Poly finishes don't have to be thick. Taylor uses a system to spray very thin poly finishes on their high end instruments and nobody is accusing them of being cheap or lower perceived value. If anything, the impact on tone and resonance would be much more important on an acoustic.
I appreciate all the responses but most feedback seems to be personal preference. I'd be interested to see some objective data about the specific properties of each.
At the end of the day, it always comes down to 'preference' and/or perceived 'qualities/values'. There are some who may prefer Nitro purely for it's historic aging qualities and way it wears, maybe even just it's smell over any tonal/playable/etc reasons and some will use internet information (not all of it 'accurate based on scientific study) to 'justify' why one is superior...
However, nowadays, you don't have a choice of 'nitro' in the low/budget end of the Electric Guitar market and 'nitro' is only on high end instruments - all cheap guitars use 'poly' 'despite' the fact that the application and formula may well be a long way from 'high end' poly finishes so ergo 'nitro must be an 'expensive' finish and poly 'cheap', or maybe their only 'experience' with 'poly' is thick horrible cheap poly finishes on budget guitars so think 'poly' is all like that...
If the 'market' thinks all high end 'electric' guitars should be Nitro because 'reasons' and its impacting Sales decisions, then it makes a difference in that way too. You'll always have 'someone' that 'prefers' whatever came before some Change or can't see the point in the 'change' but how much is preference, how much is backed by scientific objective research or circumstantial evidence?
The one thing PRS himself believes it that the finish should be thin. Something Taylor Acoustic poly finishes are too but also 'hard' so they wear very well to protect the instrument, not just the 'finish' but the guitar so it lasts lifetimes of play.
Its not just the 'connoisseurs' of the guitar buying market they are 'selling' too, but those who will modify and expect certain things, never play Acoustics and never played a guitar over a price point - hard cases for example, Stainless Steel Frets, Nitro finishes - because these are seen as 'Premium' upgrades over 'budget' guitars - that's what the market shows them - Gibson/Fender 'exempt' on Historic grounds - but PRS a 'modern forward thinking' Company should....
And yes, I prefer PRS previous Poly Finish because I would prefer a Finish that I know isn't going to age, wear, crack or be affected by what stand I use, what may come into contact with etc the finish as Nitro takes 'more care' to keep it looking like 'new' as Poly can for years with care and still play - yes some minor 'dents' in the back from buckles but not as messed up as 'some' Nitro guitars are. But I still have a PRS with the Nitro finish because I couldn't care less how it was finished when 'playing' it. I am much more careful with how I care for it, but it still is in my collection and gets played!
The Connoisseurs will buy it because its a great PRS guitar and it 'works' for them regardless - but maybe its 'Market' demand/expectation or maybe the Company and artists as a whole 'prefer' their new 'Nitro' finish, who really knows here and does it really matter? If the Instrument is telling me to 'buy', I'm not considering how it was finished. Only time it matters is when it makes me consider how its finished rather than not caring after playing it...
