Hacker News Reader

'you make a big investment (upwards of $2000) and it motivates you not to give up'

I've been playing semi-pro for quite a while, and In My Opinion, this is just as likely to fail as help. Also, I've never owned a guitar that cost more than 700 (except my Tom Anderson Tele which I inherited). And I have a lot of guitars and play quite a bit.

I've seen guys do that -- buy a really expensive Taylor or Larivee or some Guitar Center Shiny and then stare at it with guilt for the next five years, unable to part with it and admit defeat, nor pick it up and practice because it reminds them how much time they've wasted not working with this beautiful neglected instrument.

My advice: buy a serviceable, good acoustic. Find a real musician friend if you have one, a real guitar nut and take him/her to the pawn shops, and as a last resort even Guitar Center (LAST resort) and have him pick something out for you. And stay under 600 bucks for the love of God.

Then a year or two later, when you've decided that you love this guitar thing and want to get serious, you'll spend that 2K+ far, far better -- you'll know to avoid the glossy Taylor-ish nonsense and get a nice LG-1 or LG-2 (I've seen 60s models pop up at pawns shops for < 1500$, seriously twice in the last year) or a nice 70s Martin with creamy-sparkly high ends, warm and well-defined lows, and a gorgeous, aged-in finish that you will sit and stare at with pride for the next 25 years.

Taylor makes great guitars for most people. Sure, not everybody is going to like them (esp. Martin freaks), but they are high-quality and playable, which is why they're so popular.

I'm just burnt out on that sound. To my ears they lack personality and expressiveness. They have a full sound, they're radio-friendly and they "play like an electric!" so I get why they're so popular and why so many new guitarists walk out of Guitar Center with one, but to me they're the Yellow Tail Shiraz of acoustic guitars.

A lot of people play Taylors for a reason. I agree they've flooded the market in 2013, but even 10 or 15 years ago, that wasn't the case. Back then, the CW was that what you said above applied to Martin (don't misunderstand-- I love Martins for what they represent, too). It's the guitar circle of life. Some people just wanna be different and don't want to play what everybody else is playing. I get that, but ten years from now it won't be Taylor, it will be some other maker. It's the nature of the business.

Enh...the thing is, a $300 Fender acoustic sounds good enough that you can get away with playing shows on it - you probably shouldn't, but you absolutely can. As a beginner, you're really not going to appreciate the difference between that and a high end model anyways, so why spend more?

If you're the type that needs to blow money to feel motivated, sure, you can do better, but there's a lot to be said for learning to sound good on a shitty instrument before you are good enough that spending more will actually make you sound better. That's how most pros start out...

A $300 Fender acoustic is going to frustrate a beginner. They're crap, with low QC. A beginner would be better off getting a playable electric or waiting until they can spend around $1500-$2k and get themselves a playable acoustic.

I agree that I probably wouldn't go with Fender low-end (they are crap), but there's plenty of good bargains in the 300-400 range that won't frustrate a beginner. There's probably 4 or 5 Epiphone, Seagull, Alvarez or Ibanez low/mid-range guitars hanging up at your local pawn/small guitar shop right now. Even some old Harmonys, Kays or Silvertones can work out real well, depending on the guitar. My favorite acoustic to play right now is my '53 Kay arch top that I picked up for $400.

That's like buying a Porsche to learn how to drive. Sure, you can drive it around, look cool and feel good but you won't know what to do when you break something.

Also, you're going to sound like shit if you're forced to play a cheap, badly setup guitar. (oh-this-guitar-sucks-so-i-cant-play is a terrible excuse, trust me.)

Another reason why I think this is a bad idea - you have no idea what kind of guitar you want when you're starting out. You dont know what wood you want, if you want humbuckers or single coils, floating or fixed bridge. You don't want to buy a 5000$ custom shop Les Paul and realize you're not comfortable playing it.

Maybe if you have tons of disposable income, but you can get a damn good sounding acoustic guitar for under a grand that sounds better than most that cost twice that if you don't mind shopping around.

I've found a classical that sounded better than everything else in the (rather large) store. That one cost 600 while the cheapest competitor was 1700. This is taking string age, etc into account. Similar for acoustics if you add a few hundred to both ends. It really comes down to the luck of the draw on wood quality and combinations of different trees an instrument is made of.

Now, you can get an electric of craigslist for three hundred that'll play like butter after a competent setup with some 9 gauge strings on it. You do have to buy an amp, but if you don't want really nice metal distortion it shouldn't cost you too much. Distortion and effects can get costly.

And then, we could always talk about how if you really want to understand music you should just learn to play bass.....

I agree with some of the things you've said. I actually ordered myself a Fender Jazz Bass just yesterday and I've never even played any type of guitar in my life. But even though I went with that "buy the expensive guitar then it wouldn't be easy for you to give up on it" route, I don't necessarily think that's the only way to go. I live in a small town where I don't have the option to test a lot of guitars and see whether they sound good or they're a good fit for my hands (plus I'm left handed so that doesn't help). If anyone lives in a big city where there's a big music shop, I think the safest and the cheapest way to go is to go to that shop and try as many instruments as possible.

Just because you pay a guitar more money than the other one, it doesn't mean the expensive one would sound better than the cheaper one and most importantly it doesn't mean you'd be comfortable playing it.

However, if you don't have an option to try different guitars, Fender is the way to go. Their Standard Mexican made model Strats are not that expensive, in my opinion.

