Differences between Cheap and Expensive guitars?

[mirkok1]

i want to add this to my original post that started this thread because i think my post insinuated that any cheap guitar can sound as good as any expensive guitar but in my opinion thats usually not the case. i've had nothing but good experiences with buying cheap guitars because i go out and find the diamonds in the ruff. when i go out looking for a cheap guitar to buy 75%-80% of the time i don't buy anything because the guitars are not very good at all. but i do believe if someone is patient and has the luxury of playing many many guitars they can find a $200 guitar, spend another $200-$400 in upgrades and have a $500-$600 guitar that plays and sounds as good as a $2000 guitar. it's the exception not the rule but it can be done and it's really not that hard to do.

[aleclee]

As the saying goes, it's the exception that proves the rule.

I have a MIM Tele that's the dogs bawls. It's a really nice guitar, particularly for the $400 price point I got it at. Aside from dealing with some fret sprout issues and putting about $50 in parts (4-way switch, graphite string trees, new pickguard, ...) into it, it just works. The hidden cost of that gem was running the racks, checking out every decent looking Tele I could lay hands on for a period of two years. That's a pretty inefficient way of getting a nice guitar on the cheap, particularly if you value your time at something beyond minimum wage.

I looked at it as something of a challenge and perhaps a bit of a hobby. I got a really nice guitar out of it but I wouldn't recommend it as an effective way to get a good guitar.

[XPAULPITT]

Yup, the poly vs. nitro is the big difference. The fact that it takes like a month or more to complete the painting process with laquer makes all the difference in the world, cost wise and tone wise. I had a faded LP that sounded amazing but could not get used to the chambered body so I traded it for an SG faded and that thing also sounds amazing. Im a fan of the faded Gibson guitars.

[blueman335]

There's a big difference in an entry level guitar (which uses the absolute cheapest material possible and a minimum of workmanship) and a mid-priced one. Likewise there's a difference between a mid-priced guitar and a high end one.

I don't expect my Epi's and other imports to sound just as good as their Gibson equivalents, but in the situations I play them at (noisy bars, poor room acoustics, less than studio-quality mix), precious few people are able to tell the difference (and they may be hammered anyways). That's why I don't sweat it. If you want to spend more, be my guest.

With a little looking and tweaking, you can get a nice used mid-price import and upgrade the PU's; put a few hundred dollars total into it. Considering the talent level of the average player, a guitar like that won't 'hold' many of them back. But if you want to take it to a higher level, you will get a better instrument when you spend more. Everyone's got to find a balance between music gear, house payment, car payment, family, standard of living, etc. and decide what's right for them. That's a decision no one else can make for you. Whatever you have, don't be embarassed or apologetic. They're only tools, they don't make music on their own. Buying a guitar is the easy part, becoming proficient on it is where real the work starts.

[verbotenco]

Besides the conspicuous pickups, fretwork, and electronics, probably the wood. Who knows...they are probably leftover and used to make a patchwork that forms the body of the guitar.

[verbotenco]

There's a big difference in an entry level guitar (which uses the absolute cheapest material possible and a minimum of workmanship) and a mid-priced one. Likewise there's a difference between a mid-priced guitar and a high end one.

I don't expect my Epi's and other imports to sound just as good as their Gibson equivalents, but in the situations I play them at (noisy bars, poor room acoustics, less than studio-quality mix), precious few people are able to tell the difference (and they may be hammered anyways). That's why I don't sweat it. If you want to spend more, be my guest.

With a little looking and tweaking, you can get a nice used mid-price import and upgrade the PU's; put a few hundred dollars total into it. Considering the talent level of the average player, a guitar like that won't 'hold' many of them back. But if you want to take it to a higher level, you will get a better instrument when you spend more. Everyone's got to find a balance between music gear, house payment, car payment, family, standard of living, etc. and decide what's right for them. That's a decision no one else can make for you. Whatever you have, don't be embarassed or apologetic. They're only tools, they don't make music on their own. Buying a guitar is the easy part, becoming proficient on it is where real the work starts.

I feel for you man. That's why my guitar are mid-priced and cheap imports. But all use USA pickups and combined with a decent amp and a slew of state-of-the-art effects, my sound is comparable to that produced by $1500 guitar. Guitar is just one of the many defining factors in the complete spectrum that determines the ultimate outcome.

[gibson175]

There's a big difference in an entry level guitar (which uses the absolute cheapest material possible and a minimum of workmanship) and a mid-priced one. Likewise there's a difference between a mid-priced guitar and a high end one.

