What Tokai did I just buy?

ACY said:

Hey Fitz!
If that SG is good, it is good! :wink: Don?t matters what?s on the headstock! I looks nice, and if it plays like it looks, so just go ahead and enjoy!
cheers, "ACY"

Click to expand...

Thanks, that's kind of what I wanted to hear. I did get the impression from some of the people here that because it's not Tokai (a Fakai, I guess), it's complete crap. Actually, because it's a "Fakai," it sounded like the SG I bought was just a bunch of recycled guitar parts put together from a guitar "dump" in Korea, and had a Tokai label slapped on it. Which, I suppose, somewhat is the case.

So for the people who said that since it's not a Tokai, don't call it a Tokai: Got any suggestions? Fakai sounds so derogatory and cheap; I don't want to call it that.

Call it a Gibson replica - inspired by Tokai.

Weren't these guitars made by Dillion, or was that just a rumour?

/Magnus

Let's clear this one up. Tokais are copies of Gibsons; some would say they are more accurately described as replicas of Gibsons since they not only look the part but get it right under the surface too.

Fakes are things that claim to be something they aren't - Tokais would only be fakes if they said Gibson on the headstock.

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I love Tokais, but I'm afraid they are fakes. They were made to look exactly like Gibson's and Fenders because they wanted to make sales and they knew that players wanted something that would look just like the real thing (e.g. not a 'fake') from 5 feet away, that is in a bar, and didn't cost a whole lot. The fact that they are good guitars in themselves doesn't take away from the fact that they are in fact fakes. They are not Gibsons and they are not Fenders. They are made to look that way, to deceive people who might not be able to tell the difference. The reason they didn't put the real name on it is because they wanted people to know who to go to get their guitars. If they had put 'Gibson' or 'Fender' on it, they wouldn't have sold as many because people would have gone to the real companies, Gibson and Fender, to buy them.

Fake typically has a bad connotation because there's the sense that someone is cashing in on someone else's good idea. I think it's hard to argue that isn't happening here. Tokai is cashing in on the designs that Gibson and Fender have built up during rock's formative rock. Yes, G&F lost their way in the 70's and Tokai stepped in, but the fact remains they did it by making fake Gibson's and Fenders, not by making original designs that took the world by storm. Tokai's original designs such as the Talbo aren't really that attractive (although the Love Rock II is pretty nice).

Just my two cents....

Detroit ace, i get sick of saying this, if the Tokai's were "fakes" they would have Gibson on the headstock. Why is it so hard for you people to understand the difference between "fake" and "replica". These guitars are REPLICA'S,Fakes are exact copies down to the the logo and serial numbers. If you want to know what a "fake" is look at this link.

http://www.musoland.com.cn/classbrand.asp?LarCode=7

I hope this clears things up.

Mick

leadguitar_323 said:

Fakes are exact copies down to the the logo and serial numbers.
Mick

Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this definition of fakes. The guitars Mick points to are not exact copies although they have serial numbers and logos. Having checked numerous dictionaries it seems to me that a fake is something designed to deceive or represent something it is not.

I leave it to others to decide where Tokai and fakai fit in with this.

Chris

These guitars are REPLICA'S,Fakes are exact copies down to the the logo and serial numbers

Click to expand...

Actually, I would say that a replica is an exact copy down to the logo and serial number. It 'replicates' the original. With replica, there's also the sense of a single copy of a particular original. Tokais are not replicas, therefore, because the logos and serial numbers are not the same and they were mass-produced for the market. Fakes are copies intended to deceive, which I would argue is what Tokai, etc. are doing when they make their G&F copies. Now, there are good fakes and bad fakes. Tokai make good or great fakes, musoland make bad fakes.

I would say that Tokai could make very good fake G&F guitars by replicating the original building practices and with great attention to detail. However, they are still fakes because they whole point was to deceive people with the G&F look-a-likes.

