Jump to content

The Martin D-28


Glenn F

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I owned a bad one. Years ago I bought my first really "high end" acoustic when I was just out of school making decent money and living in New York City. I bought it at Mandolin Brothers in Staten Island. It was a used mid-1980's Brazilian rosewood D-28 made to pre-war specs as one of their first special edition guitars. I paid $3600 for it.

 

This was in the early 1990's and I was new to guitars back then. Anyway a few weeks after owning it, I started to realize something was wrong with that guitar that I couldn't put my finger on.

 

It seemed to have WAY too much bass and the treble strings sounded dead and tinny. When you strummed the guitar it sounded kind of dead with no projection....but if you played softly it sounded better. It had this ironic quality of sounding better with extra light gauge strings. It improved the balance and strumming didn't overwhelm the guitar's tonal quality...but then the guitar had weak overall volume.

 

I came to realize later that the guitar suffered from an "underbuilt top". In an effort to build the guitar to vintage specs, the bracing had a lot of features that caused the top to become "floppy" and weak in sound. This along with structural issues were probably why Martin changed the bracing design back in the 1940's.

 

Anyway I ended up trading the guitar for a really sweet Gibson J200 and a Martin D12 a few years later at the Guitar Emporium in Louisville Kentucky. By that time I figured out that you really need to sit down and PLAY the guitar and not just trust it's "pedigree" reputation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

FF, you have a very high opinion of Martin and probably hold it dearer to your chest than I can know. But, yes, they did make duds and the early 70's bear witness to that. My first "real" guitar was a D35 that was made with uncured (green) wood for the neck. It had no adjustable truss rod and warped after I got it. It warped on three separate occasions. The factory had it more than I did for warranty repair and after I got it back the third time I gave it away with full disclosure, nearly new in condition, and bought a better guitar (at the time) in the form of a Guild. That was 1973. You would think Martin would have admitted fault and simply swapped out my guitar for another mo' betta one but they didn't. I swore off that brand for many years. There's no second chance with me after foisting poor quality on a customer and then copping the stance they did. I still hold them in contempt for that one but rarely think of it anymore. There were literally hundreds of guitars that went out that way causing more than a bit of a stir and questioning the brand's quality. That's when Gibson's sales jumped and, via Martin's stumbling, took a brief (and undeserved) lead as a quality maker from them. BTW, their mantra up to that time was their guitars didn't have adjustable truss rods because their necks don't warp. I never liked Gibson's cowboy garishness and sound so Guild was the only contender in that market left to choose from, IMO.

 

All that nonsense said above, their sound boxes were still the best there ever was, IMO, despite their bout of using green wood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Of course it is, on the macro side of the the discussion, but on the personal side we all have druthers for reasons that are always personal and can create the illusion of irony if taken out of context like you have here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I owned a D28 from 1965-1975 in the days when they were still brazilian. I never liked the playability of the guitar and to be honest, I think the East Indian Rosewood being used today has a better sound than the brazilians did..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wouldn't necessarily BASH Martins. No guitar brand is perfect 100% of the time. These guitars are made on an assembly line. Some are great. Some are average. Some are bad. The same holds true for other brands. Given that, I like to seek out that guitar that's fantastic and made by a less expensive brand. One that sounds and plays great...but you can take it anywhere and not worry about losing a lot of money dinging it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
I wouldn't necessarily BASH Martins. No guitar brand is perfect 100% of the time. These guitars are made on an assembly line. Some are great. Some are average. Some are bad. The same holds true for other brands. Given that, I like to seek out that guitar that's fantastic and made by a less expensive brand. One that sounds and plays great...but you can take it anywhere and not worry about losing a lot of money dinging it.

 

I've never found one. I went through a number of HC flavah-of-the-month guitars, and they're all gone now. They just don't stand up. And, as you can see by my situation, the reason I am asking the question is that I have no recourse but to defer to pedigree, as it has to do with probability. I don't aim to have to hustle my butt to re-sell something that disappointed me in the first place. I've also played some Martin duds, so they're out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I purchased a new D-28 back in 1983/84 and it was a total POS to me. I knew very little about guitars back then. It was either fret buzzing or the action was so high it was a bear to play.

Had it back to the place of purchase 3X and 2X in another shop. The "other" shop actually did make it a lil better, but not good enough.

I placed it on consignment and lost my ass on the deal.

 

In hindsight... I know now what was wrong with that guitar. It had a slightly warped/twisted neck. No authorized repair shop caught this, nor recommended sending it to Martin for repair.

I think the dealers let me down more than Martin did.

Been shy on the 28's ever since. Live & learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Never owned a D28. Did own a D35 that I believe is identical to a 28 with the exception of a 3 piece back. It was a nice guitar and I enjoyed it. However, over time I began to realize it was not a star performer. While solidly built, with good intonation, it just did not sparkle and was not as loud as other guitars I played. I sold it a few months ago. Tough decision, but I'm glad I did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The D-35's bracing is scalloped, iirc, whereas the D-28's is not. Kinda moot at this point. If I am gonna plunk down that much dinerii for a guitar, I have to be able to try it first, whether by meeting someone in person, or having a 30 day money-back guarantee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm going to mention a trend I notice going on with guitar manufacturers for the past few years:

 

Lately it's become popular among ALL major guitar builders to build guitars so that they sound great right away.

 

You accomplish this by building the guitar top's bracing so light that it will sound fantastic new in the showroom (without any need for "playing in")

 

.....The trouble is that after a couple of years, these guitars fade as the top gives in to string tension.

