The vampire thread that won't die...

I usually argue for 'expensive' or band-name guitars. I believe there's a better chance of getting a quality guitar with good sound and playability. This is particularly important when buying by mail/shopping online which is a huge and growing portion of U.S. guitar sales. I know we all preach, 'try before you buy' but sometimes the heart wants what the heart wants and it lives in an area with little availability (...see my hand raised? :D )

Personally, I'm not confident that; 1) I can hear the difference between brands or between guitars of the same brand and model and 2) I'm not confident I can detect subtle playability differences. That's why I have trusted to 'big brands'. I'm not a total fool...I realize that the same shortfalls I have for identifying a quality guitar could argue for a cheap guitar. But I went the other way and my stable of three, actively played expensive guitars is probably all I'm going to have for the long term.

But in support of the 'cheap' guitar side of the argument is this from Reverb.com; "In praise of cheap instruments" https://reverb.com/blog/in-praise-cheap-of-instruments-3-pros-discuss-their-appeal?_aid=newsletter&utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=9f05aaa7ea-rn151121_contentgen&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5889ed6702-9f05aaa7ea-55421629&mc_cid=9f05aaa7ea&mc_eid=d9d2364688 .

Note; however, the first 'cheap' instrument discussed in the article is a Martin with a street price of nearly $1800 (which exceeds what I paid for my used 'expensive' Martin). 'Cheap' is relative...what you or I consider expensive may not be so considered by someone else. Sounds and playability are relative too...something the musicians in the article have the skill and experience to discern.