Los Angeles
Senior Member
I agree that there were good DeArmonds out there and the trick was to find a good one.guitarslinger said:I've heard some derisive comments about the DeArmond brand here but they may be instructive. Good, not great, fit and finish, very good (IMHO) USA made pickups, lousy switches and stuff. Clearly mass produced but still with the opportunity to find "a decent one" in the batch. I imagine (well, I hope anyway) that they would provide even better quality on the "Guild" branded line. That SB X175 looks exactly like my first Guild and I want one instinctively. It remains to be seen whether this new line may be some sort of Faustian deal, however, it will, largely, be the only deal for some of us. While I might find an old X175 for a "reasonable" amount of money I still have to be concerned with shrinking binding and neck re-sets. Either way I'm looking forward with some excitement to some honest, Guild lovers, "hands on" descriptions here in a few days.
I generally found them lacking. The pickups were inconsistent from guitar to guitar. They were also heavy as lead. I felt that anything that was made of plastic was very cheap looking. The look of the "mother of toilet seat" block inlays were just about the worst I had seen on any guitar. It looked like the same material used for shampoo bottles. Or solid hand soap.
But the worst part of the whole thing was that they were look-alike guitars of the most desirable guilds (Starfire, M-75s, Thunderbirds and S-100s) and I feel that as such, they were a disservice to the entire brand, causing more harm than good to the guild family.
My biggest fear was that Fender Music would repeat it's very poor excecution of the DeArmond experiment. It looks at first blush that we may have dodged that bullet. I can't wait to hear some no-hype reviews of the instruments from a hands-on perspective.