Why Martin???

[djuna]

I just wanted to pop in to say I'm glad we're able to have a civilized discussion about the dreaded (no pun intended) Martin issue--when I saw the OP I thought it might devolve into a slinging match, but not so.

I'm in the same boat as Frank upthread--sure I'd like to have a Martin, but it's not feasible for me now, and who knows if I will ever be. I have no way of knowing if an expensive guitar is "worth it", I just know that I'm happy with what I have.

[Oldskool Texas]

This same argument gets hashed out daily on the electric forum, only the brand in question is usually Gibson. Here's my acoustic version of my usual response:

Yes, Martin is expensive. Yes, you're paying for the name. But you're also paying for a high-quality, USA-made guitar, and unfortunately, that means it's going to cost you more than an import. Will the import sound as good? Maybe. Will it sound as good in 20 years? Who knows? Most people won't keep them that long.

The reason why I like Martins, Guilds, Gibsons, and to a lesser degree Fender, is that I like being a part of the American guitar making culture and tradition. It's very satisfying to me to play an instrument made by American craftsmen who work for companies who have been doing it for a long time. I like being connected to the same instruments that my influences play.

Mostly it's about pride of ownership. I just value my American guitars more than my imports. And that's who I buy them for: me.

[missedmyexit]

Blueridge guitars are great I own one and love it. But will it hold up 20 years from now? 30? What is the warranty of the guitars you mentioned? Lifetime free repair? You pay a premium for the name that's a granted but the name comes with a certain peace of mind. I know my Martin was made well and will stand the test of time. I don't think many of the other guitars mentioned in this thread could say the same.

I am not saying my Blueridge won't last, I am just saying I don't know. And neither does anyone else.

[slagorourke]

I just wanted to pop in to say I'm glad we're able to have a civilized discussion about the dreaded (no pun intended) Martin issue--when I saw the OP I thought it might devolve into a slinging match, but not so.

True! Try posting this over on the AGF and world war 3 would have started by now. I swear there are people there who spend their days lying in wait for a thread like this, just so they can start ranting and raving! Mostly the 3000 posts a month dudes who always seem to have an opinion on every thread ever posted. I'm finding HC much more convivial!

[garthman]

That is a good point, but can you really travel to Greece for 300 - 500 dollars? A really good Martin can be had for 800 bucks.

 

 

I bought a new Crafter guitar (real solid wood and, moreover, complete with factory fitted Headway Snake PU) about 5 years ago. I tried many, many different makes and models before I did so. In the same shop from which I bought the Crafter there was a used Martin guitar of similar specification selling for

[TN.Frank]

Yamaha has a Limited Lifetime Warrenty. I just wish we could get an American Guitar Company that could turn out a decent guitar in the $500 buck range, until then at least we've got our neighbors to the North in Canada making the Seagull guitars. I've still not forgotten about those,LOL. Still thinking about that Seagull S6-Folk.

 

P.S.

Who cares about Greece? If I go anyplace Over Seas it'll be Ireland, County Donegal, Ulster to be exsact. That's where my kin on my Father's side came from. I'd love to see it someday.

[missedmyexit]

I would LOVE to own a Martin someday but I just can't afford or justify spending $800+ on ANY guitar. Right now I'm living in the $200-$400 guitar market. I love the sound of my FG720S, it's hard to imagine anything that would sound better. I'm sure there are many guitars that do sound better but at what cost? For now I just have to be happy with what I can afford.

 

 

Can't argue with that, makes alot of sense. But also brought up another "Why Martin".

 

Generally speaking they are the measuring stick most manufactured guitars are graded on. When people get a great soundin 300 dollar guitar they say "It sounds as good as a Martin".

 

Alot of us grew up with that misque and it was something we aspired to own. I felt great when I finally moved into a house that I own and didn't rent, felt that all that working has paid off. I felt similar when I took my Martin home.

[garthman]

Who cares about Greece? If I go anyplace Over Seas it'll be Ireland, County Donegal, Ulster to be exsact. That's where my kin on my Father's side came from. I'd love to see it someday.

 

 

The sun shines in Greece, the rain pisses down in Co Donegal.

 

PS. And I could do Ireland for

[TN.Frank]

IF I ever hit the lotto I'd get one of those Johnny Cash Black Martins. They retail for something like $4500 or a bit more but dang, that's be a cool guitar to own.

[guitarcapo]

Why Martin?

I don't know many companies in America that have been in business for over 150 years. They are the original. They invented the flattop steel string guitar.
I know there were other out there. But they popularized the X brace design and they invented the drednaught shape. Everyone else copied them. Some people value the original. Besides that...they have a long history of honoring a lifetime warrantee. Which in itself is amazing because they are waranteeing a product made of wood GUARANTEED to warp under tension over decades.
THAT'S why Martin can charge what it does.

Now why are these other copy companies able to charge what THEY do?
That's what I want to know. Will they be around in 20 years? Will they give me a free neck reset when it will need one?

