Collectibility Vs. Playability

[dark_knight]

As a collector, many guitars have passed through my hands, including several Charvels and Jacksons. The dilemma that faces all collectors from time to time is which ones stay and which ones go. After much thought and time spent with each, I have narrowed the list of possible choices to let go - a Charvel Warren DeMartini San Dimas and a Jackson PC1. Plans for my next purchase are making this tough decision necessary.

[dark_knight]

I purchased the Charvel as an investment, or so I hoped at the time. It is the NAMM 2006 DeMartini (Blood/Skull). The guitar came with a folder from Charvel documenting the build which included a DVD, a certificate and the original hang tag. This is the guitar featured in all of the original Charvel ads, essentially the first one.

[dark_knight]

The Jackson PC1 had been on my wish list for a long time, but for whatever reason, I was never able to find one that was exactly right for me. Then after a long search, I found a chlorine PC1 that had a great quilt top and highly figured fingerboard. I contacted the owner, and after some intense negotiations, he agreed to sell it to me. I've enjoyed owning and playing it ever since.

[dark_knight]

Here's where I need the advice of the forum. One of them has to go, but which one? Even though I feel the Charvel represents a better investment, I enjoy playing the Jackson a bit more. Any comments or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

[markD]

well, my first question would be are you buying a new collector's piece, or a new player? my next would be, which of the two you are debating between do you spend more time with? my final question would be, are you a player or a collector?

answer those and i my be able to offer some suggestions...

[Gartron]

Hmmm to me the Demartini would be tough to get back if you prize the Namm aspect of it..a chlorine PC1 on the other hand is more easily replaceable once the sellers remorse kicks in

[Mr Sandman]

Collectors are fucken` nerds! Sorry,,,,,,,

Why have a new Warren if you cant`t play it? Waste of space!

[neilli]

They're both cool guitars, but for what it's worth, I wouldn't put too much on the 'collectibility' of either of those - Charvel resale values generally suck, and while some may pay a little more for a NAMM guitar, it's only gonna be a percentage on top of a regular guitar, and if the regular guitar price has taken a beating then that will be reflected in the value of the NAMM guitar too. So basically, enjoy them as players, and if you need to move one, move the one that doesn't work as well for you as a player.

[dark_knight]

I'm a player first, always have been. As I've gotten older, I've picked up a few pieces that looked like they might hold some value. Most of my guitars are players though. That's why I'm leaning toward keeping the Jackson.

[dark_knight]

Investments come and go, but guitars that have mojo and play well are worth something on an entirely different level. How often does a truly great guitar come along? Looks like the Charvel may end up for sale if I can't find a way to keep both. Thanks to all who replied.

[tonemonster]

I am a player, not a collector by nature. I play all the guitars I own. Best advice I can give is to ask yourself what you want most. trust your gut, it will never serve you wrong.

[Newc]

As I've always said: if you want an investment, talk to Charles Schwab. If you want a guitar, buy a guitar.

[Musician78]

As I've always said: if you want an investment, talk to Charles Schwab. If you want a guitar, buy a guitar.

I like that... I think I may steal it....

[chrisolson]

I smell SPiced hAM.

[straycat]

You smell a pork product Chris?