Martin or Taylor?
MaestroDMW
shown the Taylors (I never heard of them at that point). I was hooked, I
thought they outplayed and sounded just as good as a Martin. I was
shocked, but they are wondrous!
After playing pretty much all the models in both lines, I went with the
Taylor 810. And living happily ever after!
Lucy A. Vinturella
experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
to make a $1000.00 decision. I have played Martins in the past and
always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
instrument is a very particular matter, but advice from experienced
owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
two instruments would still be appreciated. Thanks.
BAKimsey
A. Vinturella ) writes:
>advice from experienced
>owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
>two instruments would still be appreciated.
I had a 410 in my house for a month and played it quite a bit. I also
have a seasoned Martin D-28 and a brand new Martin 000-1R. The Taylor had
really good treble, and sounded good, if somewhat raw (probably because of
its newness). At the time I was having some tendinitis trouble and the
thinner Taylor neck definitely bothered me more than the fatter Martins.
However, I've bought two 410's for friends and recommended one to a third
friend who bought it. I like the D1's, too, but they haven't impressed me
as much as the D-16's which are great guitars for the money.
Other experiences:
I recently played a new Martin D-18 limited edition, a 4-year old used
Taylor 710 custom (cutaway), a new Taylor 710, a new 410, a new Goodall,
and a used Breedlove (here we go again!) in a bluegrass/fiddle tune jam
which lasted for a total of 3 hours. I played each guitar for at least 2
tunes and asked the other jam participants what their impressions were.
The results were:
1) everybody liked the Martin. It had a punchy, slightly boomy sound and
felt great to me. I couldn't get quite as much volume from it as I could
from my personal D-28, though, but I was also being a lot more careful
with it and it wasn't setup to my taste.
2) most people liked the 410, although it didn't seem to have the smooth
strum of the D-18. It did seem to cut better on leads, probably because
of the treble. It was very light and felt good in my hands.
3) comments were mixed on the Goodall, the Breedlove, and the used 710.
There was nothing wrong with any of these, but they just didn't inspire my
listeners. When I asked for opinions, most of 'em just shrugged. My
comments on the Breedlove are documented and debated elsewhere. I
originally thought the Goodall was really good, but when I picked up the
D-18 (the guitar I kept going back to and used as a standard), the Goodall
felt sort of awkward for some reason. It definitely was a "big" feeling
guitar. The used 710 was sort of disappointing- I expected more from a
4-yr old guitar, but it didn't sound played at all, so maybe that was its
problem.
4) the new 710 was pretty thin-sounding. It wasn't the best 710 I've
played, though. The used 710 seemed to have a thicker neck which felt
more comfortable to me. The new 710 wasn't nearly as responsive as the
410 which literally jumped when I punched it.
So there ya go, if you can make any sense out that. In sum, you can't go
wrong with any of the guitar you're looking at, although a D-16 might
prove more satisfying in the long run. Oh, I also played a brand-new
HD-28 and did an A/B with my D-28. The HD was excellent! I know the guy
who's getting it, so I'm sure I'll get to play it some more later down the
line. Great looking, too, now that they've gone back to smaller tuners
and a "tortoise" pickguard.
Bryan
Charles Fugee
Vinturella ) writes:
>
>I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence and need some
>experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
>I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much
above
>the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never
heard
>of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
>impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>to make a $1000.00 decision. I have played Martins in the past and
>always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
>so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
>owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
As an owner of a Martin D35, I can definitely attest to their delicious
sound. However, I'm now in the market for a new 12 string and I know
your dilemma. I expected to buy a Martin, in fact I played a 1969
Brazilian rosewood D35-12 and loved it. Then I played a Taylor 855-12,
and then I played the Taylor "Leo Kottke Signature Model" (LKSM). I
think I'm leaning toward the Taylor. It becomes a choice that is pure
emotional. Play them, listen to their sound and feel the sound as you
hold them. The sound you love the most is the guitar you should buy.
There are all the logical reasons you pick a person to love, but you
never make that decision based on logic. Given these are excellent
guitars from top class manufacturers, let your heart and ears make the
decision.
Chuck Fugee
Jerry Dallal
: I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence and need some
: experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
: I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
: the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
: of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
: impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
: to make a $1000.00 decision.
Not a sarcastic comment: "Go back and play 'em for a couple of hours."
This is a guess. You grew up when all the *real* folkies played Martins
and now nothing but a Martin will make you truly happy. (I'm not being
critical of you; I'm describing me.) So, I'm a three time Martin owner
(player, not collector! I play them all), but I have played
some Taylors that grabbed me in a way that few guitars have. (But they
invariably had a bridge that made the guitar look, well, . . . cheap.)
Here's what you do. Find the Martin you like best, find the Taylor you
like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
(Acknowledgement: This technique is not original with me, but I can't
remember the name of the poster who first suggested it.)
David Beals
>I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence and need some
>experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
>I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
>the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
>of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
>impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>to make a $1000.00 decision. I have played Martins in the past and
>always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
>so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
>instrument is a very particular matter, but advice from experienced
>owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
>two instruments would still be appreciated. Thanks.
Having never played a Martin, I'm afraid I can't comment on that
instrument other than they have a wide base of satisfied customers.
That means the product must be a fine one.
As a Taylor 410 owner, I can comment on my passion for this
instrument. For a so called entry level guitar, it far outplays many
other manufacturers high end models. I have found mine to play well
with a robust yet softer tone; my instrument has spurred me to play
more often and increased my ability to play.
As far as the Taylor quality, it is superior for all of their models.
The workmanship is excellent. Given the fact that the company builds
their own cases specifically for their guitars tells me what they feel
about their product.
I would suggest playing any guitar you like. Find one that you fall
in love with for your tastes and budget - then buy. I can tell you
that if you choose a Taylor, you will not be sorry.
Dave Beals
david...@lexis-nexis.com
Robert W. Van Sickel
and now nothing but a Martin will make you truly happy. (I'm not being
critical of you; I'm describing me.) So, I'm a three time Martin owner
(player, not collector! I play them all), but I have played
some Taylors that grabbed me in a way that few guitars have. (But they
invariably had a bridge that made the guitar look, well, . . . cheap.)
Here's what you do. Find the Martin you like best, find the Taylor you
like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
(Acknowledgement: This technique is not original with me, but I can't
remember the name of the poster who first suggested it.)
IT'S SO TRUE. I'VE OWNED BOTH MARTIN AND TAYLOR, BUT HAVING CUT MY
TEETH ON THE DREAM OF A MARTIN, I CAN'T QUITE FULLY EMBRACE THE
AESTHETICS OF THE TAYLOR (THE LOOKS I MEAN). I HAVE A TAYLOR 710
ROSEWOOD DREADNOUGHT THAT IS ABOUT THE BEST GUITAR I'VE PERSONALLY EVER
PLAYED, BUT I REALLY DON'T CARE FOR THE LOOK OF THE THING -- HAD IT
THREE YEARS AND IT HAS NOT GROWN ON ME.
ANYWAY, MORE TO THE POINT -- THE TAYLOR 400 SERIES ACTUALLY HAS A MORE
ATTRACTIVE APPEARANCE THAN THE OTHER MODELS IMHO, AND IF I WAS BUYING AN
ENTRY LEVEL DREADNOUGHT, I THINK THAT THE QUALITY OF TAYLOR WOULD
DEFINITELY MAKE THAT MY CHOICE. LOOKS ASIDE, I THINK THAT YOU GET A LOT
MORE GUITAR FOR THE MONEY WITH TAYLOR.
Bill Willis
>
>
> As an owner of a Martin D35, I can definitely attest to their delicious
> sound. However, I'm now in the market for a new 12 string and I know
> your dilemma. I expected to buy a Martin, in fact I played a 1969
> Brazilian rosewood D35-12 and loved it. Then I played a Taylor 855-12,
> and then I played the Taylor "Leo Kottke Signature Model" (LKSM). I
> think I'm leaning toward the Taylor. It becomes a choice that is pure
> emotional. Play them, listen to their sound and feel the sound as you
> hold them. The sound you love the most is the guitar you should buy.
> There are all the logical reasons you pick a person to love, but you
> never make that decision based on logic. Given these are excellent
> guitars from top class manufacturers, let your heart and ears make the
> decision.
