Members kcinator Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 I'm sure that this has been done before, but it was never taken far enough imo. SO which one? It seems to me that the hd-28 always sounds slightly better, but I've heard that it only sounds better new and over time it becomes "mushy" sounding. It also is more expensive than the d-28. What do you guys think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bridgepin Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 Well I found that the HD-28 has more volume and more overtones due to scalloped braces I've not heard that they go mushie after time if anything the more you play the better they sound because the top is opening up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members slagorourke Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 I own an HD28 so am biased, but to me it just has more power, projection and tone.I really don't buy the "it goes mushy over time" argument. The HD28 is made closer in spec to the pre war herringbone D28's than modern day D28's are. I don't hear anyone complaining that they've gone mushy over the years.For me it stacks up like this - the D28 is a good guitar, the HD28 is a very good guitar.If you can afford the price differential then buy the HD. Otherwise buy the D. Either way you're getting a great guitar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarcapo Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 I owned a 1984 Brazilian rosewood HD-28 made to prewar specs. One of their first "pre-war spec special issue" models. Went to mush on me. So, slag and bridgepin, I guess now you heard someone complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Brokepick Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 Different gits, same subject. http://acapella.harmony-central.com/showthread.php?t=2351410 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sangemon Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 I'm staying out of this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kcinator Posted June 21, 2009 Author Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 It's funny that you're staying out of this one considering you already expressed your opinion in the other thread. Thanks guitarcapo for having an educated opinion on the subject. I have been told that I should really try to pick through the d-28's and find a real keeper and it will be better than going for the hd. Do you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sangemon Posted June 21, 2009 Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 It's funny that you're staying out of this one considering you already expressed your opinion in the other thread. My point exactly. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kcinator Posted June 21, 2009 Author Members Share Posted June 21, 2009 Then again your sig expresses your opinion as well. I'm surprised more people don't have opinions on this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bridgepin Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 I owned a 1984 Brazilian rosewood HD-28 made to prewar specs. One of their first "pre-war spec special issue" models. Went to mush on me. So, slag and bridgepin, I guess now you heard someone complain. Well.... your right now I have. Sorry to hear that guitar was a disappointment. I'm sure it came with a very high price tag to boot. But I'm still gald martin does give folks the option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DJ in FL Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 HD 28 is a D-28 ON STEROIDS...it is about as simple as that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kcinator Posted June 22, 2009 Author Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 guitarcapo is not the only one who has expressed this sentiment, but I'm wondering if that is reason enough to avoid the scalloped braces. I still find that the scalloped braces sound better than the non-scalloped braces. Should I just buy the hd anyway ignoring the possibility of it not lasting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guildfire Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 The one I played at GC sounded much better than the D28. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarcapo Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 Well.... your right now I have. Sorry to hear that guitar was a disappointment. I'm sure it came with a very high price tag to boot. But I'm still gald martin does give folks the option It wasn't so bad. I paid $3600 at Mandolin Bros./NYC for it... and ended up trading it in 5 years later for a nice Gibson J200 and a Martin 12 string at The Guitar Emporium in Louisville, Kentucky. Of course, most guitar stores didn't want to give me cash for it as much as I paid (Gruhn's were particularly cheap and snooty...saying something about how no one wants drednaught guitars anymore since Eric Clapton did his "Unplugged") This was around 1993 before Ebay was an option so I figured my best bet would be to try and get a store credit at some high end guitar shop. I don't know if you ever played a guitar with an underbuilt top but the sound usually is very boomy without projection and the high strings don't ring but sound floppy and muddy. It also has the weird characteristic of sounding BETTER with extra light strings. It tames the bass overpowering everything but the volume is weak. When you strum chords it's almost like the notes are fighting each other and they clash in a way that's not very harmonious but sort of "clanks" Guitar manufacturers these days seem to underbuild their tops more because they sound great in the store on day one when they are competing with other new guitars for your $$$. Taylor and those Epiphone Masterbuilts are a couple I've noticed like that. I had a Taylor 710CE that had it happen to also. Sounded great new but slowly over the years would only sound good with light gauge strings that were brand new. Another weird characteristic I found with these underbuilt guitars is they sound better capoed up on the neck, probably because the higher strings balance out the boomy sound and the shorter scale tightens up the floppy response in the soundboard. I sort of used the Taylor more that way before eventually selling it on Ebay. Martin knows about the problem but the public keeps asking for scallop bracing because of the mythology surrounding it. Every bracing feature that Martin used to weaken the top over their entire history combined into one guitar(smaller bridge plate, move the X brace toward the sound hole, thinner width braces, scallop everything) should make the ultimate guitar, right? Don't count on it. I've even heard that on some of Martin's recent limited special edition guitars that they included the estimated cost of future warranty work into the sale price. Scallop bracing was a feature that worked well for Martin with their smaller guitars, but as their guitars got bigger it started giving them problems and they tried to get away from it. Now when a guitar gets old it will sound better, and it was easy for the public to look to these build features as the reason why the old guitars sounded better... when it might have