Many guitarists fetishize the 59 Les Paul because of the sound. The trick is that '59 Les Paul might not sound any different objectively, but the musician knows they are playing an iconic and rare instrument. This can make the musician play better than usual. Guitarists often attribute this to the "mojo" in the guitar; the trick is the mojo is in the player's belief.
On the other hand, I could see that for some successful performers, the purchase could be a sound financial investment if fans are just a bit more excited about hearing their favorite musician playing a rare instrument live than they would otherwise be. One might be able to recover the purchase price of the instrument through increased ticket sales.
I once turned up to a pub session and saw this hairy-looking person with a complete PoS no-name guitar. It had holes in the body and looked like it was held together with tape.
Even so. Surprisingly good sound. Sweet playing.
Complete opposite to the guitar nerds who turn up with gleaming prestige instruments they fumble around on.
I found out afterwards he'd been in a household name UK pop band in the late 60s.
[edit] I think it might have been a Fender Jaguar actually, it looked terrible!
stage 1: figure out how to make a thing
stage 2: figure out how to make the thing well
stage 3: figure out how to make the thing cheaply
stage 4: figure out how to make the thing well, cheaply
I'd say that for electric guitars, the '59 Les Paul was at the early end of stage 2, and sometime in the last decade or so we've gradually transitioned into stage 4.
One might argue that there's also a stage 5: figure out how to make the thing well and cheap, but customized to a specific user's preferences. Right now, that's the main reason why one would have an electric guitar custom made by a luthier rather than buy a factory-made instrument. (I like to mess around with just-intonation-based tuning systems, and have ended up building or modifying a lot of instruments simply because guitars in the tunings I want simply aren't for sale.)
It's true that I don't think you could find a decent acoustic guitar for anywhere near that price. I recently paid $500 for my first acoustic because I saw a clear difference in quality between the one I selected (Taylor GS Mini) and the competition in the $200-$400 price range.
I have one of the last Korean Ibanezes(2005) before production of mid and low end models was almost entirely moved to Indonesia, and in 2006 the Korean ones were much better in comparison.
Nowadays, after almost 15 years the Indonesian made Ibanezes caught up.
Another guitar I use regularly is a Squier Bullet Strat. It sounds kind of like Strat and it doesn't buzz at frets because of super high action, but it won't stay in tune, the ends frets are sharp and so are saddle adjustment screws that are a couple of millimeters too long and the icing on the cake is that basically anything played on second string makes something under pickguard rattle unless you press it at a certain spot. If you have to ask, it's audible through pickups and kills sustain.
I think you can find equally bad USA-made instruments at several times of the price if you look hard enough, but I wouldn't call these good instruments.
Back in the 80s I bought a Charvel (Japanese) as I couldn't afford a Jackson (US made) - the cheaper Floyd Rose tremolo was disappointing but it was fine to play. Eventually switched to an Ibanez RG 570 which was super nice to play.
The type and grade of wood used will also affect the string vibration and what overtone frequencies are refected back into the strings. It takes 20-40 years to mature a mahogany tree so while your boutique makers will spend the time to source the perfect timber you won't get that for a mass produced guitar.
There are guitarists who swear by their guitar tech who will adjust everything from bridge height, neck tension, even reseat and glue the neck before they pick it up the first time. I pulled the neck off my old Charvel more than once to get a lower, more even string height along the fretboard. Second time I filed back a few frets that had nicks or weren't quite evenly set and sanded the epoxy coating off the neck and replaced with shellac for a smoother raw wood feel.
It sounds more than okay (which is subjective). The body is light but without any head dive present. The neck is a dream and the fretwork is impeccable.
The tuners are bad but not awful. That's the only bad thing I can say about it.
Hey now, the neck on the Gibson SG is wonderful.
I've owned both and personally strongly prefer the SG. It doesn't have the same iconic image as the Les Paul, though.
But personally I'm just not a fan of the shorter scale lengths and thick gloss finishes on most Gibsons, I'm personally a fan of thinner maple necks and will sand down the finish myself if I have to, but everyone's different
Oh I am too. Most of the time I play a Fender. But I love playing an SG also.
(Disclaimer: worked in the MI business for decades. It always fills me with a sense of wonder, the things people will buy to make themselves sound different from others while also conforming to industry expectations...)
Because that link may not work forever - although I suspect it will be there for a while - the summary is: two Telecaster guitars painted to look like copies of the Teles Jimmy Page played in Led Zeppelin. Signed by Jimmy Page. £44,999.
I'd love to know what the shop markup is on those, or if they're on sale-or-return.
Synthesizers have a similar scene. An official Keith Emerson Moog Modular Replica reissue a few years ago was being sold for >$100k. (Note to those under 40: Keith Emerson was a famous/notorious rock keyboardist in the 1970s.)
It doesn't have to be a 'classic' synthesiser to command extraordinary markup/profit.
There is a reason why the current synthesiser market is vibrant and active and virulent - and nobody is playing well with each other, there are more competing platforms to do the same thing than many other spaces.
That reason is, you can spend $100 on a BOM-per-product, and sell it for 5 figures, year after year. That $3000 synth workstation, at scale, can add up to a lot of real, good old fashioned atom-based commercialisation.
I'd say they were pretty expensive to produce:
> And these 2 pieces were masterfully built by Paul Waller at the Fender Custom Shop under the discerning eye of Page. They are exact re-creations of his beloved guitars!
It certainly amazes me what some hobbyists can spend without playing a single gig, or even understanding the kit they have, but I guess it's a hobby.
As to professionals if they decide it's worth it to their bottom line I wouldn't call them consumers.
There is a distinction in the market between professionals and hobbyists, but then most of the MI market is borne on the fact that there are about 2 - 10 million new musician students coming into the scene every year - a portion will become hobbyists, and a very, very small percentage will become 'professionals', by many variant degrees of definition of the word professional - i.e. gets paid, has money to spend on music stuff.
Musicians can be pro or hobbyist, doesn't matter to the instrument maker unless its important the end user feels special. Thus, the higher prices for 'special' instruments.
Music, though, doesn't need to be high quality in order to be experienced. Even low quality instruments can sound amazing in the hands of a musician - hobbyist or otherwise.
My brother teaches guitar and he frequently sees people who’ve just started playing show up for lessons with ludicrously expensive instruments. And hey, if they enjoy it, more power to them.
[1] https://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?83971-Jimm...
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAF_(pickup)