A thought on the price of a guitar... People often cringe at the thought of spending several thousand dollars on a guitar (or I guess other instruments too), but for myself and probably most of this crowd, I spend that much every 3-5 years replacing computers as they age and become outdated. A nice guitar will last you a lifetime if you take care of it. You can even pass it onto your kids. I tell myself it's a wise investment!

That's crazy. Crazy crazy crazy.

Spend $400 and you can get a really nice guitar. Totally sufficient for anything you need as a beginner.

Take the other $1600 and book yourself lessons for the next 18 months. That qualifies as the same "cost commitment", but actually adds value.

A nice electric, yeah. But not a nice acoustic. He's right that (give or take a few hundred) $2k is about the threshold for a playable acoustic that has good action and isn't going to make you cry. $400 doesn't buy much acoustic guitar at all these days.

UPDATE to my parent post: YMMV. I described what worked for me. As a teenager I learned a few chords/songs on a simple guitar that sounded dull, because I lived in a place where I didn't have any choice. Eventually I decided that guitar playing is probably not for me, since I had not been able to progress.

But I noticed that I still loved to listen to the folk/blue grass/blues acoustic guitar and would spend literally hours on youtube watching people play. So I kind of always had an idea in the back of my mind what kind of guitar I'd like to play.

3 months ago I ended up buying a slightly used Martin dred. It was a difficult decision, because I remembered that I'd already given up once. But it turned out to be the most gratifying purchase I made in my life - I love it and it's hard to put down. I've made more progress in 3 months than I had in 3 years the last time I had a guitar.

So, what I'm trying to say, knowing what you want is probably essential before buying a high end guitar, but you certainly don't have to be an advanced player to make the most out of it. Also, by all means try a lot of guitars, if you can. You may decide that that Takamine sitting in front of the shop is more to you liking than the beautiful Guild hanging in the back under the ceiling.

I like this advice, but I don't necessarily believe that it has to be a high end guitar. My first real guitar was a Seagull Cedar Maritime, and it's basically what I taught myself on. I like it for a number of reasons, namely

- It's pretty cheap. The SWS models can get up there (and I've since picked one up) but you can get a decent Seagull for under $500, and it won't break the bank.

- Seagulls generally have wider nut widths, which gives a little more breathing room between the strings, and is great for finger style and the 'fat finger' feeling new guitarists have.

- They sound AMAZING. For my last guitar, I was dead set on buying a Taylor 514CE, but playing it side by side next to Martins and solid body Seagulls, I ended up getting another Seagull. Obviously, this is as subjective as the ongoing 'Martin vs Taylor' holy war, but I took a neutral party to blind listen to me playing so as to mitigate the confirmation bias, and they picked the Seagull too (though obviously, I was more keen on the Seagull architecture, which I'm sure did bias things).

All that aside, I don't think I got really serious about learning guitar until I ultimately picked myself up a Les Paul (per your advice) to effectively "get more skin in the game", as well as to know that whatever mistakes I made were mine, and couldn't be blamed on the guitar.

Also, in addition to justinguitar.com, I would add Marty Schwartz, who has a Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/guitarjamzdotcom.

He teaches a lot of beginner level, few-chord songs that people know and recognize, and even though I know that it's a Youtube video, and not interactive, the videos are recorded with a great deal of patience.

I'm also a big fan of Marty Schwartz's, and I've learned a lot of great Blues licks and soloing techniques from him. Most recently I've been working on combining major and minor pentatonic licks and runs into my improvisations, and I'm loving my progress. Thanks Marty!

I love YouTube, I really do, besides great resources like justinguitar and Mary Schwartz, there are a huge number of excellent backing tracks you can use improvise over, here are a few of my favorite favorites

Happy Blues in E (great for mixing major/minor pentatonic) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxo2bEX45KI

Acoustic Rock Style Backing Track - D Major http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohbtYFRe-xc

Marty teaching 'Fly me to the moon' (great jazz standard) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr3fa1NDVB4

Second the vote for Seagull. I'm pretty sure they're all made with solid tops, but are still affordable (last time I looked starting in the $300 range. I think you need a "good enough" guitar that will stay in tune properly and sound decent, but that doesn't need to be a $2000 guitar. There are a bunch of big brands that fit this, but I think the Seagulls are some of the ones that don't feel cheap while actually being affordable.

EDIT: for those not aware, a solid top is preferred to a plywood top for tonal quality. Most of the cheaper guitars use a plywood top. That said, a lot of plywood tops sound pretty good these days, but I tend to be a purist in these sorts of things so greatly prefer the solid tops. :)

Completely agreed. My first acoustic was a "made in Cambodia" Fender that wasn't horrible, but really didn't compare well to pretty much any other guitar of any quality.

My second purchase was aiming for something with a solid top, and the tonal quality was apparent from the very first note I played.

My third purchase was aimed at getting a solid body guitar, which is trickier because there isn't necessarily a noticeable difference between a guitar with a laminate body and one with a solid body, though you can certainly find guitars that sound different, neither is clearly better (by sound) on a new guitar.

That said, as I'm told, the tone of a solid body guitar will age, like wine, and sound better and better over time, so long as it's taken care of. A laminate will, at best, stay the same, and more likely will dull over time.

This (and nostalgia, history, etc.) is the reason old, good guitars tend to fetch so much money, because they were likely made from great stock to begin with, and have since aged to sound even better. (I say with only anecdotal evidence).