I spent quite a while in GC today, playing everything in the sub-$700 range. Going into the store, I had my eye mainly on the Martin X series, as well as a couple Fender's I had never played before. Being a GC, there were a couple Mitchell's on the wall as well. I played 4-5 different Martin X's, 3-4 Mitchell's, as well as several Fender's & Alvarez's. My main takeaway on the Martin X series: they were heavy, and fairly dark sounding. Those aren't negatives to me btw, just what I thought. And holding a laminate guitar was weird. The feel, the balance, it was just very foreign to me. Also not negative. I kept coming back to a couple Mitchell's, a $499 T413 & a $279 T311. Admittedly I liked the looks, which is probably why I even bothered in the first place. But then after 90 minutes of constant A/B-ing between those and the Martins, the Mitchell's just kept sounding and feeling surprisingly good. I plugged into a Fishman amp they had there, since my main concern is being able to use it in a live setting through a PA. That's where the Mitchell's started to stick out even more. To be fair, the Martin's have a single tone knob, whereas the Mitchell's have a 3-band EQ to work with, so a competent sound guy could get more out of I'm sure. I'm not going to say that the Mitchell blew the Martin out of the water, because it didn't. Martin's have a distinct sound, and it's a good sound for sure. But the Mitchell just sounded very full & clear. So to my thread title: what am I missing with Mitchell guitars? As in, what am I sacrificing with a $279 guitar that plays & sounds great? The fit/finish was good, not high gloss or fancy, but that's a bonus for me. It seemed to hold tune just fine while I was playing as well. To give a little background, I've been playing for 20yrs, and up until about 3 weeks ago, every single one of those years was spent playing a 1978 Martin D35, so I'm no stranger to good acoustic guitar tone. I guess what I'm really asking is, am I going to seriously regret buying one of these down the road?