-
Im new to archtops, and I've been searching for what I want. Ill probably get an Eastman Ar371 or Ar503 because under $1000 fits my budget, but during my search I've noticed drastic prices ranges. Is a $4800 ES175 really that much better than an Eastman manufactured in Asia? Is a $20,000 Benedetto that much better? I realize this is hard to quantify, but what are your opinions on this?
-
09-05-2014 08:40 PM
-
here we go again, the age old question. usually brought up to make someone feel better about buying an affordable house/car/boat/cappuccino machine/guitar/whatever.
here's a link to generic value/price curve.
so to your question - there's nothing wrong with buying an affordable archtop if it's made well, has good materials, and plays well. also, it's not a bad idea to get one if it's your first entry into the market segment.
one thing to keep in mind, the difference between a fine archtop guitar and something like a car is that a fine guitar can theoretically last for centuries, like a fine violin. in that case, a highly prized make/model is important. we all know what they are...
-
Ya, so it was a real question. I really want to know what differences experienced guys notice. I have no problem spending $1000. I didn't realize this question was asked all tge time. But thanks for the smart azz reply
-
Why are you concerned at all with the issue? Find something you like to play, WANT to play, DO play and ignore the sticker price.
If an Eastman fits your budget and you play it well the price of the ES-175 (or other BETTER guitar) sitting next to it on the pegboard is irrelevant unless the BETTER guitar plays, and sounds like you want it to, then I suggest you get a payment plan or, like I did when I got a guitar once... a second job to pay for it :-)
-
Actually I don't think fumble was being a smart ass. What he said about justification for value line products is very real in many consumer's heads.
His advice on getting an affordable guitar was sound.
-
+1
Originally Posted by PTChristopher2
Two important factors to consider are tone and playability. In terms of playability, many of the budget archtops released in the last 5-10 years now rival expensive guitars. Whereas many budget archtops from yesteryear might look good, but there was always something a little bit off in how they felt and handled compared to say, a Gibson.
As for tone, that's what you pay for. Even then, when amplified the difference might be small, yet significant.
Never been a better time to buy a new budget archtop.
-
Im curious. Guitar A is $1000 guitar B is $20000. Why? Is it just the Benedetto signature? Do you pick up an L5 and making music is easier because of tge tone and playability? Never mind what fits my needs, that h as nothing to do with my question. , I'm curious as to what the other players think.
-
Get a Yunzhi made to your specs for 1150 USD.
They also sound nice.
-
Like many things the answer is not straight forward and is very subjective
As with most things you get what you pay for ... up to a point, .... there is definitely a diminishing return as your spending increases ...
And there is a considerable amount of "paying for the name" as well
Most of the "pay for the name" brands have earned their reputation .... and that pays dividends if you ever need to sell the guitar .... they are easier to sell and you have a better chance of getting your money back ... especially if you buy used. This has gotten a little ridiculous with some makers IMHO ... but if they can sell their guitars for $20K and higher ... the good for them even if it's bad for me
That said there are plenty of great low cost guitars out there today .... some are less expensive because they are made in Korea or China ... others are cheaper because they are made by a luthier or factory that is relatively new to the business
And even the Chinese made Eastmans are climbing in price as they develop a good reputation ... and their quality improves
The best thing is to play everything you can get your hands on ... find out what you like best and balance that with your own budget and priorities
good luck
-
I really don't agree with that. In my experience, the Ibanez Artcore Expressionist Series guitars that retail for about $600 sound every bit as good as a new laminate Gibson Archtop that sells for many times that price (plus the quality control on the Ibanez is way better). Originally Posted by 3625
-
This is a very valid question IMO -- at least to the extent that I would expect manufacturers at least to provide some bare non-mumbo-jumbo details as to why some models cost more than others. Of course there may be good reasons, but I'd like to get a solid idea of them rather than be left guessing.
For example, when I compare the PM2 (800 euros) to the PM200 (2800 euros) on the Ibanez website, all I get to see for a hard fact is that their PM200 features a "Gotoh® GE103B bridge".
-
Thank you. This is exactly what baffles me.
