Are guitarists spoiled or lucky?
Chris Isaak—the pompadoured crooner of hits like “Wicked Game” and “Baby Did a Bad Bad Thing”—used to come into a vintage guitar store where I worked. He would look at a guitar’s price and joke, “For that much money, I don’t want to play it—I want to drive it!” These instruments were between $5,000 and $15,000. Though Isaak was still a bargain hunter, he’d achieved considerable commercial success and wasn’t what you’d call a cheapskate. But his thinking reflected that of countless players of the time.
And this was well before the incredible rise in quality control and bang-for-buck value we’ve seen in both American and imported guitars over the last decade or so. Back then you really didn’t need a guitar that cost as much as a car—and you definitely don’t now. Many great players get gigs with top acts—from Paul McCartney to Nine Inch Nails—playing quality instruments that don’t even come close to maxing-out a $5,000 credit card.
The truth is, when it comes to buying instruments, electric guitarists are spoiled—especially compared to players of many other instruments. Granted, we have to purchase at least one amp, and most of us will also use pedals or rack effects. But even if you go a little nuts at your local guitar shop and spend 10 grand on a reliable touring rig, it’s nothing compared to how much, say, a symphony orchestra harpist has to plunk down for her dream instrument.
down for her dream instrument.
“I paid $25,000 for my harp in 2001. The same model purchased new today would be $37,000,” says Allegra Lilly, principal harpist for the St. Louis Symphony. “You could easily get a great concert grand for $20,000–$25,000, though I would guess that the most popular model goes for $33,000.”
Or suppose you played double bass. Freelance classical bassist Ali Cook says she paid $17k for hers. “Colleagues of mine have basses that range from $10,000 to $50,000. Once we, hopefully, win a permanent [symphonic] position, we would generally upgrade to an instrument that could cost up to $200,000.”
If you play traditional jazz guitar, you might pay as much as $30,000 for a custom instrument like a Benedetto. Yet you could just as easily gig with an Eastman, Ibanez, Godin, Epiphone, or Gretsch archtop and come in at under a grand. It’s interesting, though, that new instruments for traditional jazz players are the ones that reach into the range of those earmarked for classical players.
Classical bassists might use a double bass ranging from $20,000 to $50,000, but those playing permanently in an orchestra would likely spend more than $200k on a premier instrument. Photo by Andrew Kepert.
Not necessarily. More likely it’s because they have no choice. A high-end jazz box has more in common with a violin than with a Telecaster. The relationship between archtops and classical instruments becomes apparent when you hear Cook describe why symphonic quality instruments are so pricey—and why orchestral players need them.
“The instruments are acoustic, so the wood used, the measurements, and even the varnish can affect the resulting sound,” she explains. “They can takes months or longer to make.” A similar construction process is used to make a hand-built archtop guitar, and explains why they too can be so costly.
More expensive instruments offer sonic advantages as well. “When you’re auditioning for one spot in an orchestra against dozens of competitors, having an instrument that projects sound half as far as the next guy’s can seriously hurt your chances,” Cook continues. “Everyone’s technique and musicality being equal, the quality of instrument has noticeable advantages.”
Jazz guitarists who use amplifiers don’t have to worry about projection, but many traditional players work with transparent amps, often at relatively low volume where the acoustic properties of the guitar are audible. But traditional jazz guitarists also resemble classical players in that they can ply their craft with a single instrument, whereas guitarists engaged in popular music usually need a variety of axes to be competitive.
A traditional jazz guitarist might pay as much as $30,000 for a custom instrument—yet they could just as easily gig with a guitar under a grand, like a Joe Pass Epiphone Emperor II. Are classical and jazz musicians dedicated to their craft in some deeper way than pop musicians, and thus willing to spend more money for their instrument?
That last bit may sound like a story we tell our significant others, but it is nevertheless true: Most working guitarists need both humbucking and single-coil models, and often a quality acoustic as well, not to mention backup instruments for each type. Even with relatively inexpensive models, costs can add up.
Still, let’s do the math for a bare minimum typical rig a pro guitarist might need to be properly equipped for most gigs:
- Fender American Standard Stratocaster $1,199.99
- Gibson Les Paul Standard $2,999.00
- Martin D-18 $2,199.00
- Vox AC-30 $ 999.99
- Ibanez Tube Screamer $ 99.99
- Line 6 DL4 $ 249.99
- Total (not including tax and/or shipping) $7,747.96
We could add another guitar or amp, or an additional pedal or two (or five) and still be under the cost of the cheapest professional double bass.
