Was looking at Invalid Link Removed on a UK-based bass forum, about the age old question of 'are more expensive basses really better?'.
Interested to see the difference in opinion in that thread compared to the 'cheap vs expensive' threads on this site, where there often seems to be a majority who feel that more money gets you more performance, at least until you get to a couple of thousand dollars or so.
What gives? Are Brits just so poor that they can't bear to admit that they can't afford a decent bass? Or so talentless that they can't tell the difference? Or is it that Americans are just more easily taken in by the lure of something shiny?
Better is a hard thing to quantify beyond a certain point. Once you have an instrument which stays in tune, has accurate intonation, no dead spots etc., you start looking at things which are much more subjective.
It's also worth noting that cheap doesn't have to mean low quality.
I don't know if I'd say poor, but many basses are simply much more expensive to buy over here than in the US. For instance, a new Musicman Stingray costs about $1,500 in the US, over here they cost about £1,500 (~$2,500).
As far as talent, a talented musician will sound like a talented musician regardless of the instrument they use.