Perhaps. But I maintain that comparing a regular production domestic guitar to an import instrument in a shop is not comparing similar items. I base my claim on several factors including: the absence of domestic production at the import price point;
The "gotcha" there is something we all seem to readily agree as being the whole reason the imports are here in the first place:
We
can't build an instrument
of equal quality here
at the price point.
We (domestic guitar makers)
have to offer some advantage to justify a higher selling price for US built instruments.
The argument is that the "regular production imports" offer quality
very very close to "regular production domestic quality", but that somewhere the "regular production domestics" seem to offer some slight advantage in to tone (to the OP as well as others who posted in this thread), even at the cost of a higher price tag, so to speak.
The OP was expressing his opinion that in general he does perceive a subjective intangible of better tone, but I also cited
tangibles in terms of construction techniques and materials that have been supported by owner input, too.
the expectation that any country's domestic production would be superior to its export quality production;
I humbly submit that that assumption itself is only supported by specific instances cited on your part and may not necessarily apply in the framework of "regular production" or as general rule at all.
I could cite instances where countries specifically export their BEST stuff because they get more hard currency for it, but that gets close to the edge of the international economics/politics rathole.
Anyway, just saying I don't think it's a valid generalization that countries keep their best stuff for domestic use, although it may be true in specific cases.