So what are we complaining about? Walter Carter, who worked with famed vintage dealer George Gruhn for years and now owns Carter Vintage Guitars, wonders. “Musicians have never had any money, so an instrument of high quality has always been high-priced relative to a musician’s income,” he says. “But there are good quality utility instruments now that are cheaper than they have ever been. A Les Paul was $250 in the ’50s. You can get a copy now for not much more, and the real thing for $2,500. New cars were under $2,000 in the ’50s, and they are over $20,000 now. That ratio makes guitars a better deal now than they ever were.”
What about the costly vintage instruments Carter sells? “Most guitar players are not willing to spend collectable prices for working instruments because they will put wear on it and decrease the value by playing them, though they may use a high-end guitar in the studio,” he notes.
a variety of axes to be competitive.
According to Carter, Nashville studio players favor reliability over vintage appeal and tend to employ newer instruments in the $1,000 to $2,500 range. “The higher-end vintage guitars go mostly to collectors and wealthy musicians,” he says.
The player who purchases a guitar in the classical instrument price range for use on gigs is rare, but not unheard of. Take Joe Bonamassa—while he might not consider himself wealthy, he travels with three vintage Les Pauls whose worth must easily top five figures each—maybe even six. Of those instruments he has said, “They have a certain feel to them, and a clarity that makes you play better. There is that scorching high end that is not too bright. The pickups have only a little more output than a Strat, which helps the clarity.” Bonamassa also recently purchased a 1956 Fender Strat in a custom cream color from Carter for around $50,000.
Before you gasp and clutch your heart, consider this web post by violin luthier Kevin Lee, in which he explains what kind of violin you get in various price ranges. One post section is labeled: $6,000-$50,000: The beginning of professional instruments. (Yes, the price goes up exponentially from here), and one bit of advice he offers is, “There are many symphonies that will not accept your application unless you are playing a violin worth at least $15,000, many much higher, no matter how good you or your instrument may sound.”
This student model pedal harp by Salvi Harps costs $19,400, while elite harp models cost
upwards of $100k.
I think we can all agree that Bonamassa is as dedicated to his career and music as the typical symphonic violinist, and is far from scuffling. In fact, it would be hard to imagine he earns less than a symphony musician, whose pay can range from $28,000 to a maximum of $115,000 a year (2010 estimates from Berklee College of Music). So it makes perfect sense that, like them, he invests in instruments that help him perform at the highest level. Still, while not all of us can afford a ’59 Les Paul, the good news is that we don’t have to.
As Carter says, good guitars have gotten cheaper. I recently played an Epiphone Les Paul Standard Plustop Pro, which streets for under $500. This instrument went well beyond “good”—I would be happy doing any gig or session with it. For that matter, I have gone toe-to-toe with a fine guitarist playing a real Gibson Les Paul through a Marshall stack (total cost $5,000 or more), while I played a Danelectro Pro reissue through a Fender Hot Rod Deluxe (total cost around $1,000) and held my own sonically—not because I’m so amazing (I’m not), but because that inexpensive equipment sounds so darn good.
On top of everything else, popular guitar tone is much more subjective than classical tone. Pawnshop prizes like Harmony, Silvertone, and Teisco guitars increasingly appear in the hands of professional players tired of traditional Fender and Gibson sounds. We are lucky to live in an age when good guitars are cheap and cheap guitars are considered good.
So how spoiled and lucky are we? Just ask a concert string player who has taken out the equivalent of a student loan to buy a single instrument. Think about that the next time you balk at the price of a guitar. Consider whether this is the instrument that will help you be all you can be as a player, and then ponder how much achieving that goal is worth to you. Finally, be very grateful you don’t play concert harp.
Featuring P-90 PRO pickups, CTS potentiometers, and a Custom ’59 Rounded C neck profile.
Epiphone’s Joe Bonamassa 1955 Les Paul Standard features the same Copper Iridescent color, a pair of Epiphone P-90 PRO pickups wired to CTS potentiometers and Mallory capacitors, a Custom ’59 Rounded C neck profile, a long neck tenon, and a “Nerdville” graphic hardshell case. This Epiphone 1955 Les Paul Standard is a passionate testament to Bonamassa’s unwavering commitment to the blues and its profound influence on his music.
The Epiphone Joe Bonamassa 1955 Les Paul Standard release is a nod to a pivotal period in the evolution of the Gibson Les Paul, in a finish guaranteed to turn heads. Whether you’re a Joe Bonamassa fan, a Les Paul enthusiast, or a musician seeking an instrument that stands out in both tone and appearance, the Joe Bonamassa 1955 Les Paul Standard is the perfect addition to your collection.
