Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
- Thread starter Silver
- Start date
Agileguy_101
Master of his Domain
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I might not have a "stable" but I sure enjoy my "cheap" guitars. Not nearly as much as my expensive ones, but I enjoy them nonetheless.
I might not have a "stable" but I sure enjoy my "cheap" guitars. Not nearly as much as my expensive ones, but I enjoy them nonetheless.
SlyFoxx
Glossless
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
As for the original question...I pretty much have. I've owned two PRS C22 and still have one. I love the guitar and the sound but what I really love is the fact that it is a rock. Winter spring summer fall....it don't move. I've never owned a sub kilo-buck guitar that was as stable. (Save a used Carvin) With no guitar boffin to tweak my axe the few extra bucks were MORE than worth it.
As for the original question...I pretty much have. I've owned two PRS C22 and still have one. I love the guitar and the sound but what I really love is the fact that it is a rock. Winter spring summer fall....it don't move. I've never owned a sub kilo-buck guitar that was as stable. (Save a used Carvin) With no guitar boffin to tweak my axe the few extra bucks were MORE than worth it.
Luke Duke
PRSlustologist
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I'd like to nominate this post for 2014 Post of the year!
The MOST impressive part is that the character cutoff didn't get him!
I'd like to nominate this post for 2014 Post of the year!
The MOST impressive part is that the character cutoff didn't get him!
jon the art guy
Nerdy Nerd
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
maybe Drex means that guitars under $500 probably have lackluster electronics, or worse off-a gnarly fretboard or possible neck issues. A $500 guitar should have decent electronics and a solid neck with minimal working necessary to be a very good player. Anything beyond beyond being that "very good player" has very little actual substance to the argument in his opinion.
My opinion is very, very similar to Derk. I also believe, IMO, that guitars that cost more than $500 do not provide me with a measurably better experience to substantiate paying the extra money for it.
The thing is....I am right FOR ME. I am correct in nobody else's eyes. There are players on here (bye Lew) who would swear on a bible bound in baby Jesus skin that a $5000 guitar will always play much more magically and sweetly than the proletariat rabble of a lowly $500 guitar. Maybe. I dunno. He got off on tangents on the subject too.
So the difference between my version of $500 guitars and Dreek's version is that I'm not trying to jam it into everyone else's orifices to the hilt and ending up forgetting where the tailend of the first argument left off and ending up with a variety of colorful fallacies that he has to untangle. All that fallacy-jamming and he ain't even a full star.
maybe Drex means that guitars under $500 probably have lackluster electronics, or worse off-a gnarly fretboard or possible neck issues. A $500 guitar should have decent electronics and a solid neck with minimal working necessary to be a very good player. Anything beyond beyond being that "very good player" has very little actual substance to the argument in his opinion.
My opinion is very, very similar to Derk. I also believe, IMO, that guitars that cost more than $500 do not provide me with a measurably better experience to substantiate paying the extra money for it.
The thing is....I am right FOR ME. I am correct in nobody else's eyes. There are players on here (bye Lew) who would swear on a bible bound in baby Jesus skin that a $5000 guitar will always play much more magically and sweetly than the proletariat rabble of a lowly $500 guitar. Maybe. I dunno. He got off on tangents on the subject too.
So the difference between my version of $500 guitars and Dreek's version is that I'm not trying to jam it into everyone else's orifices to the hilt and ending up forgetting where the tailend of the first argument left off and ending up with a variety of colorful fallacies that he has to untangle. All that fallacy-jamming and he ain't even a full star.
DreX
New member
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
Sometimes threads fork. In this case there was the original subject, and then there was the side subject of "recommending" a premium guitar.
Regarding the original OP subject, I think people should have more than one guitar, even if that means they cannot premium, for the sake experiencing more than one sound and feel on a regular basis.
Regarding the side topic of recommending premium guitars, I would only ever "recommend" a $200 guitar to someone in "need" of a guitar since that constitutes the bare minumum, and only advise that they spend more if they "want" for something better. It's nothing anyone "should" buy, that was the specific word that was used.
