What is the most highly over-rated and under-rated acoustic guitar brand?????

[Mickthemiller]

I'm still trying to work out what the question means! So I tried to break it down in my head. Price, bling, sound, general quality etc. Any guitar with an over inflated price, talking over $15000 or over here £12,000, just has to be over rated. You don't pay that sort of price for sound and playability. Bling, any guitar with more than decent wood, good tuners, reasonable binding etc must be over rated. MOP on every edge and nook and cranny does not improve what a guitars does. Sound, any guitar that sounds good to the player is not over rated, unless it falls into the super price or super bling category. Under rated guitars are generally those that are cheap but have good tone and playability. It all boils down to value for money really, but then that depends on how much money you have, or in some cases, want to invest. Personally, I think Epiphones make some good acoustics, Recording Kings always feel stiff to me, I like my J15 and generally think Martins and Gibsons fall into the middle ground, not over or under rated. One of my favourite guitars is a Harley Benton all sold dread cedar/hog which just sings, £220. I have never seen a Taylor that I lusted after, but I think they are over rated because so many seen to be priced far too high for laminate B&S. Just me trying to work it all out in my head! I could be totally wrong, mixed up or just plain ignorant

 

[Jim Wilson]

It's difficult to give anything but a subjective answer to that sort of question. Taylors are pretty well made, but have no soul, so they get my vote as over-rated. BlueRidge guitars are foreign-made guitars and there is no reason that they should be as good as they are...so that's my pick for under-rated.

 

I can't imagine people having good guitars and not taking them when they play out.

[58 Relic]

Underated - Yamaha , Sigma and Blueridge Overrated - Collings

[Willie King]

I am surprised that no one has mentioned Larivee as an underrated guitar. They are very good for the money. Eastman guitars are often very good too.

 

The overrated guitars include Blue Ridge, Ovation, Fender acoustics, 1980's guilds.

[MissouriPicker]

I'd forgotten about this old thread. Kind of nice to see it kick-started......I guess it all comes down to what "over-rated and under-rated" means to each of us. We could be talking about measureable attributes like build quality, sound, playability, or things that are purely human, like desirability.

[hojo199]

Overrated: Taylor -- bolt on necks, the most generic tone ever -- what exactly IS that tone anyway? Is it distinctive, I mean, what exactly IS "The Taylor tone"?

Underrated: Guild.

I love my J50, J45, my Martins -- but my Guilds have a special place in my heart -- particularly my D50 -- it's a D28 with an extra bell attached :-)

[fretplay]

The most underrated guitar by far is a Japanese made Epiphone Casino.

 

If you can get a Matsumoku made 80s just a gem!

[OldCowboy]

Overrated guitars make me unhappy, cause me physical pain to play, combine with my playing to produce a sound I dislike, cost more than I'd pay for a good pickup truck, and/or are absurdly sensitive to changes in climate and weather. I could name brands, but why add to an already acute case of subjectivitis? Continuing the established theme, underrated guitars are the ones I like that somebody else doesn't. In general terms, excluding certain vintages/models of each, I'm most happy with Gibson, Guild, and Martin. So they're mostly rated about where they should be, I suppose. Wish I could say something nice about Taylor, but I can't. If your canoe overturns, Ovations will float. Consider: what else floats? Just read this masterpiece and decided it's time to either post or delete!

[Lukec88]

Taylor and Martin are way too over-rated! Entry level taylor 300 series for example is 1800euros and above (new one), thats arround 2000$. And You dont even get full gloss body, just front plus its cheaper wood (sapele vs mahogany). Same is with Martin. D-16 and performing artist series are great but still, you dont have full gloss body and fingerboard is richlite and not real wood. I saw new Gibson J-15 going for 1100euros, thats 1200$ and you get full solid body, full gloss, great build in pickup and its american made with nitrocellulose finish! Than you have J-35, J-29 all not going above 1700euros.. Great guitars, all full gloss!

 

In my opinion among these tree guitar giants, Martin , Taylor and Gibson, gibson has best prices.

