-
Spook, You are probably 100% right. There probably isn't a difference. I wish I was like you. One who could fairly assess whether something better can be found in a more expensive instrument. I cant. Once I know what I want, my materialistic ass just accepts that the more expensive, more desireable guitar IS better. I've never played a D'Angelico but I want one. Eventually I hope I'll get one. And when I play it, I will hear things that I've never heard before and I will chalk that up to it being better than everything else.
Originally Posted by Spook410
Sentimental value plays into it too. I just looked at my wall and noticed I have a guitar signed by Johnny Smith, another signed by Joe Pass, One that Patrick used to own, A 165 that takes the place of the 175 I grew up on and a L7c that is just flat out spectacular. When Booboo comes home, that will be a keeper because of what she's been through and I will always remember the friendship I made during her tribulations.
The D'Angelico will be special because it was made by the 2 humans that are regarded as the greatest Guitar makers of all time.
Sentimental, Materialistic Me..
-
09-27-2015 08:17 PM
-
I think the best guitar, the guitar you must buy is the one that stops you using up practice time looking at other guitars and reading threads about other guitars etc.
I mucked around for too long looking at guitars, trying all kinds of compromise guitars. Never satisfied. Then there was a closing down sale and Gibson's going at 50% off. I tried to dislike the ES175, kept trying other guitars in the shop, cheaper Gibson's, Heritage etc spent 3-4 hours playing and just could not resist the sound. I now have one guitar and have not looked at another guitar since, we are one.
It can be any guitar as long as it makes you play more and stop wasting time.
As my best mate always says "we are here for a good time not a long time".
-
I went through several expensive guitars including an 2 L5s, L7s, some 175s, an Artist Award, etc., and found that the guitar wasn't useful if it didn't fit. I ended up in the 24.75" world for electrics, and found several for well under $1000 that were perfect tools for the job. If I were a studio ace in the old days, I'd certainly want an Epiphone deluxe or Stromberg for playing on the Sinatra sessions, but the last big band CD I did, a borrowed Eastman was perfect for the job.
An inexpensive guitar must be made well in order to be a pro-level instrument. For whatever reasons, and there are several, a $500 guitar made in the Samick factory is a completely functional tool that works right. A multi-thousand dollar name instrument will also do the job right, but the main difference will be the player.
Having said all that, a great guitar is a great guitar, and most of the cheapies will never be great.
-
i started at 14 with a $100.00 guitar or two.
moved up to a ES-335 and Fender Twin at 16 with lawn mowing money.
at 21 i bought a new L5CES from my full time income in night clubs while going to college full time.
i've purchased more than 10 fine guitars since then, one of them costing $25K.
i do just fine with a $10K archtop, and with a $5K semi-hollow. i would not want to move down from there, but i don't need to go up either.
-
I play jazz on expensive guitars and I play jazz on cheap guitars. If you spend your first $500 _very_ wisely...I'd say you get about 80-percent of the way to sonic jazz nirvana...no kidding.
I once spent $300 on a second-hand archtop that was honestly _almost_ as good sounding as some very highly regarded Gibson laminated body archtops--about 80%.
Here's the deal, though. That last 20% is SOOOOOOO good sounding that some of us spend gobs of money on carved body guitars.
I have played guitar since 1965. Until 1980, I convinced myself that I didn't need a true Gibson ES-175, i.e., that copies were enough. Finally, I got a vintage 175. I was wrong.
For 30 years, I convinced myself that the laminated 175 was all I needed. Then I acquired a Heritage Super Eagle. I was wrong, again. A carved body archtop just gets that last little bit of "stringy," electric guitar, archtop-ness for jazz.
That said, I can do a very, very convincing set on a Telecaster.
BUT, the Telecaster doesn't look like this:
-
No, bummer. Originally Posted by silverfoxx
I made it a point to learn how to work on guitars too...so my $200 danelectro plays as good as my 2k Taylor...
I also make it a point to buy used. I've saved close to 50% on a few guitars...1k+ money wise, per guitar. Gotta be smart. Good guitars are worth it.
