FFS, opinions ≠ facts. On guitars or any taste. (Actual argument in description.) скачать в хорошем качестве

FFS, opinions ≠ facts. On guitars or any taste. (Actual argument in description.)

#guitargear #yamahaguitars #fallacy The added pisser I forgot to mention is that we have mutual real life contacts. If anyone cares, here are the details of the argument, copying/pasting his main claims (not including all the insults): "The people who say "Fender" just honestly don't know any better." "Objectively speaking, the Yamaha is a better product." "There's more thought and engineering in this neck pocket than you'll ever find in a fender. Most just ignore Fender's flaws and accept their sub-standard quality because of the "name." Any instrument that is still using a neck plate with screws just isn't serious about fine instruments." "If you want to make it personal, that’s your prerogative. Buckle your damn seatbelt and bring facts. I’ll absolutely destroy your case with facts." "It demolishes the Fender in every way. Better materials, better craftsmanship. I argue for a living, LOL." "You speak like a true Fender fanboy. Like I said, you don't know any better." My responses (many comments altogether): It's perfectly fine to say "this is how I define a quality build because of x and y objective facts, which is why this is my preference / recommendation". And obviously feel in hand is subjective, thus my recommendation to try both if possible. But the poster just flat asking "which would you pick" is preference, and no preference is an automatic litmus test of knowledge. I welcome the (few) actual facts you cited. It's stating the opinions as "objective" facts and adding personal aspersions and then playing innocent "if you want to make it personal [because you don't know any better], that’s your prerogative" with the Shapiroesque "destroy you with facts" egotism that's the issue. Yamaha basses are great 🤷 especially for their price points. But even if we had the exact same preference, it's still both an unfounded claim and low to visit intentions ("only like Fender because of the name" when some of us blind test and/or eschew the big names unless we really like something they made), judge intelligence, etc. and pretend like you're not. You argue a product/brand is "objectively" better based on "superior quality of the materials and workmanship", which is again subjective. "Better materials, better craftsmanship" is still a statement of opinion; "lower failure rate" or "lower rate of returns" or "higher customer satisfaction according to Consumer Reports" would be statements of fact. And even if we charitably take those subjective arguments as givens, there's nothing here to indicate that some who plays Fender might "know" these things and still prefer Fenders. Your claim is based on knowledge of the player, and none of the would-be supporting points broach that variable. You could say "six bolts is more stable" and argue that it's a factual statement, fine, but what if four is adequate? "Any instrument that is still using a neck plate with screws just isn't serious about fine instruments." Again, subjective, and that deems large swaths of professional and touring musicians as unserious. Personally, I've played since 1996 and it's never been an issue (nor anyone else who continue to play four despite having other options and not being an endorsee; can't speak for others, but I blind test as a default and sided against Fender for decades until I changed my *preference*). Unless it's cosmetic finish cracks, admittedly super common for me (long before I played Fender), which I don't care about per my own subjective/opinion/preference. My books (or message for free PDFs on the Patrick Ashe FB page): http://www.amazon.com/author/patrickashe