Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Are the lower priced Gibson acoustics noticbly better than an Epiphone Masterbilt?


Allenjason95

Recommended Posts

I really like my Epiphone Masterbilt. It is a very nice guitar, however it is not in the same league as my J 35. I don't think they are as close to each other as some others have found them to be. I would say that the Gibson is very much noticbly better than an Epiphone Masterbilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

That's a decision that has to be made by each individual; dictated by budget, features you want/need, specs, sound, etc. It's not a cut and dry yes or no answer. Both guitars are made to cater to a certain type or group of players. You seem to just want to hear cut and dry answers to your questions, but the answers you're getting are showing that there is not definitive answer for the reasons everyone has stated as examples.

 

"I seem to want cut and dry answers"? You seem not to have actually read my posts. I wanted opinions and suggestions. I LITERALLY said that in my first post.

 

Both Epiphones and s Gibsons guitars are made to cater to certain types of players? No, Epiphones and Gibsons are made to cater to different budgets more than different "players". You can get a good used Masterbilt for between $250-300. I paid less than $300 for mine. You will not find a good used Gibson acoustic for anywhere near that. I didn't even look at Gibsons when I bought my Epiphone because a Gibson simply wasn't in my budget. It's like Squire and Fender USA, those aren't made for different "types" of players as far as playing style goes, they're made for people who have different budgets. Someone shopping for a Squire usually isn't choosing between a Squire and a Fender USA because if they could afford a real Fender they wouldn't be in the market for a Squire.

 

I don't know why whenever someone starts a thread like this someone like you always has to reply with "it varies for every person and every guitar is different" or "that's a decision that has to be made by each individual". That's obvious.

 

But there are still general truths about the quality of guitars and I wanted suggestions from people who know what they're talking about and people I could ask questions. A Gibson LP is (to most people) absolutely superior to a Chibson copy for example. My first guitar was a POS Lotus Strat. I can definitively say it was of lower quality than any real Fender I've ever played. I can say for a fact that my current Marshall tube amp is superior to the non tube Park I started off playing on. I own a Gibson LP junior and I have owned an Epiphone LP Junior and I can absolutely say the Gibson is a much higher quality guitar and if anyone ever asked me if the price difference between a Gibson .Jr and an Epiphone Jr was justified I would tell them hell yes it is. My Epiphone Jr wouldn't even stay in tune for more than a strum or two.

 

But a high end Epiphone and a low end Gibson are a little closer in quality and the Masterbilts have a really good rep.

 

I'm asking people who know about Gibson acoustics (since this is the Gibson acoustic forum?) how they compare to the Masterbilts in their OPINION and whether in their OPINION the lower end Gibsons are worth the extra money and which models to look at. I'm not asking someone to tell me exactly what guitar to buy. I'm not asking them to make a decision for me.

 

I mean, I literally said in my first post "I'M LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS" and that I knew someone like you would reply with "just play some Gibsons for yourself" but you still did it. The old "play the guitars yourself, no one can make that decision for you" cliche is trite and obvious. It's not like I just started playing guitar man, I just don't know much about Gibson acoustics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really like my Epiphone Masterbilt. It is a very nice guitar, however it is not in the same league as my J 35. I don't think they are as close to each other as some others have found them to be. I would say that the Gibson is very much noticbly better than an Epiphone Masterbilt.

 

The main thing that I don't like about my Masterbilt is it sounds really "bright" for lack of a better word. I'm looking for something with a more balanced sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO the difference does justify the price. One other thing you might consider, resale (although it may not apply to you). With the Gibson you can probably expect most of your money back, if bought correctly.

If you look on Reverb there are some reasonably priced j45s, j50s, j35s. PayPal will finance 6 months same as cash. What's not to love?

 

I'm not too worried about resale but I always buy used so if I have to sell I won't lose much if anything. I bought my Masterbilt used and if sold it tomorrow I'd probably be able to get what I paid for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....is the difference between an Epiphone Masterbilt and a Gibson worth the price difference?

 

The thing is - and this seems true for all more expensive guitars, not just Gibson - as the quality, playability, and 'good tone' increase linearly, the price increases exponentially. That's just how it seems, anyway.