>
> Chuck Fugee
I am a died-in-the-wool Martin bigot, but if I was buying a 12 string, I
would buy a Taylor. They sound and play great and seem to endure all the
string tension much better. I am prone to play ligher on a 12 because of
the lighter strings and I do not expect the dynamic range of it that I
expect from a 6.
--
Dr. Bill Willis Bill_...@NCSU.edu
Associate Provost for Academic Computing (919) 515-2516
Box 7109, Room M2 Hillsborough Building
Raleigh, NC 27695-7901
Don Brocha
>I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence... I'm looking
at... Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series).
Lucy, I was in the same situation as you about 7 months ago. I went
looking for a guitar in about that price range with the advice that "you
cant go wrong with a Martin, Guild, or Taylor." The places I looked and
played at didnt have the lower end Taylors and so I didnt play any. In
retrospect this was a mistake. I did play a lot of the Martins and Guilds
and found that the D-1 had the sound I liked.
Because I was just getting back into guitar and because my first guitar
was a cheap classical which I mainly strummed, that is how I test drove
the Martins and Guilds. After 6 months though, with a much better guitar
than I had before, I find myself doing more fingerstyle stuff. My opinion
of my D-1 is that I still like it but I could have done better for
fingerstyle.
This Christmas I had a chance to play my sister-in-laws Taylor 510. She
never plays this guitar and has it mainly because her brother-in-law used
to work for Taylor. It's a grand concert size and made of Koa. After
playing this guitar and my D-1 in a side by side comparison, I realized
that for fingerstyle the Taylor was my choice.
For those of you that have stayed with me this long, the moral of the
story for those getting into or back into guitar, is to:
1. play a lot of different guitars and a lot of each make and model
because individual instruments do vary, play even those that are beyond
you price range to get an even better comparison,
2. know what your playing style and preferred musical genre is because
different makes, models, and sizes (ie Dreadnought versus whatever) do
seem to better for different playing styles.
3. play your old guitar or borrow a guitar and get proficient in some
tunes that you like so that when you go into the stores that you can
concentrate on listening to the guitar and not trying to play some song
you are still learning.
Hope this helps, happy playing.
BTW - I WILL be making my sister-in-law an offer on that Taylor.
Dave Coleman
(purchased new in 1994). I love them both. If I had to live on a desert
island and could only take one, I'd take the Taylor--but I would really
miss the Martin, and I'd make sure I left it in good hands.
David P. Baker
lucy...@ix.netcom.com (Lucy A. Vinturella ) wrote:
>I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence and need some
>experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
>I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
>the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
>of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
>impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>to make a $1000.00 decision. I have played Martins in the past and
>always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
>so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
>instrument is a very particular matter, but advice from experienced
>owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
>two instruments would still be appreciated. Thanks.
I was in the same position as you a few months ago. I went after
the Martin D-1... Came home with the Taylor 410.
**************************************************************************
David P. Baker | All opinions expressed |
Eli Lilly & Co | are mine, not theirs | De Colores!
**************************************************************************
tom bogle
>
>Lucy A. Vinturella (lucy...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>: I am just returning to the guitar after a long absence and need some
>: experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
>: I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
>: the entry level Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
>: of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
>: impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>: to make a $1000.00 decision.
>
>
>and now nothing but a Martin will make you truly happy. (I'm not being
>critical of you; I'm describing me.) So, I'm a three time Martin owner
>(player, not collector! I play them all), but I have played
>some Taylors that grabbed me in a way that few guitars have. (But they
>invariably had a bridge that made the guitar look, well, . . . cheap.)
>
>Here's what you do. Find the Martin you like best, find the Taylor you
>like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
>you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
>(Acknowledgement: This technique is not original with me, but I can't
>remember the name of the poster who first suggested it.)
>>>Keep in mind this group might as well be named
"rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic.taylor" ... where seldom is heard
a discouraging word.
RussSwanson
to sell, buy the Martin.
If you want a guitar that plays easy, sounds great, and is easy to work
on, buy the Taylor.
RJ
David R. Emberson
buy an HD-28. :-)
Dave
CoopHarris
and a half layoff. I was shocked to find so much to choose from. My dreams
of owning a Martin were realized soon thereafter with the purchase of an
HD28. Then I became enamored with small bodied instruments and then the
barn door was flung open. So much for retirement at an early age.
You cannot go wrong with Martin or Taylor but keep in mind that they are
very different instruments with different design philosophies. However, at
the entry level price that you mentioned, the Martin is more similar to
the Taylor than not. Both have bolt on necks and flat lacquer finishes.
Taylor may have an edge here since the Martin is not solid Mahogany back
and sides, whereas all Taylor guitars are solid wood construction. Build
quality on both is very high. Bridge pins on the Martin, through the
bridge on the Taylor.
My advise is to play a bunch and enjoy the bounty to be had. Don't forget
to check out used instruments. In the $1,000 range you can find some
excellent used instruments that are leaps ahead of the Taylor entry level
400 series and 0001, D1's of Martin. Good luck. Coop.
R. "Coop" Harris
tr...@quads.uchicago.edu
CoopHarris <cooph...@aol.com> wrote:
>My advise is keep an open mind. I too re-entered the market after a decade
>and a half layoff. I was shocked to find so much to choose from. My dreams
Funny, but about half the posts in this thread involve the same experience.
I also started playing again/buying again after 14 years away from the
instrument, and was amazed at the change in relative price and quality,
as well as the number of good brands.
>of owning a Martin were realized soon thereafter with the purchase of an
>HD28. Then I became enamored with small bodied instruments and then the
>barn door was flung open. So much for retirement at an early age.
>
>You cannot go wrong with Martin or Taylor but keep in mind that they are
>very different instruments with different design philosophies. However, at
>the entry level price that you mentioned, the Martin is more similar to
>the Taylor than not. Both have bolt on necks and flat lacquer finishes.
>Taylor may have an edge here since the Martin is not solid Mahogany back
>and sides, whereas all Taylor guitars are solid wood construction. Build
>quality on both is very high. Bridge pins on the Martin, through the
>bridge on the Taylor.
Also keep in mind that the entry-level Taylor has scalloped bracing, and
that the necks on the Taylor and Martin are very different.
>
>My advise is to play a bunch and enjoy the bounty to be had. Don't forget
>to check out used instruments. In the $1,000 range you can find some
>excellent used instruments that are leaps ahead of the Taylor entry level
>400 series and 0001, D1's of Martin. Good luck. Coop.
>R. "Coop" Harris
I'd agree with the "look used" advice too, but don't forget used Taylors.
I got my 410 for $500. Which, of course, gave me a little spare change
to spend on a Stratocaster......
.
FLpenguin
but each time in comparing the quality and price for what I was looking
for each time, ended up with a Taylor. First time was a D-41 vs a Taylor
910, the second time Martin and Guild 12 strings vs an 855 and the third
time various 'low-end guitars' vs a 510. I purchased the 510 last year
new for about $1100 so for another $100 you may be in the 510 price range
if you want to upgrade a little.
Jeff
@his.com John Bijarney
several Taylor 855 12 stringers and found this guitar as easy to play
(if not easier) than the Martin. I didn't know a 12 stringer could have
such ease of play; and the tone___exquisite. I've been told the 855 12
string has scalloped braces. Good luck in your choice. I don't think
you'll lose either way.
Bob Alman
Bob Alman
Han Speek
Hi all,
Well, I can tell you: I've made my choice, and I don't quite agree with the
last statement of above post: "I don't think you can loose either way."
I've found you can. About 2 1/2 ago I traded in my Martin D-28, which had a
nice, bright sound, but lacked character: it was "just a guitar".
I looked at a lot of guitars of various makes at that point, and decided I had
to move away from the D-model. At that moment I still felt Martin was a safe
choice, so I went for an M-36, which was warmer than the D-28, and had a
totally different character.
But not only did I soon find out that it was a rather temperamental guitar
(it could be bass-heavy, booming one day, and rather dull the next, and again
the perfectly balanced fingerstyle guitar I bought it for on another day,
probably mostly depending on changes in the weather - rather unreliable), I
also found it had intonation problems, especially when tuned below standard.
I've struggled with this instrument during the last 2 1/2 years, and have
never really enjoyed it. And about 1 1/2 years ago I started looking for a
guitar that I might want to get instead. I have tried (again) lots of guitars,
this time also in a more expensive price range, but couldn't make up my mind.
Until, a few weeks ago, I tried a Taylor GA-RS. I played it, it was brilliant.
I tried tuning it down to DADGAD, played it again, and I knew I had to have
this one. I could do anything I wanted with this one, and it was perfectly in
tune with itself - no noticeable intonation flaws (of course, this Taylor has
a compensated saddle, a feature Martin still doesn't offer. But also the low E
is perfect when I tune down to D. And that's something I couldn't say for the
Martin.).
So I picked it up yesterday, and traded in the Martin. True, in terms of money
(investment) you can't go wrong with a Martin (they gave me a good price for
it). But I have now got a guitar that no Martin I ever played can match:
my Taylor GA-RS ('95 Limited Edition, #152 of 300).
And the difference between playing "a well-built guitar" that doesn't inspire
you, and one that "really works for you", is tremendous.
Thanks to Dan Gilman and Chief for their input on the Martin/Taylor subject:
Chief, your suggestions were probably well-meant, but I just HAD to get rid
of that Martin. And Dan, the info on the US Taylor prices was quite useful.
Han.
--
H. Speek, B.Sc. E-mail: h...@ice.el.utwente.nl,
Univ. of Twente, Dept. EL, ICE group H.S...@el.utwente.nl
The Netherlands WWW: http://www.ice.el.utwente.nl/~han/
Luke Faulkenberry
bass and brilliant trebles with that breathy sound good
mohogany guitars have when strummed just right. I have two
Taylors, a Dan Crary Signature Model that I bought used
because it had a good dark sounding rosewood bass with the
brilliant type of treble available from mohogany, and a 555
Taylor twelve string which is brilliant sounding and easy to
play. I have played, in guitar stores and shows, many
wonderful Martins and Taylors. You can find many exemplary
examples of each and also a few dogs of each, and some very
pedestrian guitars of either brand. You have to look until you
find the one that is right for you. This is complicated by the
fact that it takes a few months for a spruce top to open up and
a couple years to optomize. Thus, a pedestrian sounding new
guitar sometimes becomes a great used guitar a few years down
the road. If you choose well, you cannot loose with either
Martin or Taylor because both companies make high quality
guitars, and they worry about their reputation which, I
believe, helps their quality control.
I also cannot let go of an old guitar when I buy a new, or
sometimes - new to me, guitar. They can accumulate at fairly
quickly for an unmarried person with no spouse to moderate
response to good deals.
Good luck on guitar purchase to all. Someone on the webb, I
cannot recall who, said, "It is hard to explain to any one
other than another guitar player why you need another guitar.
Luke
Paul Wieland
>save up for a Rosewood guitar, nothing sounds like it. I mean, a
>Taylor 4-7 guitars or even Martins just don't compare to
>Rosewood, plus, down the road, it is also an investment,
>Rosewood, of all kinds are being depeted to near extinctioneugene <e-
leu...@uiuc.edu> wrote:
You know, I have a wonderful rosewood Taylor which I'll have forever.
But I sold a mahogany Taylor 510 to buy a more expensive rosewood Taylor
and I've always regretted not finding a way to keep it. I think there is
something really special in the sound of a mahogany guitar that rosewood
is lacking. Mahogany has a grainy and rough satisfying sound to me.
Rosewood is smooth sounding. I don't think either one is better...just
different. I want my 510 back!!!
Also, is rosewood really near extinction?
David R. Emberson
characteristic of rosewood. And yes, Brazilian rosewood is believed to
be genetically extinct.
Dave
BAKimsey
<swan...@mails.starnetinc.com> writes:
>If you want a guitar that will hold it's value better when it comes time
>to sell, buy the Martin.
That's not necessarily true. Taylor are more than holding their value in
the used market. I've never seen a used Taylor stay available for very
long.
Bryan
@his.com John Bijarney
relationship with a significant other (human being). There is give and
take. On the level of subtlety(Martin vs Taylor), except in the case of
a real lemon, I find myself operating in the range of delicate
distinctions and quite subjective analyses and judgments. At this level
I discover the quirks (inconsistancies, even faults) of this
individual, perfect instrument. Here enters the sensitivity of my
handling of the instrument; learning about this instrument and what its
needs are to produce "my" perfect sound. For example, an instrument with
a booming bass may require that I exert more force when plucking the
trebles and less, ease off with the thumbpick.
Charles Held
FHL...@prodigy.com (Paul Wieland) wrote:
->Also, is rosewood really near extinction?
All woods are renewable resources. Talk about "extinction" is propaganda to
raise prices and scare you into accepting more socialist government, fewer
freedoms and higher taxes. Case in point: ask New Yorkers if they still
believe in "global warming".
Gregory Tucker-Kellogg
> In article <4d500j$1i...@usenetw1.news.prodigy.com>,
> FHL...@prodigy.com (Paul Wieland) wrote:
> ->Also, is rosewood really near extinction?
> All woods are renewable resources. Talk about "extinction" is propaganda to
> raise prices and scare you into accepting more socialist government, fewer
> freedoms and higher taxes.
Sure Charles. Say hello to all those voices in your head.
--
Gregory Tucker-Kellogg
Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology
Harvard Medical School, Boston MA 02115
adam s.
try level >Martin (D-1) or Taylor (400 series). I had never heard
>of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
>impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
>so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
>instrument is a very particular matter, but advice from experienced
>owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
>two instruments would still be appreciated. Thanks.
I share this dilemma, but from a different angle.
I visited a store yesterday in search of used Martin D-18s. I have long dreamed of trading in my Gibson J50 for a Martin. In the sto=
re was a pro guitarist who plays or has played with CSN and other major groups. He could not say enough about the Larivee and the Mo=
rris guitars, and the guy working in the store agreed. Both were quite disparaging of the Martin; I think comments included: uses pl=
astic edging; glued-on pic-guard eventually cracks; not a solid back; neck bracing eventually needs work; uses small tuners, not the=
best wood used in fretboard or bridge...I lost track. I would appreciate anyone with experience with more than one of these brands=
giving me their impression/comparison.
(P.S. Any e-mail replies go to adam...@aol.com. Thanks.)
BAKimsey
writes:
>I have never been able to let go of an old guitar when I get a new one.
>
>
I have and I've regretted it every single time- even when it as guitar
that I just "had to get rid of" at the time.
Bryan
Alan C. Lott, Jr
followed this thread for the last couple of weeks, going to be a Martin
D-28. I'd just like to say "thank you" to everyone who offered their
input on Martin V Taylor. I'm definetly going to give Taylor a good, hard
look and play several models from both manufacturers. Can someone give me
some info on Taylor pricing?
Warren Neill
ch...@clt.mindspring.com (Charles Held) writes:
>All woods are renewable resources. Talk about "extinction" is propaganda to
>raise prices and scare you into accepting more socialist government, fewer
>believe in "global warming".
First, it is clear that just because something is a renewable resource doesn't
mean that it can't or won't go extinct. As for the specifics of the situation
regarding the particular type of wood in question, I'm not qualified to
comment. But there are certainly some varieties of woods that are in real
danger of extinction in the near future.
As for what New Yorkers feel about global warming, their opinions don't have
any relevance to the truth of the matter. The evidence in favour of the
claim that global warming is now occurring is overwhelming. The extreme
weather in the northeast may itself be a result of, as well as evidence for,
global warming. The Earth's weather systems are not a simple phenomenon. Anyone
who infers that global warming is not occurring because they witness a short
period of colder than usual weather in one area of the planet has not taken
the time to investigate and learn about the scientific evidence for this
dangerous trend in our cimate. The increase in the average temperature of the
whole planet is most likely responsible for much of the extreme weather of all
types that has increased over the last several years. That includes snow
storms and cold spells.
OK. Let's get back to guitars.
Warren
Alan C. Lott, Jr
Jerry Dallal
: I'm buying myself a graduation present in August which was, until I
Let us know how it turns out!
Rob Bradley
Han Speek <h...@ice.el.utwente.nl> wrote:
>
>... and it was perfectly in
>tune with itself - no noticeable intonation flaws (of course, this Taylor has
>a compensated saddle, a feature Martin still doesn't offer.
Yeah, probably any guitar worth owning should have a compensating saddle.
A bone blank costs $3. If you want to make your own (I don't) that's all
it'll cost you. Otherwise, get one made the first time you have the
guitar set up. Over the years I've bought 2 new Martins, both in the
spring. Both times I played the guitar with the factory set-up until
the weather dried out in the fall and brought them to MB for a set-up
and a bone compensating saddle.
