Page 4 of 5

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 4:06 am
by stratman323
What an absurd thread. :roll: If there is something wrong with a guitar you buy, you raise it with the seller in the first few days & try to agree on a solution to the problem. After you have owned the guitar for a couple of weeks it becomes the responsibility of the buyer, & it's far too late to expect the seller to resolve any problems that may or may not have arisen in the time since the sale.

Or does greco-burst expect a lifetime guarantee with a second-hand guitar?

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 4:09 am
by DaveWW
Michael, sorry about the name calling - you're right there's no need for that and I apologise. That was the result of too much seasonal loopy juice.

I've noticed that you're quite good at twisting other peoples words to try and put your own spin on them. A guitar you were delighted with seems to have suddenly developed belly bulge, now it seems to have a bent or bent and twisted neck....... As it suits your argument you claim to know nothing about acoustics but a guitar neck is a guitar neck.

The fact is that the action is clearly much worse now than when I sold it to you over 2 years ago. The action was in the normal range for a large acoustic like that. I think most people here can see that.

There is more that I could say but I won't be adding to this particular post again no matter how tempted I get.

_______________________________________________________________

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:14 am
by leadguitar_323
JohnA wrote:If Leadguitar123 says Tyms is not the best place to take it, then why take it there? I would also say that if simple stuff like checking the relief on the neck require you to take the guitar in to a repair shop, then perhaps you are not really qualified to make a judgement on the state of the guitar.
It was only a set up too John, i am the once bitten twice shy type, i now have an excellent luthier, he is a little expensive but i know guys with Vintage Gibbo's that won't take them anywhere else......suits me just fine.
I should add that i have been in Tyms shop a few times over the years, he sells vintage Japanese guitars as well and i have seen some good repairs he has done but if you pay for something then have to get it redone, well as far as i am concerned, i would rather go else where.


Mick

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:53 am
by greco_burst
stratman323 wrote:What an absurd thread. :roll: If there is something wrong with a guitar you buy, you raise it with the seller in the first few days & try to agree on a solution to the problem. After you have owned the guitar for a couple of weeks it becomes the responsibility of the buyer, & it's far too late to expect the seller to resolve any problems that may or may not have arisen in the time since the sale.

Or does greco-burst expect a lifetime guarantee with a second-hand guitar?
Ah I see...the only error I made here, was mentioning who the seller was....

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:06 am
by stratman323
greco_burst wrote:Ah I see...the only error I made here, was mentioning who the seller was....
Misquoting people again? :roll: No, the mistake you made was saying that the guitar was fine when you bought it, and then later claiming that it was faulty all along, even though it took you months to notice the apparent problem.

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:16 am
by greco_burst
edited

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:26 am
by stratman323
I give up! Maybe the only way to deal with this thread is to just ignore it.

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:55 am
by JohnA
There have been a few mistakes mostly based around the fact that you don't know what is acceptable for a 25 year old acoustic and what's not, to be happy with a guitar for 18 months it certainly can't have been terrible!

To start acusing the seller of misleading you two years doen the line after you pick up a bit of knowledge is bound to rub people up the wrong way.

As for mentioning the sellers name, I, and others here know Dave personally, he's as honest a guy as you will ever meet, and very knowledgeable about guitars, so he would have known if there was an issue, and would have mentioned it too. When you start acusing people who we trust it's bound to cast a little doubt on what ou are saying.

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:03 pm
by BlueThird
Saw no particular need to get involved in the squabble here when I posted in this thread before, but after an invitation like this:
greco_burst wrote:Take another good look at the beginning here?
I'll just restate the obvious. The beginning doesn't make you look good, Grecoburst. It's ridiculous to start complaining about a guitar two years or so after you bought it. Try it with a new one, sometime, and see how far you get. But it's especially ridiculous when the guitar is so old, and after you were so effusive in your earlier praise.

Some folk even seem to think that a month would be too long to leave it.
Mickdal wrote:You had that guitar for over 3 weeks, nearly 1 month before emailing me with a concern?
When you made your statement "buyer beware" earlier on, it might be that you were talking about Cat's Eyes or old guitars in general rather than about DaveWW, but I can certainly understand why Dave would have found your comments insulting.

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:41 pm
by greco_burst
BlueThird wrote:Saw no particular need to get involved in the squabble here when I posted in this thread before, but after an invitation like this:
greco_burst wrote:Take another good look at the beginning here?/quote]

I'll just restate the obvious. The beginning doesn't make you look good, Grecoburst. It's ridiculous to start complaining about a guitar two years or so after you bought it. Try it with a new one, sometime, and see how far you get. But it's especially ridiculous when the guitar is so old, and after you were so effusive in your earlier praise.

Some folk even seem to think that a month would be too long to leave it.
Mickdal wrote:You had that guitar for over 3 weeks, nearly 1 month before emailing me with a concern?
When you made your statement "buyer beware" earlier on, it might be that you were talking about Cat's Eyes or old guitars in general rather than about DaveWW, but I can certainly understand why Dave would have found your comments insulting.
Thanks, I got the editing cleaning gear out, for the simple reason I view all this differently, and this thread is going 'against the grain' of TF.
Better late than never. :o

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:56 pm
by leadguitar_323
The action and guitar is how it is when it arrived davewww.idiot.com
Yeah, real nice editing mate...... :roll:

Mick

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:59 pm
by greco_burst
leadguitar_323 wrote:
The action and guitar is how it is when it arrived davewww.idiot.com
Yeah, real nice editing mate...... :roll:

Mick
Oh that is a reply to the member who called me a name so.... :roll:

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:22 pm
by leadguitar_323
Ahhhhh, i see, 2 wrongs make a right.....or you just have to have the last word......Really Mick, you are doing a great job of undermining any credibility you think you may have....


Mick

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:27 pm
by greco_burst
leadguitar_323 wrote:Ahhhhh, i see, 2 wrongs make a right.....or you just have to have the last word......Really Mick, you are doing a great job of undermining any credibility you think you may have....


Mick
You should be quiet, because adults were talking, and calling each other names.

Posted: Mon Dec 28, 2009 9:59 pm
by leadguitar_323
What is becoming highly apparent her is that your IQ is fighting with your shoe size for domination.............and its losing..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Mick