singemonkey wrote:
A lot of replica builders think it's ok to put the original designer's logo on their guitars. Or their customers demand it. I think it's wrong. It could lead to very bad feeling down the line - especially in the unlikely situation it's sold as a genuine vintage original (and some replicas I've seen could pass but for serious chemical and DNA finger-printing).
The flip side is that it's not typically as bad as a cheap fake - in that the instrument might very easily be better than the best quality offered by the manufacturer. If I thought I'd bought a Gibson R9 and then found out it was an expert made replica of a '59 LP, I'd be thrilled (although I'd change the logo). But it's still wrong and could potentially lead to someone ended up way out of pocket.
Put your own damn name on it and be proud.
+100000
funny enough i had this very conversation last week with a renowed cape town builder / repairman..
I did voice that I thought it was both morally and ethicaly wrong to create a fake no matter how good. whilst he may rely on the honesty and integrity of the customer requesting it, there will never be a guarantee that it wont be sold off later as the real deal.
I did suggest, as a way of compromise, that no serial numbers be put on the guitars at all, that way, if anyone is forking the kind of money a 'custom" guitar will go for, it may raise the buyers eyebrow if the guitar has no serial number.
