Killer Acoustic... Great Price!!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Buck62
  • Start date Start date
Ditto Buck, Elvis, etc.

I bought a Yammie FGX 412C VS acoustic for $400 two years ago after demoing guitars up to $1500 at three shops in two states. Brand didn't matter to me. All that mattered was playability and sound, with price being a bit of a concern.

To my ears, the Yammie was the best.
 
I was talking about old Yamaha VS NEW Martin

I will be dead and gone long before a vintage Yamaha can compete with ANY Martin that is $1500 or more, New or old. Never. Ever. Never. Not in hell could that ever happen.

Now as for price over quality. You can not get a guitar for $500 that will ever compete with one for $1500. Takamy what ever sucks....Epiphone...sucks....Alverez?...sucks....Yari...Good....Sigma....like Epiphone.....all other cheap guitars suck.

Now if $500 is all you can afford, then it is a hell of a great guitar over one for $250, and you can feel it, just like you can feel the difference between a D35 and a HD35, or a HD35 and my D41. I saved a lifetime to get that because I made the mistake of playing a guitar I could not afford and screwed myself out of the "what you dont know cant hurt you" or "if you never played it, you don't know what you are missing" catagory.

To say that you want a guitar that you can "acually play" and gig with...first, I don't fret over a scratch, those add life and character and make a guitar YOURS....but acually playing....that is BS line that starving "musicians" use to feel better. If an expensive guitar didn't play better, then there would be no market for them.
 
I was having a local luthier/guitar tech do a setup on my Webber OM, and his opinion was that if you paid more than $1,500 - $2,000 for an acoustic, you were paying for more than sound.

I sold a Yamaha classical (early 80s vintage) a few years back for $75. I wish I had it back, because I haven't played a < $500 classical since that I thought played or sounded any better.
 
LocusLarsen said:
I will be dead and gone long before a vintage Yamaha can compete with ANY Martin that is $1500 or more, New or old. Never. Ever. Never. Not in hell could that ever happen.


Now as for price over quality. You can not get a guitar for $500 that will ever compete with one for $1500.


To say that you want a guitar that you can "acually play" and gig with...first, I don't fret over a scratch, those add life and character and make a guitar YOURS....but acually playing....that is BS line that starving "musicians" use to feel better. If an expensive guitar didn't play better, then there would be no market for them.
Click to expand...

First of all, as to your contention that the guitar for sale was mine... I assure you, it is NOT!

Now, as to your above statements...

Statement #1....
The ONLY reason the Martin's are worth more is because they are an older, more established, American-made guitar. Yeah, they were quality made, but don't kid yourself... their "worth" is due to the company being around longer and AMERICAN. Sheeesh, the Japs didn't even get into the market of making guitars until the 60's, so it doesn't take a genius to figure out that it'll take awhile for their guitars to appreciate in value... if ever. It's because the "demand" is for American-made stuff... not Japanese.
Hell, nobody wants a pair of Nagasaki blue jeans. Even the Japs want Levis! Again... it's the "American-made" thing.
The Japs made ALOT of cheap and crappy guitars at first, but they also made a better Les Paul than Gibson (Tokai LoveRock) and so did Ibanez back in the late 70's.

Statement #2 is pure bullshit.
How can you equate $$$ with quality, tone, and playability for ALL guitars?
Have you played EVERY guitar ever made to back up that statement?
That is a VERY broad, un-educated opinion dude.


Statement #3...
I could easily buy a $20,000 PRS Dragon or a '52 Fender Broadcaster for $25,000 CASH right now.
The thing is, I don't need to buy expensive guitars to impress people or to get "value" for my money.

You don't even own an old Yamaha, so how can you dispell my comments?

Look at the others who posted in this thread... those who own or "used to own" a vintage Yamaha. You'll see nothing but praise for their tone.

You, sir, are "speculating".
I and the others are speaking from experience with the actual product.
 
Oh, BTW.....

It looks as if that FG-150 was bought by a guitar store or dealer.
The "buyer" has sold almost 1,100 products on ebay, so it's safe to say the guitar was bought to be re-sold at a higher price.

Check it out by clicking on the link in my first post.

Obviously, someone who knows something about guitars knows it's worth alot more than the price they paid... which was only $125.

Nuf said...
 
like i said earlier..i love my 1980 fg-335...got when i was 12 and i'll never part with it..don't know if qualifies as "old" or not...don't care...i wouldn't trade it for any guitar in the world..not this one.

the player makes the difference anyway...

a damn $25,000 guitar played my me aint gonna sound as good as a $150.00 hohner played by stevie ray.

like roy D. mercer says, "right on, by god!"

Buck, i'm glad you posted this thread...I love finding out about this stuff.
 
I am not equating tone verses money but that is how it is. That yamaha might sound good but it will never be great. If it did, collectors would have caused it to appriciate more. I don't have to play every guitar in the world to know that some 50% are crap from the start. I know certain things such as Create will forever suck my ass.

Now, yes, you do pay a little for a martin so that you have a martin, but it is nowwhere near what you seem to think. The reason a good martin or gibson or larivee or whatever is expensive is because SOMEONE is making sure that the action is superb, and that the neck and fretboard truely feel as one.