 

Most under-rated guitar company for me is Alvarez. My father have MD-200c. I played it quite long time and its great guitar! Retail price was around 1300$ at that time, he bought it over ebay for 800$ with great SKB guitar case, mint condition! :)

[IanHenry]

With all the Taylor knocking, I have to say in my opinion, the higher priced ones have never impressed me but I've quite liked the cheaper models, the 110's etc, I actually like them better than their solid timber models! I know that's probably blasphemy, but it's true in my opinion.

I think Yamaha's are very much under rated, I have a AC3M which is great, it's not all that loud, but the electrics on it are second to non, and it's great to play.

 

 

Ian

[Gibson Artist]

Takamine, Epiphone and ibanez. They have some of the best guitars going and people often pass em by.

 

Overrated? Martin. I know many here may disagree but read why and you will understand. On the high end sure Martin has some great tones. On the low to middle well, their guitars really undperform. In fact, if you spend 1500 on a Gibson j15 or even 1200 on a Taylor 214ce like mine, they completely dust em. Martin uses cheap mats on their under 2k gits, you dont even get real wood fretboards and their cutaways are just awful, i mean BAD BAD BAD! I had a pair i recieved in trades, a omcpa4 and a dcpa4, both underwhelmed in comparsion to my Taylor and Gibsons i have owned.

 

My Taylor has real ebony fingerboard and bridge at 1200 bucks, plays chords, fingerpicks and has the most comfortable neck ive ever played on an acoustic, the only neck close is on my j50. Several guys i know raved about the 15 series martin, i tried one. One trick pony, could pick but couldnt strum, my Taylor completely owns it and so did my j15. You literally have to spend thousands on a Martin to get a top quality sound, that to me screams overrated.

 

Taylor impresses me, they put ebony on many affordable models and they play like butter. When i looked at baby taylor and lil martin i knew the taylor would dust it just from the specs sheet, still i gave it a chance and i wasnt wrong. Taylor owns martin all the way up to 2000 dollar models. Imo you really have to get a D28 before martin starts to even compete with Taylor and Gibson. I just traded away a DCPA4 Martin, it just couldnt do a decent F bar chord, i couldnt justify keeping it so traded it for a J50 and am very happy since.

[Lukec88]

Before I choose mine songwriter I was looking Taylor 214dlx sb like yours. It plays great, even sounds great, its beautiful guitar but 1350€ (price at that time) for a laminate, mexican made guitar it was little bit too much money. Thats just my opinion. 😊

[Gibson Artist]

Before I choose mine songwriter I was looking Taylor 214dlx sb like yours. It plays great, even sounds great, its beautiful guitar but 1350€ (price at that time) for a laminate, mexican made guitar it was little bit too much money. Thats just my opinion. 😊

Let's not forget ibanez made Gibson copies so good that Gibson sued them. In fact, some of their copies were flat out better than the real thing in that era. Friend of mine runs a guitar store and he has sold ibanez les pauls from that time for 3k each. The japan factories have made some great guitars thru the years and we yanks snub our noses at them, well some of us lol. the same could be said for mexi guitars, but ask yourself this. Do you like mim Fenders? I have never felt the urge to buy an American Strat or Tele, (tho i have traded for one) mainly because the mexican ones were made so fantastic.

 

Still, trade valuewise, people will snub their nose at them. It is something to consider if you trade a lot which i do, but i cant see me selling my taylor right now.

[rct]

Let's not forget ibanez made Gibson copies so good that Gibson sued them.

 

I'm sorry bud, that just did not happen.

 

The lawsuit of the 70's was a joint effort by American guitar companies to stop people from duplicating their guitars to such a degree that they could be mistaken at a certain distance. "so good" was never part of it, and never will be.

 

Pee in a can, put a red and white label with a gold circle in the middle, call it Kambulls, you will get sued for making cans of urine, not cans of good soup, because "good" has nothing to do with it.

 

It's a tired story, often repeated by people that (usually) weren't even born at the time, and even more often are selling something from that time. It's pretty interesting that guys my age are not the people buying these so great copies.

 

rct

[Gibson Artist]

I'm sorry bud, that just did not happen.

 

The lawsuit of the 70's was a joint effort by American guitar companies to stop people from duplicating their guitars to such a degree that they could be mistaken at a certain distance. "so good" was never part of it, and never will be.

 

Pee in a can, put a red and white label with a gold circle in the middle, call it Kambulls, you will get sued for making cans of urine, not cans of good soup, because "good" has nothing to do with it.

