Rod Turtle
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 29
Look at the features such as pickups,bridge,controls.It's just like a JP.Have EBMM thought of being endorsed by this guy?I guess he wouldn't be hard to convince.
- Thread starter Rod Turtle
- Start date
Look at the features such as pickups,bridge,controls.It's just like a JP.Have EBMM thought of being endorsed by this guy?I guess he wouldn't be hard to convince.
PeteDuBaldo
Well-known member
It looks like a BFR JP and Luke hybrid! I'm guessing that the 4+2 means it won't be available in the US because of EB trademarks...
Roubster
Well-known member
I believe that is Marco Sfogli's signature guitar...that is based on the JP and a bit of Andy Timmons guitar I guess. He played JPs guitars on James LaBrie's albums. He is an awesome guitarist though.
Edit: Ummm, I just realized that it says that it's Sfoglis guitar...hahaha.
Edit: Ummm, I just realized that it says that it's Sfoglis guitar...hahaha.
Rod Turtle
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 29
Lol,I haven't noticed the 4+2 headstock.But if you call it a luke hybrid,the standard option of pickups are an Air Norton+ a D-Sonic!
petruccirocks02
Well-known member
That is indeed the Marco Sfogli Sig. Model. He used to play EBMM JP's, so thats probably why he wanted his model to be kinda similar to the EB's. Pretty cool guitar if you ask me.
-Phil
-Phil
petruccirocks02
Well-known member
I agree about the trademark thing, which does suck, and happens overseas all the time.
-Phil
DrBob
Well-known member
Yeah, most definitely not neat.
I've got a question though,
Is it the 4+2 tuner arrangement that you have the trademark on or is just when that tuner arrangement is used in context of the EBMM headstock ?
Don't worry, I'm not looking to go into business making EBMM knockoffs,
it's just that I've seen a fair bit over the years about various manufacturers going through hell in court trying to get other makers to stop making copies of their stuff, and it always seems to come down to real minutiae.
Slingy
Well-known member
Looks like they have 7 different models with that headstock. Why would a talented company resort to making EBMM and Strat knock-offs?
Rod Turtle
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 29
Well,didn't wanted to say that nobody is copying ebmm.Maybe that's a custom shop, and so I believe that you can do pretty much nothing,at least I've seen many custom shops using 4+2 heads,as this brazilian custom shop does: N.ZAGANIN - Guitarra: Flow
If it's a custom shop they do what the customer asks,so you can't sue them,right?The funniest thing is that here in Brazil custom shop instruments are cheaper than regular ones due to high taxes.
If it's a custom shop they do what the customer asks,so you can't sue them,right?The funniest thing is that here in Brazil custom shop instruments are cheaper than regular ones due to high taxes.
73h Nils
Well-known member
If I were him, I would have just stuck with the EBMM JPs. They seemed to suit his tone and playing fine on Elements of Persuasion, but then again, I'm not him, so it's not my decision...
That thing looks kinda like the Andy Timmons Ibanez AT300 or whatever, as well....
That thing looks kinda like the Andy Timmons Ibanez AT300 or whatever, as well....
eegor
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2007
- Messages
- 127
Why would you say that? Just because they have 4+2 headstocks doesn't mean their EBMM knock-offs. It's a different style than 6-inline or 3+3, and since they're located in Italy, they can do it. I don't see a problem with any of this.
Well perhaps the fact he was playing with Labrie meant that he was being compared to Petrucci all the time and playing a JP would not give him individuality that he was losing just for playing with labrie. He would get compared to JP all the time simple fact Labrie was there and playing a Petrucci signature guitar would just enhance fact they would probably think he was a wannabe...
Doesnt look anything like a JP to me though...
Rod Turtle
Active member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2008
- Messages
- 29
The body shape isn't similar,but the pickups are,there is a piezo trem and the controls' position are the same.
koogie2k
Well-known member
Interesting...but not sure about the infringement as I don't know. So, no comment on that.
But, I do prefer my 4 x 2 headstock to say EBMM.
But, I do prefer my 4 x 2 headstock to say EBMM.
Pablo
Well-known member
Seing as you don't have a trademark for the 4+2 headstock outside of the US, I really can't see anyone doing anything wrong. Oh, and Rash had the 4+2 headstock before Sfogli joined them.
I know I'll probably get a slap for this, but I really don't get the 4+2 trademark - guitars were made with that setup well before anyone had ever thought of MusicMan... Hence, I have a hard time seing how EBMM even got the trademark in the first place.
I love and support the company, I love the instruments you guys put out and I love and brag about the amazing customer service you offer... However, for a company that produces so many decidedly Fender inspired guitars, you are extremely focused on a machine head layout that you didn't invent.
Cheers
Eske
Last edited:
paranoid70
Well-known member
Is the 4+2 headstock really a trademark? I know the design of the headstock has to be, but I would think putting 4 tuners on top and 2 on the bottom would be fair game. There only 7 ways to configure a six string headstock after all.
Thanks for your support of the company, Eske.
What makes you think we're extremely focused on the machine head configuration? You don't think we have enough to focus on other than people who try to rip our designs off day after day? Go to the next Chinese or European tradeshow and see how many disgusting ripoffs you see of Music Man guitars. Most of the time we don't bother, but you have to draw the line somewhere. These itchy Rash guitars are one of the very FEW guitars I've seen with the 4+2 that doesn't try to rip off a MM body shape as well. Additionally, go to said Chinese tradeshow and see how many 3+1's you can find that DON'T have the banana+toilet seat design in the same bass.
Pablo
Well-known member
What makes me think that you are protective of the tuner configuration? Well, the rumble on this forum as soon as a foreign 4+2 headstock is spotted is a pretty good indication.
Don't get me wrong Beth, I absolutely support anyone protecting their intellectual property. Hence, I don't copy CDs, download movies, copy sheet music etc. - I know (and what's worse, my birth certificate is starting to prove it): I'm a dinosaur! However, with the decidedly limited possibilities available with 4 and 6 tuning keys respetively, I just don't understand how something like the 3+1 and 4+2 can constitute intellectual property.
Still, you are absolutely right: just like Fender and Gibson, your landmark models are being copied. However, a copy (especially a dirt cheap Chinese one) will always be just that: a copy. I know many of us (if not most) started off playing a copy instrument only to save up for the real deal and eventually aquire it. To me, my first piss poor Jazz Bass copy spurred me on to get the real deal and my first piss poor guitar - an EVH copy - led to me buying a REAL MusicMan. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this was the kind of effect you aimed to achieve when you struck the deal with OLP.
The thing is: all musicians know the difference between a Chinese copy (probably made from bamboo and dental floss) and your original quality products. Moreover, as long as international copy right laws exist, a simple peak at the name at the headstock will reveal all you need to know.
I do not mean to come across as disrespectful to either you, the company or the amazing work all of you guys do day in and day out - trust me: I have nothing but respect for the entire package... Which in turn is why this is the only company owned forum I frequent. If I offended anyone, I am terribly sorry, that was never my intention.
Cheers
Eske