-
The most obvious difference is the country of manufacture. The PM200 is built in Japan. Originally Posted by palindrome
-
With the L5 example - the answer for me is yes. For example, Gibson make/made a range of different archtops with different neck profiles - the L5 neck profile just feels so much more nicer and comfortable to me, compared to most of their other models. I don't think it's a coincidence that they keep a certain type of neck profile for only their flagship models. That's obviously a highly subjective statement, but still, I think there's something to it. Originally Posted by eh6794
There's also a complex interrelationship between the instruments tone and the playability. A more expensive instrument has a more complex tone, as compared to a budget guitar, irrespective of whether it's a laminate or carved top. The more complex tone is more inspiring to play off - it catches your ear easier - and your brain and hands seem to naturally sink deeper into the music. The guitar becomes the music, whereas a cheaper instrument can feel like a barrier between you and the music.
Once you acquire a certain level of experience - with a great instrument, the moment you pick it up you just 'know'. And it feels good. Sounds good.
I think $3000 - $10,000 is approx. the range where this stuff is apparent. Above $10,000, it starts to get blurry in terms of paying for craftsmanship vs. reputation.
-
Definition of RATIOCINATION
1
: the process of exact thinking : reasoning
2
: a reasoned train of thought
— ra·ti·o·ci·na·tive adjective
New to me. You would think after all those years in engineering this would have come up with some regularity. Good word.
------------------------------------
Buying a guitar is like anything else. You write down your hard requirements (must have). You write down your preferences (wanna have). You write down what you can pay. Compared to the market this will yield a list of candidates. Research those candidates to see which ones will work.
Only the last step involves the Internet. When researching it's "just the facts ma'am". Ignore emotional, biased, myopic, intellectually sedentary, and non-informational input.
One important thing that is not true when it comes to production archtops: You get what you pay for. Maybe it was true once and maybe it will be again, but it isn't true right now. Take for instance a tough requirement like 'must be a true acoustic instrument with all the beauty, dynamics, and flexibility an archtop is capable of'. This can be met by some $1100 guitars. And yet with some brands you must spend quite a lot to get there. You just have to do honest research and take your best shot at what your real needs are.Last edited by Spook410; 09-06-2014 at 12:40 AM.
-
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. I think the Gibson has more character to the tone whereas by comparison an Artcore sounds good, but more uniform and bland. Again it's a slight difference but I can notice it, and it matters to me. I'll back that up by saying that I recently owned a 2006 175. Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
-
You said something interesting about the complex tone. Im an hour east of Sacramento, there aren't many shops around here, so I'm trying to listen to samples on line. The samples of the Eastman AR503 are great, exactly what I want, but when a listen to the guitars on the Benedetto site, I do hear more in each note. It could just be the Mic picking up more.
I dont mind spending $1000 on a guitar I've never played, but if i was spendingmore, id have to play it.
-
That has everything to do with it like it or not. If you feel a guitar is worth $20,000 and you can afford it you'll pay it. If you don't you'll buy a $1000 guitar and feel you got your money's worth. Neither guitar is going to make you a better player, that again is all you. You could ask the same question about guitar players. You have a casual and can get guitar player A who is an establish pro and wants $500 for the night. Guitar player B is not a pro, but you know he can easy handle this gig. This gig is for a close friends wedding you going to pay for Guitar player A or B they both can handle the gig, but one has a name and reputation to maintain. Originally Posted by eh6794
Value is totally subjective, if it wasn't you wouldn't even be asking, because you're going to sound the same whether its an off the shelf Ibanez or a Gibson Citation. The audience doesn't care except for the gear fanatics and they'll be over that in five minutes and checking out the waitress.
-
For me, the increase of quality to price is immense from $0-1000. From $1000-2000 you see improvements in feel, longevity, appearance, and to a lesser extent, sound. From $2000-3000 you start paying for specifics and brand preference. Anything above $3,000 is a silly waste of money to me. I realize this is probably an unpopular opinion but the guitar will not make you sound good. I've played a $650 Epiphone Regent with a kent armstrong pickup and a d'angelico tailpiece for a decade and haven't run into a single boutique guitar that sounds better. With the replacement parts and setup that guitar cost me about $1,000.
-
Probably the clearest example regarding the cheap vs. expensive issue it to look at what the best players use. The vast majority of great players use instruments in the $3000-$5000 price range. Not many perform or record on cheap guitars, and in the jazz world considering most players don't earn a lot or have famous endorsements, I think that gives a fairly unbiased result.
