Why Are Some Acoustic Guitars so Expensive?

guitarjack66

I am a firm believer in everybody being paid for their time doing any kind of role in society,from a skilled artisan to the humble street or office cleaner therefore I understand the time and labour part of my question. But where does the rest come from? I mean in essence it's made of wood and wood surrounds us,both scrap and fresh blooming trees and plants. Can't we make more use of these things( replant afterwards of course ) and work with nature rather than against? 

Don't shoot the messenger here as I'm just looking to be educated rather than being deliberately argumentative.

munckee

In a lot of cases you are paying for higher wages for experienced and skilled 'craftspeople' as opposed to chucking them together although as we all know guitar building standards are very high.

Often its the time they take finishing methods and attention to detail and better parts/cuts of wood.

monquixote

Because they can be.

Most designer clothes don't cost much more to make and yet cost 10 times as much.

Tannin

There are going to be 10 different answers in this thread, and most likely all of them will be right. To answer the question sensibly, we really need to be more specific and single out particular classes of guitar. 

I think one of the more subtle factors to consider is the huge variation in actual hands-on time per instrument, or to put it the other way about, the big differences in the number of guitars produced per year per worker. 

High quality acoustic guitars result from highly skilled people taking as much time as they need to get things exactly right. 

Note that once you step into the higher end of acoustics, the "manufacturing rules" change. If you are running a guitar factory - let's say you are Martin or Taylor - you work out what thickness an average Sitka Spruce top needs to be to be strong enough to last for 30 years. Let's say that's 3mm. Then you add a bit to that because some individual bits of spruce are going to be weaker than average, so we say 4mm. (Numbers are purely for example, not intended to be actual thicknesses.) So now you run all your spruce through the thicknesser and it all ends up exactly 4mm thick. It's a cheap way to do things and reasonably effective.

Now suppose you are aiming higher, and prepared to accept that you'll be making fewer guitars per worker-year. You don't plane to a thickness, you plane to a certain measured rigidity. (Or you might do it the old-fashioned way by tapping and listening.) Either way, every top you make is different. Each one is hand-finished to suit the characteristics of the particular piece of wood. You are probably more ruthless about throwing out discards too, ones that don't quite cut the mustard. Result: you are now spending probably 10 times more on labour to make the same number of tops. 

---- Back later. Mrs Tannin and I are about to watch the last episode of Ghosts. Great show, we love it. 

TheMarlin

Easiest answer….

……Let people have nice things….

DavidR

I think there's a big psychology to guitar buying. In fact luxury/leisure goods generally

We have some French friends in Laval. He works in the French car industry teaching CAD design skills. He's very experienced in what he does and actually sets the postgraduate exams for the whole of France. We once drove over there and I was showing off our new 3 Series and he said, "I don't really know about cars like that". I was bemused and he explained that, generally, the French car industry concentrated on the mass production of low and mid range vehicles, because the Germans had the executive and luxury end sown up.

And it's true. The French tend to drive French cars and there's far fewer BMs, Mercs, Audis etc on their roads. Are they any less happy? No; they're very happy with their cheaper French cars and take a pride in them. And they're good cars.

I think it's the same with guitars now. There's some fantastic instruments at the low to mid range and this comes over in tFB threads all the time. But there are also fantastic expensive instruments, and, if it's your thing, go for them and good luck to you. I have also lusted after and bought £3-4K instruments in the past and love owning them. It's just that my view has changed.

I now think I can lust after, seek out, buy and own acoustics in the £500 - £1K range and get just as much good tone and good fun. There are some truly great guitar manufacturers out there from all over the world. We are even being blessed with cracking products in the £2-500 range now. The days of buying 'something-which-only-looks-like-a-guitar' are, with a bit of care, over.

So it's a personal choice. If you want a very decent cheaper instrument go for that. If you want a branded, Spruce/Mahogany/Rosewood/Ebony not-made-in-China instrument which costs thousands go for that.

It's up to you. The world is your lobster.

:-)

guitarjack66

DavidR said:

I think there's a big psychology to guitar buying. In fact luxury/leisure goods generally

We have some French friends in Laval. He works in the French car industry teaching CAD design skills. He's very experienced in what he does and actually sets the postgraduate exams for the whole of France. We once drove over there and I was showing off our new 3 Series and he said, "I don't really know about cars like that". I was bemused and he explained that, generally, the French car industry concentrated on the mass production of low and mid range vehicles, because the Germans had the executive and luxury end sown up.

And it's true. The French tend to drive French cars and there's far fewer BMs, Mercs, Audis etc on their roads. Are they any less happy? No; they're very happy with their cheaper French cars and take a pride in them. And they're good cars.

I think it's the same with guitars now. There's some fantastic instruments at the low to mid range and this comes over in tFB threads all the time. But there are also fantastic expensive instruments, and, if it's your thing, go for them and good luck to you. I have also lusted after and bought £3-4K instruments in the past and love owning them. It's just that my view has changed.

I now think I can lust after, seek out, buy and own acoustics in the £500 - £1K range and get just as much good tone and good fun. There are some truly great guitar manufacturers out there from all over the world. We are even being blessed with cracking products in the £2-500 range now. The days of buying 'something-which-only-looks-like-a-guitar' are, with a bit of care, over.

So it's a personal choice. If you want a very decent cheaper instrument go for that. If you want a branded, Spruce/Mahogany/Rosewood/Ebony not-made-in-China instrument which costs thousands go for that.

It's up to you. The world is your lobster.

:-)

Having driven a Renault Clio for a while all I can say to him is 'It shows!'

DavidR

On a separate issue, sort of ( and apologies 'cos I've said this before but it's pertinent), some of the upper end manufacturers' price lists - independent of exchange rates - are a complete rip-off.

DavidR

guitarjack66 said:

DavidR said:

I think there's a big psychology to guitar buying. In fact luxury/leisure goods generally

We have some French friends in Laval. He works in the French car industry teaching CAD design skills. He's very experienced in what he does and actually sets the postgraduate exams for the whole of France. We once drove over there and I was showing off our new 3 Series and he said, "I don't really know about cars like that". I was bemused and he explained that, generally, the French car industry concentrated on the mass production of low and mid range vehicles, because the Germans had the executive and luxury end sown up.

And it's true. The French tend to drive French cars and there's far fewer BMs, Mercs, Audis etc on their roads. Are they any less happy? No; they're very happy with their cheaper French cars and take a pride in them. And they're good cars.

I think it's the same with guitars now. There's some fantastic instruments at the low to mid range and this comes over in tFB threads all the time. But there are also fantastic expensive instruments, and, if it's your thing, go for them and good luck to you. I have also lusted after and bought £3-4K instruments in the past and love owning them. It's just that my view has changed.

I now think I can lust after, seek out, buy and own acoustics in the £500 - £1K range and get just as much good tone and good fun. There are some truly great guitar manufacturers out there from all over the world. We are even being blessed with cracking products in the £2-500 range now. The days of buying 'something-which-only-looks-like-a-guitar' are, with a bit of care, over.

So it's a personal choice. If you want a very decent cheaper instrument go for that. If you want a branded, Spruce/Mahogany/Rosewood/Ebony not-made-in-China instrument which costs thousands go for that.

It's up to you. The world is your lobster.

:-)

Having driven a Renault Clio for a while all I can say to him is 'It shows!'

My Fiat 500L (Yes - I know - it's Italian) has everything my wife's BMW 320i M spec has. 

And the suspension's better!

:-)

Advice to future thread contributors. Let's not get too bogged down in car analogies (or metaphors, or similes, or whatever) shall we? Yes, I know I brought it up, and I know this exhortation will almost certainly result in lots of car stuff cos' I know what your'e like but it's a GUITAR chatroom.

:-)   
:-)     
:-)

Soupman

@guitarjack66 what about this Martin then?
https://www.thomann.de/gb/martin_guitars_d_200_deluxe.htm
I have to say personally I find it gross. Too much bling for me, I don't care how well it plays or sounds.
 

 

TheMadMick

I've bought 3 Avalons. Each one better than the last. They are not cheap and I love them. The only guitar I have that comes close is my 1989 Guild and it's not that close.

The problem is that not many others can tell the difference between my lovely Avalon and the others I play. Pity really but it keeps me happy and I can afford it.

DavidR

Bloody good car 500L

bertie

# quality and rarity of the raw ingredients 
# quality and skill level of the constructor(s)
# add or remove any labour saving/automation re #2
# quality of finish product
# desirability of finish product
# potential re-sale value 

Tannin

DavidR said:

My Fiat 500L (Yes - I know - it's Italian) has everything my wife's BMW 320i M spec has

I always used to love reading CAR magazine. I don't know why, perhaps because I was young and stupid in the 1980s. Anyway, the best bit was the fine print at the end where they used to list every new car you could buy in the UK with the price, a short description, and brief PROs and CONs. My all time favourite was ... er .. it might have been one of those V6 Alphas. PRO: Italian engineering.  CON: Italian engineering.

I still chuckle over that one.,

Tannin

One reason put forward with almost religious mania by Americans is worth mentioning just because it is so completely wrong. This is that "American labor is so much more expensive than foreign labor". And American workers are indeed paid more than workers in (say) China or Nigeria.

But that isn't the actual question, which is why are American guitars so much more expensive than guitars made in every other First World nation, even though American wages are no higher, and very often lower than wages in Germany, Japan, Australia, the UK, Canada, and other places? Hell, the minimum wage in Korea is higher than the minimum wage in most US states. And the US prides itself (mostly incorrectly) as having lower taxes than anywhere "foreign". 

So why are American guitars so expensive? It's not wages. It's not taxes. It's not expenses (running a business in Germany or Australia or the UK costs big money too). And it's certainly not quality - at any given price point, guitars made in the UK, Japan, Australia, Germany, and several other places are of at least equal and usually even higher quality. 

Is it massive profit margins? Maybe, I don't have the numbers on that. Or is it simply inefficient, bloated production techniques long past due for reassessment? Having seen American cars, that's where I'd put my money. But it's only a guess, of course. I don't know the real reason.

TTony

guitarjack66 said:

I am a firm believer in everybody being paid for their time doing any kind of role in society,from a skilled artisan to the humble street or office cleaner therefore I understand the time and labour part of my question. But where does the rest come from? I mean in essence it's made of wood and wood surrounds us,both scrap and fresh blooming trees and plants. Can't we make more use of these things( replant afterwards of course ) and work with nature rather than against? 

Don't shoot the messenger here as I'm just looking to be educated rather than being deliberately argumentative.

Apparently, the hourly rate for a plumber is £40-£70 in the UK.

IMHO, a skilled luthier, particularly a maker of acoustic guitars, is a more skilled job, with a lot more time invested in building the necessary experience, than a plumber.  So, fair rate for the luthier should be way more than a plumber.

But let's a fair rate would be £100/hr.

Maybe 100hrs go into building an acoustic.  

Cost of materials is hugely variable.  You could probably source the woods for £100, or you could pay £5000, depending on what you want (rarity, quality).

Add in the overheads of running any business and consider that the output of a skilled acoustic luthier is not going to be high (so the overheads cost per unit will be high).

Add that lot up and I wonder how some of them make a sensible living ...

(The answer being that they don't   )


The other side of that question is how can some manufacturers produce the quality that they do, at the price that they do.

guitarjack66

TTony said:

guitarjack66 said:

I am a firm believer in everybody being paid for their time doing any kind of role in society,from a skilled artisan to the humble street or office cleaner therefore I understand the time and labour part of my question. But where does the rest come from? I mean in essence it's made of wood and wood surrounds us,both scrap and fresh blooming trees and plants. Can't we make more use of these things( replant afterwards of course ) and work with nature rather than against? 

Don't shoot the messenger here as I'm just looking to be educated rather than being deliberately argumentative.

Apparently, the hourly rate for a plumber is £40-£70 in the UK.

IMHO, a skilled luthier, particularly a maker of acoustic guitars, is a more skilled job, with a lot more time invested in building the necessary experience, than a plumber.  So, fair rate for the luthier should be way more than a plumber.

But let's a fair rate would be £100/hr.

Maybe 100hrs go into building an acoustic.  

Cost of materials is hugely variable.  You could probably source the woods for £100, or you could pay £5000, depending on what you want (rarity, quality).

Add in the overheads of running any business and consider that the output of a skilled acoustic luthier is not going to be high (so the overheads cost per unit will be high).

Add that lot up and I wonder how some of them make a sensible living ...

(The answer being that they don't   )


The other side of that question is how can some manufacturers produce the quality that they do, at the price that they do.

Feel free to flip the question too. It's a pertinent discussion.

BillDL

Ask yourself what was the real difference is between a Skoda Octavia and a VW Passatt Jetta.

The exterior styling was a bit more "expensive" looking on the VW and the interior may have been a little more plush, but that's subjective.  The ride on the Skoda was said to be less smooth, but the engines were comparable.  As is often the case, with more expensive brands, "extras" like car mats and sat-nav were optional extras that cost quite a lot to add to VW spec, whereas many came as standard on the Skoda, so the actual cost difference was hard to compare.  Perhaps people buying VW may have assumed they would receive better aftercare service than Skoda buyers because of the perception that the brand name gave them more credence and the roughly equivalent cars were priced quite differently.  The cars were obviously put together in much the same way using many common components.  Fitters wouldn't have spent less time assembling Skodas, the paint jobs wouldn't have been inferior on the Skoda, and the body panels will have been made from much the same grade of metal.  They wouldn't have used cheaper oil in the engines or cheaper rubber on the door surrounds and wiper blades.  So where's the difference really?

Speaking about solidbody electrics, CNC machines are able to cut bodies and necks very accurately and consistently.  Gluing jigs / presses mean that wooden components can be glued together in batches at one time very accurately.  Fretting presses are very consistent and considerably faster than somebody tapping them in with a hammer or pressing them in one by one.  I would hazard a guess that there is some automation in spray booths of factories that have a high throughput.  Obviously all the machinery requires operatives who, although skilled in the operation, don't require the same level of fine skills as those down the line in the final assembly and finishing stages.  These stages are common to expensive and budget mass produced electric guitars.

That's where the similarities between "expensive" and "affordable" mass produced guitars end and the total cost for the "man hours" taken doing the finer and more skilled work begins. On an expensive guitar usually more time is dedicated to tasks like scraping of binding, final sanding, fret dressing and polishing, accurate fitting of tuners, and so on.  It takes just as much time to solder components together for an expensive guitar as for a cheap one, but cheaper wire, pickups, pots and switches are usually fitted to cheaper guitars.  Quality control at different stages or manufacture, assembly, final finishing and setup should be more stringent on more expensive guitars, but we all have proof that this is not always the case.

Multi piece bodies are more common on cheaper guitars as are scarfe jointed necks (uses less wood), different cheaper and more plentiful grades and types of wood, and cheaper hardware and electrics.  We all know this, but it is still very surprising to find what we all know to be budget brands containing good quality wood, hardware and electrics.  I suppose it's like the suggestion box proposal of reducing each packet of peanuts on a passenger plane by one nut and saving tens of thousands over a year.  Even miniscule savings when you are making tens of thousands of guitars in a year adds up to a saving.

Obviously there is a break point in price tagging where there are no longer any perceptible physical and sonic difference between an "affordable" and an "expensive" guitar.  Where we choose to place that pivotal price is subjective and entirely dependent on what we each deem to be expensive and cheap.  As far as I am concerned, and from recent experience of budget and more expensive guitars, there should be no reason for anybody to buy an electric solidbody guitar above about £750, because above that price any differences are almost imperceptible.  When you can buy a LP copy that is, by brand association alone a "budget" make that retails for about £400, and receive an exceptionally good quality guitar that sounds and feels every bit as good as an £800 to £1,000 Gibson, you have to ask why.  Brand association, just like VW Passatt Jetta vs Skoda Octavia was more or less business executive vs taxi driver.

When you go above say £1,200 you are really just paying for the luxury of the brand name on the headstock, but there is one very important aspect that keeps the prices higher than they should and need to be, and that's 2nd-hand resale value.  I'm quite sure that a 2nd-hand VW Passatt Jetta of roughly the same spec as a Skoda Octavia would have commanded a higher resale value, and that's much the same for the "premium" brand guitars.

These are just my opinions, so take them or leave them.

stickyfiddle

The Undercover Economist is a very good read on this sort of thing. Essentially almost nothing is sold to consumers on a cost+profit basis and hasn't been for a long time. 

Good extract here from an early chapter - https://timharford.com/2005/10/go-figure-an-extract-from-the-undercover-economist-2/ 

And an excellent summary here: https://www.zenflowchart.com/blog/the-undercover-economist-tim-harford-book-summary

PC008

It's do do with quality, craftsmanship, tradition, economics, psychology, art, capitalism, x factor, snake oil,branding and greed. Too much to go into really. If someone waved a magic wand and all guitars had to be sold  for $1000 each think about that! I'm happy that we have a variety of prices 

munckee

@billdl I think the octavia was effectively a jetta whereas the superb was the equivalent of a passat, everything else you said makes sense of course.