 

I started with Masterbilts too. Love 'em. Still have a few. But after some years of acquiring deals I couldn't pass up, I figured I could cash some in and get a Gibson. I wanted a J-45, but I was seduced by the J-15's excellent price and excellent reviews from guys on this board. I had an order in for one, but just before I got it, I was beguiled by a great deal on a competitor's used model that's normally up in the $2000 range (Guild jumbo F50R). You want to talk bling? Over and above the usual bling on this model (sunburst, abalone rosette, ebony fretboard, etc., which was all I was looking for), this thing came with freaking emeralds inlaid on the bridge pins and tuning posts. Fortunately, I didn't seem to have to pay anything extra for that!

 

But yeah, bling's not your thing, and I'll join the others in suggesting the J-15. It's got a very nice, understated abalone rosette, which is bling enough. And though it's a made-in-Bozeman Gibson, the price is very un-Gibson-like. Good luck in your search!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is - and this seems true for all more expensive guitars, not just Gibson - as the quality, playability, and 'good tone' increase linearly, the price increases exponentially. That's just how it seems, anyway.

 

I started with Masterbilts too. Love 'em. Still have a few. But after some years of acquiring deals I couldn't pass up, I figured I could cash some in and get a Gibson. I wanted a J-45, but I was seduced by the J-15's excellent price and excellent reviews from guys on this board. I had an order in for one, but just before I got it, I was beguiled by a great deal on a competitor's used model that's normally up in the $2000 range (Guild jumbo F50R). You want to talk bling? Over and above the usual bling on this model (sunburst, abalone rosette, ebony fretboard, etc., which was all I was looking for), this thing came with freaking emeralds inlaid on the bridge pins and tuning posts. Fortunately, I didn't seem to have to pay anything extra for that!

 

But yeah, bling's not your thing, and I'll join the others in suggesting the J-15. It's got a very nice, understated abalone rosette, which is bling enough. And though it's a made-in-Bozeman Gibson, the price is very un-Gibson-like. Good luck in your search!

 

Thanks. I don't mind bling, I just don't really care one way or the other and don't want to spend a bunch on an acoustic guitar just because it's fancy looking. I've asked this question elsewhere and the J-15 keeps coming up and I keep hearing good things so I'm leaning towards that model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I seem to want cut and dry answers"? You seem not to have actually read my posts. I wanted opinions and suggestions. I LITERALLY said that in my first post.

 

Both Epiphones and s Gibsons guitars are made to cater to certain types of players? No, Epiphones and Gibsons are made to cater to different budgets more than different "players". You can get a good used Masterbilt for between $250-300. I paid less than $300 for mine. You will not find a good used Gibson acoustic for anywhere near that. I didn't even look at Gibsons when I bought my Epiphone because a Gibson simply wasn't in my budget. It's like Squire and Fender USA, those aren't made for different "types" of players as far as playing style goes, they're made for people who have different budgets. Someone shopping for a Squire usually isn't choosing between a Squire and a Fender USA because if they could afford a real Fender they wouldn't be in the market for a Squire.

 

I don't know why whenever someone starts a thread like this someone like you always has to reply with "it varies for every person and every guitar is different" or "that's a decision that has to be made by each individual". That's obvious.

 

But there are still general truths about the quality of guitars and I wanted suggestions from people who know what they're talking about and people I could ask questions. A Gibson LP is (to most people) absolutely superior to a Chibson copy for example. My first guitar was a POS Lotus Strat. I can definitively say it was of lower quality than any real Fender I've ever played. I can say for a fact that my current Marshall tube amp is superior to the non tube Park I started off playing on. I own a Gibson LP junior and I have owned an Epiphone LP Junior and I can absolutely say the Gibson is a much higher quality guitar and if anyone ever asked me if the price difference between a Gibson .Jr and an Epiphone Jr was justified I would tell them hell yes it is. My Epiphone Jr wouldn't even stay in tune for more than a strum or two.

 

But a high end Epiphone and a low end Gibson are a little closer in quality and the Masterbilts have a really good rep.

