Am I crazy? Ibanez vs. Martin, Takamine, Taylor, etc.
Kevin Goodsell
best selection we found in our area was at Guitar Center, where they
had all those mentioned in the subject as well as Ovation, Fender,
etc.
We were mainly looking for a guitar for him in the sub $500 range, but
I was also looking for something that might interest me.
I played several guitars, especially the Martins. But nothing sounded
as good to me (or my brother) as the Ibanez AW300 ($420), including
some that were 5 times the price. I was not expecting that at all.
Quite the opposite, in fact.
Compared to the Martins, the Ibanez had much better volume,
brightness, and sustain. The Takamine seemed closer, but still not
quite as good and about twice the price. Similar story with the
Taylors.
The Martins just sounded dull to me, and didn't feel as good either.
So, am I crazy? Clueless about what to listen for in an acoustic? On
drugs? All of the above? What do you folks think?
My brother took home the Ibanez AW300. I'm still looking for a new
acoustic for myself, and in light of this experience I'm thinking
about the Ibanez AW500 (but I haven't found one to try yet).
I'd really appreciate some opinions and ideas about this. Thanks.
-Kevin
J. Mark Lane
long report on it here (the word "revelation" was in the title... I might
have used a different account to post it). I reached the same conclusion.
I bought an Ibanez AW200. It was a far better instrument than many costing
more. It sounded better than the low end Martins, and had better
appointments. It's a fine guitar for under $400. IMO, your conclusions
just prove that you have ears <g>, and not just egos.
Mark
Kevin Goodsell <good...@bridgernet.com> wrote in message
news:2fa5ba58.02090...@posting.google.com...
George Gleason
> acoustic for myself, and in light of this experience I'm thinking
> about the Ibanez AW500 (but I haven't found one to try yet).
>
lifetime
if you find a guitar/ANY guitar? that pushes all your buttons and makes you
want to play it, you should buy it, and enjoy it until it no longer brings
you pleasure
at that point find another guitar or musical or artistic venture that calls
to your spirit
George
whirligig
(in message <2fa5ba58.02090...@posting.google.com>):
>[....]
> I played several guitars, especially the Martins. But nothing sounded
> as good to me (or my brother) as the Ibanez AW300 ($420), including
> some that were 5 times the price. [....]
>
> I'd really appreciate some opinions and ideas about this. Thanks.
Istm that music's tools do not have to be expensive.
Listen to Ed Gerhard's lovely House Of Guitars album.
Consider the notion I've heard that more guitar strings are thrown away per
day in America than are used in Africa in a year.
I met a blind man who played a banjo made roughly out of a cooking pot and a
stick with five or six frets, whose only shoe was the one boot he wore to
kick the packing case he sat on when he played. One of his colleagues played
a five string guitar - by the time he'd saved up enough money to buy the
expensive sixth, he'd discovered he could get along fine without it anyway,
so he ate for a while instead. Their percussionist played some rattletrap
he'd made out of split dowel, bottle tops and old pans. True, I swear, and
they sounded fine.
The tech who was hired to sort out pick-ups for the Cuban musicians at
Carnegie Hall is a friend. He was puzzled by some of the strings on the
instruments until he realised the Cubans had been winding their own with old
transformer wire.
A fancy expensive guitar can be a wonderful thing indeed, but it isn't the
main story.
Adrian
Jennifer
always felt that all guitars have distinct characters, and what sounds
good to me may not sound that great to you or anyone else. The brand
name is just a loose guide for surveying the many guitars out there.
Another thing, that may or may not have played a part in your visit to
GC: I think it's safe to say that GC doesn't change the strings on
their guitars to keep them fresh-sounding. In my experience, most of
the guitars I've tried out (regardless of brand) at GC sounded dull
because the strings were corroded and very nasty. I wonder how many
people have had success in requesting that strings be changed on a
guitar... and not get the evil eye if they didn't decide to buy it?
Jennifer
--
Can't live without music...
RMMGA CD3 FAQ:
http://www.geocities.com/musicaddict47/rmmga/cd3faq.html
Charlotte DeMott
> I played several guitars, especially the Martins. But nothing sounded
> as good to me (or my brother) as the Ibanez AW300 ($420), including
> some that were 5 times the price. I was not expecting that at all.
> Quite the opposite, in fact.
Sounds like my recent experience with a Tacoma DM9 (~$575 w/ case). If
you can find one in your area, it's definitely worth a listen.
Charlotte
Sherm
wrote:
>Compared to the Martins, the Ibanez had much better volume,
>brightness, and sustain.
Not to be a wet blanket or anything but don't forget that the age,
condition, type, and brand of strings on anything you play in a store
are factors. Not discounting your experience, though. Just saying
that there can be confounding variables.
When you have the cash in your pocket and you're ready to pull the
strigger, it wouldn't hurt to ask to have your 2 or 3 finalists all
re-strung for before your final evalulation.
