Guitar Magazines. LOL. I've long given up reading them.
All they do is pander to the commercial line. I almost fell for it myself when I nearly became convinced that a PRS was truly the ultimate guitar. But lab scientists are trained not to take anything at face value, thank God!
Journalists aren't always the sharpest pencils in the box and they have a very powerful vested interest in maintaining the hype. They WILL occasionally review a guitar by a small producer or custom builder (eg Gordon Smith, Laz Gajic) provided a) it fits in the accepted mould and b) it's not too good. That's important, because a guitar that was too good would bring the whole house of cards crashing down.
So they'll never, ever admit the existence of anything truly revolutionary or counter-culture, or if forced to, they sneer at it.
It's taken me a while to realize that the whole industry is built on a very simple set of premises.
1. "Entry-level" products of poor quality at relatively low prices to get the suckers hooked. Aria, Squier, etc., Stack 'em high and sell 'em cheap. They HAVE to be poor so as to encourage the suckers to trade them in for
2. "intermediate level" guitars. Mediocre products (Epiphone, Mexican Fender, ESP LTD, etc.) at medium-high prices ("intermediate level"). Now the suckers are really hooked, so they start dreaming and saving the pennies for
3. A "Professional" guitar (Gibson, Fender USA, various Signature models, etc.). Yeah! Mediocre guitars at very high prices - the ultimate aspiration of the budding Steve Vai's out there. They don't sell in such bulk, but at the money, there's still plenty of profit to be had. And finally
4. Massively over-hyped guitar-shaped ornaments at lunatic prices - the "collectors items". Musical quality is totally irrelevant in this category as these are not bought to be played. Appearance and brand is everything.
It's interesting how most manufacturers have a very clearly defined product line and upgrade path from "entry level" to "professional" and "collectors" (think Fender Custom Shit, Gibson Hysteric, etc.) while maintaining brand identity.
I recently tried a top-of-the-range Ibanez Steve Vai JEM. I thought it was quite acceptable as an entry-level instrument. Perfectly playable, but dull, un-resonant and lifeless. And not really any better than the "cooking" models. A classic example of the Emperor's New Clothes syndrome.
There is no way your guitars can ever fit into this picture. Too rare, too specialized and just too damn good to fall into any of these categories.
Ludwik (UK)
Addendum:
Gordon Smith guitars are unrivalled value-for-money no-frills instruments of real quality (I had one for many years), comparable to production Gibsons for a fraction of the price. Laz makes very nice guitars indeed (I should know - I've got one!) that outshine the mass-produced offerings from major "name" manufacturers.
It's just that they don't have that final touch of magic of the Zachary that ultimately makes all the difference. It's a subtle thing and probably wouldn't be noticed by a relatively inexperienced guitarist, but - like other Zach players have discovered - once you've got used to a Zach, you can no longer be satisfied with anything else.
Ludwik (UK)