>>4178771>They are basically the straw airplane of the cargo cult.You liked that analogy huh
>I think a better guitar example would be the PRS. Ugly designs, generic poor imitations of actually aesthetic products (a weird strat/LP hybrid with "fancy" things thrown at it to make up for the uninspired design).PRS guitars are like that because they're function over form all the way to CNC production efficiency. "What if we made the Les Paul but double cut?" "What if we gave the Les Paul a 24-fret design?". The only aesthetic concern along the way was mimicking the general shape of the Les Paul, which isn't that good looking to begin with (hot take I know, I'm more of a Strat and SG fan and the only Les Paul that made me wow was pic related). After all that, PRS goes and puts lipstick on the pig: quirky bird inlays, bookmatched maple tops and other eccentricities that guitar gearfags have been conditioned to like. All in all, not as bad as bassists who seem to be in a permanent contest to get the ugliest instrument they can. Some basses out there look like vomit, and I'm not being hyperbolic here. All in the name of being exotic. I believe they're less deluded about tone woods than guitarists are and just get those ugly knot woods for the (ugly) looks at least.