 

It's a tired story, often repeated by people that (usually) weren't even born at the time, and even more often are selling something from that time. It's pretty interesting that guys my age are not the people buying these so great copies.

 

rct

I am 46 years old, i lived thru the lawsuit era, tho i did not learn guitar until 1983 at camp. SO good will never be a part? Anyone who says that has never tried the higher end Ibanez or the Super Real or Reborn Series, this is someone who most likely tried the cheapest clones and assumed they were all crap. I am a massive trader, have played and owned many of these and i can say with absolute certainty that some of those clones were in fact better. In fact, a couple of the 59 clones are still HIGHLY sought after collectible items. Plus, the norlin era guitars had many design flaws like on my j50, i havnt seen many that didnt have a giant crack right up the middle! and their QC wasnt great then either. But, i dont care, i like oddballs regardless.

[stein]

Let's not forget ibanez made Gibson copies so good that Gibson sued them. In fact, some of their copies were flat out better than the real thing in that era. Friend of mine runs a guitar store and he has sold ibanez les pauls from that time for 3k each. The japan factories have made some great guitars thru the years and we yanks snub our noses at them, well some of us lol. the same could be said for mexi guitars, but ask yourself this. Do you like mim Fenders? I have never felt the urge to buy an American Strat or Tele, (tho i have traded for one) mainly because the mexican ones were made so fantastic.

 

Still, trade valuewise, people will snub their nose at them. It is something to consider if you trade a lot which i do, but i cant see me selling my taylor right now.

 

 

I'm sorry bud, that just did not happen.

 

The lawsuit of the 70's was a joint effort by American guitar companies to stop people from duplicating their guitars to such a degree that they could be mistaken at a certain distance. "so good" was never part of it, and never will be.

 

Pee in a can, put a red and white label with a gold circle in the middle, call it Kambulls, you will get sued for making cans of urine, not cans of good soup, because "good" has nothing to do with it.

 

It's a tired story, often repeated by people that (usually) weren't even born at the time, and even more often are selling something from that time. It's pretty interesting that guys my age are not the people buying these so great copies.

 

rct

 

 

I am 46 years old, i lived thru the lawsuit era, tho i did not learn guitar until 1983 at camp. SO good will never be a part? Anyone who says that has never tried the higher end Ibanez or the Super Real or Reborn Series, this is someone who most likely tried the cheapest clones and assumed they were all crap. I am a massive trader, have played and owned many of these and i can say with absolute certainty that some of those clones were in fact better. In fact, a couple of the 59 clones are still HIGHLY sought after collectible items. Plus, the norlin era guitars had many design flaws like on my j50, ive never seen one that didnt have a crack right up the middle! and their QC wasnt great then either. But, i dont care, i like oddballs regardless.

I have to chime in here on this here debate.

 

The "lawsuit" guitars, that's really rumor only. It's mostly just a legend created to make those old Japanese guitars seem better or more interesting than they were/are.

 

Sorry, not saying they aren't cool or suck, but this idea that they were all that great also, well...

 

Here's the truth: the "lawsuit" never happened. They just said "knock it off" and they did. I don't think there is even a story, but I have yet to hear a story worth writing that is/was true.

 

A lot of OLD Japanese "copies" were OK, and fine guitars, and I have played some. But not until YEARS and years later, did anyone think or claim they were really that good. The TRUTH of THAT is, Japanese guitars are better now than they have ever been. They were better in the 80's than they were in the 70's. and better in the 00's than in the 90's.

 

So, really, where does the idea that 70's Japanese "lawsuit" guitars being so good come from? I think it's EBAY. The only thing "better" I have personally ever seen is the prices.

 

Just my opinion here, but I think one would find the exact same thing and better value in buying the current "made in Indonesia" or Korea of China stuff available right now as we speak. And I bet if one is honest and objective, they are better than what Japan was making in the 70's/80's.

 

But, I can't think of a good rumor to go along with that right now.

