Greeny

[c_wester]

In my mind the only one that played that 1959 Les Paul was Peter Green. I never heard it sound remotely good in any other hands.
Gary Moore sounded like a harsh Boss DS-1 it was not for me.

And the Boss Ds-1 is one of my favorite Pedals. I get some killer Vintage tone out of it.
Meaning the 1967-1972 range of classic tones.


To me Kirk Hammett seams like a very nice Guy. But he confuses me with his lack of knowledge about Greeny.
Not understanding how the out of phase humbuckers are setup.
Or maybe he is not gifted with explanation skills.

It is totally his guitar to Grill with if he pleases. He paid for it.

I do believe tone is important, VERY important.
But the choices of notes that conjure up melodies (Pick any Beatles or Cat Stevens song or fine melody) it can be done with shittier gear/sound.


Still a great Gibson/Fender into a great old Tubeamp that roars.
Just does something to the ear.

Not unlike putting on a vintage Christmas vinyl these days on a good setup.

I am still post surgery today so... a little dumber than usual.

 

[William Payne]

I do find it funny how when we comment on how someone treats an instrument how someone will say "well so and so did this or that". I know plenty of talented people who treat their stuff like absolute complete trash. That does not make it right.

I don't care if it is a $50 guitar or a $50,000 guitar, look after it.

But a lot of that is my background in past jobs I have had when dealing with customers, where whether you had a one off customer spending $100 or a big time customer spending $100,000 you had to treat them the same. You couldn't just give special treatment to one and cheap out on the other.

I used to have the most beat up junky looking station wagon. But it was all I could afford at the time and it was my daily transportation. It looked like a beater but I treated it like a Ferrari. I used to get really pissed off when people would work on it and they would lower their quality standards because in their words it was "Just a beater". Man I don't give a crap that is my car man.

 

[charliechitlins]

It's his. He owns it.

It's not a listed monument, is it?

He owns it BECAUSE it's iconic and of great historical significance.
That's why he paid so much.
Surely this isn't a difficult thing to understand.
I once saw a guy approach Buddy Guy with a guitar and a Sharpie.
Buddy scowled and said, "I don't mark up no guitar."
There's a man who respects the instrument.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

He owns it BECAUSE it's iconic and of great historical significance. That's why he paid so much. Surely this isn't a difficult thing to understand. I once saw a guy approach Buddy Guy with a guitar and a Sharpie. Buddy scowled and said, "I don't mark up no guitar."
There's a man who respects the instrument.

He owns it because he paid for it.

He is entitled to do what he likes with it.

It's his property.

Why he paid what he paid (which I don't presume to know, and neither can you) is irrelevant.

Apocryphal anecdotes about Buddy Guy are irrelevant.

End of.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

I do find it funny how when we comment on how someone treats an instrument how someone will say "well so and so did this or that". I know plenty of talented people who treat their stuff like absolute complete trash. That does not make it right.

I don't care if it is a $50 guitar or a $50,000 guitar, look after it.

But a lot of that is my background in past jobs I have had when dealing with customers, where whether you had a one off customer spending $100 or a big time customer spending $100,000 you had to treat them the same. You couldn't just give special treatment to one and cheap out on the other.

I used to have the most beat up junky looking station wagon. But it was all I could afford at the time and it was my daily transportation. It looked like a beater but I treated it like a Ferrari. I used to get really pissed off when people would work on it and they would lower their quality standards because in their words it was "Just a beater". Man I don't give a crap that is my car man.

Right or wrong are subjective judgments. Everyone is free to opine, but that's all.

Kirk owns the guitar. He has the right to do as he pleases with it.

I presume you heard about this?

Man eats £4.9m banana artwork​

The TRON founder previously labelled the controversial art piece "a cultural phenomenon" - an assessment that failed to stop him from eating it.

Man eats £4.9m banana artwork

The TRON founder previously labelled the controversial art piece "a cultural phenomenon" - an assessment that failed to stop him from eating it.

news.sky.com

 

[F-Hole]

He owns it BECAUSE it's iconic and of great historical significance.
That's why he paid so much.
Surely this isn't a difficult thing to understand.

We’ll, with respect, only Kirk, his accountant and the two other people in the room know what he paid.

He bought it because of the Gary Moore connection and it plays well with a unique tone.

So, perhaps it is difficult to understand after all.

 

[rockabilly69]

He owns it BECAUSE it's iconic and of great historical significance.
That's why he paid so much.
Surely this isn't a difficult thing to understand.
I once saw a guy approach Buddy Guy with a guitar and a Sharpie.
Buddy scowled and said, "I don't mark up no guitar."
There's a man who respects the instrument.

I'm pretty sure he signed my buddy's cigar box guitar!

 

[William Payne]

Right or wrong are subjective judgments. Everyone is free to opine, but that's all.

Kirk owns the guitar. He has the right to do as he pleases with it.

I presume you heard about this?

Man eats £4.9m banana artwork​

The TRON founder previously labelled the controversial art piece "a cultural phenomenon" - an assessment that failed to stop him from eating it.

