Is an AR500 "Rare"? What is "Rare"?...

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Edit Profile

Author Message   Mr_Roadstar (Mr_Roadstar) Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 1:16 pm:    So tell me, what's your definition of "rare"? This eBay ad claims an AR500 is "rare" with 1500 produced: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2559204894&category=33043 Now to my way of thinking, 1500 units is far from "rare". Anything under 100 units would definitely qualify. Under 200, probably. Under 500? Cheers Steve   Dennis68 (Dennis68) Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2003 - 5:58 pm:    Unfortunately terms like this are WAY over used alot of times. I would consider Rare to be something as close to a one-off edition as possible. Rare could even be a production run guitar that "a few" may have received some various changed/upgraded parts or accessories from the factory that weren't part of a normal production issue. I guess it's kind of like when something is on sale. If it weren't for a sign that said "sale" how many people would walk by the item and never look. In the end, this seller is making some eye candy using the term "rare". Unless he knows many of those 1,499 other guitars are vastly different or no longer existing in very good condition or better, than the term as it is applied may be a bit ambitious on his part. Well, time for me to go see what's on eBay... Best, Dennis   Guitarman (Guitarman) Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2003 - 2:46 pm:    I think when it comes to any Ibanez of the late 70's and early 80's (the golden era years for them - why do people call it that?!) these items would be consider rare. Think of the 50's and 60's Strats, they're far more than 1500 ever built - probably thousands and thousands - yet they are also consider somewhat rare and extrememly collectible. The thing about the AR500 is that you really don't see that many of them. I plan to get one some day too. This one on ebay looks like it had some serious buckle scratch on it's back. Cheers, Vic   Mr_Roadstar (Mr_Roadstar) Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2003 - 5:13 pm:    For comparison, if an AR500 @ 1500 produced is rare, what does that make my RS1400 @ 167 units made? Or my RG600WP @ 94 made? Hen's teeth? Dennis probably has the right idea. The term rare is purely subjective and used to enhance the discription. Nothing wrong with that I s'pose. Cheers Steve   Acetan (Acetan) Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2003 - 7:57 pm:    Rarity of an item is depenent on the demand. If there were only ten guitars of a certain model ever made but there are only fifteen people looking for it world-wide, then it is not rare. If 1500 AR500 exist but there are 15000 people looking to buy one, I would say it is more rare than the first example.   Ericibanez (Ericibanez) Posted on Saturday, September 20, 2003 - 8:03 pm:    When compared to production counts of all other Artists, save the AR5000, the AR500 would be considered rare. AR3000s as well. I do absolutely agree that the term is entirely subjective, in the eye of the beholder (who either holds or no longer wants to hold)and it surely implies special value or worth. By the way Mr. Roadstar's guitars should be considered rare just by production count alone. Would you post some photos, I'd like to see them. You are right regarding, the use of "rare", which is certainly used to create a greater want and attract attention to the guitar (that is for sale)with unashamed hopes that it will bring as much money as possible. I couldn't use the terms "rare-er" or "rare-er-er" without being looked down upon, I'll save that for an AR3000 or AR5000. Guitarman has a great point. How would we describe a '58 Les Paul? Production on these were upwards of 10,000. I have only seen a few and the were priced in the stratosphere! I do consider that a rare guitar. Fender Broadcaster and no-casters also. Whenever I get my hands on any pre-CBS strats/Teles I instinctively think "rare". I guess it's some kind of impulse but I actually do consider them to be rare, when in fact there are literally tens of thousands of these out there. The activity of collecting items and assigning an object a value and worth that is greater than it's actual structure is a very interesting phenomena. My wife wanted to give my '65 Strat to the neighbor kid because it was "just a beat up old guitar" that "not as nice as the other ones". It wasn't worth anything to her but I'd bet any of us would jump for joy at getting one of these for a couple weeks pay! Strange phenomena. That leads me to this question what is the difference between rare and desirable? By the way,about that particluar guitar - AR500 on eBay. It plays very nicely and it does have a good deal of bucke rash on the back to eliminate it from being anywhere near mint. The entire top, however is in very good condition, but not flamed (rare, but not desirable). But the rash on the back really detracts the overall cosmetic apperance, which is too bad. As far as AR500s I have seen better, but I just don't see enough of them. So if anyone is interested, let me know. I'm looking for an AM205. Thanks for letting me participate in the discussion.   Fox (Fox) Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2003 - 8:30 am:    Eric,I must correct one point on your writing - considering the production totals on "Big G":s 1958 Sunburst Std, there were only 434 guitars made according to factory info referred by T.Bacon in "50 Years of Gibson Les Paul". And on that production number there are included some gold-tops as well. So I think we can consider them "rare" too. During the life-span of first generation Standards (58-60) the production total of the aforementioned model was ´bout 1600 units. Well, back to the Ibanezes - some time ago I was inquiring about the rarity of "black Artists" and as well of stock black Musicians - does anyone here have any info on the latter? Some time ago I purchased what seems to be a factory original MC300 in black colour..no refin. And to continue the topic- how rare are the "limited edition" AR300:s? I mean particularily the "Brass Beauty"- edition? Any info?? greets fox   Acetan (Acetan) Posted on Sunday, September 21, 2003 - 11:05 am:    "That leads me to this question what is the difference between rare and desirable?" "Rare" has no meaning if the subject is no desirable. A good example would be a Ford Edsel. An Edsel in collectable condition is rare indeed but people who would want it is rare-er.   