 

Guitar manufacturers only profit from the sale of NEW guitars. There's a fierce competition among factories to sound great in the showroom so that THEIR brand is chosen over other brands when they are all hanging in the guitar store new. Long term is NOT in their best interest. As a matter of fact all of those used guitars COMPETE with the new guitars (even if it's the same brand)....and like I said...factories only profit from NEW sales.

 

It's happening with Taylor, Gibson, Martin....also other brands.

 

The point to take away from all this is that it's sometimes a newbie mistake to pull a bunch of guitars off the wall at your local Guitar Center and simply buy the one that sounds best to you. It might not be a keeper if it sounds "too good"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

WRONG!

No guitar maker is going to knowingly sell guitars that are likely to need expensive warranty work a few years down the road.

 

"Sound" isn't covered by Martin or anyone else's warranty.

 

 

 

 

http://www.epinions.com/review/pr-Martin_D_15_Acoustic_Guitar/content_119159295620?sb=1

 

 

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.music.makers.builders/Qgu9sZZJ3Fc

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
It's a 2008. Not likely to need a neck reset yet. Pics look ok. I've wished the guy luck, though.

 

Google Bryan Kimsey's web site (I'm on vacation and don't have all my bookmarks). He has two tabs on buying used Martins - what to look for particularly with 70's guitars. He also has a very complete price page on what he charges to fix them (he is one of the best). He has done neck resets and other work on both of my old ones and has worked magic to make them playable and sound wonderful. I would never turn down an older Martin but be very sure you know exactly what you are getting into,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Personally unless it was a great deal I wouldn't do it. I think the new Martins are the 2nd only to Taylor in consistency of sound but as many people mentioned there are always duds. I wouldn't spend that kind of money without playing it first unless there was some return policy. When I got my F50 no shop around had it in stock they all offered to order it but I would be on the hook for the guitar without any returns. Ended up ordering through a NY shop who after I called said he would refund if I returned it within 14 days. The guitar never went back and is my favorite but having that option made me feel alot better about the 2g purchase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
The D-35's bracing is scalloped, iirc, whereas the D-28's is not.

 

GW had it right. Only the "HD" models have scalloped bracing. The 35s also differ in that they have bound fingerboards, no volute on the back of the neck and Grover rotomatic tuners. The 28s have unbound fingerboards, diamond volute and either the regular tuners or open backed ones. I think otherwise the neck profile is about the same.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Repeat. Your words. I have to take that as "what you are talking about."

 

When a guitar is built too lightly as you have described, it can sound good, but parts will indeed "give in to string tension". Then, the guitar does not only sound bad, things bend, break, or come apart. It's been the dilemma of guitar builders all along.

 

Maybe re-write your posts.

 

You're reading something into that I didn't intend at all. A top can most definitely change in sound without totally failing structurally to the point of needing warranty work. It just sounds bad. If you've never played one it's really weird. It has lots of bass and weak treble. When you play chords it sounds like the strings are fighting each other and they are canceling each other out. You get this weird situation where the guitar actually sounds better with extra light strings. More balanced and less of that phase cancelation....but less volume. I explained an example of that earlier in this thread. Martin's warranty will cover structural changes but not subjective changes in sound.

 

That's not to say that Martin hasn't had problems with tops built so weak that structural problems became a concern. Historically as their guitars got bigger in size...they noticed that they were being forced to do more warranty work because the bracing was originally designed for smaller guitars. By the late 1930's/ early 40's they changed the bracing AWAY from scalloping the braces. They moved the X further back toward the bridge. They increased the size of the bridge plate. They altered the bracing thickness etc. Now all these guitars had the Martin label on the headstock....but very differently built. Which guitars are we talking about here when we talk about all Martins having some uniform quality?

 

Later on in the 70's Martin increased the bracing again...perhaps overdoing it in attempts to further avoid warranty work. These guitars were overbraced in a lot of cases and sounded bad. In response, tThe public got it in their head that the lighter the bracing the better (which isn't true in terms of sound OR structure). They started clamoring for the same "prewar" bracing that Martin was trying admittedly to get away from. But the public wanted what it wanted so Martin started issuing guitars based on these designs. It's been said off the record that Martin charges more for these models factoring in the extra warranty work they know they will eventually need.

 

You can believe what you want about guitars. You can believe that when that Martin decal get's applied to the headstock some sort of magic happens and any problems that guitar will ever have in the next decades will magically disappear. Or you can face up to the fact that these are mass produced items made on an assembly line out of materials that vary in their properties...and that will manifest itself in some guitars being better or worse than others regardless of the brand. All the manufacturer can do is address these issues grossly. By changing the design in response to what it experiences years after the date of manufacture.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Whatever. Some people can't accept any information other than what they believe and consider any new information condescending.

 

Martin has made many changes to their bracing and design over the years. Some good. Some bad. The changes were sometimes for good and sometimes for bad by everyone's admission except yours (including Martin's or else why would they change things?)

 

If you overbuild a top it sounds bad. If you underbuild a top it can fail structurally.... but can also sound bad in the way I described without failing structurally.

 

That's all I'm saying. BTW I've built about 12 acoustics over the years and repaired a few dozen more.

 

I agree with you that it's impossible to engineer a "mythical quality of sound"....precisely because it's a myth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

If I remember right, the D35 was originally created because of the Brazillian Rosewood shortage. Scrap was able to be used to make the 3 piece back, conserving total usage of rosewood. The bling was added to make it more sellable.

 

Big Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...