»

cheap guitars are just as good as expensive guitars and vice versa........

thats just a lie, really.

although anything above 400 quid is usually just as good as somethign thats like 2000.
cheap cheap guitars have horrible fret jobs, the wood is plywood, and the components they use are SHITE! i replaced the pots and switches on my tele squire for about 10 quid, and the difference was amazing, the pickups are also poor, and the cavities arnt sheilded.

end.

p.s if saxaphone was a popular instrument like guitar, youd be able to buy cheap ones for 100-200 quid, but theyd be shite, think about it.

are you calling me a liar?

yeah, maybe the quality of the guitar is improved as the price goes up

for example, your guitar will probably work longer if you paid £1000 for it rather than £70

but if i was given a choice of guitar to play for one gig between, for example, a squire strat or a £3000 strat it wouldn't matter to me........

guitars are boring

within reason i'm talking about,

i'm just saying, why would someone want to spend thousands of pounds on a guitar? it's stupid to me

[Savant]

Go and play an expensive guitar. Then you'll notice the difference.

Think about tone. Better woods give deeper tone and cost more money. After the £1000 or so mark, extra money usually goes into the finish of the guitar; attention to detail.

[YETI]

true indeed craig... woods aere the most important... i have a bass made of chipboard ok it was £70 new but still is heavy has got no sustain no matter what i do to the intonation is always of pluss is metallized red.
also construction is pricey get a neckthrough and compare it to a bolt on then you get the idea

Originally posted by neil ex:
are you calling me a liar?

yeah, maybe the quality of the guitar is improved as the price goes up

for example, your guitar will probably work longer if you paid £1000 for it rather than £70

but if i was given a choice of guitar to play for one gig between, for example, a squire strat or a £3000 strat it wouldn't matter to me........

guitars are boring

within reason i'm talking about,

i'm just saying, why would someone want to spend thousands of pounds on a guitar? it's stupid to me

i think what your saying is inacurate below the £300 range, really cheap guitars are really shit, and thats just the end of the argument.

[Mouse]

Most guitars under £200 are shite, with a few exceptions....the Yamaha Pacifica 112 that doesn't come close to being shite. It is more reliable than my Gibson, which initially reatailed at £1600. Shows that you don't have to pay a lot for quality.

[Tav]

You pay for what you get with guitars to some extent. It all depends on who your buying from really. Some companies offer better products for cheaper and some companies are over priced...a Gibson Les Paul might cost £1700 and a Tokai copy about £900 and from what I've heard the Tokai might be bette built...it's still not £150 though is it?

Good wood costs...the better the wood you use the better the sound you will get. Where as Alder comes in at around £50 for a guitar sized sheet, some like Brazilian Mahogany is going to be in the hundred's.

Better electronics cost more. Good pickups cost more than the one you'll find on a cheap guitar. Better magnets, more accuratly wound wire even active components all cost more and sound better.

Time and care that goes into building a better guitar bumps up the price. Cheap guitars are made by the hundreds in factories and slung together, more expensive guitars can have hand selected woods, no manufacturing faults<more rejects costs more>, carefully finished and put together. Taking time costs money and leaves you with a better product.

[GraemeC]

Originally posted by YETI:
true indeed craig... woods aere the most important... i have a bass made of chipboard ok it was £70 new but still is heavy has got no sustain no matter what i do to the intonation is always of pluss is metallized red.
also construction is pricey get a neckthrough and compare it to a bolt on then you get the idea

Are you saying a neckthrough is in some way better than a bolt on, or that they are just more expensive to make, neither statement is factual!

[Tav]

Originally posted by GraemeC:
Are you saying a neckthrough is in some way better than a bolt on, or that they are just more expensive to make, neither statement is factual!

Well it does give you super strong neck/body join as they are one...no bulcky heel area for bolts like on a bolt on...surely that's an improvement? It allows for radical double cut aways which otherwise maybe be unstable/somewhat fragile...that's a bonus?