Mr_Roadstar (Mr_Roadstar) Posted on Monday, September 22, 2003 - 1:11 pm:    LOL !! Good point. Another automotive example: 1953-55 Corvettes were produced in far fewer numbers than the 1956-57 models. But the '56-'57 is much, much more desireable (and expensive). Why? 'Cause the '56-'57 offered lots more performance, and most folks think the early ones is ugly... Let's look at this a different way: You have the cash and desire to purchase an early Gibson LP Gold Top. How much time-effort will it take to find one for sale? Same cash and desire to purchase, but the target is a black Ibanez RS1000. (Ever seen one?) My perspective says the Ibby, not the Gibby, is the rare one here. Cheers Steve   Mr_Roadstar (Mr_Roadstar) Posted on Tuesday, September 23, 2003 - 2:19 pm:    Here's another example of an ad claiming rarity: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2559888209&category=33043&rd=1 Does an RS505 qualify as "rare". Where did the seller get that information? The ad also claims "top of the line Roadstar II from 1983". Where did that info come from? No, I don't expect everybody to know that the RS505 WAS NOT the top of the line Roadstar '83. But, I would like to know why/where/how something like that gets started. Am I too detail oriented? Or maybe just I'm just a cynical old fart! Cheers Steve   Raisinbrain (Raisinbrain) Posted on Monday, June 21, 2004 - 10:14 pm:    A question for Mr. Roadstar So one day I'm in a pawnshop lookin' for a used artist for backup to my 76 Ibanez les paul. Instead I found a funny lookin' roadstar. Since it was only $250 CAN with case (about $180 U.S.) I decided to take a chance on it. So I go to Ibanezrules.com and I identify the thing as an 86 RG600WP. A check of that model on Google brings up two links which both lead me here. I could go on for a while about my new roadstar, but I think to say that my beloved les paul is now my new backup guitar pretty much sums it up. I'm really curious as to where you got your number of 94 of these guitars produced Mr Roadstar. My serial number ends with a number considerably higher than 94, and I was under the impression that this number indicated the number of units produced that year. I'm kinda hoping that I'm wrong about that since I'd really like to tell my buds that my axe is one of 94 ever made. And since I'm here, I'm gonna also ask if anyone out there in ibanez-land knows anything about wizard 1 necks. I have a 1989 rg760 that seems to have run out of adjustment in the truss rod department. My experience tells me that the rod needs to be tightened, but the nut seems to be about as tight as I'm comfortable turning it. Any advice or suggestions or offers to buy the guitar from me and save me from flogging it on ebay as an axe that I just can't get to play well would be appreciated. BTW, I don't go out of my way looking for deals on vintage ibanez stuff, they just seem to have a way of finding me! -Jef   Craigjc (Craigjc) Posted on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 - 7:30 am:    Tight truss rod. 1. Try loosening the strings when you adjust it 2. If you've done that, gently pull back on the headstock while you're attempting to tighten the truss rod. It should help ease the tension on the rod enough to tighten it. Warning: over tightening a truss rod can break it. If you have any concerns about potentially ruining your guitar, take it to a qualified reparman.   Tonedef (Tonedef) Posted on Friday, June 25, 2004 - 1:59 pm:    Raisinbrain--I am no where near Mr. Roadstar's zipcode and will not attempt to speak for him, but if I recall correctly he explained to me the sequential serial number is the total number of guitars produced that month, not just of any one particular model. It makes sense to me and seems logical, but I guess there may be some debate on this. I always defer to Mr. Roadstar's expertise...I hope he returns from hiatus soon! Tonedef   Tonedef (Tonedef) Posted on Friday, June 25, 2004 - 2:30 pm:    Well, as usual I have confused myself--but I was most likely on the right track, probably. I think how it was explained to me was something like this (but I am old and probably forgot--sorry Mr. R-Star!!). Let's say your guitar has A862015 stamped on the neck plate. The idea is this guitar was number 2015 produced in January '86--who know how many more came after, but 2014 came before. Another train of thought is this was the 2015th Roadstar, Artist, etc. produced. I don't think Mr. Roadstar is onboard with this one. The other supposition is that "Hiro" just grabbed a pre-numbered plate out of a box of many, and screwed it onto your guitar--could have been the first guitar made that month or the last--who knows. Maybe Jim D knows the real answer... Tonedef   Mr_Roadstar (Mr_Roadstar) Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 - 6:34 am:    RG600 production as per Jim D: Wine Pearl = 94 Transparent Black = 116 Black = 151 Total = 361 Tonedef has the right idea about "Hiro" and his box of neckplates. Just IGNORE the digits behind the date code. They don't mean squat.   Mr_roadstar Username: Mr_roadstar Registered: 6-2002 Posted on Sunday, July 22, 2007 - 3:29 am:    I thought this old thread deserved a bump. Oldtimers should re-read it. Newbies need to go to school on it! With the latest rash of hype and BS found in eBay ads, we should all refresh our perspective. And yes, I AM a cynical old fart... The Bear

Add Your Message Here Post: -Color- Black Red Green Blue Yellow Purple Orange Cyan Gray White -Font- Arial Courier Symbol Times Verdana -Size- Smallest (-2) Small (-1) Normal Large (+1) Largest (+2) Enter Item number: Username: Posting Information: This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here. Password: Options: Enable HTML code in message Automatically activate URLs in message Action: