Annoying cheap acoustic question

[ballandbiscuit]

Hi all

One of my gas resolutions for 2013 is to sort my acoustic guitar options out. I know more about electrics but play acoustic reasonably well for my purposes. I wondered if there were any good "bang for buck" acoustics, equivalent to, for example, my Squire Tele I got recently which is lovely. Recommendations of good or bad models or brands would be massively helpful. Not hugely fussed whether electro or not

I'm not a huge strummer, prefer finger picking or bluesey style. I like playing White Stripes, Beatles, Simon & Garfunkel.

I do have two already, which id sell but wouldn't get much for. I can't remember the brand of the one, the other is a slightly battered (by the shop, was cheap damagaed stock) ovation type copy, which has ridiculously high action, but as I can't sell it cos of the damage, I could just keep it for slide or something.

Thanks in advance

[BigLicks67]

Ebay is full of used decent quality acoustics at less than £150.00. I saw an all solid wood Tanglewood go for £125.00 before xmas.
But it depends on your budget. Go for a minimum solid top guitar and you would be probably better looking at smaller bodied instruments, say a 000 or folk size rather than a dreadnought. Brands like Tanglewood, old Sigmas, Recording King should be good.

[PonchoGreg]

+1 on the above. Looked at Tanglewood and Recording King when shopping for a cheap but good quality 000.

Went with the Recording King (bargain and great build) but was also impressed by one Tanglewood.

[ESBlonde]

What he said above. Also non electrified guitars tend to be better instruments because no cost was held back for the pickups etc. If it feels good and sounds good, it is good.

[bertie]

bang for buck is still dependent on budget............. there are £100 and £500 guitars that I'd consider to have good bang for buck!

[amberlamps]

Vintage V300 is good value for money as is Lag T66a, both worth checking out..

[guitarfishbay]

Corts may be woth checking out, though I have only played a cheap dreadnaught and none of their smaller bodied guitars (which tend to suit finger pickers more). A friend has a solid top Cort dreadnaught and it is good for the price and I think he paid less than £200 new.

I agree small bodied guitars are worth considering for finger pickers. Don't totally discount larger body guitars though. Intstrumentalists such as Andy McKee often use Jumbos for fingerpicking, and IMO get a fantastic tone. They have a bigger tone compared to a OM type, as you'd expect, but if you're used to an amplified electric guitar tone you may prefer this fuller response. My acoustic is a Jumbo and I very much enjoy its tone for fingerpicking, though I have played some larger guitars where there is too much boom going on with the low strings for fingerpicking to sound balanced. A Jumbo can feel pretty massive however, and some people do not enjoy/adjust to playing the larger guitars.

[bertie]

unless you're recording, or uber critical about balanced tone - its ALL about comfort, and unless you're 6' 10 or an alien - smaller bodied guitars are much more comfortable. (and easier to use in hammocks !! )

Ive always been a picker - even before I could 'strum' (sounds bizarre but thats the way it is) Ive owned acoustics of all shapes and sizes over the many years Ive been playing - and for me smaller bodies are the 'win' - but to be fair, I dont do a lot of strumming.........but If I need a boomer, I still have an old Washburn dread tucked away somewhere

[guitarfishbay]

I can't argue with the hammocks thing! Comfort is definitely a major factor to consider as there is no point buying a guitar you don't enjoy playing. Most people are ok with a dreadnaught but Jumbos do creep over in to the 'too big for some' category with that extra width on the lower bout.

[bertie]

dreads are the same for me (plus they're fookin ugly) - send a few months with an OM/000 and playing a dread again is a real pain - in more ways than one !