Now, what I happen to "want" has nothing to do with what anyone else might "need". Apples and oranges.
I generally like and want guitars priced around $700 because, IMO, that's the price beyond which the cost to performance ratio drops sharply.
Sometimes threads fork. In this case there was the original subject, and then there was the side subject of "recommending" a premium guitar.
Regarding the original OP subject, I think people should have more than one guitar, even if that means they cannot premium, for the sake experiencing more than one sound and feel on a regular basis.
Regarding the side topic of recommending premium guitars, I would only ever "recommend" a $200 guitar to someone in "need" of a guitar since that constitutes the bare minumum, and only advise that they spend more if they "want" for something better. It's nothing anyone "should" buy, that was the specific word that was used.
Now, what I happen to "want" has nothing to do with what anyone else might "need". Apples and oranges.
I generally like and want guitars priced around $700 because, IMO, that's the price beyond which the cost to performance ratio drops sharply.
Last edited:
Agileguy_101
Master of his Domain
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
This thread is a trainwreck. OP, if you read this, please consider locking/deleting the thread.
This thread is a trainwreck. OP, if you read this, please consider locking/deleting the thread.
jon the art guy
Nerdy Nerd
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
It is rather forked up, isn't it.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
It is rather forked up, isn't it.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
Chris of Arabia
Desert RATT
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
It's an option, but for every trainwreck, there is a correspondingly expensive investigation, and eye-wateringly expensive 'lessons leaned' report to implement thereafter - I put it to you, that this may not be dead just yet...
It's an option, but for every trainwreck, there is a correspondingly expensive investigation, and eye-wateringly expensive 'lessons leaned' report to implement thereafter - I put it to you, that this may not be dead just yet...
F
Funkfingers
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
The sad thing is that the original question has been ignored in a flurry of unreason and personal abuse. Nobody has yet stated plainly what is supposedly better about the hypothetical $1500 guitar.
This is one high end guitar.
This guitar resonates like nothing else I have ever tried. It weighs as little as a Fender Custom Shop Relic. The neck profile resembles the '52 Hot Rod model. The bridge is modern whilst the pickups are supposedly based on a '62.
If you want to grasp the difference between $500 and $1500, simply A/B the MIM and MIA Fender La Cabronita Telecasters. Both perfectly playable instruments. I would happily gig with either but one of them is going to put a much broader grin on my face than the other.
The difference that the extra money buys boils down to materials and attention to detail. I think that this is worth paying for.
Even having said all of this, I could not make all of the noise that I might want to make on just this guitar.
Take me to the bridge.
The sad thing is that the original question has been ignored in a flurry of unreason and personal abuse. Nobody has yet stated plainly what is supposedly better about the hypothetical $1500 guitar.
This is one high end guitar.
This guitar resonates like nothing else I have ever tried. It weighs as little as a Fender Custom Shop Relic. The neck profile resembles the '52 Hot Rod model. The bridge is modern whilst the pickups are supposedly based on a '62.
If you want to grasp the difference between $500 and $1500, simply A/B the MIM and MIA Fender La Cabronita Telecasters. Both perfectly playable instruments. I would happily gig with either but one of them is going to put a much broader grin on my face than the other.
The difference that the extra money buys boils down to materials and attention to detail. I think that this is worth paying for.
Even having said all of this, I could not make all of the noise that I might want to make on just this guitar.
Take me to the bridge.
Agileguy_101
Master of his Domain
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I think it's funny that someone in this thread (I don't name names) seems to think that supporting American labor is frivolous and stupid.
You must have missed the memo - your job was outsourced to India. We want you out of here by noon.
I think it's funny that someone in this thread (I don't name names) seems to think that supporting American labor is frivolous and stupid.
You must have missed the memo - your job was outsourced to India. We want you out of here by noon.
