to be. It could be that the Artist Korina with P90s is just not for you. I love the look of a PRS but I have never played one that knocked my socks off. I'm not crazy about the shape and feel of their necks and I really do not like the sound of their pickups. That's just me.

[mrhamerman]

You mentioned that ..."Every guitar player with a few years of experience learns that a Les Paul has easier action and longer sustain than a Telecaster." Just by you and other guitarists mentioning it over and over it becomes fact. So why not actually measure the action pressure. Maybe its not true, its just we all believe its true because its repeated so many times.

Interesting topic, but I'd like to say some things, if I may...

1. If you're concerned about value received for dollars spent, always buy used.

2. As for the price differences you'll encounter when comparing apples-for-apples guitars; that's the reason many of us own used Hamers. I've owned/sold some used Les Pauls in the past, but my used Hamers--at a fraction of the price--easily hold their own against any of them. That's not just a romanticized opinion. I worked in a music store for years and was able to conduct numerous one-on-one shoot-outs at the store and at band practices. Time after time, in everyone's opinion, the Hamers equaled or surpassed the Gibsons in tone and playability. Yes, the general public holds Gibsons in higher esteem than Hamers, but I switched for the above mentioned "value received for dollars spent" factor and have remained satisfied with my decision ever since.

3. Les Paul vs. Telecaster... try the experiment for yourself. I have, and with the same setup and string gauge on each guitar:

a. The Fender's longer scale length made for stiffer action and tougher string bends. It's a scientific fact that the same string will require greater tension to be tuned to pitch on a longer scale length.

b. The Fender's single-coil pickups did not have the powerful output of the humbucking pickups, and thus did not produce as long a sustaining note.

4. Anything involving our senses will always be subjective. I'm glad my guitars sound different; it gives me a wider variety of tones to create with.

[jdrnd]

I realize that there is a subjective component to appreciating a particular guitar, but there is also an objective peice that is currently not given enough attention. That Les Paul vs Telecaster experiment is what I'm talking about. Its a qualitative experiment but not quantitative. But its not exactly the experiment I was thinking of. Most guitarists, with experience, that I sought advice from felt that particular Hamer Instruments are as good as Gibson instruments. This is based on their subjective experience. I'm suggesting a real world comparison with objective values. Maybe Gibson is really better... or not. But one doesn't really know untill parameters are measured. These same type of measurements are being applied to cars, appliances, stereos, and even medicine. Why not guitars? I have always felt that the more information one has about any "thing", situation, procedure, the better able one is to make a reasonable decision.

Objective data would be useful when i buy my next guitar. Since I can't try every model, the existance of data for sustain, action pressure, tonal overtone, etc for all the models I mentioned above (and others such as PRS, GL, Campbell, whatever) would make it easier for me to narrow the list. What if a PRS santana III has the same parameters as a (I'll pick one out of the air) an Epiphone LP. Of course the marketing perception is that the first kills the second. I say: "Prove it". Lets see the data. A similar comparison could be made for the Hamer Artist ultimate vs Gibson LP super deluxe ultimate special edition with a cherry on top. These comparisons are now made being made in every area of industry, why not the music equipment industry.

As for my experience with my AK P-90, I'm not as unhappy with it as you may think. The tuning problem was due to my pressing too hard, going from string gauge of 012 to 010, and having my thumb in the wrong place (for years). I ate craw and took one lesson and the bending was corrected. I also changed the strings to 011 and had the action lowered. I didn't appreciate P-90s because I was comparing them to single coils, and acoustic pick-ups. I play the AK every day. Since, buying it, I've made a trip to the Guitar Center. Interesting store. There are amps all over the place. I see a $1500 Gibson les paul on a stand and I asked the sales person if I can try it. So he hands me a cable and I sit down, plug in and play. I also tried a Fender strat, and a Gibson SG. No one said anything to me. After an hour I figured I better leave before I over stay my welcome (if you could call it that). So I turned in my cable and walked out the store. The guy at the cash register didn't even ask me what i thought of the instrument. Playing these instruments after having played the AK for 2 months gave me a different perspective then my impulsive buy of the Hamer when I had no experience (other then an acoustic and Mustang). These guitars were good, but they were different. The tone of the Strat was the clearest and the LP humbucker (I didn't ask which model humbucker) was OK, but I think I like the sound of My AK P-90 better than that of the LP. It would have been nice if I could have played them back to back. The learning experience of buying the AK P-90 was worth the money. And this forum is worth its weight in gold. I learned about string tension, pickups, woods and how they change effect tone, and the resale value of various models. Most of what I learned came from this forum..... But quantifiable numbers would also be helpful and that data doesn't exist in a way that guitars can be compared.

Jeff

[HamerHokie]

It's seems to me you are trying to obejctively quantify a purely subjective decision. I think you've made a few assumptions that lead you to believe that this is easier than it really is.

You say that you can't compare P-90s to humbuckers. You also cannot compare humbuckers to other humbuckers! Some are voiced for vintage tones, some more modern. Also, you can't compare P-90s to P-90s, because some people want them to sound like Telecaster pickups, some like Strat pickups, and some like something totally different.

That's how we get into such ridiculous 'advice' threads on this board. Someone says 'I want a good nasty P-90 tone' and are told 'Try Phat Cats!' Personal bias invariably drives advice - if I like it, you should too! Despite what you say you want!

It all comes down to this - what do you want? You have to KNOW. What tone do you have in your mind? It seems to me you are way to willing to let a salesman do that for you. Salesmen push product. If they sell Fenders they are going to steer you to Fender. Even if you want a Gibson. If you have no idea what you want, they will thank God for sending you.