been other things like the fact that the wood was older, the vintage guitars had been worked on by master luthiers more etc. Bottom line is that you can underbuild a top...and it will start to sound bad before it fails structurally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sangemon Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarcapo Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 See what you get for offering up an opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sangemon Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 See what you get for offering up an opinion? I'm sorry, really. I couldn't help myself. I love that graphic. I just think that if that were true there'd be a whole lot of lousy sounding HD's out there, and that just isn't the case. You just got a bad one. Mine sure isn't muddy and floppy, either one of them. The 35 is loud and BRIGHT. and the 28 is beautiful, balanced, full, rich and warm, with great sustain and wonderful tone, and they've both had plenty of time to "go bad". You and I are going to argue about this forever I fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members roughtrade Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 I don't see how you could lose with either one. I would try them side by side and picked the one I liked the best. Personally, I play a D28, I liked that particular guitar over three others I played that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bridgepin Posted June 22, 2009 Members Share Posted June 22, 2009 It wasn't so bad. I paid $3600 at Mandolin Bros./NYC for it... and ended up trading it in 5 years later for a nice Gibson J200 and a Martin 12 string at The Guitar Emporium in Louisville, Kentucky. Of course, most guitar stores didn't want to give me cash for it as much as I paid (Gruhn's were particularly cheap and snooty...saying something about how no one wants drednaught guitars anymore since Eric Clapton did his "Unplugged") This was around 1993 before Ebay was an option so I figured my best bet would be to try and get a store credit at some high end guitar shop. I don't know if you ever played a guitar with an underbuilt top but the sound usually is very boomy without projection and the high strings don't ring but sound floppy and muddy. It also has the weird characteristic of sounding BETTER with extra light strings. It tames the bass overpowering everything but the volume is weak. When you strum chords it's almost like the notes are fighting each other and they clash in a way that's not very harmonious but sort of "clanks" Guitar manufacturers these days seem to underbuild their tops more because they sound great in the store on day one when they are competing with other new guitars for your $$$. Taylor and those Epiphone Masterbuilts are a couple I've noticed like that. I had a Taylor 710CE that had it happen to also. Sounded great new but slowly over the years would only sound good with light gauge strings that were brand new. Another weird characteristic I found with these underbuilt guitars is they sound better capoed up on the neck, probably because the higher strings balance out the boomy sound and the shorter scale tightens up the floppy response in the soundboard. I sort of used the Taylor more that way before eventually selling it on Ebay. Martin knows about the problem but the public keeps asking for scallop bracing because of the mythology surrounding it. Every bracing feature that Martin used to weaken the top over their entire history combined into one guitar(smaller bridge plate, move the X brace toward the sound hole, thinner width braces, scallop everything) should make the ultimate guitar, right? Don't count on it. I've even heard that on some of Martin's recent limited special edition guitars that they included the estimated cost of future warranty work into the sale price. Scallop bracing was a feature that worked well for Martin with their smaller guitars, but as their guitars got bigger it started giving them problems and they tried to get away from it. Now when a guitar gets old it will sound better, and it was easy for the public to look to these build features as the reason why the old guitars sounded better... when it might have been other things like the fact that the wood was older, the vintage guitars had been worked on by master luthiers more etc. Bottom line is that you can underbuild a top...and it will start to sound bad before it fails structurally. Hi Guitarcapo Thank you for taking the time to explain that, I just have never had that happen or seen it happen ....but that doesn't mean that it hasn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Attila Posted June 23, 2009 Members Share Posted June 23, 2009 I don't see how you could lose with either one. I would try them side by side and picked the one I liked the best. Good advice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kcinator Posted June 24, 2009 Author Members Share Posted June 24, 2009 Aright I've been convinced that the d-28 is the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members flip333 Posted June 24, 2009 Members Share Posted June 24, 2009 I have a D-28(2006) and an HD-28 (2001). When I play them back to back, the HD-28 sounds better. It is a little louder. It has a deeper, warmer bass, and it is a bit more resonant with better overtones. The D-28 is a little more punchy and can cut through in a jam better. When I don't compare the two, the D-28 sounds great as if it had no deficit at all... (it seems like a mental thing). Of course, after a short warm up on any good guitar, the guitar will teach me how to get the most out of it. I tried to lower the action and play with custom light strings (11-52) on the D-28. The playability increased, but the tone suffered, and the bass was weak. Right now, I have some GHS Lawrence Juber true mediums on it that sound pretty good. If you are going to amplify your guitar it won't matter much what you get. If you like unplugged pure rich acoustic sound, the HD-28 will fill the bill better, IMO. If you suspect the HD will sound better and you get a D-28, you will have some buyers remorse. Get what sounds best to you. I'm not afraid my HD-28 will turn to mush. If it does, I'll do something about it then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Sangemon Posted June 24, 2009 Members Share Posted June 24, 2009 If you suspect the HD will sound better and you get a D-28, you will have some buyers remorse. Get what sounds best to you. I'm not afraid my HD-28 will turn to mush. If it does, I'll do something about it then. Gee, if guitarcapo's theory were correct, that guitar should have gone to mush years ago. Just sayin'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kcinator Posted June 24, 2009 Author Members Share Posted June 24, 2009 Sangemon, guitarcapo is certainly not the only one to express that "theory". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guildfire Posted June 24, 2009 Members Share Posted June 24, 2009 I have never owned either one. All I know is when I play them side by side at GC, the HD28 sounds better - a noticeable difference. Is it worth hundreds more? That's up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.