[rct]

I am 46 years old, i lived thru the lawsuit era, tho i did not learn guitar until 1983 at camp. SO good will never be a part? Anyone who says that has never tried the higher end Ibanez or the Super Real or Reborn Series, this is someone who most likely tried the cheapest clones and assumed they were all crap. I am a massive trader, have played and owned many of these and i can say with absolute certainty that some of those clones were in fact better. In fact, a couple of the 59 clones are still HIGHLY sought after collectible items. Plus, the norlin era guitars had many design flaws like on my j50, i havnt seen many that didnt have a giant crack right up the middle! and their QC wasnt great then either. But, i dont care, i like oddballs regardless.

 

This is a quote from you:

 

"Let's not forget ibanez made Gibson copies so good that Gibson sued them."

 

That did not happen. You can not sue someone because they make good copies of your protected work. PERIOD.

 

You sue somebody because they are copying your headstock shape, your logo, your script, the things that identify your guitar.

 

Let's not forget that as soon as Ibanez, Tokai, whomever, as soon as they were served that they could not duplicate the big American guitars they suddenly stopped making great strats and teles and les pauls. Why? Why is it that if they couldn't look just like them they wouldn't make them? Why is that? Because they weren't that great to begin with.

 

I have no doubt they were good guitars, I remember them very well even though I never used one, I was in bands using my Teles and Strats and Les Pauls right next to Love Rocks and the Ibanez with the I script that looked exactly like the F in Fender. They may have been good guitars, but they weren't so good they kept making them after they couldn't duplicate the originals. By the time I was married in 1980 nobody around here, and that was a lot of guitar players, was using them at all.

 

rct

[rct]

Here's the truth: the "lawsuit" never happened. They just said "knock it off" and they did. I don't think there is even a story, but I have yet to hear a story worth writing that is/was true.

 

It did happen. Smith in his comprehensive Leo biography, Bacon in one of his Fender books mentions the actual matter.

 

Leo didn't want to, Gibson was doing it. Forrest convinced Leo to put his name to it too.

 

The three or four named companies were served. Some guitars arrived after that in San Francisco and some of each type Fender and Gibson were confiscated and had the headstocks sawn off of them in order to demonstrate penalty.

 

That was it.

 

The rest of us were, for the most part, blissfully unaware because nobody was fawning over Love Rocks and Ibanezii.

 

My wife of 35 years does not play the guitar, but when she sees the later 80s or 90s Bugs Bunny on tevee she still calls him the Ibanez Bugs Bunny. THAT is how strong the "I" word is to Deptford kids that grew up guitar!

 

rct

[Gibson Artist]

I have to chime in here on this here debate.

 

The "lawsuit" guitars, that's really rumor only. It's mostly just a legend created to make those old Japanese guitars seem better or more interesting than they were/are.

 

Sorry, not saying they aren't cool or suck, but this idea that they were all that great also, well...

 

Here's the truth: the "lawsuit" never happened. They just said "knock it off" and they did. I don't think there is even a story, but I have yet to hear a story worth writing that is/was true.

 

A lot of OLD Japanese "copies" were OK, and fine guitars, and I have played some. But not until YEARS and years later, did anyone think or claim they were really that good. The TRUTH of THAT is, Japanese guitars are better now than they have ever been. They were better in the 80's than they were in the 70's. and better in the 00's than in the 90's.

 

So, really, where does the idea that 70's Japanese "lawsuit" guitars being so good come from? I think it's EBAY. The only thing "better" I have personally ever seen is the prices.

 

Just my opinion here, but I think one would find the exact same thing and better value in buying the current "made in Indonesia" or Korea of China stuff available right now as we speak. And I bet if one is honest and objective, they are better than what Japan was making in the 70's/80's.

 

But, I can't think of a good rumor to go along with that right now.

I bought a chinese Tokai by accident a year and half ago. Biggest mistake of my life, they were HORRIBLE quality, i mean awful. they have sharp edges on the frets, buzzing strings, dead spots in the frets and ive seen a couple of the other made in china tokai and all 3 had blemishes in the finish. Epiphone offers much better quality for the same price as what some clowns on eflay charge. So being made in china hardly makes it a good guitar any more than made in japan.

 

there were plenty of duds coming out of japan in the 70s, but none as bad as many of the china/indonesia junk. But, i maintain that the people who claim japanese guitars werent great, most of them never played a good super real or reborn.

[milod]

RCT....