 

I'm asking people who know about Gibson acoustics (since this is the Gibson acoustic forum?) how they compare to the Masterbilts in their OPINION and whether in their OPINION the lower end Gibsons are worth the extra money and which models to look at. I'm not asking someone to tell me exactly what guitar to buy. I'm not asking them to make a decision for me.

 

I mean, I literally said in my first post "I'M LOOKING FOR SUGGESTIONS" and that I knew someone like you would reply with "just play some Gibsons for yourself" but you still did it. The old "play the guitars yourself, no one can make that decision for you" cliche is trite and obvious. It's not like I just started playing guitar man, I just don't know much about Gibson acoustics.

 

Guess you know everything and answered all your own questions and have it all figured out! Good luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess you know everything and answered all your own questions and have it all figured out! Good luck!

 

Dude, what is your problem? I asked for people's opinions and suggestions and you replied with "it seems like you want cut and dried answers" and now "guess you know everything"?

 

what bothers you so much about me asking for recomendations and opinions? How does it affect you at all? Just ignore my posts please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude, what is your problem? I asked for people's opinions and suggestions and you replied with "it seems like you want cut and dried answers" and now "guess you know everything"?

 

what bothers you so much about me asking for recomendations and opinions? How does it affect you at all? Just ignore my posts please.

 

No problem. Just seemed like you kept asking the same question after others replied. That's just the impression I got. Take it easy, piranha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem. Just seemed like you kept asking the same question after others replied. That's just the impression I got. Take it easy, piranha.

 

I can't help how you interpreted what I said dude. Did you notice no one else in the thread had any trouble with what I was saying or had any problem answering my questions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help how you interpreted what I said dude. Did you notice no one else in the thread had any trouble with what I was saying or had any problem answering my questions?

 

Done with this crap. Go somewhere else for the attention buddy. I got better things to do. Go play some Gibsons and figure it out for yourself. If my words are so offensive feel free to go to your safe space and coddle your trophies and it will al be better. Later!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Done with this crap. Go somewhere else for the attention buddy. I got better things to do. Go play some Gibsons and figure it out for yourself. Later!

 

OK?

 

How how many times are you going to say goodbye? Keep it up and you're going have more "final appearances" than Frank Sinatra.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, for instance the J-15 swaps out mahogany body and rosewood fingerboard/bridge for walnut. An alternative wood for fingerboard and bridge. If it is just the wood, it's pretty impressive that domestic sourced walnut can save $700 on a slope price - $2199 J-45 (hog and rosewood) to $1499 J-15 (walnut and walnut).

 

That's a compromise of sorts in my mind - I prefer ebony or rosewood fingerboards. I recall Gibson tried using layered rosewood during the Lacey period for fingerboards and bridges in the acoustic division, and for fingerboards on certain electric models. In the electric division there were also other alternative fingerboard woods being used (Baked Maple, Obeche, Curacao De Negro). Some folks were fine with that, others, including me, weren't.

 

 

.

 

The J15 has maple neck over the J45's hog. Also the 45 has the mop headstock inlay. Don't forget the sunburst finish also on the J45.

 

The J15 is a superb guitar and well worth the price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Masterbilts are good solid guitars but a Gibson will always be in the next league up.

 

I had a J15 for a bit, loved the tone but the intonation was out of whack on mine and I fell out of love with the short scale. Great guitar if you snag a good one though.

 

J35s and J29s are both corkers too. Really nice instruments for not too much money.

 