There may (or may not) be good reasons for not buying a Martin, but
their (IMHO poor) choice of saddle is something that can easily be
rectified.
--
Rob Bradley | http://www.adelphi.edu/~bradley/
Dept. of Mathematics & Computer Science | bra...@panther.adelphi.edu
Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530 | (516)877-4496
BAKimsey
(Warren Neill) writes:
>First, it is clear that just because something is a renewable resource
>doesn't
>mean that it can't or won't go extinct.
"Renewable resources" such as Brazilian rosewood can easily go extinct
from a combination of overharvest and habitat destruction. The areas
where Brazilian rosewood and koa are grown are generally being developed
or burned and it doesn't do any good to have a B.rosewood seed if you
don't have any place to plant it. A B.rosewood seed planted in Kansas,
for instance, isn't going to turn in B.rosewood as we know it because of
soil and climate differences. Thus, even if something's renewable, if
there's no time and place to renew it, you haven't gotten anywhere.
As for this political b.s., all I know is that I am an endangered species
biologist (I work with raptors) and there certainly is a lot of political
muck, but there's no doubt that a lot of species are going extinct.
Whether that's evolution in action or something else is a source of
endless debate (elsewhere!). Quite often, species such as the goshawk are
used by groups to accomplish their goals, when the species really isn't
that threatened. Other times, though, the issue is real, as in the
example of the California condor.
Anyway, my report from the field is that extinction is BOTH real and has a
lot of propaganda. Just like [ATTENTION!! GUITAR CONTENT FOLLOWING:]
your D-28 can be both boomy and have screaming treble.
Bryan
Paul J. Stamler
this discussion, if at all:
1) In my experience, Taylors tend to have more accurate intonation up the
neck than Martins, especially when a capo is used.
2) Martins, even the cheap ones, have a particular and distinctive sound,
while most Taylors have a very different sound--more air to them.
3) The necks are very different in shape, and Taylor's necks have gotten
wider in the last few years, with the low E set farther in from the edge.
Since I use a thumb-hook a lot, this makes them harder for me to play.
Also, since I have tendinitis, the thin, wide neck is very uncomfortable.
But this is so individual that you shouldn't pay much attention to what I
say, except to hear the importance of the shape of the neck and how it
feels on *your* hand. (The Taylor dreadnoughts, by the way, seem to have
slightly narrower necks than the smaller-bodied guitars.) Play the
guitars you're considering, and concentrate on the feeling in your left
hand. If there's anything at all uncomfortable going on, it's a harbinger
of possible trouble.
BTW, I play a Martin 00-18, and struggle every day with the g****mn
intonation problems, but put up with it for the sake of the incredible
sound, and the neck which fits my hand just right. I've played an older
Taylor that I could easily fall in love with, but my friend Phil wasn't
selling it back then, and when he did sell it I didn't have any money.
My ideal? The body from my Martin, the neck from Phil's Taylor. Or the
neck from my Martin, but with the frets in the right place.
Dream on, Pablo.
Peace.
Paul
BAKimsey
<acl...@mailhost.accesscom.net (Alan Lott, Jr.)> writes:
> going to be a Martin
>D-28
I don't think I'd buy a plain ol' D-28 when the HD-28 and it's variations
(particularly the HD-282R and HD-28 Vintage) are available. You may find
HD's too "boomy" but I find them louder and more responsive.
It just occured to me that people who complain about boominess perhaps
play too far over the sounhole? Every decent bluegrass-style picker that
I know of plays between the soundhole and bridge, in which location the
treble is accenuated and the bass controlled. However, I see many folks
strumming D guitars right over the soundhole, where it is indeed boomy.
Also, I had my D-28's braces scalloped and I'd defintely start with the
scalloped braces of the HD right off the bat.
Bryan
Charles Held
g...@walsh.med.harvard.edu (Gregory Tucker-Kellogg) wrote:
->Charles Held (ch...@clt.mindspring.com) wrote:
->> In article <4d500j$1i...@usenetw1.news.prodigy.com>,
->> FHL...@prodigy.com (Paul Wieland) wrote:
->> ->Also, is rosewood really near extinction?
->
->> All woods are renewable resources. Talk about "extinction" is propaganda to
->> raise prices and scare you into accepting more socialist government, fewer
->> freedoms and higher taxes.
->
->Sure Charles. Say hello to all those voices in your head.
Say that to my face you little sniveling preppie faggot piece of shit.
tom bogle
>
>In article <1770E139F4...@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>, WNE...@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU
>(Warren Neill) writes:
>
>>First, it is clear that just because something is a renewable resource
>>doesn't
>>mean that it can't or won't go extinct.
>
>"Renewable resources" such as Brazilian rosewood can easily go extinct
>from a combination of overharvest and habitat destruction. The areas
>where Brazilian rosewood and koa are grown are generally being developed
>or burned and it doesn't do any good to have a B.rosewood seed if you
>don't have any place to plant it. A B.rosewood seed planted in Kansas,
>for instance, isn't going to turn in B.rosewood as we know it because of
>soil and climate differences. Thus, even if something's renewable, if
>there's no time and place to renew it, you haven't gotten anywhere.
>
>>>
Know this for sure, companies that are charging a $3,000 or $4,000 uplift
price for Brazilian Rosewood are making a HUGE profit on it. The amount of
B.R. required for a guitar purchased in the time frame it would have been
bought in would have cost $300, max. It isn't the scarcity or supposed
extinction that's driving these ridiculous prices, it's Guitar Players
who are willing to pay these overvalued prices. Besides, I would be willing
to wager that none of these guys could tell the difference between Indian
and Brazilian in a "blind" test anyway.
rellison
bogle) wrote:
You can't get B.R. unless it was cut before the CITES ban on B.R.(and you
need documentation to prove it to get it through customs, and the buyer
needs a copy if they are going to take it across borders). It is scarce
and its hard to get old growth B.R. If companies bought enough B.R. back
then to last them 10 years they would have made a good investment but most
companies only keep a max. 2 year stock. Yeah, companies are making a
huge profit and yes the players who want it because they've played or had
previous B.R. guitars are willing to pay it. There is a limited supply
(becoming more limited) and so the demand is willing to pay the price. If
you're a luthier just try and absorb the price if you happen to wreck a
side when you're bending!
You can still get B.R. but you're paying upto $500+ for a good old growth
set. Even still the guys will tell you that the quality of B.R. is way
lower. As for the majority of people being able to tell the difference
between I.R. and B.R. you're probably right. Most players probably
can't. But there are some who probably can a fair majority of luthiers
can.
B.R. is a supply and demand thing, not B.S.
Rob Ellison
rell...@express.ca
Ross Cowart
>I visited a store yesterday in search of used Martin D-18s. I have long dreamed of trading in my Gibson J50 for a Martin. In the sto=
>re was a pro guitarist who plays or has played with CSN and other major groups. He could not say enough about the Larivee and the Mo=
>rris guitars, and the guy working in the store agreed. Both were quite disparaging of the Martin; I think comments included: uses pl=
>astic edging; glued-on pic-guard eventually cracks; not a solid back; neck bracing eventually needs work; uses small tuners, not the=
> best wood used in fretboard or bridge...I lost track. I would appreciate anyone with experience with more than one of these brands=
> giving me their impression/comparison.
>
I am admittedly a Martin fan, so you may take my prejudices into account,
however . . .
I am suspicious of any music store/salesperson who is _excessively_
critical of any well-known maker, whether it be Martin, Taylor, Gibson,
or even Ovation. Comments such as "I prefer the sound of 'X' because
.. , or "Brand 'Y' is better suited to bluegrass flatpicking while brand
'Z' is better for fingerstyle" may serve to inform the potential buyer.
However, comments that can be roughly translated "Brand 'X' is crap" do
not inform and are often (IMO) intended to keep you out of the store down
the street that carries brand 'X'.
Martin manufactures quality guitars. Some examples may be better than
others. Sometimes they need repair work. This is true of any quality
maker. It sounds to me that some of the disparaging remarks may have
been truths (but whats wrong with plastic binding?), half-truths (some
Martins do get cracks around the pickguard), and falsehoods (D-18's DO
have solid backs).
I will say that I have never played a Larivee that I liked better than
any one of my four Martins. Does that mean that Martins are the only
good guitars out there and Larivees are junk? Of course not. It just
means I prefer Martins. But you shouldn't let me or a salesperson tell
you what you should prefer.