 

I'd disagree on at least some of the "lawsuit" guitars. Gibson in the '70s didn't have all that good a rep for quality. Ibanez at their higher end came in with stuff that was as good as, although slightly different, from Gibson designs and were quite clearly marked as "Ibanez." I've got one myself, and frankly wouldn't trade for a current model Gibson of the same configuration. It's that good. Were you closer, I'll wager you'd agree. I also have an excellent Eastman single pup ES175 clone from a couple of years ago that is an exceptional instrument I'd play anywhere it would be practical or appropriate, but not in the class of either a current Gibson or some of the old Ibanez offerings in the "lawsuit" era.

 

I'd suggest that Guild also had some instruments in the '70s that were of equal or better quality than similar Gibson models. I'd not trade my old 1970s S100c "SG" type for a current similar Gibson, either, and at that point of time, the S100c was IMHO preferable to Gibson SG models. Some 40 years later she still plays as if moving to make our music as a duet rather than she as only an instrument.

 

m

[Gibson Artist]

This is a quote from you:

 

"Let's not forget ibanez made Gibson copies so good that Gibson sued them."

 

That did not happen. You can not sue someone because they make good copies of your protected work. PERIOD.

 

You sue somebody because they are copying your headstock shape, your logo, your script, the things that identify your guitar.

 

Let's not forget that as soon as Ibanez, Tokai, whomever, as soon as they were served that they could not duplicate the big American guitars they suddenly stopped making great strats and teles and les pauls. Why? Why is it that if they couldn't look just like them they wouldn't make them? Why is that? Because they weren't that great to begin with.

 

I have no doubt they were good guitars, I remember them very well even though I never used one, I was in bands using my Teles and Strats and Les Pauls right next to Love Rocks and the Ibanez with the I script that looked exactly like the F in Fender. They may have been good guitars, but they weren't so good they kept making them after they couldn't duplicate the originals. By the time I was married in 1980 nobody around here, and that was a lot of guitar players, was using them at all.

 

rct

Im not old enough to have seen what people played in the 70s, i wasnt a musician then, i was a toddler lol. But if you say they stopped using them by 1980 i believe you. People probably used them because they were cost efficient, well made clones that did the job and other then some wiring or pot issues, usually played very well for the price they paid. Not surprised people went back to Gibson when they could afford it, but Greco and Tokia and Ibanez really had some sweet numbers back then. Those are my three favorite, but Orville gets snubbed by American players too and a surprising amount of Gibby players dont even realize that was orville gibson making them. The orville les paul custom was the best les paul ive ever owned, hands down.

[rct]

Greco! That's another name, with Kent. Yes, cheap alternatives. When we were in 6th grade we had Kents and Silvertones and stuff, and we couldn't wait to get "real" guitars!

 

rct

[EuroAussie]

Surely Gibson is the most overrated brand.

 

They sound like full of socks, cant put on a pickguard to save their lives, same models sound different, fit n' finish sloppy..... absolute rubbish !

[charlie brown]

Over-rated, under-rated, according to Who? IMHO, it's more about personal

preference, for whatever reason(s). It's the reason I always play any model

guitar (brand, model, electric, acoustic (especially acoustic), etc.) as much

as possible, before making any final purchase decisions. I think, too often,

people tend to get on Marketing's bandwagons. And/or are overly influenced

by what their favorite "stars" are playing, etc. That goes, for any brand, really.

 

As to my personal (acoustic) favorites. Martin, Guild (12-strings, especially),

Gibson, in no particular order. But, I've played some fantastic Epiphones, and

Seagulls, as well as Yamaha's that were very much to my liking.

 

Taylor's, not so much...and, in all honesty, I'm not at all sure, "Why?" They're

a bit like PRS electrics, to me. By all accounts, and with their fit and finish,

and beauty, I "should" love 'em, but I don't seem to, at least, not so far.

 

So...???

 

CB

[Gibson Artist]

Greco! That's another name, with Kent. Yes, cheap alternatives. When we were in 6th grade we had Kents and Silvertones and stuff, and we couldn't wait to get "real" guitars!

 

rct

Greco made literally tons of guitars, the early 70s ones probably werent great. But in the late 70s, they made some gems. This is only a middle of the road Greco i owned a year ago, not even a high end one, and it was pretty killer for what i paid.