Guitars costing less than $3K but that compete on tonal grounds with 10k plus guitars

[maxtheaxe]

One word...'Larrivee'.

More words...you have to be patient with new ones as they require more than a year to really begin to season properly. I attribute this to their robust build quality...takes a while to 'play them in'.

[Glennwillow]

Originally Posted by RP

I think it's more the player than the guitar. Many of us simply can not appreciate the nuances of a $10,000 three times as much as a $3000 guitar...

I think this sums it up...

The people who can appreciate really expensive guitars are generally skilled fingerstyle players or highly skilled flat pickers (a la Carl Miner). Most players are not in that league.

- Glenn

[Jinder]

This is an interesting question…what skews the pitch a little for me is the fact that when you look at pricing, £2/3000 is “professional level”. £10k is not professional level-those instruments exist in the rarefied air somewhere north of professional level equipment. They’re more boutique level or collectors’ grade.

As a working musician, I wouldn’t want to take any £10k guitar on the road…knowing what can happen to instruments on tour (honestly I could write a book on some of the horrors that have befallen my kit!) I would be perpetually unable to relax.

Yes, there are plenty of folks who own valuable vintage or boutique guitars for home or studio use, but I don’t know anyone in the music industry who is regularly slinging a 10k instrument for general use. Most folks I know play Gibsons or Martins (J45s, SJ200s, D18s, D28s, D35s and OMs), some Collings, some Santa Cruz, Huss and Daltons etc, all high quality instruments but nothing stratospherically high end. Probably the most expensive being a ‘62 SJ200.

This to me indicates that whilst a £10k guitar is no doubt a beautiful thing to possess and play, it’s not necessarily better in a linear sense than a professional level instrument. I have an early D18GE prototype which is a genuinely beautiful and immensely toneful guitar. It cost me £2k secondhand. It is more than sufficient for any studio or stage in the world. Would I get more work with a £10k guitar? I don’t believe so. Would my audience be better satiated? I don’t think so. Would I be happier? I don’t believe so. Having THAT much money wrapped up in an instrument would likely wrack me with anxiety.

So, to answer the question directly, my D18GE compares very favourably with a £10k guitar in as much as I’m happier owning it than I would be the more expensive counterpart on many levels.

[Boozehound]

I would say it depends on what kind of music, and if you are willing to look used and/or stretch your budget.

For example: If you are looking for a fingerstyle guitar I think that a used lower end Lowden can compete very well with some very expensive guitars. Also a used Santa Cruz, but those are harder to find around $3K.

In terms of vintage-style guitars I think a good Martin or Gibson standard series will get you very close. My vintage Gibsons sound better than my J45 standard, but not that much better. I could be very happy with my 2017 J45 standard if I had to.

You hit diminishing returns pretty fast above $3K anyways, so the differences aren't as huge as you think. You should be able to get something that more than meets your needs at the $3K price point. That's not to say that you may not enjoy a more expensive guitar a little more, but lots of (most?) professionals get by on $3K or under guitars.

[SpruceTop]

What Jinder wrote!

Let me relate a story my favorite dealer told me about an invitation to visit his dentist at his home to peruse and play the dentist's guitar collection. Dave looked at the many luthier-built guitars the dentist had and played a few and then he picked up the dentist's Martin dreadnought. Dave played it and thought, Now that's more like it! The dentist's collection was full of very expensive, luthier-built guitars, some with exquisite woodworking details that would blow your mind, and with a wonderful tone of their own but it all wasn't what Dave, a longtime Martin, Taylor, Larrivee, and Huss & Dalton dealer, really appreciated.

[jaymarsch]

I also have not owned a $10K guitar but it helps to remember that the price isn’t driven by levels of quality necessarily. How a luthier/brand decides to market their guitars and who their primary audience is affects the ultimate cost of the guitar rather than assuming that a $10K guitar has that price because it’s 3 times better than a $3K guitar.
Decide on your budget, play a bunch of guitars in that price range and see what you find. If you end up trying a more expensive instrument and liking it more then start saving up for the difference. If you find one that costs less, use the money saved for a few lessons. There are so many fine guitars to be had at all price points these days. A great time to purchase a guitar that you’ll enjoy for a good long while.
Best,
Jayne

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by jaymarsch

I also have not owned a $10K guitar...

Actually you have. And do most days. Or have you not looked at Kathy's price list to see what replacement cost would be?

[Silurian]

It's a difficult question. I suspect the answer is probably 42.

[Desmosedici]

I would argue that for 10k you could get one of the very best sounding guitars in the world, the number of excellent guitars in this price range is enormous. However, I would not even consider the vast majority of guitars at this price point, for all kind of reasons. So, it is a difficult question. With Martin Authentic guitars available used at 4k, I would look for those. The OM 18A might be available at 3k, and might be an exceptional option at this price point. Recently B&C and Marklund guitars were also available at around 5k, which I think is far below their true value.