I don't expect my Epi's and other imports to sound just as good as their Gibson equivalents, but in the situations I play them at (noisy bars, poor room acoustics, less than studio-quality mix), precious few people are able to tell the difference (and they may be hammered anyways). That's why I don't sweat it. If you want to spend more, be my guest.

With a little looking and tweaking, you can get a nice used mid-price import and upgrade the PU's; put a few hundred dollars total into it. Considering the talent level of the average player, a guitar like that won't 'hold' many of them back. But if you want to take it to a higher level, you will get a better instrument when you spend more. Everyone's got to find a balance between music gear, house payment, car payment, family, standard of living, etc. and decide what's right for them. That's a decision no one else can make for you. Whatever you have, don't be embarassed or apologetic. They're only tools, they don't make music on their own. Buying a guitar is the easy part, becoming proficient on it is where real the work starts.

+1.
nice one blueman.

[Jeff5]

It's complete preference of course. If a $200 guitar with upgrades works for you, then it works for you. If it's all you can afford then it's all you can afford. I forget who has this in his sig but it's a quote by Joel Danztig formerly of Hamer stating that some of the best most classic music was made by using gear far inferior to anything we have today. I tend to agree with that.

That being said, from a pure business standpoint, corners must be cut in order to get to a cheaper price point. Labor is the most obvious one as most cheaper guitars are produced in other countries. However, everything has to also be cheaper, including the wood which is one of the biggest influencers on tone and can't be changed. I'm sure there are many other shortcuts they take and I'm not a luthier so I wouldn't have a clue as to what they are but everything adds up to affect the playability and tone of a guitar.

How much this matters to you is completely up to the individual. Some people don't care. Some people can't hear it or cover it up. Some people are just such good players that it doesn't matter. My personal experience is this. I play my Epiphone Les Paul (Chinese I believe). Then I play my Hamer Monaco Elite. The Epiphone is actually a pretty nice guitar (I've upgraded the crap out of it) and is decent to play. The Hamer...I just can't put down. I play other guitars, I want to play my Hamer. The tone, the feel, the under tones hat sometimes creep out, the balance, just everything about it is.....better.

My experience, yours may vary.

[LesStrat]

I'm with aleclee. Mind your own business.

I am a mediocre guitarist, yet a good musician. I do what I do.

My #1 is a Parker Fly Mojo single cut. No, I did not pay retail for it, but it IS a relatively expensive guitar. It's worth far more than I paid.

My #2 is a mid-priced Ibanez. I dig it. I prefer the neck specs over the Parker; yet the workmanship is nowhere close to the Parker. Eventually it'll need a refret. The Parker will not.

There is no comparison in quality between the two. It is likely that the Parker will play the same 20 years from now with minimal maintenance. The Ibie will require work.

#3 is a Parker Fly Deluxe. It, too, is meticulously made. It's #3 only because it has a brighter tone than I prefer.

Quality costs. I do not select guitars based on audience perceptions. I select guitars based on player preferences.

The majority of audience members couldn't tell you anything about the axe used other than the color.

[totergecko]

I've played cheap guitars that were really good, and I've played expensive guitars that were ****ty. the only real difference I've noticed is that as price goes up, so does the AVERAGE quality of the the guitars in that price bracket...but if you know what you're looking for, there is no reason why you can't find an exceptionally well crafted instrument in lower price ranges. especially if you're good at working on guitars, then basically every guitar you own becomes a dime.

[Ball&Chain]

They talk about differences as you move up in price here, at least as it applies to the ESP/LTD lines.

[Left_Hand_Strat]

i have not read a simple thing in this thread.

yes, I'm an @ss like that.

here's my verdict.

Expensive guitars play really nicely as a whole, although I did try a £2k les paul and it played (in my eyes) like a bag of s***. however others play like a dream, yep okish sound (again dependent on taste and what you plan to do etc) and oh it has a nice name on the headstock.... oh crap it's about a $1000 + because it says Fender, Gibson, Ibanez or some other expensive name on the headstock. total put off.

meanwhile look at cheap import guitars (or cheaper ranges) and play a load of them. each one will be different to different people. OK so I can spend 3 hours in the shop and have done before just playing through the 'dead' guitars in order to find the right one. Always worth it.

that Import tele i'm modding? that's the beauty i got for £79 (in a sale, shop was clearing for a refit) soon as I picked it up, I knew it was alive, that was the tele for me.

