I judge a musical instrument on ergonomics, build quality and sound. you can add aesthetics but it doesn't affect quality.
I generally disagree. Even if you're talking about workmanship, that's something you can judge objectively. But, mostly, I'm talking about how much it inspires you. That being said, an objectively more expertly done finish does not necessarily make the guitar better. I can't really imagine a 70s punk band playing immaculate guitars, for example.
as we have acknowledged this industry is not exactly known for a scientific approach to much unfortunately
It's shocking when you dig into it. There are a lot of people who ignore objective, verifiable data on measurable differences
while claiming that they can hear things that can't be measured. It's not at all limited to guitars and amps. There are very talented mastering engineers who say those kinds of things about different converters or fancy cables.
A person's ability to do a job seems not to be determined by understanding any piece of the science or math behind it...which is kind of a foreign concept to me.
Yes I've seen this from people who have never played through a real one or ever really listened....To really appreciate the difference you need one in front of you and an amazing guitar plugged straight in.
I disagree. Strongly. There are what, 300 Dumbles out there? I know a lot of them have changed hands and some of the owners let people play them whenever the opportunity comes up.
Pretend for a minute that a thousand people have played every single Dumble. In 2020, Fender Play, just Fender Play, saw twice that many new users in a 3-month period. Statistically, the number of guitarists who have played a Dumble is rounding error.
If needing to play them was required to appreciate them, then the reputation would be complete BS.
FWIW, I have heard a couple in person. But...they were a part of Joe Bonamassa's big rig. So, they had effects in front of them, I never knew objectively when they were playing, they were behind shields, and they were mic'd through the PA. Does that mean I've never heard one? Does that mean I have no reason to think they're good?
In this circumstance you would not find anyone to deny the sheer quality of tone.
So, for those few thousand people...sure. But...Bonamassa currently owns and tours with 3 of them, and he said in an interview that when he got the first two he wanted his money back because they sounded awful...they needed a speaker change.
Anyway, not to derail the thread
This thread was made to be derailed as far as I'm concerned.
Brand and price does not always reflect how good a guitar is (for you). Which is why no matter what 3 pages of back and forth on subjective vs. objective....guitars are always something I need to play before I judge them.
Agreed.
My personal "hot take" is that I've never played a PRS SE that I thought was definitely worth the asking price, except for the one Parlor Acoustic I played. No objective quality (frets, nut, finish, etc.) stood out among the herd of "nice" imports. I know those aren't expensive, but "everyone" says they punch above their weight. They're no better or worse than basically any of their competitors IME. And I don't think I've ever really read that on the internet. People who don't like them say they're the cheap version of lawyer guitars (which doesn't mean anything), and people who do like them think they're flawless. I wouldn't have come to that conclusion if I hadn't played about 15 or 20 of them.