This partnership with Epiphone celebrates the timeless synergy between the brand and Joe’s musical trajectory. Joe’s latest release Live At The Hollywood Bowl immortalizes Joe's first-ever performance at the iconic Hollywood Bowl in August 2023. Accompanied by an impressive ensemble of 40 orchestra members, Bonamassa delivered an unforgettable performance. Live At The Hollywood Bowl With Orchestra showcases Bonamassa’s virtuosic blend of blues and rock, but also elevates fan-favorite tracks with grandiose orchestral arrangements by some of Hollywood's finest – David Campbell, Trevor Rabin, and Jeff Bova. “Very few gigs represent my journey in music more than the Hollywood Bowl. I moved to Los Angeles in 2003 in search of opportunity and cheaper rent than New York City. My first gig at The Mint was attended by 5 of my friends. We have played The Greek Theatre many times since, but the Bowl has always been a dream. The orchestra and the sheer scale of the event and venue are something I will never forget. I am so grateful that we filmed this special event in my life,” reminisces Bonamassa.
For more information, please visit epiphone.com.
Joe Bonamassa Introduces the Epiphone 1955 Les Paul Standard - YouTube
Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.Epiphone Joe Bonamassa 1955 Les Paul Standard Electric Guitar - Copper Iridescent
JB 1955 LP Std, Cop IridWonderful array of weird and thrilling sounds can be instantly conjured. All three core settings are colorful, and simply twisting the time, span, and filter dials yields pleasing, controllable chaos. Low learning curve.
Not for the faint-hearted or unimaginative. Mode II is not as characterful as DBA and EQD settings.
$199
EarthQuaker Devices/Death By Audio Time Shadows
earthquakerdevices.com
This joyful noisemaker can quickly make you the ringmaster of your own psychedelic circus, via creative delays, raucous filtering, and easy-to-use, highly responsive controls.
I love guitar chaos, from the expressionist sound-painting of Jimi Hendrix’s “Machine Gun” to the clean, clever skronk ’n’ melody of Derek Bailey to the slide guitar fantasias of Sonny Sharrock to the dark, molten eruptions of Sunn O))). When I was just getting a grip on guitar, my friends and I would spend eight-hour days exploring feedback and twisted riffage, to see what we might learn about pushing guitar tones past the conventional.
So, pedals that are Pandora’s boxes of weirdness appeal to me. My two current favorites are my Mantic Flex Pro, a series of filter controls linked to a low-frequency oscillator, and my Pigtronix Mothership 2, a stompbox analog synth. But the Time Shadows II Subharmonic Multi-Delay Resonator is threatening their favored status—or at least demanding a third chair. This collaboration between Death By Audio and EarthQuaker Devices is a wonderful, gnarly little box of noise and fun that—unlike the two pedals I just mentioned—is easy to dial in and adjust on the fly, creating appealing and odd sounds at every turn.
Behind the Wall of Sound
Unlike the Mantic Flex Pro, the Time Shadows is consistent. You can plug the Mantic into the same rig, and that rig into the same outlet, every day, and there are going to be slight—or big—differences in the sound. Those differences are even less predictable on different stages and in different rooms. The Time Shadows, besides its operating consistency, has six user-programmable presets. They write with a single touch of the button in the center of the device’s tough, aluminum 4 3/4" x 2 1/2" x 2 1/4" shell. Inside that shell live ghosts, wind, and unicorns that blow raspberries on cue and more or less on key. EQD and DBA explain these “presences” differently, relating that the Time Shadow’s circuitry combines three delay voices (EQD, II, and DBA) with filters, fuzz, phasing, shimmer, swell, and subharmonics. There’s also an input for an expression pedal, which is great for making the Time Shadows’ more radical sounds voice-like and lending dynamic control. But sustaining a tone sweeping the time, span, and filter dials manually is rewarding on its own, producing a Strickfaden lab’s worth of swirling, sweeping, and dipping sounds.
Guitar Tone from Roswell
Because of the wide variety of sounds, swirls, and shimmers the Time Shadows produces, I found it best to play through a pair of combos in stereo, so the full range of, say, high notes cascading downwards and dropping pitch as they repeat, could be appreciated in their full dimensionality. (That happens in DBA mode, with the time and span at 10 and 4 o’clock respectively, with the filter also at 4, and it’s magical.) The pedal also stands up well to fuzz and overdrives whether paired with humbucker, P-90, or single-coil guitars.