I had an LG2AE for a bit too and liked it well enough, it was just a bit small all round for my tastes. I traded it for my SJ100 '41 reissue and have no regrets at all-but then I'm 199cm tall and a Jumbo always suits me better than a parlour!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned two of the Epi Masterbilts. One a DR500 something-or-other and the EPI J45/AJ. Both were very nice guitars, especially for the money, but after I got them I rarely played them because of my Gibsons. The Epis were at least the equal of competitors in their price range, but they were not Gibsons. Doesn't mean they were not good guitars, but different materials and different construction made a difference to my ears. The Epi guitars sounded like good guitars. My Gibsons sound like Gibsons...... Is a $1500 Gibson or Martin three times better than a 500-600 Epi, etc? No, but there's far more to bonding/needing a particular guitar than that. Besides, I have an Alvarez that I love playing, but it's not a J15, etc. Only cost half as much and it sounds great, but it's still not a J15. A long time friend loves his #300 Yamaha. A sweet little guitar, but it's not his Martin D42. The Martin (used) costs nearly 12 times what the Yahmaha costs new and the Yamaha sounds like a guitar is expected to sound, but it is not the Martin. The Martin doesn't sound 12 times better, but that's not the point. The point is that it's a Martin D42, and that alone says a lot. If money was what it was all about, we'd all be playing nice sounding guitars that cost a few hundred dollars, but we all know there's more to it than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a couple few pretty nice Epiphones in my life. If I'm going out with the fellas for an evening of mildly restrained White Zin fueled full on arena rock fury I have never walked past the Gibsons to get an Epiphone. Hence, I have no Epiphones. I've only played a few Epiphone acoustics in my life, but I'm pretty sure the same would be true for those as well, I wouldn't be walking past the Martins for one.

 

rct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Both Epiphones and s Gibsons guitars are made to cater to certain types of players? No, Epiphones and Gibsons are made to cater to different budgets more than different "players".

 

It's like Squire and Fender USA, those aren't made for different "types" of players as far as playing style goes, they're made for people who have different budgets. Someone shopping for a Squire usually isn't choosing between a Squire and a Fender USA because if they could afford a real Fender they wouldn't be in the market for a Squire.

 

I don't know why whenever someone starts a thread like this someone like you always has to reply with "it varies for every person and every guitar is different" or "that's a decision that has to be made by each individual". That's obvious.

 

But there are still general truths about the quality of guitars and I wanted suggestions from people who know what they're talking about and people I could ask questions. A Gibson LP is (to most people) absolutely superior to a Chibson copy for example.

 

But a high end Epiphone and a low end Gibson are a little closer in quality and the Masterbilts have a really good rep.

 

The old "play the guitars yourself, no one can make that decision for you" cliche is trite and obvious. It's not like I just started playing guitar man, I just don't know much about Gibson acoustics.

 

I know it can seem annoyingly obvious when people here revert to the old try-before-you-buy advice, or else pointless given the number of complaints about how few shops there are with any guitars worth trying, let alone enough examples of different models to really run a comparison. But the old 'it depends what you like' chestnut really does apply here, because you are currently not comparing like to like at all.

 

All of your examples are drawn from the world of electrics, and based on pairs of instruments which are based on the same design. So a Squier Tele is built according to the same basic plan as a Fender Tele, give or take through-stringing, modern or vintage bridges, tuners, etc. There are some differences in terms of materials (wood type, weight and quality, nitro vs poly finish), probably more in terms of labour cost (not everybody is as convinced as you are that a USA standard Tele is better than a Squier CV 50s). The same goes for your Gibson, Epiphone and Chibson Les Pauls (assuming you are talking about the more convincing Chibsons).

 

You can't assume, though, that your long-scale Masterbilt is comparable to a J15 in the same way as an Epi LP is comparable to a Gibson LP, or a Squier Tele is comparable to a Fender Tele. It's not just a question of labour costs, workmanship, quality of materials, fit and finish. It's also a question of fundamental design. Comparing a long-scale acoustic to a short-scale acoustic is like comparing a Tele to a Les Paul. If I really like the sound and feel of a Tele and really don't like the sound and feel of a Les Paul, I will probably prefer a Squier Tele to a Gibson LP. The quality issue is secondary to what I really want. So your Masterbilt and a Gibson J15 actually are built to cater for different sorts of players, not just for the same type of player on a different budget. You need to work out whether you really want a better quality long-scale acoustic or a short-scale acoustic before working out whether you want a Masterbilt or a Gibson.

 

When I bought my Gibson, I had worked out that I really liked the sound of short-scale guitars with a spruce top and mahogany back and sides. I'd also worked out that I preferred the Gibson slopeshoulder variant of that sound over the Martin OOO variant. At that point in time (6 years ago), there were no cheaper alternatives to the Gibson. There weren't even the cheaper Gibsons: no J35s, no J15s. Some long-scale Recording King slopeshoulders appeared around that time (hybrid copies of the J45 and an Advanced Jumbo), but the long scale means they don't sound or feel the same. Or there were Masterbilts like yours (again long scale, so not the same). Now there are closer, short-scale copies of the J45 by Sigma and in the Masterbilt series. The Sigmas have laminated back and sides, so won't be completely comparable. Which means that the Masterbilt AJ45 is the closest comparison. And yes, there are also the J35s and J15s. If I were buying now, I'd be paying very close attention to the differences between that particular Masterbilt and those particular Gibsons.