I really don't think the Japanese guitar builders were in it for the honorable purpose of preserving the great building practices of the 50's and 60's American guitar makers. Otherwise they would have stopped when they succeeded in making their replicas. They were in it for the money. That's also why they offered fakes at different entry levels. For instance, Gibson didn't offer so many versions of the les paul. There was basically the standard and the custom. But with Tokai, you saw the LS-50, 60, 75, and so on -- all les pauls and all look genuine from 5 feet. The market for fakes can cast a wide net because they cater to anyone who wants a fake, no matter how much they want to spend.

--

I see what you are saying, but i can guarantee nobody has been deceived by thinking a Tokai was a Gibson {unless they have replaced the decals and are intentionaly trying to deceive} and that is where your point of view falls apart. Tokai is not trying to deceive anyone into thinking that they are buying a Gibson, hence the term "replica" where as the Chinese models are Fakes as they are claiming to be gibsons right down to the "made in USA" on the back of their headstocks. There are also lots of examples in the motor industry with cars like the Ford Cobra, there are 100's of companies making replicas of the originals, but none are trying to deceive the public into thinking that these are "real" Cobra's they are nothing more than "replicas" This is exactly what Tokai do when they make their guitars.....Replicas not fakes....there is a big difference.

Mick

Mick

I see your point. Replica certainly sounds better and seems more appropriate than fake when we talk about Tokai guitars, because of the quality. However, I have trouble believing they weren't trying to 'fake' somebody out when they produced the early tokai logos that looked from a short distance like the real thing. The 'Love Rock' script looks like 'Les Paul' from a distance and the spaghetti Tokai logo looks like Fender from a short distance. I agree with you that no players are deceived into thinking they have a Gibson or Fender, but people in the audience might be and that's what the players want -- they want people to think they're playing the real thing, just like the stars whose songs they're covering in the bar do.

-- Bill

I don't care what the audience thinks i'm playing, as long as they like it i'm happy... :wink:

Mick

Oh dear, we're back to the fake argument again....

Here are two of the Strats I use live most - which one is fake?



The SB one is a 1980 Springy ST80, so we all know what that is, and whether or not we regard it as a fake. The red one is a 1986 Fender US 62 re-issue. Now, it is a genuine US Fender, but it's a pretty accurate copy/replica/rip-off of a 1962 Strat. Does this make it a fake? It wouldn't be very hard to change the neck date & neck plate & try to pass it off as a genuine 1962 Strat - I'm sure some people must have done that.

Personally, I don't really care, they are both excellent Strats with a vintage vibe for a fraction of the cost of a genuine early 60s model. I don't feel I'm deceiving the audience if I take a Tokai to the gig rather than a "real" Fender - in fact the Tokai is more likely to attract attention from punters.

Maybe another question should be - are all non US made Fenders fakes? If you're a purist, a real Fender shouldn't be made in Japan by an outside contractor like Fujigen or Tokai. So are the Tokai made Fenders as fake as Tokais are?

And does it matter?

Too late Mike i'm already over it... :wink:

Mick

I don't regard them as fakes.

Gibson and Fender used to build some wonderful instruments. Then they stopped making them, yet the demand was still there because their replacements were shi.... er, Not Very Good.

Tokai had the skills, expertise and facilities to remanufacture these instruments to a standard that was as good as if not better than the originals. They saw the gap in the marketplace and went for it.

And let's not forget that if it hadn't been for people like Tokai then the whole Japanese scene would never have happened. The U.S. manufacturers would have stuck with their indifferent products as they'd have had no incentive to raise their game. We'd still be playing Strats with wonky tilt-necks and pot-metal bridges.

Is this a fake then?:

http://www.slashsworld.com/equipment/59-les-paul-replica-built-by-chris-derrig/

Or this?

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/567962.htm

They are reproductions in my book, not fakes.

Albert King had more than one Flying V that was a fake, but I don't remember anyone complaining about it. I don't imagine Albert would have given a toss if they had!