Lesson?

don't be a guitar snob. If there is acheaper guitar which in your eyes, Plays like you want it to, sounds like you want it to and ticks all the boxes and fits your wallet price, then go for it, no shame in it at all.

If you want a nice flashy name on your headstock and made in USA or whatever the **** it says, then cool, go for, congrats you have a nice strat or somethin, so what so does everyone else.

what I actually mean from all of this junk I wrote:

Follow your heart, Don't be a sheep and don't buy expensive guitars for the sake of it.


its totally unrealted but worthwhile reading it.

[Jessie's ghost]

The biggest difference I consistently see is in the rhetorical strategies used by the owners to justify their purchases, to themselves and to others.

[Left_Hand_Strat]

The biggest difference I consistently see is in the rhetorical strategies used by the owners to justify their purchases, to themselves and to others.

This.

I will openly admit that me and my dad do this all the time.

[aleclee]

The biggest difference I consistently see is in the rhetorical strategies used by the owners to justify their purchases, to themselves and to others.

[ExplorersRock]

I hate to beat a dead horse on this one, but I gotta share this thought. If you don't see a difference than buy the cheaper instrument. Big money doesn't always mean a better build, just usually and more consistently. I've played expensive guitars that played like crap, and cheap guitars that played WAY above their price point (my new Modern Player Tele is a case in point, it has played incredibly from the moment I picked it up off the rack). It also says to me that you may not have been playing that long. When I had been playing for less than 5 years, I didn't see any point in paying more. The longer I played the more profound the differences became. I've been playing for almost 20 years now and to me it's insanely obvious where that extra money goes.

I just want to give this example. I bought an Epiphone Explorer years ago and it played just fine except that it was neck heavy. Two years ago, I ponied up and bought a Gibson Explorer. When I got home with it, I played the two back-to-back for an hour. My wife saw me afterwards sitting on a chair staring at the guitars in their stands scratching my chin looking perplexed. "Did you notice a difference between the two?" she asked. "Well," I said, "I'll put it to you this way: I will never, ever buy an Epiphone Explorer again! If I buy another Explorer, it has to be a Gibson!"

I meant it. I got rid of the Epiphone shortly after. The Gibson wasn't neck heavy to start, but that's just scratching the surface! I'd buy an Epiphone again, but never an Explorer. It's buy Gibson, or don't buy at all for me with Explorers!

[jumble jumble]

"Cheap", always means inferior.

A salesman's dream customer.

[ExplorersRock]

The biggest difference I consistently see is in the rhetorical strategies used by the owners to justify their purchases, to themselves and to others.

Sorry to double-post here. I think this can go both ways. Some people will try to justify the expense "because since I paid more, it is be definition better." Hogwash. But to me it's usually the opposite that I hear. "Why pay more? You're just one of the followers that thinks brand name equals quality!" No, I can feel and hear a difference. Besides, if price wasn't an object, most of these players who know the "truth" would buy the Gibson over the Epiphone, the ESP over the LTD, and the PRS over the SE. So don't BS us by saying that we're just a bunch of idiots who fell for some corporate ploy! The best playing guitar I own was custom made not by some giant conglomerate, but by a local luthier working out of his garage! I'll take the Pepsi Challenge with any Fender, Gibson, or PRS custom-shop-job you can line up! And, I payed a lot less than if I had gone for a major label.

At the end of the day, what matters is what you like. If you pay more, you will usually get more because parts and woods are more selectively chosen (be careful, this is not always the case) and more time is taken on each instrument. Some cheaper guitars just play great because they do, and I encourage the owners of these to enjoy them and not loose sight of how good it is because of what's on the headstock. I'm not willing to splurge for a Gibson Les Paul when an Epiphone suits me fine (the Gibsons are usually better in my experience though). But like my last post stated, Explorers... Gibson only.

[blueman335]

A salesman's dream customer.

Yeah I know, my dad was a salesman.

[Left_Hand_Strat]

A salesman's dream customer.

sounds like the dodgy bar stools at one of the local music shops in my city. there is always a teenger and his/her parents saying son/darling we are getting you a guitar and it's like their first or second guitar.

parent's say 'cheap is inferior' or words to that effect, criminalizing shop clerk says, Oh look at this £500 epiphone, gibson, whatever.....

I also thing this mentality has something of substance in this discussion. If people weren't trying to make as much money these days and relaxed their policies a bit I think more people would buy Cheaper alternatives to expensive guitars seeing that some cheaper guitars are sometimes the better option. The only reason why the majority don't believe this is simply because they have been educated that more money = more which has been driven into them by the businessmen of today.