Ross Cowart
George Kaschner
: In article <4d8k1o$n...@netope.harvard.edu>,
Wow! Which personality was that?
Get a grip or find another group to snarl on.
George Kaschner
Rob Bradley
>I visited a store yesterday in search of used Martin D-18s.
>I have long dreamed of trading in my Gibson J50 for a Martin.
>CSN and other major groups.
So his word _must_ be gospel truth! :-)
>He could not say enough about the Larivee and the Morris guitars,
>and the guy working in the store agreed. Both were quite disparaging
>of the Martin; I think comments included:
>uses plastic edging;
Um, yes, on their less expensive guitars. So does Taylor, Gibson,
Guild, Larrivee and even Collings. Are they comparing an $1100
Martin to a $2300 Larrivee or something like that?
>glued-on pic-guard eventually cracks;
Ummm, they're talking about Martins from the 60s and earlier, yes?
>not a solid back;
Only on the new D1R and the 000-1R. D1 and 000-1 have solid back
and laminate sides. Every other Martin ever built is solid.
>neck bracing eventually needs work;
Ask them what a neck brace is; I'd like to know.
(Perhaps they're referring to the fact that Martin had
non-adjustable truss rods until the mid-80s.)
>uses small tuners,
This one really has me scratching my head. Are they maybe
comparing tuners on 12-string Martins to tuners on 6-string
guitars made by other people?
>not the best wood used in fretboard or bridge
Maybe...first I ver heard of it. Are you sure anybody else
uses their Grade A quartersawn rosewood and ebony for these
purposes?
>...I lost track.
Clearly.
I will be the first to admit that I like Martins. I've also
been sorely tempted by some great Taylors (810, 855, 912C).
Reasonable people can disagree about the relative merits of
Martins, Taylors, Larrivees, etc., but there's no need for
these boys to stoop to lies and half-truths.
>I would appreciate anyone with experience with more than one of
>these brands giving me their impression/comparison.
Larrivee's are beautiful. With the exception of their some
of their "standard" models, expect to pay US$2000 and more.
There's a Polaroid of a CS-09 (which will cost $2090 new at
Mandolin Brothers) at
http://www.adelphi.edu/~bradley/Larrivee_CS-09.html
charles tauber
>
> Know this for sure, companies that are charging a $3,000 or $4,000 uplift
> price for Brazilian Rosewood are making a HUGE profit on it. The amount of
> B.R. required for a guitar purchased in the time frame it would have been
> bought in would have cost $300, max. It isn't the scarcity or supposed
> extinction that's driving these ridiculous prices, it's Guitar Players
> who are willing to pay these overvalued prices. Besides, I would be willing
> to wager that none of these guys could tell the difference between Indian
> and Brazilian in a "blind" test anyway.
Read the above twice, folks. It's true.
Charles Tauber, Luthier
Ray Johnson
(Charles Held) writes:
>
>In article <4d500j$1i...@usenetw1.news.prodigy.com>,
propaganda to
fewer
still
>believe in "global warming".
Hey My Man, I'm typing this in your face. Maybe if you keep posting
this drivil you can convert everyone over to your side and save the
world as you believe it to be.
Whew, chill out my paranoid friend.
BAKimsey
<cow...@vth.vetmed.missouri.edu> writes:
> But you shouldn't let me or a salesperson tell
>you what you should prefer.
Amen.
Good points all the way around. BTW, the critcisms I've heard regarding
plastic binding is that it absorbs sound whereas wood binding enhances it.
Collings use plastic binding. 'nuff said.
Martin was criticized for building their guitars too lightly during the
30's, so they responded with non-scalloped bracing. Then people said they
were built too heavy! Ya just can't win. You just can't build a light,
responsive guitar for the masses without taking some risk of damage in
20-30 years. I'd be perfectly willing to bet that there's going to be an
equal number of Larivee, Taylor, Santa Cruz, and whatnots that are going
to need neck resets, replaned fretboards, new pickguards, cracks repaired,
etc., etc. when they hit their 20th or 30th birthday. Everybody makes
mistakes, materials are not perfect, and only the test of time will show
many errors.
When _did_ Taylor start making mass-production guitars? mid-70's?
Bryan
Tcaster51
experienced help. Now that I have some money (not too much, mind you)
I would like to invest in a quality instrument, but can't go much above
of Taylor before trying one in the store the other day and was quite
impressed. However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
to make a $1000.00 decision. I have played Martins in the past and
always imagined the day I could afford to purchase one. Now, I'm not
so sure what to do? I am quite aware of the fact that choosing an
instrument is a very particular matter, but advice from experienced
owners especially those who have switched back and forth between these
two instruments would still be appreciated. Thanks.
Personally, I'm a Taylor fan but you're right, a couple of minutes is not
enough time to make a decision. So go back when you've got at least an
hour to spend and play some guitar. If you're not sure then, go home
,sleep on it and come back another day until you've found the one that
screams " TAKE ME HOME!!!!! "
GOOD LUCK, TCASTER51
Andy Howell
I am a happy Martin owner - a J40. The store where I bought my instrument
stopped selling Martins several years ago after Martin's UK representatives
refused to honour the guarantee on a new Martin which had the laquer peeling
away from the top at an alarming rate.
My dealer, who I respect a lot, stopped stocking Martin and in time took on
one of the few UK Taylor dealerships. I have played a lot of Martins and
Taylors in the last year - as I am looking to buy a new small bodied guitar.
Somehow Taylors seem to be better value than the Martins. They are
certainly competetively priced. They are well finished instruments which
seem, to me, to be more consistent.
I have played a number of new OMs recently which seem to me to be "dead",
especially the OM 21. But perhaps this is because I have come to appreciate
the Taylors brighter, more open tone. It seems that you have to go up the
Martin price range before you find that consistency.
I also agree with the remarks made about Larrivee. The guitars are very
competetively priced here in the UK and sound wonderful. However, they are
a bit more difficult to get in this part of the world.
One final word in favour of Martin. My J40 is now 6 years old. The sound
has opened out beautifully. It has a warm tone, bags of volume and
presence. And it is tough. It is a guitar you can really dig into.
On the other hand, the Taylor 812c which is hanging on my dealers wall is
astonishingly good. Can't help wondering what it will sound like in 5 years
time.
I guess you've simply got to have more than one main guitar.
--
Andy Howell
Birmingham, UK.
BAKimsey
> none of these guys could tell the difference between Indian
>and Brazilian in a "blind" test anyway.
That's certainly been a big discussion point around here! I personally
prefer a good Indian rosewood (and I've played some _great_ Brazilians) if
for no other reason than because they're the "underdogs".
Bryan
SchGuitar
>and Brazilian in a "blind" test anyway.
<That's certainly been a big discussion point around here! I personally
<prefer a good Indian rosewood (and I've played some _great_ Brazilians)
if
<for no other reason than because they're the "underdogs".
There very definitely is a difference in sound between Braz & Indian
rosewood! Which you like better is another issue.
Eric Schoenberg
Gregory Patten
>My ideal? The body from my Martin, the neck from Phil's Taylor. Or the
>neck from my Martin, but with the frets in the right place.
Have you tried having someone carve you a compensating bridge? I played
an MC28 yesterday with a custom made one (I understand this is like $20
or $30) and it seemed to intonate well. (Actually, I bought it...)
charles tauber
As for the majority of people being able to tell the difference
> between I.R. and B.R. you're probably right. Most players probably
> can't. But there are some who probably can a fair majority of luthiers
> can.
>
I can't. I strongly doubt anyone else can either, in a blind test.
> B.R. is a supply and demand thing, not B.S.
It is certainly a supply and demand thing. However, the B.S. is the thing that
is sparking the demand. Many people believe that JUST because a guitar
is made using BR it will sound better than one which is not. This is
B.S. One of the
worst sounding guitars I've ever made was made with BR back and sides.
(The wood wasn't used correctly - there was nothing wrong with the wood
itself.)
Charles Tauber, Luthier
GmagicB
and large, at the price points we're talking about for most models from
either of these fine makers, there are no bad dogs.
Each maker has it's own sound and each wodel within that gernal sound has
one that is further true to type.
As a middle aged, 45 yrear old, I was born and raised with the sound of
great Martins and Gibsons constantly ringing in my ears and despite the
excellence of any number of the newer makers, those great sounds of from
my early years remain the benchmarks I use when evaluating an instrument.
Thus, I remain a Martin proponent for the purposes of this discussion
(though I have just purchased my first Collings, btw). There is simply
nothing like the sound of a great Martin guitar. For example, it is pretty
much a given that the early 30's Martins are among the greatest steel
stringed acoustics ever produced. Well, true, but a good deal of that
sound is due to the 60 years of age on those instruments.
It is also a given that the Martin guitars of the 70's are generally not
too great.
BUT, my '76 M-38 now with 20 years on it, is beginning to have that great
vintage sound of the early classics and I consider that this instrument is
a truly great guitar by any standard. The NEW Martins are now frequently
closer to the older ones in design and construction than they have been
since the thirties and I can only say amen to that.
Bottom line for me here is that I prefer the Martin look, and the Martin
sound. To my eye the Taylor pickguard and the headstock are both somewhat
unpleasant to look at, and the sound, while excellent is more an imitation
than an original.
I'll weigh in then, as an energetic proponent of Martin. I love 'em!
All the best,
Magic.
Paul J. Stamler
: >My ideal? The body from my Martin, the neck from Phil's Taylor. Or the
Yes--this is *with* compensating bridge.
Peace.
Paul
btif...@pbs.org
>> none of these guys could tell the difference between Indian
>>and Brazilian in a "blind" test anyway.
> That's certainly been a big discussion point around here! I personally
> prefer a good Indian rosewood (and I've played some _great_ Brazilians) if
> for no other reason than because they're the "underdogs".
Personally, I like balsa wood. It's very light and so responds very well.
-- Bruce Tiffany ;-} ;-} ;-}
Bob Alman
: Personally, I like balsa wood. It's very light and so responds very well.
Are you talking Indian or Brazilian balsa wood?
--
Bob Alman
John Cowan
I am indeed pleased with this guitar. I believe I got snake bit after
reading a thread about 'RSI' or 'Repetitive Strain Injury'. How lucky
I was, I thought, to not have this problem. Sure enough after over 25
yrs of playing, I have this pain in my wrist. I decided to take a few
days off to rest it. I've got an open mind so I tried playing one of
the smaller bodied Taylor guitars. Not sure which one ... beautiful
cut-away. Any hows .... I noticed, to my surprise, how little effort
was needed to play it. We are talking about 2 entirely different beasts
here. Guess it all depends on all kinds of factors, to this there is no
question. If I find that this wrist prob continues to persist, I may
decide to go with that model Taylor that is so easy to play. I may have
to work a little harder to play the Martin .... but thats ok with me.
Either way you cant go wrong -w- either make. I'll try & make this
Martin play a little easier for me. Sure hate to give up on a fine
guitar just because of a little wrist pain !
My 2\ worth. John
GmagicB
ismore a dunction of the various other elements of difference than the
species of rosewood used. No two pieces of wood have the same tonal
properties.
I further suspect that the perception of this "difference" is a function
of knowing that one is radically more expensive than the other. Years of
marketing around this subject have predisposed all of us to believe there
is a qualitative difference. My personal experience suggests otherwise.
All the best,
Magic.
Joseph A Pescatello
With all due respect, GM, I believe it was Eric Schoenberg who
emphatically stated in this thread that the difference between Brazilian and
Indian rosewood is discernable to the ear. Eric builds some fine guitars
and has for years. He's traveled the jungles of the world (correct me if
I'm wrong here, Eric) to dredge up fallen rosewood trees large enough to
make a two-piece back from. I don't think his perception is based on
marketing hype.
Humbly,
Joe P.
btif...@pbs.org
> : Personally, I like balsa wood. It's very light and so responds very well.
>
> Are you talking Indian or Brazilian balsa wood?
Uhh ... that would be Brazindian balsa wood, I believe ... :-)
-- Bruce Tiffany
BAKimsey
>Personally, I like balsa wood. It's very light and so responds very
well.
What size engine do you put in it?
Bryan
Gitarzan
>
>>Personally, I like balsa wood. It's very light and so responds very
>well.
And it looks so cool when you're performing and those little chunks of
wood keep falling off the fretboard.
--
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Gita...@GANet.NET | Three Chords , Five Notes, |
| Gita...@AOL.COM | Six Strings, and Eight Beers.|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-=Never Spammed. Never Will.=-
Al Koenig
>If you want a guitar that will hold it's value better when it comes time
>to sell, buy the Martin.
>
>If you want a guitar that plays easy, sounds great, and is easy to work
>on, buy the Taylor.
>
>RJ
>
>
This is essentially true. However, I think that a Martin responds to a
flatpick better than a Taylor, and a Taylor fingerpicks a little better.
This is my personal preference.
Al
<<<<I love animals - they taste great!>>>>
Al Koenig
>This is a guess. You grew up when all the *real* folkies played Martins
>and now nothing but a Martin will make you truly happy. (I'm not being
>critical of you; I'm describing me.) So, I'm a three time Martin owner
>(player, not collector! I play them all), but I have played
>some Taylors that grabbed me in a way that few guitars have. (But they
>invariably had a bridge that made the guitar look, well, . . . cheap.)
>
>Here's what you do. Find the Martin you like best, find the Taylor you
>like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
>you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
LOOKS ASIDE, I THINK THAT YOU GET A LOT
>MORE GUITAR FOR THE MONEY WITH TAYLOR.
>
>
>
I disagree. However, I think that get just as much guitar with the
Taylor. I own a Martin D-28 that I would never part with, and nothing
has come close to matching the volume, tone or playability. That aside,
I have played numerous examples from Taylor and they are all excellent.
One would never go wrong acquiring one.
Remember though that instruments vary one to the other...if you can look
at more than one example of each.
charles tauber
>
Eric builds some fine guitars
> and has for years. He's traveled the jungles of the world (correct me if
> I'm wrong here, Eric) to dredge up fallen rosewood trees large enough to
> make a two-piece back from. I don't think his perception is based on
> marketing hype.
>
> Humbly,
> Joe P.
Joe,
You're right, his perception is based upon personal opinion. (He may be
one of the people responsible for the hype.)
Jose Romanillios, famed classical guitar builder, PREFERS Indian to
Brazilian rosewood, based upon the sound characteristics. That is HIS
personal opinion.
Who's opinion should we take as gospel? Mine, obviously.
Charles Tauber, Luthier
ps
The REAL question is whether or not Eric's globe trotting search for
wood results in a superior instrument. Are Eric's guitars better than
those of EVERY other maker who does not visit the jungles to pick their
trees from which to make guitars? If not, then Eric must do it for fun
or exercise, otherwise he's misguided. (Just think of how many more of his
fine instruments would be available if he didn't spend the time necessary
to visit jungles in search of wood, and instead spent the time making
guitars.)
charles tauber
> Howard Hughes built, "Spruce Goose", the world largest
> airplane at that time, *presumably* from Adirondack spruce. The top was
> laminated and I don't think the back and sides are rosewood.....
Actually, it was Sitka spruce, used extensively during the war for air
plane infrastructures.
Charles
Dale Grote
>My ideal? The body from my Martin, the neck from Phil's Taylor. Or the
>neck from my Martin, but with the frets in the right place.
>
>Dream on, Pablo.
You've just described my Goodall!
Dale Grote
BAKimsey
writes:
>Though the Collings D-1A I recently acquired is
>certainly challenging that notion these days.
What's the neck like on the Collings? I remember them being pretty much
Martin-like, but a friend of mine played one and reported that it was like
a "club".
Bryan
Chifuru Noda
same wood. So if you compare a Braz. RW guitar to an Ind. RW guitar,
individual differences will mask the tonal characteristics attributable
to B vs I rosewood.
However, I also think tapping a piece of wood can be used to characterize
the wood. To do this, you just hold a piece of wood (rectangle, ready to
be cut into the guitar shape) and tap lightly on it. You can actually
hear differences in tone! I do trust experieced luthiers can discern
difference in tone from this. It does not necessarily mean Ind-rw sounds
*better* or *worse* but the tapping can prove that these two woods can
produce different tones once they are used on a guitar.
What we have here are (a) the law of average and (b) the test of acoustic
properties of wood without other factors that you would've had had it
been made into a guitar.
Pennies for thoughts.....
Chief
GmagicB
>If you want a guitar that will hold it's value better when it comes time
>to sell, buy the Martin.
