Keira WitherKay wrote
it was asked cos the ussual thing came up of some people saying they can't tell the difference between some production line guitars and custom luthier built guitars........
Well what's a "production line" guitar? A Martin? A Gibson? A Larrivee? Where do we draw the line?
I think that most people would hear a difference between my Morgan and a R3000 Ibanez. No prob. But the difference between the Morgan and a top of the range Ibanez is much less. This is the trick with acoustic guitars (maybe with electrics too), it's a game of diminishing returns. The R8k Ibanez is way better than the R4k Ibanez. But at R16K you are getting a better guitar, but the improvement is not as great as between the R4k and the R8k. This is where you need to have better educated ears, or do back to back comparisons, or just decide that the whole thing's a scam and your top of the range Cort is the dog's bollocks so wah!
we talking acoustic guitars specifically but i guess it does cross over ........... but the thing is even with acoustic guitars once you plug in your R60 000 custom ...it can sound pretty dodgy if the electronic/PA, engineer ,acoustics in room are not right .......
Plugged in sound seems to not correlate to price. I've heard expensive guitars at TJs sounding crap, and way cheaper ones sounding very good. I think the pickup and on-board pre-amp have a much bigger say here and it's not just down to the bracing, the grade of wood etc.
so acoustically can one hear the nuances........ or rather can one be taught to hear the nuances.........
how would one go about that?
Back to back comparisons. When I was out on the shopping spree that would eventually result in buying the Morgan I ended up with a short list of 3 guitars at McGibbons. The Morgan was priced at R13k and was the very top of what I could afford (if they gave me a decent trade in on the Takamine I had at the time). There was a Yamaha at round about R10k and... can't remember what the 3rd was (not a Larrivee). So I played each of them again and couldn't make my mind up. Then I asked one of the guys behind the counter to play all 3 for me whilst I stood off a few meters. THEN you could hear the differences, and the Morgan stuck out with better definition, better separation of the strings when being played finger style. I'd been kind of hoping the Yamaha would shine, but it didn't.
I think people can hear a difference actually. Friends of mine who come to TJs and who don't know a Tanglewood from a Manzer will often pick out good sounding guitars - my Morgan, Mike Burger's Larrivee JCL. I don't push the issue or try to steer them a certain way. It may be easier if you know nothing about brands and woods and all guitars look the same to you.
and again the argument that tone is personal.... what is sheer beauty and dripping in tone for me......... might not be for the next person........
To a point yes - though I believe that there are better and worse sounding guitars and that people will agree more than differ on these matters, IF you can get them to focus just on tone. I think WHAT you play influences them. I think a lot of of people don't separate the sound of the instrument from what is being played. If they enjoyed the playing most people will tell you the guitar sounded great. This might be down to experience - hearing the guitar and the music separately.
Really good players make a difference as well though. Top players do make a guitar sound good - mostly, I think, because they play very precisely and consistently EG consistently pressing the string down just behind the fret and so getting a well intonated note. They will have better strength and agility in their hands, have a better vibrato and so on.
My rule of thumb is that really good acoustic players have a "ring" to their playing. But it's not always true - I don't think John Martyn had a good acoustic sound even though he had good guitars, but he was a fab player. Given the choice between good playing and good tone I would take good playing any day.