In reading the angst in your past posts it sounds more like you don't have any really effective methodology for evaluating guitars YOURSELF. My methodology can never be yours, unless you want exactly what I do.

A few tips:

1. If you are going to audition different guitars, bring your amp. You can't expect them to sound the same as they do in the store unless you use the same amp.

2. Do your research. Harmony Central is OK, in that you'll see the good and the bad with each model. Find guitar mag reviews of the guitars you're considering.

3. Learn what pickups sound like. Some pickup manufacturers provide sound clips of their pickups on their websites. Learn the difference in 'vintage,' 'modern,' 'hot,' 'aggressive' tones, especially in the areas of resonant frequency and frequency balance across the spectrum (some have better bass response, some have hotter mids, some have exaggerated highs).

[HamerHokie]

I realize that there is a subjective component to appreciating a particular guitar, but there is also an objective peice that is currently not given enough attention. That Les Paul vs Telecaster experiment is what I'm talking about. Its a qualitative experiment but not quantitative. But its not exactly the experiment I was thinking of. Most guitarists, with experience, that I sought advice from felt that particular Hamer Instruments are as good as Gibson instruments. This is based on their subjective experience. I'm suggesting a real world comparison with objective values. Maybe Gibson is really better... or not. But one doesn't really know untill parameters are measured. These same type of measurements are being applied to cars, appliances, stereos, and even medicine. Why not guitars? I have always felt that the more information one has about any "thing", situation, procedure, the better able one is to make a reasonable decision.

Objective data would be useful when i buy my next guitar. Since I can't try every model, the existance of data for sustain, action pressure, tonal overtone, etc for all the models I mentioned above (and others such as PRS, GL, Campbell, whatever) would make it easier for me to narrow the list. What if a PRS santana III has the same parameters as a (I'll pick one out of the air) an Epiphone LP. Of course the marketing perception is that the first kills the second. I say: "Prove it". Lets see the data. A similar comparison could be made for the Hamer Artist ultimate vs Gibson LP super deluxe ultimate special edition with a cherry on top. These comparisons are now made being made in every area of industry, why not the music equipment industry.

What determines the difference in price between models and manufacturers?

Quality/type of wood

Quality of hardware

Quality of pickups

Quality of workmanship - handmade vs CNC

So that explains the difference between a Santana III and an Epiphone to a large extent. But you know, someone who plays metal might find a Santana III as a waste of time and might prefer a Jackson with Dimebuckers.

What criteria do guitarists need to have preferences for?

Weight

Features

Finish colors

Wood tone

Wood appearance

Scale length

Resonance

Hotness and tone of pickups

How things sound in your own rig

[BadgerDave]

Where's Mike Lee? I beleive we need a bit of engineer to engineer dialogue here.

(jdrnd, forgive me if I'm mistaken about your background/profession. I'm married to a ChemE and I see great similarities in your precise logic, technical writing and quest for quantifiable data - all great qualities, IMO)

[jerseydrew]

I need a beer.

[HamerHokie]

Where's Mike Lee? I beleive we need a bit of engineer to engineer dialogue here.

(jdrnd, forgive me if I'm mistaken about your background/profession. I'm married to a ChemE and I see great similarities in your precise logic, technical writing and quest for quantifiable data - all great qualities, IMO)

I think you're forgetting that Gibson and Fender stopped relying on engineering long ago, when they found their mystical pots of 'vintage magic' they pour on each and every guitar produced. Instant masterpiece!

[Steve Haynie]

There is no good barbecue in Western North Carolina. We can look at the cooking technique and the ingredients in the sauce. They all suck in Western North Carolina. Go to Tennessee, Georgia, or South Carolina and it gets better.

We can see better cooking recipes. Scientifically we can deduce that the pH and moisture contents are different. We can laugh at people in Western NC that think they know what barbecue is supposed to taste like. The WNC people are offended by remarks like mine (but WNC BBQ really is not as good as it should be) and claim how long they have been in business making BBQ. The mustard based BBQ people from South Carolina really do make better BBQ, but it is also an entirely different recipe. An argument can be lost on that fact alone.

BBQ magazine editors will swoon over the brands of BBQ sauce that happen to be the most heavily advertised in their pages. Stores that get a bigger discount from a manufacturer will be trying harder to sell that brand of BBQ sauce.

It all comes down to what kind of BBQ you like, what you have tried, what you understand about cooking BBQ, and whether or not you could stand to eat the same BBQ every day.

[blackfbiv]

Wow...

Just switch to bass guitar..all of this stuff will cease to matter... hahahahahahahahahaha

I slay me...

Oh yeah: don't forget that we all hear things a little differently and by that I mean actually physically hear things differently.

So my tired ear is going to miss some freqs, overtones and that sort of thing that will surely affect my subjective response to a certain piece of gear.

I don't think there is any way to nail down the information that you seek.

Dion

[Matt Mattson]

The mustard based BBQ people from South Carolina really do make better BBQ, but it is also an entirely different recipe. An argument can be lost on that fact alone.

Finally, a person with some class has appeared on this board! I salute you, Sir. Everytime I'm over in Minneola (Florida) right on Hwy. 27 as you enter the N. side of town, I load up with bottles of BBQ sauce from Jack's (BBQ). Man alive is that stuff good!

And for the best all you can eat catfish joint of all time, go to the N. shore of Lake Okeechobee right by the Kissimmee River barge canal.

This ends our lesson for the day on culture and culinary cuisine.

Back to your regularly scheduled program . . .

The best guitar: the one you're looking at. Ask any seller.

[MTM105]

The best guitar is the guitar that is pushed by their cheesy Artist of the Month on the cover of Guitar World.....that's objectivity!