>
>If you want a guitar that plays easy, sounds great, and is easy to work
>on, buy the Taylor.<<
The implication here is that the Martin doesn't sound great. Have to
disagree with that. I've got four Martins, bought two new, two used. They
al sound great and I would sell any of 'em. As for the easy to play issue,
this is largely a matter of what you get used to. I've never found ANY
guitar to be "difficult" to play, provided it was set up properly.
Perhaps the Taylor neck is a shade quicker, but the difference, at least
to me, is not that great. Perhaps players with an electric background will
find the Taylor somewhat more comfortable, but the hands tend to adjust to
an instrument with time.
I like the look and the sound of a good Martin, pretty much better than
anyother acoustic. Though the Collings D-1A I recently acquired is
certainly challenging that notion these days. Still, for value, look,
sound, and heritage, I'll take the Martin in most cases.
All the best,
Magic.
Joseph A Pescatello
charles tauber <tau...@candu.aecl.ca> wrote:
[-snip-]
>Jose Romanillios, famed classical guitar builder, PREFERS Indian to
>Brazilian rosewood, based upon the sound characteristics. That is HIS
>personal opinion.
>
[-snip-]
>
>The REAL question is whether or not Eric's globe trotting search for
>wood results in a superior instrument. Are Eric's guitars better than
>those of EVERY other maker who does not visit the jungles to pick their
>trees from which to make guitars?
Well, my impulse is to say you have to play his instruments and judge for
yourself, but therein lies the crux of the issue. I believe the original
(perpetual) question was 'Does Brazilian sound _different_ than Indian
rosewood?' Whether one is better than the other is a matter of taste.
Whether one is worth more money is a matter of economics. The
answer to the fundamental question, though - do they exhibit different
tonal qualities when used to build a guitar? - seems to be yes according
to Senor Romanillios and Mr. Schoenberg.
MHO,
Joe Pescatello
d...@imonics.com
>In article <DKxyB...@world.std.com>, gda...@world.std.com (Jerry Dallal) says:
>>
>>Lucy A. Vinturella (lucy...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>>: However, a couple of minutes in a store is not a long time
>>: to make a $1000.00 decision.
>>
>>
Oh very much yes! I just recently bought a Lowden D32 (the only guitars I
consistently liked better than the Taylors were Lowdens), and I must have
spent 8 hours (more?) playing various instruments in my local shop, plus
time I spent at other area guitar stores. PLUS a drive out to the US importers
of Lowden Guitars (10 hours driving for 1 hour of playing) to make sure
that I didn't want a variation that my local shop didn't stop. Everybody
involved was very gracious about this, and I now own a guitar of which I
am not worthy...
ObPlug: Hoffman's Stringed Instruments in Raleigh, NC is a *great* shop.
lots of patience, answers when you want them, room to play when
you want that, too. They gave me the info on how to contact the
importer. (I'm a very satisfied customer)
>>Here's what you do. Find the Martin you like best, find the Taylor you
>>like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
>>you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
>>(Acknowledgement: This technique is not original with me, but I can't
>>remember the name of the poster who first suggested it.)
I think its a universal technique. I've used it for years. But for this
guitar I was going to use my ears...
>>>>Keep in mind this group might as well be named
> "rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic.taylor"
ObAdvocacy: With good reason. :) I did find one very nice cedar/mahogany
Martin. It was the first Mahogany guitar I ever liked.
mike...@spec.org
>>>like best. Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
>>>you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
>>>(Acknowledgement: This technique is not original with me, but I can't
>>>remember the name of the poster who first suggested it.)
>
>I think its a universal technique. I've used it for years. But for this
>guitar I was going to use my ears...
IMHO I think that regardless if it's that close, than either would work.
(Personally I would go for that Taylor though). :) It could jsut be because
I'm prolly a baby when it comes down to playing (I was lucky and got a
Taylor 410 like a month or two after I started...don't ask why). It's
like...choosing between a Jeep Grand Cherokee or a Porsche. Both are great,
and chances are, you'll be happy with either, but you'll always look back
sayin...if only I got the <other guitar>.
:)
SchGuitar
>
Eric builds some fine guitars
> and has for years. He's traveled the jungles of the world (correct me if
> I'm wrong here, Eric) to dredge up fallen rosewood trees large enough to
> make a two-piece back from. I don't think his perception is based on
> marketing hype.
>
> Humbly,
> Joe P.
Joe,
You're right, his perception is based upon personal opinion. (He may be
one of the people responsible for the hype.)
Jose Romanillios, famed classical guitar builder, PREFERS Indian to
Brazilian rosewood, based upon the sound characteristics. That is HIS
personal opinion.
Who's opinion should we take as gospel? Mine, obviously.
Charles Tauber, Luthier
ps: The REAL question is whether or not Eric's globe trotting search for
wood results in a superior instrument. Are Eric's guitars better than
those of EVERY other maker who does not visit the jungles to pick their
trees from which to make guitars? If not, then Eric must do it for fun
or exercise, otherwise he's misguided. (Just think of how many more of his
fine instruments would be available if he didn't spend the time necessary
to visit jungles in search of wood, and instead spent the time making
guitars.)>>
Thanks for your comments, Joe. I'm afraid I've never been to a jungle,
except perhaps to that crazy world of trying to buy Braz. rosewood from
the bunch of speculators who have jockeyed the price up just like drug
dealers. There are other similarities to the drug trade: Several years ago
I gave a bunch of money to a wood buyer (he'd been supplying Martin &
others) to stake his trip to Brazil in exchange for first pick when He
returned. We had to be in San Francisco the day the boat came in (not easy
- we had to track the progress of the boat while keeping our travel agent
busy) so as to insure safe delivery and guaranteed 1st pick. We still lost
some (to theft, most likely) in between our leaving CA and receiving the
shipment at home!
Charles, I think your statement quoted above is a bit strange. All I said
initially is that there is a difference, though one is not better than the
other: that's a personal preference. Every guitar is different, true.
Every piece of wood is different. They all sound different; in general,
Brazilian rosewood is very different than Indian rosewood, in weight,
density, etc. And thus, they sound different. I've produced several
hundred guitars with the same body and different woods. EVERY Braz. guitar
sounds different than EVERY Indian one, and always there are specific
qualities in the difference. There is definitely a difference! If you
can't hear it, you just need more experience. The REAL question is, what
in the world you were talking about in that paragraph you wrote about the
REAL question?
Eric
RV WRLee
my 2 cents. As a player and owner of lots of guitars I've found great
ones and not so great ones. My playing style and the qualities that I'm
looking for seem suited more towards Martin than Taylor and I've been
very impressed with Collings.
i know quite a few performing artists and no matter what they may be
playing on stage (due to artist deals) at home they always seem to have
a Martin to pick on or record with.
Jerry Dallal
: >>>Flip a coin. If you like the outcome, buy that guitar. If
: >>>you wish it had come out the other way, buy the other guitar.
: >I think its a universal technique. I've used it for years. But for this
: >guitar I was going to use my ears...
: IMHO I think that regardless if it's that close, than either would work.
No, no, no, no, no. The technique puts you in touch with your *true*
feelings. If it comes up heads, for example, and you're happy or even
indifferent, then go with the choice. However, if you get a twinge that
it didn't come up tails, then go with tails.
charles tauber
I've produced several
> hundred guitars with the same body and different woods. EVERY Braz. guitar
> sounds different than EVERY Indian one, and always there are specific
> qualities in the difference. There is definitely a difference! If you
> can't hear it, you just need more experience.
I'll bow to your experience. Thank you for sharing it.
The REAL question is, what
> in the world you were talking about in that paragraph you wrote about the
> REAL question?
> Eric
Sorry, I occasionally slip into lapses of rationality.
Charles
Al Drewes
>
> Howard Hughes built, "Spruce Goose", the world largest
> airplane at that time, *presumably* from Adirondack spruce. The top was
> laminated and I don't think the back and sides are rosewood.....
>
>>>>
Chief:
Note that Martin discontinued the use of Adirondack because of the lack of supply. This ocurred around the time of
the Spruce Goose. I had been told that the loss of supply of Adirondack was because it went into army aircraft in
WWII.. Given the size of the Spruce Goose, perhaps that's where it all went.
Al
JohnB66
<lmfaulk...@uh.edu> writes:
> I have two
>Taylors, a Dan Crary Signature Model that I bought used
>because it had a good dark sounding rosewood bass with the
>brilliant type of treble available from mohogany, and a 555
>Taylor twelve string which is brilliant sounding and easy to
>play.