 

The main thing that I don't like about my Masterbilt is it sounds really "bright" for lack of a better word. I'm looking for something with a more balanced sound.

 

That is arguably down to the fact that it is a long-scale guitar. Perhaps you really will like the J15 or J35 because they are short-scale instruments. They typically produce stronger mids, which might equate to more balance for you. But to be sure that the Gibsons are noticeably better, you need to compare with the short-scale Masterbilt model.

 

I have an Alvarez that I love playing, but it's not a J15, etc. Only cost half as much and it sounds great, but it's still not a J15. A long time friend loves his #300 Yamaha. A sweet little guitar, but it's not his Martin D42.

 

I think MP is talking about the added X factor that you get from a top name guitar (or in Martin's case, from a higher-end top name). But it is also the case that a 300 Yamaha simply is not a Martin D42: they are built differently. The Yammy has a 16 and 3/16-inch lower bout, while the D42 has the usual 15 and 5/8-inch lower bout. The dimensions make a difference to sound. Which also means that the 'it's not a Martin D42' principle works the other way around. If I am ever lucky enough to find a D42 in a nearby shop, it might just convert me to the sound of Martin Dreadnoughts with rosewood back and sides. Some Martin Dreads have more upfront mids than others. But I've not encountered one in person. My experience is that even a very nice D28 won't float my boat. I can really feel its quality, but in the end it still doesn't work for my ears: where some hear rich overtones from a long-scale rosewood/spruce Martin Dread, I just hear the glossy metallic sound of the strings. So chances are that even if I had the money for a Martin D42, and even though the Martin's quality might win hands down, I would still buy a Masterbilt AJ45 instead, because it's not a Martin D42, and the Martin isn't a short-scale mahogany/spruce slopeshoulder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been tempted several times to get an Epi MasterBuilr. But every time I go to GC to try some out - I realize it would just sit in the case. As others have already said here - not all but most - when you have both, you always pick up the Gibson.

 

You can only play one at a time, and life is too short to play a guitar that is less rewarding and enjoyable than you can afford.

 

G'Luck !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it can seem annoyingly obvious when people here revert to the old try-before-you-buy advice, or else pointless given the number of complaints about how few shops there are with any guitars worth trying, let alone enough examples of different models to really run a comparison. But the old 'it depends what you like' chestnut really does apply here, because you are currently not comparing like to like at all.

 

All of your examples are drawn from the world of electrics, and based on pairs of instruments which are based on the same design. So a Squier Tele is built according to the same basic plan as a Fender Tele, give or take through-stringing, modern or vintage bridges, tuners, etc. There are some differences in terms of materials (wood type, weight and quality, nitro vs poly finish), probably more in terms of labour cost (not everybody is as convinced as you are that a USA standard Tele is better than a Squier CV 50s). The same goes for your Gibson, Epiphone and Chibson Les Pauls (assuming you are talking about the more convincing Chibsons).

 

You can't assume, though, that your long-scale Masterbilt is comparable to a J15 in the same way as an Epi LP is comparable to a Gibson LP, or a Squier Tele is comparable to a Fender Tele. It's not just a question of labour costs, workmanship, quality of materials, fit and finish. It's also a question of fundamental design. Comparing a long-scale acoustic to a short-scale acoustic is like comparing a Tele to a Les Paul. If I really like the sound and feel of a Tele and really don't like the sound and feel of a Les Paul, I will probably prefer a Squier Tele to a Gibson LP. The quality issue is secondary to what I really want. So your Masterbilt and a Gibson J15 actually are built to cater for different sorts of players, not just for the same type of player on a different budget. You need to work out whether you really want a better quality long-scale acoustic or a short-scale acoustic before working out whether you want a Masterbilt or a Gibson.

