Gitfiddler Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 OK, just for fun, how many errors or innacuracies can you find in the Wikipedia page describing The Heritage Guitar Company? I saw a some that made my eyes roll and others that caused a face-palm moment. Take out your red correction pens and start your list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Guitars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HANGAR18 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I added one small line there once. A supporting fact I knew to be true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gitfiddler Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 Can anyone add/delete information to Wiki? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pegleg32 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 It seems like a reasonable article, but some of the details may be suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
golferwave Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I think as an overview they got it mostly right. I didn't see anything blatantly wrong. The plek machine reference could be dropped now. The lack of advertising is a valid point, they used to put out some great ads in the monthly magazines and I have a few of them framed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HRB853370 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 OK, just for fun, how many errors or innacuracies can you find in the Wikipedia page describing The Heritage Guitar Company? I saw a some that made my eyes roll and others that caused a face-palm moment. Take out your red correction pens and start your list. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_Guitars Show me a face palm moment, do it, I want to see what it looks like!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 well wiki is open so yes you can submit corrections & more accurate info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gitfiddler Posted September 5, 2013 Author Share Posted September 5, 2013 Show me a face palm moment, do it, I want to see what it looks like!! You mean this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyGrass Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I suspect that photo of Roy Clark shows Roy on one of his H535-style RCs, not a H535. You can't tell from the picture. Here he is with a H150. Roy's a treasure, but neither his voice nor the sound he gets from the H150 are at their prime. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0-VxB7DhlI This is the Roy we all love with his trusty Byrdland. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua6Svm-WVYU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HRB853370 Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 You mean this? Oh, that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidsmoke Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 I suspect that photo of Roy Clark shows Roy on one of his H535-style RCs, not a H535. You can't tell from the picture. Did they make a DC Roy Clark? I had understood that a roy clark was essentially a single cut 535/555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthpawGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Did they make a DC Roy Clark? I had understood that a roy clark was essentially a single cut 535/555 Yes there was / is a 535 Roy Clark sig model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthpawGuy Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barrymclark Posted September 5, 2013 Share Posted September 5, 2013 That's been up for quite some time. What I've always read into it was the Heritage article being more in defense of Gibson than actually about Heritage. Further, the language also seems to very much marginalize Heritage's reception in the musician's world. I am not saying the article should be a fan-boy's perspective, but when the first paragraph (third sentence) makes a claim that starts with could be, it really makes the rest of what is supposed to be an informative article difficult to trust. Hey, they did stop short of saying the headstock is ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HANGAR18 Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Hey, they did stop short of saying the headstock is ugly. Originally I thought Gibson's headstock was really cool looking and the Heritage headstock was ugly, but I have now completely reversed on that. Now, I LOVE the way that the Heritage headstock looks and completely despise the Gibson headstock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bolero Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 Originally I thought Gibson's headstock was really cool looking and the Heritage headstock was ugly, but I have now completely reversed on that. Now, I LOVE the way that the Heritage headstock looks and completely despise the Gibson headstock. Amen!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PunkKitty Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 I never thought of the Heritage headstock as ugly. The simplicity is beautiful. The headstocks fit their instruments perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidsmoke Posted September 6, 2013 Share Posted September 6, 2013 I certainly don't despise the G***** headstock. But I never had an issue with the Heritage stock either. First time I saw I thought it was cool. I was concerned about the rest of the guitar, and knew nothing of the companies ties to G*****. I think when folks come to Heritage through their knowledge of G***** and the Parson St legacy...the view is skewed slightly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HANGAR18 Posted September 7, 2013 Share Posted September 7, 2013 I think when folks come to Heritage through their knowledge of G***** and the Parson St legacy...the view is skewed slightly. I know, right? I was a HUGE fan of the Gibson Les Paul model guitars and collected them the same way I now do with Heritage guitars. I studied their construction methods and knew them inside and out to the best of my ability. So the first time I saw a rack full of Heritage guitars (H150's and H157's), my very first thought was, "Who the f*** do these guys think they are?" (...making guitars that look like Les Pauls) hahahaha Now I know, don't I? Having that little bit of in depth technical knowledge helped me realize that Heritage guitars are literally a better made guitar than the Gibson look-alikes. Now I've jumped ship. I sold all my Gibsons and bought all Heritage in their place (as far as that type of guitar goes). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidsmoke Posted September 7, 2013 Share Posted September 7, 2013 Thanks SPG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurph1 Posted September 13, 2013 Share Posted September 13, 2013 I never thought of the Heritage headstock as ugly. The simplicity is beautiful. The headstocks fit their instruments perfectly. I never thought of the Heritage headstock as ugly. The simplicity is beautiful. The headstocks fit their instruments perfectly. I agree.. and to this ol Hillbilly the article seems pretty accurate except that the Plek is now a coatrack.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.