I agree with Luke, I was looking for a 'real' guitar to get back to
playing on after a long absence. I orginally thought Martin or ? - then I
discovered Taylors. I probably played every 'common brand' of guitar,
generally the ones I could purchase in the mid-west, not order custom,
etc. I kept coming back to the Taylors. I was initially considering a 410
since I wanted a dreadnought and didn't think I deserved better. However,
I ended up with an 810 and a 555. The 810 mainly for the rosewood sound
and punch and the 555 12-string for brilliant sounding and easy to play
for a 12 string. I thought the 855 12-string was too overpowering for my
taste, the mahogany 555 sound cleaner. The 810 and the 555 make a great
duo for playing and recording (if I can ever learn to play two guitars at
once). Plus the dealer made me a great deal on both guitars. I might have
gone up the scale to the 910 or Dan Crary or the Leo Kottke- but my check
book ran out of money.
The Martins probably place third or fourth IMHO. If Taylors were not
around, I may have gotten a Breedlove, or Collins, and definitly could not
have afforded two guitars.
There are a lot of good guitar makers and good guitars out there. But
don't buy one until"'you find one that wants to go home with you". Don't
worry - this will happen!
Good luck
jblaesi
jblaesi
Chemical Engineer, Guitarist Under Development
---Now Have Guitar!
S. Goldman
Drewes) wrote:
I have the keys to the Spruce Goose's hangar.
We can probably get enough wood out of the tail section to build several
thousand incredibly great tops. No one will miss the tail anyway.
They only look at the wingspan. In addition, there is enough great
adirondack in the spare parts that are lying around to provide you
guitarmakers with wood for the next 100 years. Whos' got a chainsaw????
Chifuru Noda
>schg...@aol.com (SchGuitar) wrote:
>
> I've produced several
>> hundred guitars with the same body and different woods. EVERY Braz. guitar
>> sounds different than EVERY Indian one, and always there are specific
>> qualities in the difference. There is definitely a difference! If you
>> can't hear it, you just need more experience.
>
>I'll bow to your experience. Thank you for sharing it.
I, too, bow to Eric's experience. I've only played about five of his
guitars but they *consistently* possess a distinct, mellow sound that I do
not hear from any other makers. Schoenberg Guitars are class of its own -
immediate responce to touch, can be overdriven if thumbpick is
used. I often wonder how Rory Block can get her tone out of it......
Hi, Eric, this should count as 5 % discount toward a purchase of your
guitar, shouldn't it?
Chief
btif...@pbs.org
> Note that Martin discontinued the use of Adirondack because of the lack of supply. This ocurred around the time of
> the Spruce Goose. I had been told that the loss of supply of Adirondack was because it went into army aircraft in
> WWII.. Given the size of the Spruce Goose, perhaps that's where it all went.
I'm not sure what kind of spruce is meant by "Adirondack spruce", but there
is certainly no lack of spruce in the Adirondack Mountains, an area larger
than Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Olympic, and Grand Teton parks
combined, by a good margin. Perhaps there are certain restrictions on
cutting wood, or a lack of a specific kind of spruce. At any rate, I don't
think there's a type of tree called "Adirondack spruce".
If all the guitars produced in the world were made entirely out of spruce
from the Adirondacks from now on and forever, I'm sure it wouldn't make a
dent in the supply. This is a VAST forestland. So there must be something
else going on here.
-- Bruce Tiffany
btif...@pbs.org
>>Note that Martin discontinued the use of Adirondack [...]
>>Given the size of the Spruce Goose, perhaps that's where it all went.
> We can probably get enough wood out of the tail section to build several
> thousand incredibly great tops. [...]
I've got two!
-- Bruce Tiffany
scotta
sell the wood to Martin, Lowden and Taylor and then retire (with our
little piece of the pie)!
..scotta
S. Goldman
wrote:
>And just think, it is perfectly aged as well. Maybe we can make a raid and
>sell the wood to Martin, Lowden and Taylor and then retire (with our
>little piece of the pie)!
>
Yeah! 70 year old well-seasoned adirondack spruce. What a racket. We're
gonna be rich...
And the small stuff can be made into toothpicks. We can sell all we get
to Weyerhauser.
The top wood will go to Martin to make into more unaffordable
commemorative models.
The Spruce Goose Special. D-28SGS only made 1932 of 'em. Rare... The
prototype was Howard Hughes' 1932 D-28.
Let's see...how's about $ 300 per square inch for this stuff??
SchGuitar
there
is certainly no lack of spruce in the Adirondack Mountains, an area larger
than Yellowstone, Yosemite, Grand Canyon, Olympic, and Grand Teton parks
combined, by a good margin. Perhaps there are certain restrictions on
cutting wood, or a lack of a specific kind of spruce. At any rate, I
don't
think there's a type of tree called "Adirondack spruce".
If all the guitars produced in the world were made entirely out of spruce
from the Adirondacks from now on and forever, I'm sure it wouldn't make a
dent in the supply. This is a VAST forestland. So there must be
something
else going on here.>
It's called Red Spruce, and comes from up and down the East Coast, from
the Adirondacks to the Appalachians.
The way I understand it, almost all the virgin lumber was used up
during the days of heating with wood, before the concept of "insulation"
was dreamed up. From my days living in the mountains of West Virginia in a
log house, I can just begin to imagine how much wood got burned up for
energy. Also, a great deal of what is now second growth forests used to be
farmed. You can often see miles of stone walls running through the woods
all over New England. Those were borders to cleared fields in the early
days.
We're starting to see red spruce available for guitar building now
because the second growth can be a hundred years old now, and just getting
big enough to make guitar tops.
Eric Scoenberg
The Music Emporium, Lexington, MA
MindlesOrb
>because the second growth can be a hundred years old now, and just
getting
>big enough to make guitar tops.
> Eric Scoenberg
> The Music Emporium, Lexington, MA
Eric,
I am working witha luthier (Ted Davis) who has some of the best Red Spruce
I have ever seen. This is not saying much since I am just beginnig to
learn about wood. But Ted feels it is the best. He is a Wood-a-holic who
builds very fine instruments. I was privledged to see the tree before he
cut it into tops. The growth rings were so close together they were very
hard to count, but we did manage to count over 400 ! The tops are
beautiful and He has some for sale if your interested. I'll ask if I can
pass his number to you. He just sold Martin and Collings quite a few
tops..
Tim (Mindless but not thoughtless)
SchGuitar
I am working witha luthier (Ted Davis) who has some of the best Red Spruce
I have ever seen. This is not saying much since I am just beginnig to
learn about wood. But Ted feels it is the best. He is a Wood-a-holic who
builds very fine instruments. I was privledged to see the tree before he
cut it into tops. The growth rings were so close together they were very
hard to count, but we did manage to count over 400 ! The tops are
beautiful and He has some for sale if your interested. I'll ask if I can
pass his number to you. He just sold Martin and Collings quite a few
tops..
Tim (Mindless but not thoughtless) >>
Tim,
Thanks. I bought a lot of tops from Ted a couple years ago. Is this
another tree?
Those tops made some wonderful sounding guiitars!
Eric Schoenberg
Al Carruth
could most easilly attack: once you cut the trees down the Indians and the
wolves had no place to hide. It took a long time for that attitude to
fade, and even afterward the supply must have seemed inexhaustable. Up in
the Pemi vally in NH they built railroads along the river around the turn
of the century, logging as they went. They cut out the pine and left the
spruce, which was only good for framing lumber. Fires, caused by drought
and poor forestry practices, destroyed most of what was left, and the
hurricane in '38 took out the last stands of old growth in the Whites.
That area was called 'the Desolation' for years because not a tree was
left standing. They have pictures in the Zeeland Falls AMC hut of rail
cars with a single log of pine on them, and 5' dia. spruces in the
background. I sure wish they had saved me one. :-\ Many of the Victorian
houses in the Boston area are framed in red spruce, and you can get nice
old wood in salvage if you try.
The trees are trying to come back. Some is being harvested in this
area, but there are huge swaths of die-off, probably caused by acid rain.
Down south, where the weather is more temperate and the soil more alkaline
the trees are doing better. Ted Davis is, indeed, cutting some good stuff.
I've used a few of his tops and they are really nice. Eric: if you get a
chance, Holly Getting's HD-28 has one of Ted's tops on it as a
replacement. I much prefer red spruce to sitka.