datalore
awkward soul
Its weird that an article from 1996 on a Steely Dan website is trying to tell us collecting guitars isn't cool. Anyway the guy's argument is kind of moot in that he uses a session player as his example. A session played has to stay versatile and guitars are tools that enable this. The more guitars the more versatility the more possible jobs. Ever heard of a carpenter only owning one saw? Me neither.
Yeah, I've listened to enough Steely Dan to know that I'm not interested in their advice about anything. One could argue that needlessly accumulating instruments is wasteful and selfish, but there are plenty of arguments against that. First, if you buy smart, instruments are a pretty good investment. For example, if you buy a rare vintage instrument now, you can expect the value to continue to increase as long as the condition doesn't change significantly. Second, buying instruments helps to support the industries that supply tools to working musicians. Third, it's not like a great guitar collection is going to go to waste when one inevitably passes away. You can pass guitars down to your children, or they can go to close friends or other musicians. I'm not really a huge fan of seeing great guitars languishing in a glass display case, but that doesn't seem to happen all that often. I think it is possible to strike a healthy balance between owning guitars as useful tools and collecting them.