Man eats £4.9m banana artwork

The TRON founder previously labelled the controversial art piece "a cultural phenomenon" - an assessment that failed to stop him from eating it.

news.sky.com

As an art enthusiast I had no problem with the banana thing. That’s not even the original banana. I remember when that installation first went up the banana was in constant rotation because it soon rot.

It’s conceptual art it isn’t meant to make sense.

 

[S. Weiger]

Correlation doesn't imply causation, as I'm sure you know very well.

I'll chalk this up to a joke on your part, shall I?

Only partly.
I'd say there's a very good chance the two are related.
As you probably know, ppl who are fokking their bodies up, also very often are careless with their belongings.

Sadly, Bloomfield apparently was no exeption to this. That said, I sure wish he'd only mistreated that guitar, and not his body too.

 

[Epi Les Paul]

He owns it BECAUSE it's iconic and of great historical significance.
That's why he paid so much.
Surely this isn't a difficult thing to understand.
I once saw a guy approach Buddy Guy with a guitar and a Sharpie.
Buddy scowled and said, "I don't mark up no guitar."
There's a man who respects the instrument.

Depends on who is asking to sign his guitar. I saw Buddy Guy sign a young teenage fellow's strat one time. On a side note a bass player I know was at a Buddy Guy club show years ago. After the show was over he approached Buddy's bass player saying "hey man great show" The bass player replied "hey man you got any hash?"

As for the Peter Green/Gary Moore Les Paul I too will always consider it Green's guitar even though Gary Moore owned it the longest. I just feel that Peter Green got the best tone from it.

 

[William Payne]

The reality is that the only thing you need to be able to do to own these instruments is pay the price tag. That is the reality of any collectable.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

Depends on who is asking to sign his guitar. I saw Buddy Guy sign a young teenage fellow's strat one time. On a side note a bass player I know was at a Buddy Guy club show years ago. After the show was over he approached Buddy's bass player saying "hey man great show" The bass player replied "hey man you got any hash?" As for the Peter Green/Gary Moore Les Paul I too will always consider it Green's guitar even though Gary Moore owned it the longest. I just feel that Peter Green got the best tone from it.

The fact that Kirk owns it now supersedes your feelings.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

The reality is that the only thing you need to be able to do to own these instruments is pay the price tag. That is the reality of any collectable.

That is the reality of ownership, full stop.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

Only partly. I'd say there's a very good chance the two are related. As you probably know, ppl who are fokking their bodies up, also very often are careless with their belongings. Sadly, Bloomfield apparently was no exeption to this. That said, I sure wish he'd only mistreated that guitar, and not his body too.

I don't believe you can equate the value of a human life with the value of a used guitar in any wise, but that's just me, maybe.

 

[Xpensive Wino]

As an art enthusiast I had no problem with the banana thing.

That's handy, because you didn't own that banana either, did you?

 

[MattD1960]

Greeny is a perfect example of fandom becoming a bit "toxic", excuse my use of an internet buzz word, but its the truth. I love Peter Green, i dont particularly care for Gary Moore or Kirk and i personally think of it as PGs guitar as mentioned by a couple people above. that said i can also separate my "feelings" form the reality Kirk bought it, he loves Gary Moore and has been blessed with the funds through hard work to afford such a guitar GOOD ON YA. its in a stable collection and world gets to see it for the price of a metalica ticket. if you feel his peter green or gary more Knowledge isnt up to "par" or that his "treatment" of the guitar is sacrilegious you should probably re evaluate your "feelings" i was guilty of this as a teenager, "HOW dare someone not to the most blues inspired thing with XYZ amp/guitar" " i would honor the memory of XYZ player if i owned said thing" its a short sighted way of looking at the thing. A vintage dealer i was fortunate enough to meet put it to me in a way that really changed my mind. DONT GET ATTACHED ITS ALL FANCY PAINTED FIREWOOD and I really think thats the truth now. some stuff should be preserved because history is cool but in the end its all up to whoever owns the thing to do with it what they choose to do.

 

[S. Weiger]

I don't believe you can equate the value of a human life with the value of a used guitar in any wise, but that's just me, maybe.

That's definitely NOT what I said. Please don't twist my words like that.

Ok, I'm out of this Bloomfield derail.
Back to Greeny, PG, GM & KH. For me at least.

 

[William Payne]

That's handy, because you didn't own that banana either, did you?

I’m not even sure what we are debating anymore. If someone owns something, it is theirs by right to do as they please whether I or anyone agrees or not. Disagreeing with something, or not liking something isn’t the same as telling someone what they can or cannot do with their stuff that they own.

For example my neighbour is putting in a door in a weird place on their house. Not my house, they can do whatever they like. But I can still think it makes it look weird when I look at it. I like architecture so I have things I like and things I don’t. They are just opinions, not gospel.

 

[GreenBurst]

Maybe this will help with getting back on focus. Watch it all...

 

[William Payne]

Seriously this thread has gone weird. Have you guys never gone to a car show and thought “I love that car but I just don’t like those wheels they chose to put on there”.

Or “man that car is beautiful but I think I prefer the one across the way”.