so, which one u guys prefer? what r the advantage and disadvantages between both?

i play medium to low...easier for speeding...but my idol marty friedman play high action....i dunno advantages playing high...maybe can get better tones or sustain?

yeah..high more sustain. i prefer medium low

High for me, for those big blues bends.

for me, i prefer high in studio but low in live...

low for me!

super super super low!

low easier to play the notes mar.

never ever liked high action

but most virtuoso using low since they hav gud pickup and sustain, n dey play fast, easier to fret i think..

high action good for practicing.. but might end up tensionly..
its hard to play.. i prefer medium low..

most jazz or blues guitarist prefer high action..
i guess it defines their tones..

Yeah, it does define their tone (SRV, John Mayer, Eric Clapton, etc).
But not only for Jazz & Blues players...
In Malmsteem's case, he not only has high action on high shredding machine, the upper frets are scalloped as well, making his guitar double hard to play!!

in malmsteen's case, the whole 21 frets are deeply scalloped, not just the upper frets. the scalloped is deeper than normal scalloped

yup, high action is hard to play, i hav watch dis malmsteen gtar lesson vid. he said, scalloped neck is hard to play, the reason he uses scalloped is that more control of the string, and more grip to..

intonation runs slightly off too with very high action

o tot high action is good oni for bending

I prefer low-but-not-so-low action

Oooh... I thought they were pretty even on the lower frets...
Thanks for the info.

maybe some of his guitars, coz the one i mentioned is the Fender Yngwie Malmsteen for sale

Gots to get low-low-low. My guitars are usually tuned half a step down so have to compensate the action with string gauge as well.