William Rion

Nov. 14th 2014

ENC1101
Paper3:Final
The ads I have chosen for my paper are a series of advertisements created by three
of the top brands in music equipment, Gibson guitars, Fender guitars, and Marshall
amplification. Both of these brands are very well established in the world of musicians,
and music all together. Over the past decades, (centuries, in Gibsons case) these brands
have been played by, recorded on, toured with, and everything in between by many of the
most renowned musicians and bands today and in history. Being that the products alone
and countless musicians already speak for these companies, they tend to not demonstrate
the most aggressive or widespread advertising campaigns. You really only see theyre ads
in magazines like Rolling Stone or Guitar World, or outside your local music shop. But
the ads they do print, are aimed at very small, specific audiences within the musical
community. They are also perfect examples of ethos, pathos and logos. They often relay
on the credibility of famous artists who are commonly seen with theyre product; like
Jimmy Page and his iconic 59 Gibson, commonly used to sell Gibsons Les Paul models.
They might use details or hints that grab a certain audience, for example, is Marshall
marketing a 200-watt, heavy-duty, high-gain, amp stack to touring rock band playing
areas? Or is it a small, warm-sounding, tube-powered combo for a gig at a small jazz
club? All of these companies produce not just ads, but products aimed at a variety of
players; beginners, pros, touring bands, casual gigging musicians, blues men, country
singers, metal-heads, younger boys who like bright colors and impractical shapes, girls
who like Taylor Swift, the different audiences are endless.

The first advertisement I would like to discuss was created by Fender. Its not
necessarily aimed at one of their specific products, but at the brand as a whole. The ad
simply shows a fairly intense vintage photograph of Jimi Hendrix, literally the most
influential guitarist in the history of music. The text reads The sounds that create
legends. And the Fender Logo is placed tastefully at the bottom right. The reason this ad
is effective in regards to ethos is because the product (a Fender Stratocaster) is seen in the
hands of, once again, the most creditable figure. Seeing this ad is meant to not only to sell
the guitars, but to reinforce the fact that people all over the world associate Jimi Hendrix
with his iconic white, up-side-down Fender. As you could imagine, this association is
good for business. For example, my dad has an old off-white Fender Stratocaster, and
almost every time someone comes over and sees it, they make a Hendrix-related
comment. Gibson ran a similar ad back in the 1970s when Led Zeppelin was huge. For
some background, Zeppelins guitarist, Jimmy Page is another one of the worlds most
renowned guitar players. Like Hendrix, Pages playing is idolized, studied, learned,
played and replayed by musicians of all age and skill sets. The ad is even more simple
than is Fender counterpart. It simply shows a shot of Jimmy Page on stage, passionately
playing a well lit, clearly depicted black Gibson Les Paul. The only text says Les Paul
Series and then the Gibson logo at the bottom. With ads like these Fender and Gibson
examples, very little actually needs to be said by the famous person endorsing it, or about
the product itself. Both simply rely on the combined creditability and established
reputation of the product and the famous spokesperson to make a point that they
produce a high-quality product, worthy of being chosen by those who could chose any
guitar. To someone who doesnt have any interest in guitars or listen to certain music,

these ads mean close to nothing. Its simply Some guy, endorsing some product, neither
of which I know anything about. because of the lack of description, theres no testimony
from the person, no list of key features or product specifications, no slandering the
competitor, its simply meant to try to tie two Rock and Roll icons (a guitar and a player)
together permanently as a single icon, in order to give the brand more reputation.
Brands that make instruments and music equipment realize that the people buying
their products dont all play the same types of music, to the same amounts of people, for
the same set times, in the same scenario, every one has different tastes and needs. And
they people in charge of advertising do their best to appeal to just about everyone. A
good example of an audience-specific ad is the following Marshall Amplification ad. The
ad is for a line of amplifiers designed for guitarist Kerry King of Slayer (I dont listen to
Slayer, I promise.) Its essentially a classic JCM800, but fitted with the exact same
custom modifications King made to his own, giving it a higher output, and more-gain,
making it more suited for the intense metal music played by Slayer. The model number
and knob labels on the amp are stamped like this JCM800 instead of like this JCM800,
and the tribal markings on the front grille of the amp are even meant to resemble his
head-tatoos, all to give it that metal appearance. This tweaked JCM800 was then
replicated, mass produced, and marketed by Marshall as the KK Signature model. The
ads for this product are rare, controversial, kind of vulgar, and clearly aimed at hardcore
metal-heads (it took me a while to find the ad I knew I had seen before.) They depict
Kerry King (a terrifying man; bald, with a long braided beard, wearing a pentagram tanktop, and covered in tattoos, the most visible of which reads God hates us all.) holding
the 60+ plus-pound amp over his head, with his mouth open, aggressively yelling. There

is a quote from Kerry King about the product, it reads The 2203KK punches like Mike
Tyson in his Prime, and Im sure it will kick youre ass as much as it stomps on mine.
Crank it up and enjoy the best f**king amp on the planet. Bottoms up. Kerry King.
Obviously this is not the most acceptable advertisement and probably scared as many
people away from the product as it attracted. However, its extremely effective toward its
intended audience. In terms of metal guitarists, Kerry King is about as creditable as they
come and as barbaric as it might be, this ad holds true to Marshalls reputation of being
the most iconic amplifier in history and for being played at speaker-blowing volumes.
Another audience-specific ad I would like to discuss is another amplifier ad, one made by
Fender. Its on the complete opposite end of the spectrum from the Kerry King Marshall
ad in terms of the product and whom theyre trying to sell it to. In this ad, Fender is
advertising an amplifier, but one totally different from Marshalls. And, theyre famous
spokesperson is Eric Clapton, more of classic rock, blues, blues-rock musician, however
equally as respected as Hendrix, or Page. The products are the EC (Eric Clapton) series
Amps by Fender, handmade, custom designed, boutique-style, tube-powered combo amp
endorsed by the man himself. The ad is extremely conservative and aimed at an audience
opposite that of Kerry Kings Marshall. It simply shows Eric Clapton (average looking
grey-haired man with glasses), wearing a plain old black suit and white shirt sitting and
playing a very simple black and white Fender guitar. Hes sitting against a white backdrop on a stool, surrounded by the various available sizes of the Amp. The amps them
selves are also very conservative looking. I feel as though this ad is aimed more
specifically at blues musicians, and those who play more mature music, like middleaged male guitarists (which happen to make up most of Claptons fan-base) Also, the

maturity of the ad, the price of the product (the smallest one pictured sells for $1,000),
and the fact that its hand-made implies that its not something for the casual player.
Its meant for a very serious player, who cares very much about sound and quality.
Another set of Gibson advertisements that I liked were ads for their Les Paul and
SG Models. One ad simply shows a red, devils pitchfork on the left and a red Gibson SG
on the right, on a black back-drop. There is no text. The SG has always been associated
with rock and roll, especially because of AC/DCs Angus Young and his school-boy
outfit making the guitar iconic. An SGs body is symmetrical with a double cutaway,
making it look like a set of small devil horns (if you buy it in wine red, that is.). This
makes it the perfect Rock and Roll guitar and thus makes it appeal to a certain group.
Gibson finally caught onto this reference that people have been making since the guitar
first came out in the 1960s, and used it in they advertisements. The other ad is extremely
similar, but its for the Les Paul model, which many people say is a more classy SG.
The wine red version of the Les Paul is also used, but its next to a glass of red wine, not a
pitch fork. This ad does the same thing as the SG version, it takes a stereotype that people
have given guitar and turns it into a clever visual to promote the product.
For my anti-ad, I decided to poke fun at something in the world of instruments
and music gear that has always baffled me. Every once in a while, Fender, Gibson and
Marshall will release a new line of guitar or amp, that is an exact copy or replica of the
one used by that person. For example, Fender made an exact replica of Eddie Van
Halens Frankenstein guitar, and I mean exact. Artificially aged word, wear and tear in all
the same places, exact specifications, like I said. Exact. Replica. Gibson released a replica
of Paul McCartneys acoustic. Theyve done so for Slash, Jimmy Page, Billie Joe

Armstrong, the list goes on. But, the point is, these replicas cost insane sums of money.
The Eddie VH Frankenstein copies were marked at $24,000 each. I saw the price tag
myself. The Billie Joe Gibson, $4,000, when the same model not endorsed by him, was
$1,500. The names of these people makes the prices shoot up through the roof. So far my
anti-ad I made an ad for an exact replica of the smashed guitar from Nirvanas
Saturday Night Live set. Its an exact replica of Kurt Cobains fender that night that he
smashed. Accept we sell it to you already smashed well beyond repair, just the way he
did it! Broken and scratched in all the same spots! No working electronics and totally
unplayable! And those broken, splintery heap of wood, wire and strings can be your for
only $15,000. My anti-ad is meant to make fun of how simply putting a famous name on
any product warrants a higher price, and not just that, but one that people actually end up
paying.
The biggest factors in how these music equipment companies advertise theyre
products, in my opinion, is the fact that people want recreate what they hear and want to
feel connected to all of the music they love to play and listen to. Not necessarily copying
favorite artists songs note for note, word for word, but replicating that sound. The twang
of an old Telecaster, the deafening growl of a Marshall, only comes from Telecasters and
Marshalls. The iconic sounds of these products have etched themselves in stone, into the
past decades of popular music, so much that these companies barely advertise, accept in
magazines or stores where they know there small audience is hiding. But while the
audience is small, they sure do know how to speak to them, and it works. The just of
most advertisements for music gear can be summed up in a few sentences; You like this
artist. You want to play like this artist. This artist plays or uses this guitar, this amp, this

kind of string, this brand of picks, etc. And if you buys this product, your playing might
sound more like theirs. Or I am a very talented, well-paid and respected artist. I could
play whatever brand I want, but I chose this. And so should you.