-
Wow GT, that is gorgeous. Perfection. And you are so right about the 20%. That color is amazing.
Joe D
Originally Posted by Greentone
I play jazz on expensive guitars and I play jazz on cheap guitars. If you spend your first $500 _very_ wisely...I'd say you get about 80-percent of the way to sonic jazz nirvana...no kidding.
I once spent $300 on a second-hand archtop that was honestly _almost_ as good sounding as some very highly regarded Gibson laminated body archtops--about 80%.
Here's the deal, though. That last 20% is SOOOOOOO good sounding that some of us spend gobs of money on carved body guitars.
I have played guitar since 1965. Until 1980, I convinced myself that I didn't need a true Gibson ES-175, i.e., that copies were enough. Finally, I got a vintage 175. I was wrong.
For 30 years, I convinced myself that the laminated 175 was all I needed. Then I acquired a Heritage Super Eagle. I was wrong, again. A carved body archtop just gets that last little bit of "stringy," electric guitar, archtop-ness for jazz.
That said, I can do a very, very convincing set on a Telecaster.
BUT, the Telecaster doesn't look like this:
-
I think it is important to keep in mind the fact that the overall quality and functionality of the lower-priced instruments available today are much, much higher than the q & f of the instruments occupying comparable positions in the marketplace in the past. A big part of this improvement is due, IMHO, to the incorporation of design elements and construction methods that were first applied to higher-end guitars. Some of this improvement is attributable to advances in technology and the vast expansion of the market itself, post-"British Invasion" here in the States, and subsequent proliferation of demand world wide.
But surely the refinements in the actual design of guitars (and amps) are largely driven by the market for higher-end products aimed at buyers who want more- better balance, more ornate appointments, innovative construction, more refinement and range of tone, etc. The high-end luthiers whose instruments command (and get) the bigger bucks are also moving the art and craft of guitar-making forward. Their customers are in essence patrons of the art. Those who have been blessed with the wherewithal to purchase these are also helping to drive the quality and functionality of all instruments to a higher level.
All of my guitars and amps are low-to-mid level, and I love 'em all. Would I like to explore higher strata? You bet!
But I am thankful for what I have, and I envy no one for what they have. I rejoice in resonance with everyone's NGDs, and hope we all continue to live and learn and play the heck out of all those beautiful guitars!
-
Yep! We live in a golden age for affordable guitars
-
Originally Posted by Spook410
I've been contemplating ordering a Yunzhi or Wu guitar for a while now and just can't bring myself to pull the trigger ... for multiple reasons
I haven't tried one so I don't really know how they compare to a nice Heritage or Gibson ... maybe someday I'll order one
I know the Eastmans that I've tried were very good guitars .... but I like my Gibsons much better .... I also understand why someone would not find a Gibson to be worth 2 to 5 times the price of a good Eastman .... and I have no problem if someone finds Eastman to be better guitars than Gibson
For myself I know what I like and I like what I know .....
-
IMHO the point of diminishing returns is somewhat personal and subjective .. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
But, yeah .... around $3K seems about right to me
I think it's worth it to pay 4K to 6K or maybe even 8K to get something like a Gibson, Campellone, or Heritage ...
But I'm not sure it's worth spending another 10K to 20K to get a Benedetto or Buscarino
-
The advent of the CNC router has made production of inexpensive, GOOD quality guitars a reality. Once upon a time it took VERY educated hands to turn out guitar bodies and necks. Now, it is possible to take the measurements of the best example of a vintage Fender, Gibson, etc., make a CAD model of the instrument, and assign the model's measurements to a CNC router--or gang router--that can swiftly reduce a block of wood to a nearly finished body or neck that only requires fine finishing. BAM! Production costs have dropped seriously. Thus, beginners can go out and pay a fraction of what my generation paid for, say, a Stratocaster, and receive a high quality instrument. A $350 Stratocaster from the late 60s (when I first started pricing them, then, the list price was around $350) would be the equivalent of about $2,500 today. That's Custom Shop territory. You can get a Mex-Fender for MUCH less, and a US Standard for much less, due to CNC technology.
