I understand that you are hoping to evaluate them via objective criteria -- and it's great that you're asking questions and trying to figure them out. But you're still ultimately chasing subjective factors, though doing so in the language of objective differences. The two guitar lines are, in a very broad sense, more alike than different. They occupy similar niches in terms of manufacturing quality, and use similar grade components. The newer guitars are more faithful to the originals by some criteria, and not others -- but you say you don't care about those distinctions, or about weight.
Maybe you're used to guitar mag journalists (ugh) or video reviewers (UGH) who will rattle off a list of construction details and tell you which one is "really" the better guitar, or the better deal. That's BS. I can't think of anyone here who indulges in that kind of crap.
Just go play some.
Quite a few assumptions here.
I'm not chasing any subjective factors. I don't know if you consider CTS pots vs Chinese made generic ones subjective for example. Maybe you do. I definitely don't and consider this as a clear reference of quality, as I have used and owned both and know what to expect and which is better. Chinese or Korean made doesn't automatically means generic pots. There are Epiphones with CTS pots, with Gibson pickups etc. But the guitar is still made in China. The Dearmond pickups on the DA Starfire Custom are said to be made in USA. Even if the guitar is put together in Korea. Are the current Guild pickups made in China? This is the type of facts (well there is only one type really) I was looking for. But subjective differences were brought up along the way, such as styling. The color of the knobs doesn't affect playability or performance. This is what I would call subjective, and yet, I never asked anybody which color knob they prefer or they think I should go for.
So to say that I'm still chasing subjective factors, though doing so in the language of objective differences, is a lot of assumption on your part, and quite a bit of word twisting.
I'm not sure what your guitar choosing process is, everybody's process is different and I respect all opinions and approaches. But I don't live in NY city, Chicago, Nashville or any big musical center. I don't have the luxury of just walking on in a used guitar shop and just testing several options. I have to hunt these guitars down. Unless it's a new guitar and mainstream such as Gibson, Fender, Epiphone or Gretsch. But the obscure stuff, and Guild is obscure, I know guitar players who know nothing about Guild or have just heard the name in passing, but the obscure stuff, I need to hunt them down. Sometimes having to drive 2 hours just to see or test a single guitar. I'm not sure how much time you have, I definitely don't have that much. I'm not retired yet. Under these circumstances, I try learning as much as I can before I take the time to hunt something down. It's not even just going there. But the time that takes to find something that is rare, look for the right deal, communication with seller and all that. This is just how I do it. If you do different, I respect that.
For example, no shop in town sells even new Guilds.
I only came here because I found a Dearmond. If I hadn't bumped into one (2 actually) I would probably not have hunted it down. They are unicorns. I didn't have any hopes to find one within reach. I was only getting I DC hits on my Guild searches.
Like I already said, I have decided it's not worth it hunting down a SF-IV NS, for now. And I'm glad I came here and learned that I could totally scratch a I DC off my list and not waste my time on that. Yes, testing a guitar is the ultimate way of telling. But once you have experience with several guitars, you come to learn what you like, what you don't and what you just can't or won't put up with. Once you have that sense, specs, history and solid facts do help you not wasting time. I don't need to try some guitars to know they are not for me. Pre-elimination is helpful. You might even let something good slip through the cracks. But if you have a few guitars already, not a big deal. If it's right, you will come across it again in a better situation.
As for the newer ones being more faithful to the originals by some criteria, and not others, so is the Dearmond. It's more faithful in some respects than the newer ones. So this is all a moot point. I think what it boils down too is the amount of weight somebody might put on a logo. I put zero weight on that. Never did. Epiphone makes crap (wasn't aware this was acceptable language here. More freedom is always good), but Epiphone also makes great stuff which rivals Gibson. Gibson makes great guitars but also crap. The only guitar I had to ever replace a switch on was a Gibson. A logo or brand means nothing anymore. Companies don't stand for their products as they used to. It's all about the bottom line and the shareholders. But obviously most people still make a fuzz about logos and place a lot of value on them. Or fake Gibsons wouldn't have a market.
As I have said a few times now, this week I will try a Dearmond Starfire Custom. If I hate it, I might hunt down a SF-IV NS and pay twice. But there is none within driving distance so far. If I want a Sheraton, DOT, ES335, Hagstrom Viking, Gretsch or Ibanez, I can have my pick within spitting distance.
I thank all the people who took the time to post here, trying to help. This conversation has been very helpful. Thanks very much!
I will be back with an update if I buy the Dearmond. Possibly write a review after a few weeks playing it and a few gigs, trying to post up some specs I measure etc. There is basically zero solid info on them out there. It has been very hard to research it. I had to gather bits of info here and there and put them together myself. Stuff like neck profile with measures at 1st, 5th and 12th frets for example. Useful info that is just not readily available.
Cheers!