[mrmoe]

Good point, mrmoe. I love my OM-03R and would put it up against an OM/000-16 any day of the week. Yes, I'd say that it's even "nicer" than a D-28, but easier to mic? Of course: it's a "balanced" OM, not a bass-heavy dreadnought.

 

 

...when I say "easier to mic", I mean easier to get a nicely balanced and clean sound....both the Martins and the Larrivees have wonderful necks, but the Larrivee is less boomy and more evenly balanced....this is not a Martin slam....the best guitar that I own is a Brazilian Rosewood Gallagher drednaught and the Larrivee has always recorded better than it....when I bought the Larrivee, I was out to get a 00-18....I played a few of them as well as a 16 (which I didn't care for at all) and then played 3 or 4 OM-03 Larrivees....one particular Larrivee (the one I bought) had better sound than any of the other small body guitars I played.....imagine my pleasant surprise when I found out it was much less expensive than the 00-18 Martin!

[Hudman]

Martin are priced on par with other USA made acoustic guitars.

 

The price of labor, insurance and other employment laws make it much more costly to mass produce acoustic guitars in the USA than it does in third world countries.

[mrmoe]

Martin are priced on par with other USA made acoustic guitars. The price of labor, insurance and other employment laws make it much more costly to mass produce acoustic guitars in the USA than it does in third world countries.

 

 

....when you say "third world countries", you're including Canada?

[TN.Frank]

....when you say "third world countries", you're including Canada?

 

 

Good point. I'd say Canada has about the same standard of living that we do here in the U.S. and probably about the same pay scale too. They make a Seagull that's pretty decent from what I hear(the Original S6) that can be had for about $400, you can't beat that price for a guitar made in N.America.

I'm really thinking hard between Blueridge, Recording King and Seagull right now.

[wooglins]

....when you say "third world countries", you're including Canada?

 

 

Canada is not "third world", but more appropriatly is socialist, which means someone can work in a guitar factory making the equivilent of 10 us dollars per hour, and the government picks up the rest of the cost of living. In America it is pretty hard to get by on 10 bucks an hour as your career. On the other hand in Canada you cannot get beyound lower middle class, it a class system. The tax rate is practically 50% or more so everyone regardless of what they do is paying for everyone to have an equal standard of living. Sounds good if you are on the bottom end here in America, but when you have worked hard to rise beyond that, it sounds terrible.

[EvilTwin]

Good point. I'd say Canada has about the same standard of living that we do here in the U.S. and probably about the same pay scale too. They make a Seagull that's pretty decent from what I hear(the Original S6) that can be had for about $400, you can't beat that price for a guitar made in N.America. I'm really thinking hard between Blueridge, Recording King and Seagull right now.

 

 

The S6 is a solid top, laminate back/sides, minimally appointed and satin-finished guitar. That's how it sells cheaply.

 

Their higher end models sell for over a grand:

http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/Seagull-Artist-Series-Cameo-CW-Dreadnought-Acoustic-Guitar-with-Deluxe-Case?sku=516969&src=3WFRWXX&ZYXSEM=0&CAWELAID=152216481

http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/Seagull-Artist-Series-Portrait-CW?sku=512252&src=3WFRWXX&ZYXSEM=0&CAWELAID=26041961

http://guitars.musiciansfriend.com/product/Seagull-Artist-Series-Mosaic-CW-Dreadnought-QII-Acoustic-Electric-Guitar-with-Deluxe-Case?sku=516949&src=3WFRWXX&ZYXSEM=0&CAWELAID=152920938

 

I love my S6+Folk, but I know that it's a spartan guitar.

[Clif Schlicher]

In regard to resale value, there seems to be an assumption that it equates to investment. While the two may overlap, they are not necessarily the same. Resale value is simply the value I can get, relative to the price I paid for an item, when and if I should decide to sell it. It doesn't imply that I bought the item with the idea of selling it at a profit. Most material goods purchased new will sell for a great deal less on the secondary market. This surely applies to guitars. If I sell my Martin tomorrow, I will likely get better value out of it than if I sell my Seagull. Neither was purchased for investment, or for that matter resale value, per se.

Resale value did figure to a small extent in the purchase of the Martin, but more important was the sound, playability, build quality and it must be said, the history and longevity of the company, and the reasonable assurance that they will still be there to take care of warranty issues and particularly free neck resets(D12-28), when and if I need it.

In the meantime, I enjoy playing both, which was the main reason to have them. My current state of employment requires much less travel so I have less need for the Seagull, as it is my travel guitar. NO WORRIES, neither is at risk of being sold at this time.

Clif

Clif

[tbry]

The big problem with doing comparisons at GC is they dont change the strings, or if they do only when they happen to have a tech come in to do it. Taylors come strung with Elixr strings which last a long time and sound decent thru a long range of time. Martin on the other hand comes strung with plain jane PB strings, usually Martin SP4200's. Those strings last at most a week. Many of the Martins you were playing especially the expensive one probably had dead strings. The more expensive the guitar the more likely they have had it at GC for a long time.