And I was questioning yamahas VS martin, SO DON"T EVER QUESTION ME "TRYING TO IMPRESS PEOPLE" You are reading things into this that are not there. It cost more to make better. I would never compare a $25,000 guitar with a $2,500 guitar. Sure, $10,000 of that might be gold, but there is still PERFECTLY crafted guitar behind it.

You know what...If I could afford a $25,000 guitar, I would buy it in a second, and you should too if you ask me, I like nice things, there is nothing wrong with them. I bet my life that a PRS dragon plays better than ANY jap guitar out there. And a broadcaster...those are ONLY worth money because of scarcity....Not the samething as a Martin VS Yamaha, stick to the subject
 
Waddya know, that FG 150 sold for 125 clams. That's a little more than I think it's worth, but it'll be a nice guitar if it doesn't require neck work.

I think he bought it for the case.
 
LocusLarsen said:
Now, yes, you do pay a little for a martin so that you have a martin, but it is nowwhere near what you seem to think. The reason a good martin or gibson or larivee or whatever is expensive is because SOMEONE is making sure that the action is superb, and that the neck and fretboard truely feel as one.
Click to expand...

"A little?" :rolleyes:

C'mon, don't kid yourself.
The reason a new Martin costs "that much more" is because the union-woodcrafter, the union-electrician, and the union-assembler who put the guitar together send the guitars down the line to the union-inspector, who "ok's" the guitars and sends them to the union-packer, who packs the guitars up for the union-forklift driver who loads the guitars on the truck with the union-truck driver, who drives the guitars to the distribution center where another union-forklift driver unloads the guitars... which are then delivered to the Guitar Center's and Sam Ash stores in the geographical area.

This isn't a slam on unions.
It's a reality check that what you're REALLY paying for is the higher-cost of American labor when you buy a new Martin acoustic.

The only merit I see in your arguement is that Martin has much better quality control than the majority of foreign manufacturers.
Okay... I'll give you that one.

Anyway, I've never played ANY new guitar that sounds, feels, and plays as good as one that's been played for awhile and experienced some wear and tear.
Most new guitars are stiff and tight and lack the excellent tone of aged wood.
Hell, new guitars don't even know that they're guitars yet!
They still think that they're 3 seperate trees that were slapped together and forced to co-habitate by some madman with an electric saw and a 55-gallon drum full of glue!

As for the "vintage" stuff...
The "collector's market" for vintage guitars is biased toward American guitars because almost all of the big-time collectors are American. That's why the old Yamaha's aren't worth much here, but are probably a desired commodity in Japan.

Just because something is American-made and somewhat expensive, it doesn't automatically mean that it's a good product.
Chryslers are proof of that! :D

Ask yourself this...
Why aren't there any American-made televisions anymore?
Because the Japanese make 'em better for a lower cost.
 
CDT-sHaG said:
like i said earlier..i love my 1980 fg-335...got when i was 12 and i'll never part with it..don't know if qualifies as "old" or not...don't care...i wouldn't trade it for any guitar in the world..not this one.

Buck, i'm glad you posted this thread...I love finding out about this stuff.
Click to expand...

Thanx, shag...

It's nice to see another who has first-hand knowledge about how sweet old Yamaha acoustics are. ;)
 
your the man buck..i always read your posts on yamahas..when i first came here i looked up yamaha fg-335's because i had one and didn't know anyone else that had one...

quick note;

i remember when i bought my seagull s6+ spruce dread..paid $350.00 for it new plus i bought a case and a pickup so all together it was about $500.00...

I have a friend with a taylor 714ce..now that guitar set him back about $2600.00.

he won't leave my seagull alone when we jam. he loves it and is going to get one in addition to his taylor.

I'm not saying it's "better", he's not saying it's "better", just "different", because "better" is subjective and relative to experience.

BTW, he's a great player in the monte montgomery/SRV vein..but just acoustic.

bottom line is just get a guitar and play it and write songs and perform and have a good time.

last thing you want to do is have a damn guitar you are afraid to take out of the case. what good is that?
 
damn...why am i afraid to buy from ebay???????:mad:

screw it...i'm signing up now on ebaybaybay!!!

thanks for that..it cheered me up...


$51.00 my ass!! wtf is wrong with them? hahayou are the man!!
 
"You know what...If I could afford a $25,000 guitar, I would buy it in a second, and you should too if you ask me, I like nice things, there is nothing wrong with them. I bet my life that a PRS dragon plays better than ANY jap guitar out there. "

Is a PRS Dragon really worth $20,000 anyway? I say no. It's machine made and the inlays are set with a CNC machine. There are guitars that play better for less than half that price. Hell, a guitar one eighth that price will play circles around a Dragon. A David Thomas Mcnaught Signature is about five times the guitar, at less than half the price. I refuse to pay that much for a guitar that isn't hand-made. All of the best guitars in the world are under ten grand.
 
Mark Knopfler has been described as "laid back" or even "lazy" when it comes to songwriting/albums.

However:

Knopfler makes the process sound so easy. He was puttering around his London home, playing on a new Martin guitar, a brand he had never owned before, “and then the songs came out if it.” Soon, he had enough for a new record, and he took over studios in Nashville and London with his band of the last six years.
Click to expand...

Thus, the Martin virtually wrote Knopfler's new album for him. I've never seen a Yammie do that. Damn, I've gotta trade my Yammie in on a Marty!

:rolleyes: :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top