I'd also suggest a blindfold test.
Good luck and enjoy whatever you buy.
Jeff
dm
to play it. It sounded awful but I'm sure the strings were a factor. I
didn't ask to have them changed but you think they would at least keep their
higher-end models in shape.
"Jennifer" <musica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:v8fqnuc8cbopbooo0...@4ax.com...
Mark McDonald
guitar for slide (Delta style) I've ever heard and respectable for
fingerstyle. Have gigged with it about 3 times since I bought it (and I
haven't even changed strings on it with the exception of putting a 15 on
top). I also wrote a great song on it (inspired by it's own unique tone).
It's been glued together after what looks like it got bashed over someones
head but man does it sound good. It captures that Delta sound like no
other.
So it just shows to go you. Every guitar is different. It's like airplanes
(I'm an old bush pilot). Every airplane has a different mission and
purpose. One job may require a little, slow airplane and a 4 million jet
could not do that job. So money is not the main factor here. Same with
music.
Go with what sound and feels good to you. Many of the low end "big name"
guitars may not sound at all as well as another in the same price range.
Adrian is right on. It is not the instrument it is the player.
--
Mark McDonald
m...@sonic.net
http://www.markmcdonaldblues.com
George Gleason
>
> I'd also suggest a blindfold test.
>
> Good luck and enjoy whatever you buy.
>
experiance so is ego and pride they should not be discounted as they will
add a significant amount of influence on your enjoyment of your guitar
how would one see a warped nechk with a blindfold
I am against blind and double blind testing as it trys to minimize the human
aspect of buying
after all does a mercedes really transport one any better than a chevy
impala? NIMO we all feed our ego in diffrent ways and if a slick guitar
pushes your buttons your should be entitled to enjoy that button being
pushed
George
Sherm
<g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> I'd also suggest a blindfold test.
>>
>> Good luck and enjoy whatever you buy.
>>
>why a blindfold test? looks are a very important part of the guitar
>experiance so is ego and pride they should not be discounted as they will
>add a significant amount of influence on your enjoyment of your guitar
Those may very will be important factors but I'd rather control for
them by making sure I'm consciously aware of them --- not let them be
confused with the single most important consideration --- how the
thing sounds.
>how would one see a warped nechk with a blindfold
Good point, George. Plus you might fall off the stool trying to sit
down or you might knock over a display trying to move around the
acoustic room.
;-)
>I am against blind and double blind testing as it trys to minimize the human
>aspect of buying
Okey dokey.
>after all does a mercedes really transport one any better than a chevy
>impala?
Nope. But you're confusing me. So looks and image don't matter or
they do matter?
> NIMO we all feed our ego in diffrent ways and if a slick guitar
>pushes your buttons your should be entitled to enjoy that button being
>pushed
I think listening to a prospective guitar with your back turned or
playing it blindfolded would help you isolate the factors involved so
at least you know *which* buttons are being pushed when.
You might very well choose the more visually attractive guitar *in
spite* of the fact that another one sounded better (i.e., it *failed*
the bilindfold test) but at least you're making that decision
deliberately and consciously. You've reduced the risk of kidding
yourself.
Just my .02, though. Ain't nuttin but a lil ol thang.
Sherm
1 eyed jack
"Sherm" <jsherma...@lorainccc.edu> wrote in message
news:3d7e37d6...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 17:45:25 GMT, "George Gleason"
> <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
> >> I'd also suggest a blindfold test.
> >>
> >> Good luck and enjoy whatever you buy.
> >>
> >why a blindfold test? looks are a very important part of the guitar
> >experiance so is ego and pride they should not be discounted as they will
> >add a significant amount of influence on your enjoyment of your guitar
It's refreshing to actually hear someone cop to that. I confess that I don't
get the same ego rush strapping on my Squier 5 string fretless that I did
with my Alembic. On the plus side, I know that my credibility as a bass
player is based solely on my ability and not some misguided notion that a
"name" on the headstock = talent in the hands.
>
> Those may very will be important factors but I'd rather control for
> them by making sure I'm consciously aware of them --- not let them be
> confused with the single most important consideration --- how the
> thing sounds.
>
> >how would one see a warped nechk with a blindfold.
If you can't feel it in the playing what difference does it make? Those kind
of things are usually just setup issues anyway.
>
>
> >I am against blind and double blind testing as it trys to minimize the
human
> >aspect of buying
Your ears and hands aren't important aspects of the guitar buying process?
All blind testing does is separate the ego issues of "how cool I'll be when
the dudes see me playing *this*" from how good the guitar sounds and feels.
If you decide from there that you have to have brand X anyway because that's
what you've always wanted then, by all means, do so.
>
> >after all does a mercedes really transport one any better than a chevy
> >impala?
>
> Nope. But you're confusing me. So looks and image don't matter or
> they do matter?