 

When I bought my Gibson, I had worked out that I really liked the sound of short-scale guitars with a spruce top and mahogany back and sides. I'd also worked out that I preferred the Gibson slopeshoulder variant of that sound over the Martin OOO variant. At that point in time (6 years ago), there were no cheaper alternatives to the Gibson. There weren't even the cheaper Gibsons: no J35s, no J15s. Some long-scale Recording King slopeshoulders appeared around that time (hybrid copies of the J45 and an Advanced Jumbo), but the long scale means they don't sound or feel the same. Or there were Masterbilts like yours (again long scale, so not the same). Now there are closer, short-scale copies of the J45 by Sigma and in the Masterbilt series. The Sigmas have laminated back and sides, so won't be completely comparable. Which means that the Masterbilt AJ45 is the closest comparison. And yes, there are also the J35s and J15s. If I were buying now, I'd be paying very close attention to the differences between that particular Masterbilt and those particular Gibsons.

 

 

 

That is arguably down to the fact that it is a long-scale guitar. Perhaps you really will like the J15 or J35 because they are short-scale instruments. They typically produce strongerexists mids, which might equate to more balance for you. But to be sure that the Gibsons are noticeably better, you need to compare with the short-scale Masterbilt model.

 

 

 

I think MP is talking about the added X factor that you get from a top name guitar (or in Martin's case, from a higher-end top name). But it is also the case that a 300 Yamaha simply is not a Martin D42: they are built differently. The Yammy has a 16 and 3/16-inch lower bout, while the D42 has the usual 15 and 5/8-inch lower bout. The dimensions make a difference to sound. Which also means that the 'it's not a Martin D42' principle works the other way around. If I am ever lucky enough to find a D42 in a nearby shop, it might just convert me to the sound of Martin Dreadnoughts with rosewood back and sides. Some Martin Dreads have more upfront mids than others. But I've not encountered one in person. My experience is that even a very nice D28 won't float my boat. I can really feel its quality, but in the end it still doesn't work for my ears: where some hear rich overtones from a long-scale rosewood/spruce Martin Dread, I just hear the glossy metallic sound of the strings. So chances are that even if I had the money for a Martin D42, and even though the Martin's quality might win hands down, I would still buy a Masterbilt AJ45 instead, because it's not a Martin D42, and the Martin isn't a short-scale mahogany/spruce slopeshoulder.

 

Dude....obviously the guitars are somewhat different. They're still all acoustics. The reason Epiphone exists is as a budget line for Gibson. Epiphones (in most cases unless you're talking some Elitist models) are lower end price wise and in many cases they are budget variations/versions of Gibsons. Epiphone exists for the same reason Squire exists. The only difference is before being taken over by Gibson Epiphone was its own company and old Epiphones have a good rep so occasionally a modern Epiphone is a nonbudget guitar. But for the most part Epiphones are Gibson's budget line. A new Masterbilt retails for (last I checked, I bought mine used) well below a thousand dollars. There are no Gibson accoustics available for below a thousand last time I checked. The Gibson and Epiphone are designed for completely different price points. There are still a million comparisons online between Masterbilts and Gibsons online though. You can absolutely compare them just like I compared my cheap POS Chinese Fender acoustic to the Masterbilt I bought.

 

When anyone asks any question regarding how a guitar sounds or advice on models etc......anyone could just reply "play them for yourself".

 

That's trite and annoying and accomplishes nothing. Yet every single time someone asks a question like this someone replies with "only you can decide.....each guitar is different". When you go to buy a guitar do you sit and play every single guitar in the store before deciding? I sure don't. Because I've done my research before hand and have an idea of what I'm looking for.

 

I realize when you buy a Gibson....or a Martin....or a Fender.....or any other really high end guitar a sizeable portion of what you're paying for is the name. Like others have asked is a Gibson LP Custom that costs 5,000 (MSRP anyway) that much better than an Epiphone LP Custom which can be bought for a fraction of that? No, but the Gibson is better. The question is how much better?

