Is it worth paying extra for a name? Is the premium you pay for a Martin guitar or Steinway piano worth it? Does the higher cost translate into better playability, sound or undefinable musical quality?

Sure, a name-brand instrument will keep its value better than a no-name instrument and that is worth something. However, I bought a nice, slightly off-name (Alvarez Yairi) guitar new and have played it for 30 years. I have no plans to sell it, so its residual value is unimportant. It actually is probably worth about what I paid for it, maybe a little more. I do know that I got a lot of fine sound and nice playability for perhaps half the price of the equivalent Martin guitar. Yet to a lot of people, "It's not a Martin."

So the question is: Is it worth it to pay extra for the name? Or is there a quality that comes with those name brands that is worth the extra cost?

--Bob

You have a lot more experience than I with band instruments, Amy, particularly since I have none. With acoustic guitars, there are the top-tier luthiers such as Martin, Gibson, Taylor, Guild and a couple others. Then there is a second tier, from which you can get a guitar just as good as the top names, only somewhat less expensive. These include certain models from Yamaha, Takamine, Alvarez, Seagull, Ovation, RainSong, Washburn and a few others. The problem with this second tier is that, for all their quality, they don't have the resale value and cachet of the top-tier.

There are then two more tiers. The first of these includes decent-qualtity guitars from many of the same names as the second-tier, only made in China, Korea or Indonesia. They are good for beginners and will last several years with reasonable care. The bottom tier is absolute garbage, stuff that will fall apart with even modest use.

It's that second-tier stuff that got me to thinking about the value of a name. If you buy a guitar and keep it for life, the second tier is the best value. You'll just have to endure constant comments along the lines of, "How come you don't have a Martin?" All the replies in the world about sound quality, playability and price will never end the steady deprecating comments.

Maybe it's just me rationalizing since I've never owned a Martin. (Actually, the guitar I built was a kit of parts from Martin and it is theoretically built from the same materials as a Martin D-18.)

--Bob

Ah - I see your point. And we're really talking apples and oranges since I was discussing beginner instruments - probably like your 3rd and 4th tier guitars - and you were talking about step-up instruments. Sounds like you're discussing more the instrument someone would move to once they have some proficiency... and there, just as with most band instruments, the less prestigious instrument is probably just fine for most players.

But it's just more fun to own the top of the line. For non-musicians it might be more like the difference between buying the Jaguar or the Hyundai Sonata that was designed to mimic the Jag.

... OK, that's a really bad example.

I can't believe this one passed me by for soo long.
Actually there are a few more tiers to begin with.
Fender, for example. You take the word Fender and expect some of the gratest guitars to come from this company. This is where a NAME comes in. One problem. Fender has built other plants in mexico and abroad and some of the quality has left the best known name in guitars. I sell several "tiers" of guitars, but being a music store and having to pay bills to run the establishment, I can sell "bottom-tier" guitars all day long and never sell a decent guitar known for quality. Don't get me wrong, i stand behind my product, or it doesn't stay here long, but parents care more about getting their child started with "A" guitar that has a decent price, rather than "The" guitar that the child might put down within 6 months. I stated this several times in some of my reviews,"It's best to buy a decent guitar for a good price for your child then to spend hundreds of dollars just to find out they are not interested in playing after six months".
A name is very important in the music world because the opinions and ratings that follows behind a name is VERY important. On the other hand, I hate to see a name used to sell a piece of junk.
I.E. All Stradivarius violins are not of top quality. A select few are very expensive, and ALOT of people will give their right arm for a violin that says stradivarious, not knowing that some are worth only the wood to burn.

Something that should be pointed out about those cheaply made instruments from China is that many music shops will not service or try to repair them once they break. You might as well as throw them away. It's better to get an instrument that has a well-known brand name and is not necessarily top-of-the line but one that is more reasonably priced and is pretty good quality.

Not really. Although it could be argued that the name has SOMETHING to do with it, handmade solid wood guitars built by skilled luthiers have it all over plywood machine made stuff. I know that probably doesn't make you happy to hear that more expensive is better but there are still some things made well and worth the extra money.