I loved all three modes, but the more radical EQD and DBA positions are especially excellent. The EQD side piles dirt on the incoming signal, adds sub-octave shimmer, and is delayed just before hitting the filters. Keeping the filter function low lends alligator growls to sustained barre chords, and single notes transform into orchestral strings or brass turf, with a soft attack. Pushing the span dial high creates kaleidoscopes of sound. The Death By Audio mode really hones in on the pedal’s delay characteristics, creating crisp repeats and clean sounds with a little less midrange in the filtering, but lending the ability to cut through a mix at volume. The II mode is comparatively clean, and the filter control becomes a mix dial for the delayed signal.
The Verdict
The closest delay I’ve found comparable to the Time Shadows is Red Panda’s function-rich Particle 2 granular delay and pitch-shifter, which also uses filtering, among other tricks. But that pedal has a very deep menu of functions, with a larger learning curve. If you like to expect the unexpected, and you want it now, the Time Shadows supports crafting a wide variety of cool, surprising sounds fast. And that’s fun. The challenge will be working the Time Shadows’ cascading aural whirlpools and dinosaur choirs into song arrangements, but I heard how the pedal could be used to create unique, wonderful pads or bellicose solos after just a few minutes of playing. If you’d like to easily sidestep the ordinary, you might find spelunking the Time Shadows’ cavernous possibilities worthwhile.
This little pedal offers three voices—analog, tape, and digital—and faithfully replicates the highlights of all three, with minimal drawbacks.
Faithful replications of analog and tape delays. Straightforward design.
Digital voice can feel sterile.
$119
Fishman EchoBack Mini Delay
fishman.com
As someone who was primarily an acoustic guitarist for the first 16 out of 17 years that I’ve been playing, I’m relatively new to the pedal game. That’s not saying I’m new to effects—I’ve employed a squadron of them generously on acoustic tracks in post-production, but rarely in performance. But I’m discovering that a pedalboard, particularly for my acoustic, offers the amenities and comforts of the hobbit hole I dream of architecting for myself one day in the distant future.
But by gosh, if delay—and its sister effect, reverb—haven’t always been perfect for the music I like to write and play. Which brings us to the Fishman EchoBack Mini Delay. The EchoBack, along with the standard delay controls of level, time, and repeats—as well as a tap tempo—has a toggle to alternate between analog, tape, and digital-delay voices.
I hooked up my Washburn Bella Tono Elegante to my Blues Junior to give the EchoBack a test run. We love a medium delay—my usual preference for delay settings is to have both level and repeats at 1 o’clock, and time at 11 o’clock. With the analog voice switched on, I heard some pillowy warmth in the processed signal, as well as a familiar degradation with each repeat—until their wake gave way to a gentle, distant, crinkly ticking. Staying on analog and adjusting delay time down to 8 o’clock and repeats to about 11:30, some cozy slapback enveloped my rendition of Johnny Marr’s part to “Back to the Old House,” conjuring up thoughts of Elvis trapped in a small chamber, but in a good way. It sounded indubitably authentic. The one drawback of analog delay for me, generally, is that its roundness can feel a bit under water at times.
Switching over to tape, that pillowy warmth evaporated, and in its place came a very clear replication of my tone—but with just a bit of the highs shaved off the top. With the settings at the medium-length mode listed above, I could see the empty, glass hall the pedal sent my sound bouncing down. I heard several pronounced pings of repeats before the signal fully faded out. On slapback settings (time at 8 o’clock, repeats at 11:30), rather than Elvis, I heard something more along the lines of a honky-tonk mic in a glass bottle. Still relatively crystalline, which actually was not my favorite. I like a bit more crinkle—so maybe analog is my bag....“That pillowy warmth evaporated, and in its place came a very clear, pristine replication of my tone—but with just a bit of the highs shaved off the top.”
Next up, digital. Here we have the brightest voice, and as expected, the most faithful repeats. They ping just a few times before shifting to a smooth, single undulating wave. When putting its slapback hat on, I found that the effect was a bit less alluring than I’d observed for the analog and tape voices. This is where the digital delay felt a little too sterile, with the cleanly preserved signal feeling a bit unnatural.
All in all, I dig the EchoBack for its replications of analog and tape voices, and ultimately, lean towards tape. While it’s nice having the digital delay there as an option, it feels a bit too clean when meddling with time of any given length. Nonetheless, this is surely a handy stomp for any acoustic player looking to venture into the land of live effects, or for those who are already there.
A silicon Fuzz Face-inspired scorcher.
Hot silicon Fuzz Face tones with dimension and character. Sturdy build. Better clean tones than many silicon Fuzz Face clones.
Like all silicon Fuzz Faces, lacks dynamic potential relative to germanium versions.