-
Originally Posted by Greentone
bingo! that is exactly it!!!..nowadays you get an imported guitar that is made on machine to exact spec..the initial factory set up costs are high but then the labor and production are cheap...sure there are nuances, but the basic intrinsic measurements are there…more handcrafted guitars can vary greatly, so of course there are brilliant ones, but also occasional duds…what imports lack at low price points is a high level of qc…poor or poorly aged woods and laminates, poorly cut nuts, poor finishes etc etc…
sadowsky has the right idea..make'm there, finish 'em here…smart
cheers
ps- bigsby is a prime example.. has done this for years..american bigsby trems are each sand cast..very hands on and expensive process..their import line is die cast..the original molds were $$$ pricey..but now every bigsby from there is uniform..no variations..is it as nice (or romantic) as a hand made sand cast??…that's up to youLast edited by neatomic; 09-27-2015 at 10:54 PM. Reason: ps
-
My 2 Cents:
If you are a poor player, you will still sound like a poor player on a 75K guitar.
If you are a good player, you will sound good on a 100 dollar guitar, but you will sound better on a 5K guitar because your playing will be more inspired on the 5K guitar.
Yes there is a law of diminishing returns, but where that kicks in will depend on the individual.
I have 20 guitars ranging in value from 1K to 15K. I have worked hard (and smart) and earned them. Was I envious of Scott Chinery? Nope, but I admired him as I admire all who have achieved more than I have. Those who have achieved less, I hope can do better before their time is up.
Those who are envious and bitter about others having done better in life, I can do without. I have always preferred sweet grapes to sour ones.
-
"Yep! We live in a golden age for affordable guitars"
Agreed, however, we do not live in a golden age of affordable "quality" guitars.
Martin quality, as an example, has taken a dive... there was time when they were of the highest quality (pre CFM IV)
My opinion of course.
I did buy an Ibanez earlier this year that was extraordinary.
Case by Case.
-
Archtops are like money: I'd love an opportunity to prove that having lots of nice fancy expensive archtops/money makes me unhappy and miserable.
A nice expensive archtop is a nice expensive archtop; not necessary for the purpose of making jazz but, boy oh boy, isn't it a nice expensive archtop! Your eyes and hands and heart feel it!
I won't say 'No' to a nice Gibson Citation.
Collecting archtops makes me poor and on a subsistence diet. But I'm a happier man for it. Can't put a price tag on that.
The tagline is whether they are distractions. They are distractions only if you allow them to be. Having a few different archtops makes me practise more! Not that they are necessary...Last edited by Jabberwocky; 09-28-2015 at 01:12 AM.
-
What a great post.. Thanks Joe. Originally Posted by Joe DeNisco
-
^this. +1. Originally Posted by stringswinger
... I admired him as i admire all who have achieved more than i have. Those who have achieved less, i hope can do better before their time is up.
Those who are envious and bitter about others having done better in life, i can do without. I have always preferred sweet grapes to sour ones.
-
Yunzhi/Wu are also based on Benedetto designs which can be overly bright. I like Yunzhi better than Eastman, but you would likely still prefer the darker tone of your Gibsons. Originally Posted by Bluedawg
So.. if I wanted a decent L5 with a good acoustic tone (amplified and unamplified) I'm guessing something from the 90's or 00's with a floater?
-
As can we all. Don't really see too much guitar envy around this forum though. There are just too many good guitars at all price levels. Originally Posted by Stringswinger
Those who are envious and bitter about others having done better in life, I can do without. I have always preferred sweet grapes to sour ones.
-
Reminds me of the G.A.S. prayer: "Dear Lord, please give me the opportunity to prove to you that fabulous wealth and a surfeit of high-end archtops shall not distract me from focusing on the music itself." Originally Posted by Jabberwocky
-
Add to that a nice-looking woman companion with a sweet personality who does not ask for much except LURVE from me and me loins. Originally Posted by jasaco
Scotch that thought. I don't want to be seen with any woman who wants to have anything to do with me.