F
Funkfingers
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
Speaking only for myself, I am neither American nor patriotic. My desire is for guitars that meet my musical requirements. Right here. Right now.
I own the brown hunk of railroad shed in post #313. I also own a Squier Affinity Strat with an EMG-81 pickup. There is very definitely a qualitative difference at the respective price points of these two guitars. I find uses for both.
Speaking only for myself, I am neither American nor patriotic. My desire is for guitars that meet my musical requirements. Right here. Right now.
I own the brown hunk of railroad shed in post #313. I also own a Squier Affinity Strat with an EMG-81 pickup. There is very definitely a qualitative difference at the respective price points of these two guitars. I find uses for both.
L
Little Pigbacon
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I think there are good things about supporting an industry in your own country, but I don't consider them pivotal in the discussion here -- partly because I also like some expensive guitars that are built in other countries, and partly because I think we're trying to focus on what's different about the actual guitar.
I think there are good things about supporting an industry in your own country, but I don't consider them pivotal in the discussion here -- partly because I also like some expensive guitars that are built in other countries, and partly because I think we're trying to focus on what's different about the actual guitar.
Agileguy_101
Master of his Domain
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
True. I just thought it was worth mentioning because I see no reason to hold the fact that American made guitars are made in America against them.
True. I just thought it was worth mentioning because I see no reason to hold the fact that American made guitars are made in America against them.
L
Little Pigbacon
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
Equally true. There is no logical reason to assume that, if someone buys an American-made guitar, you can estimate how heavily the country of origin weighs in the buyer's decision, or that you know precisely how that is factored in. Unless he or she tells you. We'd might as well assume that people in Japan buying high-end Ibanez or ESP are biased against foreigners, or some equally nefarious prejudice.
Equally true. There is no logical reason to assume that, if someone buys an American-made guitar, you can estimate how heavily the country of origin weighs in the buyer's decision, or that you know precisely how that is factored in. Unless he or she tells you. We'd might as well assume that people in Japan buying high-end Ibanez or ESP are biased against foreigners, or some equally nefarious prejudice.
L
Little Pigbacon
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I want to get back to something presented in the OP, that we haven't spent much time on: The issue of versatility, and what determines how much stylistic and technical ground a guitar can cover, compared to what a player might want. I've long thought -- and I think many here agree -- that, no matter how good a Strat is (for example), it will never be an SG. No matter which highly-regarded custom luthier builds an LP copy for you, it will never do what a Telecaster or a Rick does. Even the finest hollow-body archtop will never be a 24-fret shredder to the person who wants one.
My questions about this:
1.) What inherent qualities make or break the ability of a guitar to "fill in" in the absence of another?
2.) When you go up in quality in a certain type of guitar, are there places where you might gain versatility, either (a) because the guitar begins to transcend some limitations of genre and become closer to a platonic ideal of a musical instrument, or (b) because clever design and technical innovation might allow a progressive-minded builder to include some features that cater to your playing styles and allow you to cover more territory with it than you could with most production models? That is to say, where does versatility become something that you can increase in a single guitar by going more high-end? You can add versatility to any guitar by changing a pickup, adding one, adding switching options, etc. Any guitar. But if you go high-end or bespoke, can you pick up additional versatility -- in any form -- that might similarly make one more guitar redundant for you, or give you a sound or cover a genre that you otherwise couldn't do on a similar mid-level instrument, on top of everything else it's already doing? If you were having a great luthier build you a cost-no-object guitar that was supposed to cover as much ground for you as possible, what would you have built, and why?
I'll be happy to elaborate on these questions if anyone is interested, but I've slept poorly tonight and need to rest now.
I want to get back to something presented in the OP, that we haven't spent much time on: The issue of versatility, and what determines how much stylistic and technical ground a guitar can cover, compared to what a player might want. I've long thought -- and I think many here agree -- that, no matter how good a Strat is (for example), it will never be an SG. No matter which highly-regarded custom luthier builds an LP copy for you, it will never do what a Telecaster or a Rick does. Even the finest hollow-body archtop will never be a 24-fret shredder to the person who wants one.
My questions about this:
1.) What inherent qualities make or break the ability of a guitar to "fill in" in the absence of another?
2.) When you go up in quality in a certain type of guitar, are there places where you might gain versatility, either (a) because the guitar begins to transcend some limitations of genre and become closer to a platonic ideal of a musical instrument, or (b) because clever design and technical innovation might allow a progressive-minded builder to include some features that cater to your playing styles and allow you to cover more territory with it than you could with most production models? That is to say, where does versatility become something that you can increase in a single guitar by going more high-end? You can add versatility to any guitar by changing a pickup, adding one, adding switching options, etc. Any guitar. But if you go high-end or bespoke, can you pick up additional versatility -- in any form -- that might similarly make one more guitar redundant for you, or give you a sound or cover a genre that you otherwise couldn't do on a similar mid-level instrument, on top of everything else it's already doing? If you were having a great luthier build you a cost-no-object guitar that was supposed to cover as much ground for you as possible, what would you have built, and why?
I'll be happy to elaborate on these questions if anyone is interested, but I've slept poorly tonight and need to rest now.
Last edited:
F
Funkfingers
Guest
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
Hmm. :scratchch
Q1 is kinda big. Possibly, even, a whole new thread in its own right.
Q2 strikes me as being two topics rolled into one. (Admittedly, there is some overlap between quality and versatility.) One would expect to be able to extract more musicality from, say, a Martin D-18 than a mail order beater.
EDIT - One thing that I will add, however, is that having experienced some very tasty "high end" instruments makes it easier to spot when similar properties arise in "not so high end" instruments.
Hmm. :scratchch
Q1 is kinda big. Possibly, even, a whole new thread in its own right.
Q2 strikes me as being two topics rolled into one. (Admittedly, there is some overlap between quality and versatility.) One would expect to be able to extract more musicality from, say, a Martin D-18 than a mail order beater.
EDIT - One thing that I will add, however, is that having experienced some very tasty "high end" instruments makes it easier to spot when similar properties arise in "not so high end" instruments.
Last edited:
crusty philtrum
Vintageologist
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
A good player can cover a lot of territory one a single guitar. They might use more than one, but their skill levels will allow them to do a lot more with one instrument.
But everyone should simply celebrate that most of us have the options and the opportunities. There are some people whose lives don't allow them such options.
A good player can cover a lot of territory one a single guitar. They might use more than one, but their skill levels will allow them to do a lot more with one instrument.
But everyone should simply celebrate that most of us have the options and the opportunities. There are some people whose lives don't allow them such options.
jon the art guy
Nerdy Nerd
Re: Every been tempted to just settle for one high-end guitar?
I think its opposite; more expensive guitars become more specialized players in their genre. A top of the line telecaster will be so much a dual overwound single with a light body that it would do a thick wannabe LP sound like a Jim Root tele would do.
hmm...that may not work as well with Gibson...
My original idea was that if a person has decided what sort of music they're going to be playing, they would decide to get the best version of that sound as they would want, instead of something that would switch between personalities attributed to different guitars.
My assumption is specialization is a corollary of experience.
I'm going to assume it's the reason so many single pup guitars have been surfacing in professional musician's rig rundowns too...
I think its opposite; more expensive guitars become more specialized players in their genre. A top of the line telecaster will be so much a dual overwound single with a light body that it would do a thick wannabe LP sound like a Jim Root tele would do.
hmm...that may not work as well with Gibson...
My original idea was that if a person has decided what sort of music they're going to be playing, they would decide to get the best version of that sound as they would want, instead of something that would switch between personalities attributed to different guitars.
My assumption is specialization is a corollary of experience.
I'm going to assume it's the reason so many single pup guitars have been surfacing in professional musician's rig rundowns too...
Last edited: