The quality of mid-ranged guitars nowadays is insane (belated NGD thread)

Tenebrous

I've only been playing for 16 years, but even I've noticed an absolutely giant step forward in the quality of guitars (& guitar related technology) in recent times. You've Squires now which will hold their own against American Fenders from 15 years ago, great Les Paul's from a whole variety of companies, a whole load more crazy & wonderful stuff to try, and more competition for each type of guitar than ever before.

Before I took a break from electric guitar 4 or so years back, I'd probably owned 20-30 electric guitars. When I came back to electric guitar last year, I wasn't thinking about replacing my nice USA American Standard Tele or going all out for a Les Paul - All I knew I needed was a Pacifica. The one I'd owned before had left such an impression on me that I simply couldn't believe that quality of guitar could be had for that sort of money.

Anyway, fast-forward to yesterday, and yeah... I'm just blown away again - The Bernie Marsden PRS SE.

The thing just sings. The fit & finish is exceptional (and I have inspected it thoroughly), the neck plays very similarly to my USA Troublemaker Tele, and the pickups just sound great out of the box (well, gig-bag).

My recent mid-ranged budget line-up. I'd put any of them against the more expensive guitars I've owned 10 years or so back, and bet on them pretty much each & every time. Part of it I guess is down to experience & knowing what to go for, but there's no doubt been an improvement.

(PS. I'm so glad I decided to take down the Yamaha listing, as I've really been enjoying it recently, and I know I'd just end up getting one again at some point >.< )

So yeah, I'm chuffed. When the time finally comes to go on the hunt for my dream blackguard telecaster, will I really have to look past the mid-ranged pricemark? If I do so, will it be justified through quality alone? Only time will tell.

Cheers.

JDE

Congrats! Everything I have read about them has been overwhelmingly positive. Sometimes my thoughts drift to wanting something with the Gibson flavour but a bit more physically robust and I keep falling on PRS, as there’s not much else out there. 

If only I could get over the control knob placement on the BM’s!

Tenebrous

JDE said:

Congrats! Everything I have read about them has been overwhelmingly positive. Sometimes my thoughts drift to wanting something with the Gibson flavour but a bit more physically robust and I keep falling on PRS, as there’s not much else out there. 

If only I could get over the control knob placement on the BM’s!

I've already got a Telecaster with LP style controls, so I'm pretty sure I can deal with an LP with Strat style pot controls, haha. I can see why it'd be offputting to some, but for me, it's fine.

Grumpyrocker

Happy NGD (Again). I've had something of an epiphany of late. Not necessarily relating to the guitars I can afford right now, but the hugely expensive guitars I may have aspired to. At least aspired to in the past.

I do own a Les Paul - a gift from my wife nearly ten years ago. And that guitar has a lovely book-matched flame maple top. But for all that top's beauty I can see no more of it than I can the thinner veneer on my new PRS SE 245. I don't have X-ray vision nor is maple translucent.

That piece of flame maple on my Les Paul could have been better used sliced thin and made into a veneer for several guitars, rather than wasted in one go on my Les Paul. The guitar would have looked and sounded exactly the same.

And I could continue with other aspects of the more expensive guitar. But the point is there's a heck of a lot of extravagance and pointless waste in guitars that doesn't really serve any purpose at all other than enable the maker to demand a higher price. 

Tenebrous

Grumpyrocker said:

Happy NGD (Again). I've had something of an epiphany of late. Not necessarily relating to the guitars I can afford right now, but the hugely expensive guitars I may have aspired to. At least aspired to in the past.

I do own a Les Paul - a gift from my wife nearly ten years ago. And that guitar has a lovely book-matched flame maple top. But for all that top's beauty I can see no more of it than I can the thinner veneer on my new PRS SE 245. I don't have X-ray vision nor is maple translucent.

That piece of flame maple on my Les Paul could have been better used sliced thin and made into a veneer for several guitars, rather than wasted in one go on my Les Paul. The guitar would have looked and sounded exactly the same.

And I could continue with other aspects of the more expensive guitar. But the point is there's a heck of a lot of extravagance and pointless waste in guitars that doesn't really serve any purpose at all other than enable the maker to demand a higher price. 

I understand where you're coming from completely. Last year, I bought (with the help of my family) a new Telecaster for my 30th birthday. It set me back around 2.5 of the guitars in my original post... Is it the best guitar I own? I think so, both subjectively and objectively, but the margins are so fine.

Like... I can pick up any of them, and the frets are perfect. The pickups all sound great, the necks all feel great, and I guess time will tell how the tuners hold up. Each guitar is pretty much blemish free, and none of them required any sort of setup out of the box (although I did slightly adjust the intonation on one of the Yamaha's strings).

My dream guitar has always, and will always be, a blonde blackguard telecaster. Of course I've yearned for a Custom Shop/Suhr/<Insert High End Model here>, and I still may very well go that route when the time comes... But really, it's becoming more & more possible that I'll end up completely satisfied with something ordinary yet brilliant than something that's special/unique & brilliant.

guitars4you

You are right - The quality of the low end to mid market guitars has never been so good - Say £200 to £1000  - Yes some might need a slight adjustment to improve, regarding more attention on the set-up - But overall, the far eastern production lines can churn out some good guitars - Far superior build quality and playing performance than equivalent models from the 60's, 70's and 80's

And the PRS SE lines can top much of the far eastern  production lines

Nikc

The PRS se range is excellent I've tired a few and they have all been great - I own a Santana which is brilliant. My son has a few Epiphone LP's and they are all really good to - his standard LP has had some SD's fitted and that guitar really sings now. 

As far as the need for a Blonde black guard Tele goes the MIM stuff is great, looks right plays right at very sensible prices - just as it should be

thegummy

For the first 10 years of my life I was guitarless and the next 20 only had the lowest end mid-90s Squier so don't know anything about previous years.

But in the past few years I've amassed a handful of guitars ranging from 200 to 1400 quid and the only one where quality was even an issue was the 950 quid Gibson, the rest are essentially flawless.

When I hear people talking about quality differences in guitars I sometimes find it hard to know what they're even referring to and I have wondered if it's only recently that the quality has been so perfect across the board; perhaps in previous decades you'd have to spend a grand to get that kind of quality and maybe that has moulded what people expect?

E.g. The other day someone said the Bernie looks like a 1600 quid guitar and I didn't understand the comment since I've seen that level of quality on guitars even cheaper. But maybe it's only recently that this has become the norm?

The Bernie does deserve its hype though. I think the binding helps make it look fancy. I've never played the core prs lp clones but the only thing I can even imagine that would be an improvement, other than aesthetically, would be if it was lighter. Not that the SE is heavy, I just can't think of any other way it would be improved in a practical way. 

Grumpyrocker

Tenebrous said:

My dream guitar has always, and will always be, a blonde blackguard telecaster. Of course I've yearned for a Custom Shop/Suhr/<Insert High End Model here>, and I still may very well go that route when the time comes... But really, it's becoming more & more possible that I'll end up completely satisfied with something ordinary yet brilliant than something that's special/unique & brilliant.

Telecasters are a weird one. Money doesn't grow on trees - though Paul Reed Smith's wood library seems to suggest you can turn wood into cash. But Telecasters are as basic as can be. That's not to say they aren't good guitars. But the idea of paying anything over (let's be generous) £800 for a basic lump of wood, painted with a solid colour and with a simple neck bolted on, seems utter madness to me. 

While I think the bling of high end PRS are massively overpriced you can at least see what you're being ripped off with. With a Telecaster you're not even getting some massively overpriced bling, you're just getting a plank. I'd go as far as to say Telecasters represent the biggest ripoff on the guitar market. They are loved, revered, lusted after and granted some indefinable mojo; yet they are cheap as chips to make and allow the silliest of markups that folks will pay. The materials cost v sale price of high end Fender Telecasters must represent the biggest margin in the guitar industry. 

Vibetronic

The difference is huge....especially compared to when I started playing in the late 80s. So much good stuff available for decent prices now!

chrishill901

I've almost had the reverse experience to this of late. I'll agree entirely that the quality of mid-range guitars recently is outstanding. I had a PRS SE Custom 24 and a Tremonti SE and they were flawless and played great and were on a par with my more expensive guitars... until I bought a Kemper and it all changed. Through the Kemper the cheaper guitars just didn't sing like the expensive ones, they were flatter, duller and less musical. It was a difference I couldn't notice through a Katana.

I'm sure this is just electronics and pickups though which is great because it means for relatively cheap you can have quality in the areas you can't affect much and for just a little extra £££ you can make these mid-rangers into really excellent instruments. As it happens I sold the PRS SEs. I did buy an Arcane Mr Scary pickup for my LTD GL-256 though so hopefully that will confirm my theory that a pickup swap will breathe life into a cheaper instrument.

On a side note I recently played a mid-range Yamaha Revstar and was blown away by the quality and tone. I think Yamaha have really nailed it in the mid-range market and I wouldn't hesitate to get one if I was in the market for a high quality/low price guitar.