[Mycroft]

Originally Posted by gitarro

I would like to ask the advice of the members here on your experiences being pleasantly surprised by playing a guitar whether used or new costing 3K or less which impressed you so much tonally speaking that it was on the same level as solo puthier made guitars costing more than 10K. From a cost to benefit ratio perspective, I am sure the benefits of knowing what guitars tend to punch much higher than their weight would be of great interest to many here...

This very topic is brought up around here as a regular basis ever since there has been a "here" here. What can I buy that will give me the same tonal quality, responsiveness and playability at 1/3rd the price of whatever.

When the average price for a Collings, Goodall, Stanta Cruz, Froggy Bottom, Klepper, McAlister, Wingert, et. al, were tolling in the $3000 range, people wanted to know what they could buy for $1000 that were just as good. And while, as Music Man noted above, every great once in a while the stars might align and the less expensive guitar might be just as good, by and large, they just aren't.

Again, as noted above, the $10,000 guitar is not going to be 3-times the guitar that the $3000 guitar is. But it may be 10-15% better, tonally, in responsiveness, in playability. And this is not insignificant.

The reality is that most people do not buy the "best" guitar. Unless they are a member of the 1%, they just don't. We are all limited as to what we buy. By our income. By our expenses. By our spouse. By children. By our position in our life arc. By our experience in evaluating quality. By our interest in musical instrument vis-à-vis other interests competing for our dollars. So we buy the best we can, within the limits set by these other interests. But the reality is that there will always be something "better" out there.

Often folks seem to rationalize their not spending above a certain limit by misusing the term "it is above the point of diminishing returns" to imply that there is not any further increase in return for additional investment. It was probably misused at least once in this thread. The reality is that "point of diminishing returns" actually means that there is no longer a 1 for 1 return on investment, and the return begins to decline. 1 for .99%, then 1 for .98%, and so on. It does not mean that there is NO ROI. It just means that there will be less. Hence we get to the reason that a $10,00 guitar may only be 10% "better" than a $3000.

The question then becomes this: at what point is that increase in return no longer worth an increase in investment, given all the constraints listed above?

That amount is going to change over time for most individuals, as our position in life changes. When I was young skibum, or during the cab-driving years, I have very limited disposable income to spend on something like a guitar.

When I did acquire my "high-end" guitars, it was at a time when my income had increased enough to cover those costs, and which coincided with most "higher-end" guitars being in that aforementioned $3000+ range. Replacement costs now would be vastly greater, and likely beyond my ability. But I bought the best that I could afford at the time, and have had the joy and the pleasure and the experience of those guitars for over 20 years now. Are they the best guitars ever? No, in fact. I have played better. But not very often. And not by much.

Try a David Webber, if you can find one. Other than that I can't help you because I haven't really played much besides what I have for years.

OMMV

[jaymarsch]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

Actually you have. And do most days. Or have you not looked at Kathy's price list to see what replacement cost would be?

Fair enough. I should have said that I haven’t spent $10K on a guitar. Of the 2 Wingerts that I have owned for 18-19 years, one was purchased used and the other ordered early in Kathy’s career, so for far less money than today’s market values.
Best,
Jayne

[Ryan51]

Just guessing but if any $3K guitar can rival a $10K guitar it just might be a Yamaha LS36 ARE or an LL36 ARE.

[BrunoBlack]

You could just as easily substitute $1,000 vs $3,000 and arrive at a comparable outcome. I’m sure there are many in the Forum who consider their $1K guitar every bit as good as other $3K models. So would those $1K models be in the same ballpark as the aforementioned $10K models? Seems like a better question is: I have x$ to spend, what are some great options to consider? —— Or, I play rhythm guitar in a swing band, what stands out as a great guitar for this use? I don’t understand how some wildly divergent price comparison in isolation makes any sense. Of course, in reality, we buy what we value and fits our budget & willingness to spend. And that is what it costs.

[Samiamx]

There’s enough philosophical comments, so I’ll just say Breedlove is overlooked and provides good value for their models in the mid $2k range (especially their Oregon series). In my opinion they hang with guitars twice as expensive, but definite not $10k — those are just on a different level generally speaking.

Also, I would stick to used as you can get ones that were $5 a few years ago and are now half that but still in good shape. I see guitars like that all the time and they already have some minor wear so you don’t worry about them as much.

[Tnfiddler]

Originally Posted by bigbang

Or think they can hear the difference. Most fail when subject to a proper blind test. I believe many hear with their eyes/wallet when it comes to guitars as well. Just my $.02.

In the end it doesn't matter though. Play/listen to what you like regardless of price.

My son came into my room while I practicing on my Bourgeois guitar. He stood there for a minute and said, “why doesn’t my guitar sound like that”? I quickly told him that’s what a really good guitar sounds like compared to a cheaper, high-volume factory guitar. There are differences when you get into the higher-end, hand-voiced and precisely built small-shop guitars whether people want to admit it or not. Do they always justify the price difference, no, but they’re almost always going to be Present.