I want a new guitar

anyway, anyone want to defend why acoustics are so expensive? It seems, and this might just be me, but you can get a good vintage electric, a good tube amp, and a few effects cheaper than acoustic.

 

They are completely different guitars and acoustics can be electrified. I'm just throwing stuff out there and have no real idea, but depending on the wood used, the curve of the guitar, the way the guitar is made meaning whole pieces vs. glued, is the real reason I guess.

Aren't electric guitars usually for lead only? You don't really strum an electric do you?

I dunno.

 

That may very well be the case, but acoustics aren't typically more expensive. With any product, it depends on demand and how much was put into the construction of the product.

I just like acoustics.

 

well, think of rock bands. Take the Smashing Pumpkins as an offhand example. You have your lead singer adding layers through effects (flange, chorus) with chords. You don't see much of rock bands with acoustic guitars.

OK, so quality it is. I guess having the right construction, solid one piece neck, and so on make a bit of a difference, and I guess the finish matters to some as well.

 

so Martins are $2000 because of the name?

 

There's a wide variety of Martins, I've seen them up around 7 or 8000 so far.

If you know anyone who has one, pick it up and play it. I've always been an Ovation girl and wanted a Takamine because I played a friend of mines and it played/sounded great.

Then......I picked up my nephew's Martin last weekend. I was amazed at the different sound and feel.

 

Not all, but the best one's are. Mine was $800 new. Got it at a pawn for about 1/2 that.

 

.

 

here's Shrap's brother Merle with his Gibson hurdy-gurdy. retails for $15,000.

 

my $12,000 baroque guitar from Sam's Club.