Bigsby

Grumpyrocker said:

With a Telecaster you're not even getting some massively overpriced bling, you're just getting a plank. I'd go as far as to say Telecasters represent the biggest ripoff on the guitar market. They are loved, revered, lusted after and granted some indefinable mojo; yet they are cheap as chips to make and allow the silliest of markups that folks will pay. The materials cost v sale price of high end Fender Telecasters must represent the biggest margin in the guitar industry. 

You're forgetting all the time and effort spent on the relic job! Surely owning a new guitar that looks like it's been gigged every night since the 1930s is priceless?

timmypix

Absolutely agree - my Gibson LP does feel better than my old Epiphone, but not massively. Ditto my PRS Bernie feels of equal quality - the only criticism I can think of is the finish is so thick that it looks like a case of plastic. But they still feel equal, not different leagues at all.

Jez6345789

I had a Bernie on loan over Christmas which my friend bought 2nd hand for 400 quid even new I would of been stunned they are such a good guitar, fit finish and feel great to play, the sound is also a great Humbucker sound. 

I was reluctant to give it back and have been gassing to get one as a modding platform. 

Happy new guitar day enjoy

thegummy

Grumpyrocker said:

Tenebrous said:

My dream guitar has always, and will always be, a blonde blackguard telecaster. Of course I've yearned for a Custom Shop/Suhr/<Insert High End Model here>, and I still may very well go that route when the time comes... But really, it's becoming more & more possible that I'll end up completely satisfied with something ordinary yet brilliant than something that's special/unique & brilliant.

Telecasters are a weird one. Money doesn't grow on trees - though Paul Reed Smith's wood library seems to suggest you can turn wood into cash. But Telecasters are as basic as can be. That's not to say they aren't good guitars. But the idea of paying anything over (let's be generous) £800 for a basic lump of wood, painted with a solid colour and with a simple neck bolted on, seems utter madness to me. 

While I think the bling of high end PRS are massively overpriced you can at least see what you're being ripped off with. With a Telecaster you're not even getting some massively overpriced bling, you're just getting a plank. I'd go as far as to say Telecasters represent the biggest ripoff on the guitar market. They are loved, revered, lusted after and granted some indefinable mojo; yet they are cheap as chips to make and allow the silliest of markups that folks will pay. The materials cost v sale price of high end Fender Telecasters must represent the biggest margin in the guitar industry. 

Surely there isn't that much difference between Teles and other guitars to make a tele any better an example off this?

A Strat has some body contours and a trem and a LP does have the multi wood body, glued neck and binding which would make it cost more than a Tele. 

That would explain why, say, an Epiphone LP cost a bit more than a Squier Strat which cost slightly more than a Squier Tele. But does it really mean that a high end multi thousand pound LP or Strat should really be any more significantly better than the basic model than for Teles?

DrJazzTap

 It is food for thought. I need to pay for a new kitchen, windows and flush the central heating system out selling some expensive planks of wood might be the way to go.

Zoolooter

I would only ever buy secondhand. With that in mind the Mexican nitro teles and strats seem amazing value with the soft V necks. 

rossi

There is a  certain price point where a guitar becomes more of a status symbol than a guitar .Various excuses have to be made to justify it and its in the interest  owners or reviewers  to keep it up there .Much of the high value is really just a great set up  and where its made so people  can say an expensive US  guitar  plays far better than a cheapy .

darthed1981

I literally just bought a Squier vintage Modified Jazzmaster in Sonic Blue from PMT.

It's bluddy brilliant, except the shitty bridge, so it's also authentic!

The "Duncan Designed" pickups are superb though!

vasselmeyer

Grumpyrocker said:

With a Telecaster you're not even getting some massively overpriced bling, you're just getting a plank. I'd go as far as to say Telecasters represent the biggest ripoff on the guitar market. They are loved, revered, lusted after and granted some indefinable mojo; yet they are cheap as chips to make and allow the silliest of markups that folks will pay. The materials cost v sale price of high end Fender Telecasters must represent the biggest margin in the guitar industry. 

But a Telecaster will double up as a club for hitting stage invaders. Try that with a Gibson and you'll have the headstock hanging off before you're through your first good swing.

merciful-evans

But a Telecaster will double up as a club for hitting stage invaders. Try that with a Gibson and you'll have the headstock hanging off before you're through your first good swing.

That sounds like a great idea for a video game. Stage Invaders. bat those pesky fans back into the pits with yer trusty tele.