is there a guitar that by looks only,you would not consider?

[saxonblue]

Most Taylors unfortunately do not cut it for me lookswise despite being for the most part excellent instruments in terms of playability & sound.

Also not a fan of the gaudier Gibsons, in particular some Hummingbirds/Doves. For some anomalous reason however the SJ-200s (particularly the sunbursts) really do appeal to my more indulgent desires & I would readily have one in a heartbeat.

[zombywoof]

I have to admit abalone binding and rosettes really puts me off.

[sakar12]

Originally Posted by saxonblue

Most Taylors unfortunately do not cut it for me lookswise despite being for the most part excellent instruments in terms of playability & sound.

Also not a fan of the gaudier Gibsons, in particular some Hummingbirds/Doves. For some anomalous reason however the SJ-200s (particularly the sunbursts) really do appeal to my more indulgent desires & I would readily have one in a heartbeat.

Interesting how subjective we all are, as I'm the exact opposite.

[SJ VanSandt]

Guitars are inherently ugly. It's the long skinny necks. Autoharps are much more attractive, and hammered dulcimers.

[ctvolfan]

Gibson Hummingbird. Gawd that is one tacky pick guard! Sorry Hummingbird lovers. Too bad cause it's a great guitar I'm sure.

[Nymuso]

Although I'm a function over form guy, I'm not really interested in anything too gaudy and therefore would not be likely even to pick up a guitar with inlaid vines or flowers on the fretboard or anything of that nature.

I tend to gravitate toward a simple look if tone and feel meet my needs. However, I do agree about the Seagull headstock. Although simple, it gives the instrument an unsettlingly microcephalic look.

[Chickee]

Every single guitar, just like puppies, needs a home no matter what they look like.

[RGWelch]

Originally Posted by Shuksan

Most guitars with arm bevels. There are only a few builders that can integrate those smoothly into the design. On some, the bevel edge doesn't merge into the overall body outline as a fair smooth curve. I can't stand that. On others, the bevel destroys the symmetry of the guitar when viewed straight on from the front.

Oh, and then there's this:

[IMG][/IMG]

or this:

[IMG][/IMG]

or this:

[IMG][/IMG]

or this:

[IMG][/IMG]

Those are some of the ugliest guitars I've ever seen. I'm not sure even a mother could love some of these.

[RP]

Anything with a cutaway......

Originally Posted by 6L6

Any acoustic guitar with visible runout would be a no-go for me.

That too....

Originally Posted by saxonblue

Most Taylors unfortunately do not cut it for me lookswise despite being for the most part excellent instruments in terms of playability & sound...

That's ok - just leaves more for the rest of us....

[ataylor]

I should also add that tastes change — not long ago I’d have turned my nose up at any guitar with fancy trim. I tend to favor simple appointments. But over the past couple years I’ve found myself warming to traditional “bling” like the 40-style Martins...

[LyleGorch]

Taylor’s, don’t like their bridges.

[RP]

Originally Posted by LyleGorch

Taylor’s, don’t like their bridges.

Kind of resembles a smile...

[s2y]

Other than obnoxious pick guards, not really. Pick guards can sometimes be removed if it's that big of a deal.

I'm leery of koa. I'd have to hear it before buying.

I'm generally not a fan of cutaways. Again, I'd have to hear it before buying. Would I seek out a DN with a cutaway? No. Would I buy one that sounded killer? Sure.

[Sloplay]

Since it is just on looks...the Martin Backpacker. I love Martin guitars, and I think the Backpacker sounds decent for what it is, but....oooh the thing just looks horrid to me.

[KevWind]

For me it is simple..... any fake factory "relic'ed " Acoustic or Electric"