$229
JAM Fuzz Phrase Si
jampedals.com
Everyone has records and artists they indelibly associate with a specific stompbox. But if the subject is the silicon Fuzz Face, my first thought is always of David Gilmour and the Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii film. What you hear in Live at Pompeii is probably shaped by a little studio sweetening. Even still, the fuzz you hear in “Echoes” and “Careful With That Axe, Eugene”—well, that is how a fuzz blaring through a wall of WEM cabinets in an ancient amphitheater should sound, like the sky shredded by the wail of banshees. I don’t go for sounds of such epic scale much lately, but the sound of Gilmour shaking those Roman columns remains my gold standard for hugeness.
JAM’s Fuzz Phrase Fuzz Face homage is well-known to collectors in its now very expensive and discontinued germanium version, but this silicon variation is a ripper. If you love Gilmour’s sustaining, wailing buzzsaw tone in Pompeii, you’ll dig this big time. But its ’66 acid-punk tones are killer, too, especially if you get resourceful with guitar volume and tone. And while it can’t match its germanium-transistor-equipped equivalent for dynamic response to guitar volume and tone settings or picking intensity, it does not have to operate full-tilt to sound cool. There are plenty of overdriven and near-clean tones you can get without ever touching the pedal itself.
Great Grape! It’s Purple JAM, Man!
Like any Fuzz Face-style stomp worth its fizz, the Fuzz Phrase Si is silly simple. The gain knob generally sounds best at maximum, though mellower settings make clean sounds easier to source. The output volume control ranges to speaker-busting zones. But there’s also a cool internal bias trimmer that can summon thicker or thin and raspy variations on the basic voice, which opens up the possibility of exploring more perverse fuzz textures. The Fuzz Phrase Si’s pedal-to-the-metal tones—with guitar volume and pedal gain wide open—bridge the gap between mid-’60s buzz and more contemporary-sounding silicon fuzzes like the Big Muff. And guitar volume attenuation summons many different personalities from the Fuzz Phrase Si—from vintage garage-psych tones with more note articulation and less sustain (great for sharp, punctuated riffs) as well as thick overdrive sounds.
If you’re curious about Fuzz Face-style circuits because of the dynamic response in germanium versions, the Fuzz Phrase Si performs better in this respect than many other silicon variations, though it won’t match the responsiveness of a good germanium incarnation. For starters, the travel you have to cover with a guitar volume knob to get tones approaching “clean” (a very relative term here) is significantly greater than that required by a good germanium Fuzz Face clone, which will clean up with very slight guitar volume adjustments. This makes precise gain management with guitar controls harder. And in situations where you have to move fast, you may be inclined to just switch the pedal off rather than attempt a dirty-to-clean shift with the guitar volume.
“The best clean-ish tones come via humbuckers and a high-headroom amp with not too much midrange, which makes a PAF-and-black-panel-Fender combination a great fit.”
The best clean-ish tones come via humbuckers and a high-headroom amp with not too much midrange, which makes a PAF-and-black-panel-Fender combination a great fit if you’re out to extract maximum dirty-to-clean range. You don’t need to attenuate your guitar volume as much with the PAF/black-panel tandem, and you can get pretty close to bypassed tone if you reduce picking intensity and/or switch from flatpick to fingers and nails. Single-coil pickups make such maneuvers more difficult. They tend to get thin in a less-than-ideal way before they shake the dirt, and they’re less responsive to the touch dynamics that yield so much range with PAFs. If you’re less interested in thick, clean tones, though, single-coils are a killer match for the Fuzz Phrase Si, yielding Yardbirds-y rasp, quirky lo-fi fuzz, and dirty overdrive that illuminates chord detail without sacrificing attitude. Pompeii tones are readily attainable via a Stratocaster and a high-headroom Fender amp, too, when you maximize guitar volume and pedal gain. And with British-style amps those same sounds turn feral and screaming, evoking Jimi’s nastiest.
The Verdict
Like every JAM pedal I’ve ever touched, the JAM Fuzz Phrase Si is built with care that makes the $229 price palatable. Cheaper silicon Fuzz Face clones may be easy to come by, but I’m hard-pressed to think they’ll last as long or as well as the Greece-made Fuzz Phrase Si. Like any silicon Fuzz Face-inspired design, what you gain in heat, you trade in dynamics. But the Si makes the best of this trade, opening a path to near-clean tones and many in-between gain textures, particularly if you put PAFs and a scooped black-panel Fender amp in the mix. And if streamlining is on your agenda, this fuzz’s combination of simplicity, swagger, and style means paring down pedals and controls doesn’t mean less fun.