I wouldn't say that it doesn't matter but it's important to me to know where
the line is and how much I'm paying to stroke my ego.
>
> > NIMO we all feed our ego in diffrent ways and if a slick guitar
> >pushes your buttons your should be entitled to enjoy that button being
> >pushed
>
> I think listening to a prospective guitar with your back turned or
> playing it blindfolded would help you isolate the factors involved so
> at least you know *which* buttons are being pushed when.
>
> You might very well choose the more visually attractive guitar *in
> spite* of the fact that another one sounded better (i.e., it *failed*
> the bilindfold test) but at least you're making that decision
> deliberately and consciously. You've reduced the risk of kidding
> yourself.
The problem there is that once you stop kidding yourself it becomes harder
to kid others and this *is* all about ego, ain't it?
JD
Sherm
<jamminno...@boogie.blues> wrote:
>The problem there is that once you stop kidding yourself it becomes harder
>to kid others and this *is* all about ego, ain't it?
I guess in my own case I'd have to agree, JD. It takes a certain
amount of ego to get up in front of people and play music for 'em.
"Hey look at me!"
But I know players who don't give a rat's hindquarters about
performing and for them the joy is solely in the creation. That must
be a nice feeling. But I do indeed love to boogie, Mr. B., and I
can't do it alone.
And that's only because . . . .
". . . . Theeeeeeeeeeeeeere'ssssssssssssssssss . . . .
. . . NO business like SHOW business . . . "
Ethel
J. Mark Lane
>100 yr. anniversary J-200
Huh?
J. Mark Lane
to the 100th anniversary of the J200, which... well, you get my point.
Mark
Southpa <new...@here.com> wrote in message
news:uonsnu8coro53llro...@4ax.com...
> The Gibson company began producing guitars in 1894 in Kalamazoo Mi.
> My friend had a 1994 Gibson J-200. Inside the soundhole was a sticker
> saying "100 year Anniversary". Limited edition.
Dan Carey
questions are already answered, aren't they?
Best of luck,
Dan
"Kevin Goodsell" <good...@bridgernet.com> wrote in message
news:2fa5ba58.02090...@posting.google.com...
Dar S
Sherm <jsherma...@lorainccc.edu> wrote in message news:3d7e4b07...@news.cis.dfn.de...
It's just the two of you?.
The Dars
Steve Scott
guitars, whatever... I want em to look like I want. I've owned pretty
guitars in the past and I set out recently to buy a new "beautiful" guitar,
ready to spend up to $2500. Only other requirement was it had to "sound"
beautiful too! However my current definition of beautiful sound is a
complete (loud) full-range instrument that can cover as one-man-band,
flatpicked, my little 000-16sgt can't quite live up to that.
Over 6 weeks or so I traveled around, bought on mail-order approval, played
local, and even tried some ebay. I played prices from $150 to $5000 --
Bourgeois Country boy, OMC, and bearclaw slope-D; black Gibson J-200, J-100
sunburst; cheap little Olympia OD12s sunburst and equally cheap and pretty
Epiphone SJ18s sunburst; outrageous Gibson Doves in Flight; Tacoma JR55,
DR12, DR20, JK50, DM10; Martin HD28, D40, D41 & David Crosby; Taylor 615
cherry & tobacco sunbursts; Guild DV52; Lowdens, Larrivees, Gallagher G70;
Rainsong small body and jumbo; Gibson reissue AJ rosewood & mahogany, and a
few misc others. Now I know every guitar is different and I've played
outstanding examples of many of these guitars over the years, but I just
wasn't finding it this time, or maybe I've become too critical.
Anyway, I finally went back and played again the one that had the sound that
started this quest this time -- a plain little brown-dog, satin finish,
cheap ($750) Tacoma DR12. I futilely resisted buying this guitar when I
first heard it because it wasn't exotic wood/glossy/sunburst/abalone/etc. I
know I could be patient(!) and keep trying to find that sound and get the
looks too, but I also knew if I let that DR12 get away I'd kick myself for a
long time.
So the way I see it I now have a reference for the sound I want -- I'll keep
playing pretty guitars, but I know they have to sound as good or better than
what I have or they won't get played much. And it takes the pressure off
cause this one didn't cost a fortune and doesn't cost anything to just keep
around. I told my wife/singing partner that Doc Watson had played the same
guitar for 25 years, she said "Doc's not a visual guy". Lynn McSpadden told
me once that instruments already have the music built into them, it's up to
us to "release" the music :-)
Steve
"George Gleason" <g.p.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:Vcqf9.6938$1C2.5...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Tony Done
evaluate the bass response of a guitar. I only bought one recent
acquisition, after months of trying it in the store (the owner is a friend
of mine - he didn't mind), when the strings had been changed and I got to
play it while they were still reasonably new.
Tony D
"Jennifer" <musica...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:v8fqnuc8cbopbooo0...@4ax.com...