You've missed my point. My point was that you can do whatever crazy shit you want to an epi-chet but your going to be limited by the weakest link of the guitar. Also as Ranting stated the wood does make a difference regardless of it being a solid-body, otherwise I'd saw up my kitchen table and slap some Fishman's in it and start rockin.filmdude100cms wrote:i agree on the DM3MD, he brought those up. he was saying that since what im gonna do to an epi chet is not making it a good guitar, and then saying that a martin with daves sig is shit if it dont have daves sig... well thats bullshit, what im gonna do to an epi chet, makes it better than a gibson, except gibson uses better wood, its a solid bodied guitar, it really doesnt matter.shane wrote:well of course it makes a difference on normal acoustics unamplified.. that goes without saying..filmdude100cms wrote:i meant stain cause on a chet, the wood wont really change the look much.
2. i mean on a solid body it makes no real difference... on an acoustic it does, no pickups in involved...
no comments about #3 though?
but with a purely acoustic instrument wood makes allot of difference.
My example with the Martin was just used to illustrate my point. I wasn't saying that Dave's sig wasn't what made the DM3MD a good guitar. You can take a bottom of the barrell Martin and do whatever crazy crap you want but you'll still have a cheap laminate guitar.
If you want an Epi Chet then great there isn't anything wrong with that, but don't fool yourself into thinking that slappin some different pick-ups in it is gonna make it into something it isn't.