-
You know while I have a lot of respect for your opinions in general, assuming 'budget' = 'inexpensive', we disagree on this one. Even putting Yunzhi and Eastman aside for the moment, if you look at something like a 50's Epiphone that can be had for $1500 - $2500, many of those will put much more expensive instruments in the shade. Originally Posted by 3625
And forget all that putting aside stuff.. you can't ignore Yunzhi. They are a Benedetto copy competently carved out of the best materials. Their craftsmen were trained by US luthiers. There have been several recordings in this forum that sound great. They make really good guitars for a pittance. You might prefer a different design (they are pretty bright) but their tone is as complex as anything short of the boutique/custom market.Last edited by Spook410; 09-06-2014 at 12:58 AM.
-
That only proves a preference for more expensive gear. There's no one doubting the fact that guitars crave more expensive gear ad infinium. As long as you've got a decent pickup and amp the guitar mostly falls to playability. Afterall, we are talking about magnets picking up the vibrations of metal strings projected through an amp. Good luck trying to identify what kind of wood the archtop is made of in the final signal!
-
Based on the above, I don't think we're that far apart. A 50's Epiphone is basically in the same quality range as a 50's Gibson - the single pickup models tend to sell for less because the blues/rock guys don't like them. So a 50's Epi is to me more of an outlier in terms of the general gist of this debate (Snap them up quick!). Originally Posted by Spook410
Again, to generalise - it used to be that there existed two main stratas: either a Gibson or equivalent, or something like a Korean/Chinese epi/ibanez etc.
Now in recent years, Eastman seemed to have filled in that middle ground. As I stated earlier on, these 'budget' guitars are really good as compared to the past. But really, you mean to say that a Yunzhi or Eastman is on the same level tone wise to either a Gibson, Collings or Campellone? Maybe in the future perhaps, but they are not there yet. And as Yunzhi and Eastman get better at building instruments, no doubt their prices will rise accordingly.Last edited by 3625; 09-06-2014 at 01:15 AM.
-
OK, I really like the Japanese, but I don't like them enough to spend 2000 euros on their being Japanese (not even if they throw in a standard Gotoh bridge). Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
There might be other means to persuade me, though.
OK, so labor is a hard fact (which manufacturers understandably do not discuss this on their websites). But surely there must be other hard facts? Japanese-versus-Chinese quality control? Materials? Build quality? From a customer's point of view, I'd expect more than handling these issues (whether implicitly or explicitly) as yes/no questions. When push comes to shove, everything I have ever read in these departments dissipates into thin air.
-
You're asking the wrong question. Price and value are about selling a guitar (or buying one). The asking price is not the value, it's the selling price ... that's the value. You're asking about "quality". Quality is not value. If you're asking if a very expensive guitar is higher quality than a cheap guitar ... it is. Or are you asking about tone and playability? If you're asking if a very expensive guitar has much better tone and playability than a cheap guitar ... it depends on your subjective needs.
I have a few Asian guitars that I use for outdoor gigs or travel to iffy locales. I've set then up to play very very well and replaced the pick ups to sound very good. None of them are in any way as good as my good guitars. In the 80s when I played an ES-175, I thought it sounded great and played as well as anything. Compared to the Super 400, the 175 is about as easy to play, though it doesn't look nearly as nice. It doesn't sound as good. None of my guitars sound as good. The L7 with the DeArmond pick-up I had years ago didn't sound as good. I've never played a guitar that sounds better amplified through a Fender amp that the Super 400. For me, it's worth the price for that reason alone. I tried pick up swaps and everything else, no way. It's crazy better ... to me, to my ears.
I play other cat's handmade pricy guitars, brands I can't even remember, the luthiers have years long waiting lists. For my ears, nothing has come close to that Super 400. But, that's my answer. It won't be the same as yours. After you try three or four hundred archtops and make a list of the best sounding ones, and the best playing ones, you start getting closer to answering the question, but it's not about value, in the end it's about tone and playability ... unless you're planning on selling it. Then it's about the price it sells at. That's the value on that day in that place.
Reply With Quote
Moffa Mithra
Today, 08:31 AM in For Sale