Branded Or Unbranded?

[Steve]

I think things have changed in the world of guitars. Do you feel that the branded guitars such as Gibson and Fender are really worth the money? Or can the Chinese replicas do the same job at a fraction of the price?

[thelevellers]

I've never played a name brand other than Ibanez, and as I've played the cheap(ish) ones of their that doesn't really count, so I can't really say... So far I am really quite happy with my two cheap(ish) Ibanezes, except for the electrics of one are going, but as it's an 80's vintage, that's not so surprising...

Anyway! My point being that I don't have a burning urge to buy a name brand at the moment, as I don't feel I NEED one... however, the mere idea of a nice Gibson does make me all happy in special places, so I would certainly try one, and probably love it, so buy it... I think the simple factor of better build quality (which I'm sure is still an issue with very cheap guitars) is enough to go the extra mile...

Anyone with some experience of expensive guitars wanna share it?

[musicthom]

i have never owned a brand name just down to finances so its hard to compare but i would like to think it makes a diffirence in sound

[roxhythe]

Unbranded, for sure. I have yet to purchase any instrument because of its brand name. As far as I am concerned, the only considerations are (1) what it sounds like, (2) how it plays, and--maybe--(3) how well it's made.

My acoustic guitar is a Japanese copy of the big Gibson J-200, and I maintain it sounds better than the real thing. People continue to be impressed with the sound everywhere I pl,ay, and are shocked to find out it's a fake. i have had it since 1973. My Strat, too, is a copy (and I have no idea what nationality). I bought it because its neck was just about the same width as the J-200 (so it "felt right"), and it was comfortable to play. I've only had it 3 years, but see no reason why it and I shouldn't be together a long time, either. I have no plans to replace the electronics, which are stock and sound just fine.

The only reason I could envision being concerned about the brand name would be for the resale value. Since I have no intention of selling them, why should I be concerned?

Joe

[Steve]

Good points Joe. I have an Antoria Les Paul copy that I've owned for over 30 years. It plays much better than a Gibson. A friend of mine who owns a Gibson Les Paul is envious of the playability of my guitar. I just wonder if money was not an issue, would you still buy a copy?

[Rudi]

I have a Fylde acoustic which has a better sound than any other steel strung acoustic that I’ve personally played. I will admit though, it’s not the easiest article to play.

I had a Fender Strat for over 25 years. The same thing applied, the sound was just about perfect, but I never got used to the neck bevel and the general playability. I don’t like the feel of Fender necks. They are too narrow & too curved for my style of playing. Before I traded the Strat in, I used a cheap Charvelle in preference to it. The Charvelle played beautifully & was the most comfy guitar I had ever picked up. However, it was built down to a price & the pickups were out of balance (bottom E was too quiet) and the intonation was a little questionable at the 15th fret.

I now have a Jackson Soloist which is nearly as good as the best electric I have played (which was another Jackson Soloist). The sound is very good, but not as clean & distinctive as a single coil Fender pickup.

A musical instrument is a tool. If the tool is fit for its purpose, then use it.

The only other consideration is reliability. Regular gigging will find out how robust your guitar is. Switches: do you have to spray switch cleaner into the pots every time you take it out of the case? Does it stand up to temperature changes well? Are the strap cleats always working loose?

Myself, I need a pro quality instrument, but don’t worry too much about the name on the headstock. Why go for a US build when a Chinese build does?

If you don’t gig, you have a wider choice available to you. That is a distinct advantage.