Playability vs. tone

[ChuckS]

There’s no reason you can’t have the tone and the playability you want, but it may take effort to find it. If there is a necessary trade off, it might be between playability and responsiveness.

[chippygreen]

Originally Posted by Glennwillow

Playability vs. tone?

I have to have both. My experience is that when I find a guitar that sounds really good, it can be made playable. And making a guitar more playable makes it sound better because it's easier to play well.

- Glenn

Originally Posted by jaymarsch

It is a guitar to guitar decision for me. But, if I cannot find a comfortable way to play cleanly then I will not get the tone that the guitar offers. I have one of the most beautiful sounding guitars on consignment right now because the scale length and neck specs are just beyond my capabilities. I bought the guitar for the tone. My solution was to sell the guitar and have the same maker build one for me that dialed in my preferred neck specs. I am fortunate to have three wonderful guitars that are outstanding in both tone and playability.

Best,
Jayne

Glenn and Jayne said it for me. These are linked, not exclusive, traits.

[Jmaulz]

"Light/medium" strings help bridge this gap, one way or the other. This discussion also highlights the necessity for multple guitars, as in, I "need" a D-28 with mediums for jams and an OM-21 with lights for playing solo and recording.

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by D-utim

If both factors couldn’t be accomplished in one guitar, which one do you prefer?

Tone is always accomplished. ALWAYS. Why? Because. . . it sounds when we play.

Playability is PART of the tone. No matter how good or bad a guitar may sound, if two guitarists play it, I bet it'll sound different from one to another.