4 ms·

I've found that many of the finer things in life, after a certain point of thing thing serving the purpose well, it's more about variety and taste than one is o

I've found that many of the finer things in life, after a certain point of thing thing serving the purpose well, it's more about variety and taste than one is objectively better than the other. Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Will a $10,000 guitar sound and feel way better than that $1000 guitar? Probably not, more just different. Is a Bugatti Chiron "faster" than a Pagani Huayra ? Sure, in some regards, but they're entirely different cars made to do different things and feel very very different, despite both being "hypercars". Art is subjective after a certain point of being well-crafted and well-executed. Most food is more or less for utility and much less for art. Fine dining is much more art than utility, just like so many other things in life.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago
> Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Nope. Not absolutely. Not even close.
- williamdclt 5y ago
  Come on, that's just being contrarian. Sure there's going to be anecdotal exceptions here and there, but yes I'd absolutely expect almost any $1000 guitar to be better in sound and feel than almost any $100 guitar.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    No, sorry, I don't think it is. Better, almost certainly (I have played a terrible $1000 guitar -- it was a Gretsch and if you have played guitars you know what I mean by this). But that isn't what the comment I am replying to is saying. It says absolutely and way better. And that just isn't supported by evidence if you ask me. Not least on the playability: if you treat the $100 guitar to the same setup as a $1000 guitar, you may well get an extremely similar experience. $100 guitars, particularly the ones from Aeirsi, can be extremely good. OK so the gap between $100 and $1000 is much bigger with acoustic guitars, as you'd expect. (That is if we stipulate there is much of a $100 acoustic guitar market. Can't be many). But a $100-ish Encore Strat clone in the right hands? not so much. And it's especially true of lap steel guitars, IMO. Some of the best ones are cheap, some expensive ones are terrible, and the 10x price multiplier adds less than you'd expect.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  You're talking about the difference between a Martin and a First Act. Yes, absolutely. Now if the price distinction had been 1000 and 500 I'd say quality differences could be hit or miss. Even then that's the difference between a Martin and a nice Ovation, I guarantee you the Martin feels and sounds better. You can get a good Fender acoustic for $500 that will feel and sound really good, maybe that comes down to taste. But a $100 guitar? It's a children's toy guaranteed.
  - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
    The post does not specify acoustic guitars, I would note. And it says way better as well as absolutely. Acoustics: the rule is more likely to apply, I will grant you that. But playability is about setup. Treat a cheap guitar to the same level of setup as you treat an expensive one and the gap could disappear. Electrics? ehhh. A typical (non-specialist) $1000 electric guitar is a waste of at least $700, and everyone who has bought more than one in the last decade knows it.

unfocussed_mike 5y ago

> Will a $1000 guitar sound and feel way better than a $100 guitar? Absolutely. Nope. Not absolutely. Not even close.

williamdclt 5y ago
Come on, that's just being contrarian. Sure there's going to be anecdotal exceptions here and there, but yes I'd absolutely expect almost any $1000 guitar to be better in sound and feel than almost any $100 guitar.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  No, sorry, I don't think it is. Better, almost certainly (I have played a terrible $1000 guitar -- it was a Gretsch and if you have played guitars you know what I mean by this). But that isn't what the comment I am replying to is saying. It says absolutely and way better. And that just isn't supported by evidence if you ask me. Not least on the playability: if you treat the $100 guitar to the same setup as a $1000 guitar, you may well get an extremely similar experience. $100 guitars, particularly the ones from Aeirsi, can be extremely good. OK so the gap between $100 and $1000 is much bigger with acoustic guitars, as you'd expect. (That is if we stipulate there is much of a $100 acoustic guitar market. Can't be many). But a $100-ish Encore Strat clone in the right hands? not so much. And it's especially true of lap steel guitars, IMO. Some of the best ones are cheap, some expensive ones are terrible, and the 10x price multiplier adds less than you'd expect.
betwixthewires 5y ago
You're talking about the difference between a Martin and a First Act. Yes, absolutely. Now if the price distinction had been 1000 and 500 I'd say quality differences could be hit or miss. Even then that's the difference between a Martin and a nice Ovation, I guarantee you the Martin feels and sounds better. You can get a good Fender acoustic for $500 that will feel and sound really good, maybe that comes down to taste. But a $100 guitar? It's a children's toy guaranteed.
- unfocussed_mike 5y ago
  The post does not specify acoustic guitars, I would note. And it says way better as well as absolutely. Acoustics: the rule is more likely to apply, I will grant you that. But playability is about setup. Treat a cheap guitar to the same level of setup as you treat an expensive one and the gap could disappear. Electrics? ehhh. A typical (non-specialist) $1000 electric guitar is a waste of at least $700, and everyone who has bought more than one in the last decade knows it.