-
Well said. My ES-139 was just that. I started with a Fender Starcaster. Loved that, but every time I went to the store I kept playing the ES-139 for up to an hour every time. Something about it, the way it plays, how incognito it looks... I had to have it. Sure enough, my father reserved it so no one else could buy it and we paid using credit. Will cost a bit more in the long run, but now I don't want any semi-hollow guitar. I won't even try them anymore! Originally Posted by gggomez
I still really, really would like a single-pickup carved-top instrument. A forum member kindly offered me a H575 Custom which fit my desires. Great looking guitar, fair price. Added customs fee, still a fair price but I can't really afford it at this point in time. I think.
If I could, I would. I think that owning such a guitar would cure the desire to own one such guitar. At least, for a few years
My very first electric guitar was a Peavey T15, which was a very cheap guitar. Then I moved on to a Washburn falcon. I was still complete f*cking shit as a guitarist, pardon my french. I tried different solid-bodies on and off.
Then when I was 16, I started studying guitar. It's a wonder I got in, considering how absolutely useless I was at the time. Still used the Washburn, but had on-off relationships with a 1976 Strat, California Strat, and MIJ Tele. Then one time, I was noodling around the music store because I was one of "those guys". Spotted an orange hollowbody in the corner. Its color enticed me. I had to try it. I did. I loved it. It was a completely different sound than what I was used to. It was smooth. It was marked down to $290 and I bought it. I always loved that guitar, still play it from time to time. It proved only to dampen the effects of GAS, as I still kept looking on this site etc. for other archtops. Within a short period of time because of a few coincidences, I tried an L4 CES, 1978 GB-10, and a Jim Triggs carved top w/CC pickup. Suddenly I realized that guitars could be insanely good. I know now what nirvana lays beyond my reach. Now I can't really enjoy my AF 75 as much as I used to. Oh well.
I felt so inspired on the L4 CES. I think that's the point many want to get across. I felt totally inspired. I played it for hours and hours. It has become my white whale!
Back to the thing:
My ES-139 is a cheaper Gibson, but still quite expensive. Around $1500 + some credit fees. I could've gotten a different semi for 1/3rd of that, maybe an Ibanez or something. Doesn't matter, no other guitar spoke to me like the ES.
-
To build a high-quality Archtop you need high-quality wood. Therefore a tree needs to grow, what takes him usually more than a human lifetime. Then the wood needs to be cut down and to be dried. This takes some time too. Then you need a skilled luthier. To acquire these skills he needed to build quite a few guitars, which surely took him some years, too (it isn't called the "art of lutherie" for nothing) . Then you need all the electronics and hardware in high-quality....
So all these things and some more (the rent for his studio, the tools he need...) sum up to those high prices.
Surely the name on the headstock adds to the price. But keep in mind, that they had to do some good and hard work, to establish the name.
Last thought:
Ask a professional cello-player, what he needs to invest for a good-quality (not high-quality) instrument.
Regards Christoph
-
Thanks, a lot of really interesting opinions and perspectives here. Which was the only reason I started this thread was started and certainly wasn't intended to offend.
Guitars have always been working things for me so I've never gotten too precious about them. However, I've been looking through with a view to buying from the 'for sale'. Amazing works of art those guitars are, very tempted by the Shaefer... I have to admit I would probably be too scared to take them out at the busy jam sessions though!
I have an Gibson ES-333 bought when I started getting into jazz when I was 17. Certainly not low end, and has served me very well for last 11 years. I feel you form a relationship with any instrument you spend time with, no matter how cheap or expensive - I can't even imagine how much better guitars can even get.. It's just the thing in my hands when I play music - I almost don't even hear the guitar anymore - not sure that's a good thing!
Reply With Quote
Recommandations for Hollowbodies for $600 and under?
Today, 05:20 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos