Yesterday I bought a Martin D-16RGT guitar.
I didn't go to this store looking for this particular guitar, but when I played it and compared it to much higher priced 'Taylor,' 'Bourgeois,' other Martins, even the $11,000.00 Matsuda Guitar, I decided this one had the sound and feel that I liked best.
Deep rich tones and a clear sound and best of all it is very comfortable to play.
What has always surprised me when I've been in the market for a guitar is that the higher price means very little once you get into quality brands.
I played a 1952 Martin D-28 that was very valuable, but compared to the D-16RGT that I ended up buying, it had an inferior sound and feel to it.
I realize that choosing a guitar is a very subjective & personal decision.
I'm curious what other musicians views are on quality versus price regarding musical instruments.
At what point does the price of a musical instrument no longer matter?
What, other than extra features added to a guitar (like certain inlays, pickups or colors), for example, makes one guitar any better than another?
Martin D-16GRT
Re: Martin D-16GRT
Sean's going to be your man on this.
I also suppose that it depends on what you want to play on it too.
What do you play Joe?
I also suppose that it depends on what you want to play on it too.
What do you play Joe?
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Martin D-16GRT
Nice guitar Joe, very nice.
For me the price of an instrument has never been a factor. I've found very expensive guitars that sounded naff and cheaper guitars that knocked spots off the more famous brands. For example, at one stage I had three 'strat' style guitars. One was a '65 strat which was my main stage instrument with a '91 mexi-strat as back-up. For studio work however I mainly used a $200 Encore Strat copy. I don't know what it was but that cheap as shit guitar had a crispness that blew the others away! Now I will be the first to admit that that was a pure fluke. Encore could make a million guitars the rest of which would probably sound shit but it goes to show that anything is possible.
The higher up the price scale you go the less there is (usually) to separate the quality of instruments. As you say Joe, it's very personal. I for one wouldn't buy a Taylor. I've always thought they sounded dull and flat compared to others. My preference in acoustics has always been for Takamine and Tanglewood. Nowhere near as expensive as your Martins, Taylors etc but to me, far superior.
It's a simple formula as far as I'm concerned: If it feels how I want it to feel and sounds how I want it to sound then I couldn't care less what name is on the headstock or how much it cost me.
As far as what features make a guitar better, it's the obvious: The type and quality of the wood, the binding and bracing, the body size and shape, the neck width and shape and the quality control. Mind you, a shitty sounding guitar can often be vastly improved by simply putting better strings on it!
For me the price of an instrument has never been a factor. I've found very expensive guitars that sounded naff and cheaper guitars that knocked spots off the more famous brands. For example, at one stage I had three 'strat' style guitars. One was a '65 strat which was my main stage instrument with a '91 mexi-strat as back-up. For studio work however I mainly used a $200 Encore Strat copy. I don't know what it was but that cheap as shit guitar had a crispness that blew the others away! Now I will be the first to admit that that was a pure fluke. Encore could make a million guitars the rest of which would probably sound shit but it goes to show that anything is possible.
The higher up the price scale you go the less there is (usually) to separate the quality of instruments. As you say Joe, it's very personal. I for one wouldn't buy a Taylor. I've always thought they sounded dull and flat compared to others. My preference in acoustics has always been for Takamine and Tanglewood. Nowhere near as expensive as your Martins, Taylors etc but to me, far superior.
It's a simple formula as far as I'm concerned: If it feels how I want it to feel and sounds how I want it to sound then I couldn't care less what name is on the headstock or how much it cost me.
As far as what features make a guitar better, it's the obvious: The type and quality of the wood, the binding and bracing, the body size and shape, the neck width and shape and the quality control. Mind you, a shitty sounding guitar can often be vastly improved by simply putting better strings on it!
Why is it that when Miley Cyrus gets naked and licks a hammer it's 'art' and 'edgy' but when I do it I'm 'drunk' and 'banned from the hardware store'?
Re: Martin D-16GRT
Nowadays, I mostly play original stuff that I make up.Gob wrote: What do you play Joe?
The Martin is good for folk-type tunes and fills in nicely without always needing a bass guitar or other background noises.
edited to eliminate a bunch of all about me blubbering.