 

Which is my question. I own an Epiphone. I'm not entirely happy with it. I asked for advice on the lower priced Gibsons.....you know....because this is the Gibson acoustic forum (or have I already said that?). My question is are the lower end Gibsons worth the extra money? That's OBVIOUSLY SUBJECTIVE but I still want to know the opinions of others who have ACTUAL EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE WITH THE GUITARS I'M INTERESTED IN. Just telling someone to go play guitars isn't helpful. Just telling them no one can decide which guitars sound best to them is not helpful.

 

Yet someone has to do it every single time. I called it in my first post in this thread. Again: OBVIOUSLY I'M NOT GOING TO JUST BUY A GUITAR BECAUSE SOMEONE HERE RECOMMENDED IT. I wanted advice and recomendations. Why you guys feel the need to tell me "no one can make that decision for you" is beyond me. No one is making a decision for me. They're giving me recommendations and advice.

 

I really don't get why you guys always think you need to tell someone "all guitars are different....play them all.....only you can decide". Like I said, it's trite, obvious and unhelpful. I told the other guy that and you doubled down on it.

 

I really don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the price and durability in all conditions (weather) i'd gladly get an Epi to carry around a campfire though.

 

I'd hope a Gibson would be just as durable. I take pride in scratches and dents and dings and worn spots on my guitars. It means I've played them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't get why you guys always think you need to tell someone "all guitars are different....play them all.....only you can decide".

 

Because all guitars are different and only you know what is right for you, and it isn't just these guys, it's been true in all kinds of places for all of my almost 50 years with guitars. If it wasn't true, and anybody could tell you what is right, we would all be playing the same thing. You might hate all of my guitars, so what good would that possibly do you? I think a lot of people are deliberately trying not to trash one brand or price range over another, because guitars are truly something you can throw money at, so I'll defy that for a few.

 

I don't use cheap guitars at all, with one exception that is purely sentimental. I will not forego the expensive good ones for a cheap-o "great for the money" guitar, not at all, I don't know how many more nights I have of this so I'm not wasting any.

 

Crap guitars only sound so good and you can do no more. Great, expensive, well made guitars are waiting for you to catch up to them and make them as good as they can be.

 

The Epiphone Masterbilts I've played had no business hanging next to the Taylors and Martins they were with, and I don't even like Taylors. I wouldn't give you the 600 bucks they want for one for three of them. The higher priced Gibsons are no better than the lower priced Gibsons, in the acoustic saloon where these mooks hang out. Out in the other room where we fix our hair and arpeggiate Slash riffs, it's different. If I were you I wouldn't buy either, I'd be looking at Martins.

 

So there you go. You can listen to an old kook like me or you can...go try a couple of each and prove me wrong, for you.

 

rct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because all guitars are different and only you know what is right for you, and it isn't just these guys, it's been true in all kinds of places for all of my almost 50 years with guitars. If it wasn't true, and anybody could tell you what is right, we would all be playing the same thing. You might hate all of my guitars, so what good would that possibly do you? I think a lot of people are deliberately trying not to trash one brand or price range over another, because guitars are truly something you can throw money at, so I'll defy that for a few.

 

I don't use cheap guitars at all, with one exception that is purely sentimental. I will not forego the expensive good ones for a cheap-o "great for the money" guitar, not at all, I don't know how many more nights I have of this so I'm not wasting any.

 

Crap guitars only sound so good and you can do no more. Great, expensive, well made guitars are waiting for you to catch up to them and make them as good as they can be.

 

The Epiphone Masterbilts I've played had no business hanging next to the Taylors and Martins they were with, and I don't even like Taylors. I wouldn't give you the 600 bucks they want for one for three of them. The higher priced Gibsons are no better than the lower priced Gibsons, in the acoustic saloon where these mooks hang out. Out in the other room where we fix our hair and arpeggiate Slash riffs, it's different. If I were you I wouldn't buy either, I'd be looking at Martins.

 

So there you go. You can listen to an old kook like me or you can...go try a couple of each and prove me wrong, for you.

 

rct

 

Great points. Instead of all the guitar reviews, comparisons, evaluations, message boards, etc etc etc on the Internet where people ask questions about guitars and discuss guitars and compare guitars we should just have a permanent banner that reads "only you can decide which guitar is for you. Go play them all."

 

I don't know what I was thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...