I'm told this is the last ever photo of Albert. The V was made by Tom Holmes of Nashville for Billy F. Gibbons, who gave it to Albert.

Imagine - giving the great man a fake guitar - how terrible.....

:lol:

Billy looks a lot different "Off Duty" without the hat, beard and shades, doesn't he? :lol:

Excellent points. First, the '62 reissue is not fake because it isn't trying to be something that is not. It was made and sold as a reissue or replica of the original. There is no intention to deceive.

However, in my opinion, the Tokai was made to deceive and is therefore a fake. Look at the logo for pete's sake -- they are trying to make it look exactly like the Fender logo! True, they stepped in with great luthier skills and replicated the crucial aspects of the original that made it a great guitar, such as the one-piece body, awesome neck, great electronics, etc. But they also replicated things that don't affect the playability or the sound, such as the headstock shape and the logo style. Why did they do these aspects if they had no bearing on the sound? Because they wanted people to feel like they had the real thing, even though it wasn't: they wanted to sell fakes.

Look .. I'm not disputing the fact that they are great guitars. I have 4 of them and they are fantastic. But, the fact remains that the early ones were intended to deceive and are thus fakes. The later ones not so much in my opinion, because the logos and headstock were changed.

As for non-US Fenders, no they are not fakes. They are made by Fender and are sanctioned by the company. They are real Fenders. The Tokai made Fenders are not fakes either for the same reason. The Tokai made 7okais are fakes, though, if the headstock and logo look very, very similar to the real Fender logo and headstock. They are good fakes, but still fakes.

--

Sorry, but i completely disagree with that assessment dis...

To my mind selling a guitar with the name Gibson on it's headstock and calling it a Les Paul when the body has secret holes in it and the neck doesnt even fit snugly to the body, ie there's a gap down either side of it where it meets the body.

Not only that but the workshop it hails from has nothing to do with the original company or employees and none of the owners actually have anything to do with the original Gibson company is far far more of a fake than a guitar that clearly has the Logo Tokai and the words Love Rock on it.

Maybe the biggest shame is that. Tokai didn't buy Gibson and start producing well made, properly set up guitars under that brand name.

No-one denies there are some lovely Gibbos around but they bear virtually no resemblance whatsoever outside of the name, to the guitars that the company built its' reputation on.

A local guitar dealer informs me that of the new Gibson Les Pauls he sold in 2006 . On all but the one, within a year, the finish had started to crack up and craze. That is just not good enough no matter how you look at it.

I remember the first time i came upon a Tokai Love Rock back in 1981. It was everything the several Gibson Les Pauls in the same shop weren't in terms of build quality, weight, finish and all round vibe.

Not for one minute did i believe it was a Gibson though.

Replicas are nothing new. By Victorian times Louis XV furniture was already in short supply. Some very august British firms produced exact replicas of the style and sold them at a commensurate price for a replica. Those replicas themselves, are now fetching serious money.

The truth is Tokai came into existence to fulfil a local market need. Japanese guitarists could not get enough of the older Les Pauls and Strats. Plus, they were not shy about expressing their dissatisfaction with the build quality of the big name American guitars that were being sold.

It wasn't till distributors in Europe picked up on the Tokai brand and they received some glowing reviews, that Gibson even bothered to take any notice.

A fake is something that purports to be something it isn't and it usually is made from substandard materials. A replica is an attempt, not only to make something that has the vibe of an original, but use the same materials and production methods as the original.

I think an Epiphone Les Paul Standard is more of a fake than a Tokai Love Rock from Japan personally.

You know come to think of it, maybe it can be expressed in two dimensions, one for 'accuracy in reproduction' and the other 'intent to deceive':



--

Goestoeleven said:

I think an Epiphone Les Paul Standard is more of a fake than a Tokai Love Rock from Japan personally.

Click to expand...

Agreed, because it exploits the Gibson name (unlike Tokai), whilst being a cheap and nasty copy.