 

 

I don't agree...Martin isn't that stupid to put cheap strings on a 2-3000.00 guitar...they are renowned for their equipment and to think they would do that doesn't make sense...And if it is true that all the strings were dead then the Taylors should be as well unless you believe that Elixers are that much more superior to the Martins then it even more supports the idea that Taylor cares more and is superior.

 

Listen I don't care what you might like or not like ...JMO that the Taylors on this day outperformed Martin as a whole.

[wooglins]

I don't agree...Martin isn't that stupid to put cheap strings on a 2-3000.00 guitar...they are renowned for their equipment and to think they would do that doesn't make sense...And if it is true that all the strings were dead then the Taylors should be as well unless you believe that Elixers are that much more superior to the Martins then it even more supports the idea that Taylor cares more and is superior. Listen I don't care what you might like or not like ...JMO that the Taylors on this day outperformed Martin as a whole.

 

 

You are missing the point of the Elixr strings they are coated and last for at least a month without a dropoff, but they dont sound quite as good as uncoated strings. Perhaps a 7 out of 10 but long lasting. Martins ship with Martin SP Phosphor Bronze strings (which are great strings a 10 out of 10), but they are uncoated and go dead with about a week of use. The majority of Martins are sold in full service guitar stores, where they would change the strings on the guitars as soon as they drop off. Guitar Center is not a full service store, they dont even have full time techs, so the same strings sit on all of the guitars till they are sold usually. Taylor did a smart thing using Elixr strings because they ensured that regardless of where the guitar is sold it should have a quality sound in regards to the strings that are on it. The Martin side of this is that when sold in a full service store, the strings that are on a Martin will have a better sound that the Elixirs. Uncoated strings are really universally accepted as having better sound than coated.

[Glenn F]

Canada is not "third world", but more appropriatly is socialist, which means someone can work in a guitar factory making the equivilent of 10 us dollars per hour, and the government picks up the rest of the cost of living. In America it is pretty hard to get by on 10 bucks an hour as your career. On the other hand in Canada you cannot get beyound lower middle class, it a class system. The tax rate is practically 50% or more so everyone regardless of what they do is paying for everyone to have an equal standard of living. Sounds good if you are on the bottom end here in America, but when you have worked hard to rise beyond that, it sounds terrible.

 

Sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about, and I don't have the energy or the will to correct your ignorance. Canada a 'class system?' From someone from a country with gated communities, a shrinking middle-class, and a widening income disparity between rich and poor?

 

Cheers,

 

Glenn

[Do Fret It]

I have played one Martin that I really liked, couldn't tell you what model. It was the projection of sound that was unbelievable.

Other than that one, others that I have played I felt like I had to be a weightlifter to fret the damn thing! No playability.

Taylors do play nice but I call the sound too bright. Correct me if I am wrong....Taylors come with a bolted on neck and that sometimes shows like spotty craftsmanship.

Larrivee's, otoh, give a beautiful warm sound, easy to fret and the craftsmanship is impeccable. To me, Larrivee wins this war everytime. At a relatively affordable price.

[wooglins]

Sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about, and I don't have the energy or the will to correct your ignorance. Canada a 'class system?' From someone from a country with gated communities, a shrinking middle-class, and a widening income disparity between rich and poor? Cheers, Glenn

How do you know where I am from, or have lived? I will correct myself, class was the wrong term, otherwise I stand by my post. I was not refering to merit (my opinion is not important), but simply pointing out that in Canada you can build a quality product with local labor because of the socialist structure of the Country. In America you cannot build a factory and pay average wages to skilled labor because of the lack of a socialist structure that provides for even wages.

[boxorox]

175 years of master craftsmen Consistantly making a superior product of the finest materials, with a hassle free lifetime warranty that will be met or exceeded. I know some people that have more than one. Some of them may be called collectors, and may select guitars with the knowledge that they will appreciate. None of them think of this as a primary factor in purchase. They play and pick their guitars first and foremost because they are Tone Monsters and have the volume. They improve over time. They will be here in 50 years. Some I thought were clunkers 30 years ago are kickin' guitars today.
Some say "as good as" or "all the guitar I'll ever need" about other brands that sell for less. That may be so, but I haven't had the opportunity to play a 30 year old Blueridge.
Obviously there are price points where build quality, finish and materials improve. At higher levels the differences are not as obvious. Wood selection is not just cosmetic. Weight, flexibility, resonance, grain count etc are based not on batches, but how they balance in an individual guitar. This extends even to woods used in braces. Tap tuning, fine shaving of braces to produce the best balance takes place. It's a lot more labor intensive, and not mere joinery.
I own two Martins. No classics, but an R-18 and a carved top mando. I think that it takes a certain amount of time and experience before one can appreciate the supriority of well made high end instruments. We've all started with a beater, and gotten,say, a $150 git and said, "Wow! Great! Can't imagine having a better one. It's as good as...". Repeat every two hundred dollars till you hit the $800-$1200 range. Serious dough, and the improvements become more subtle, more subjective, more personal.
As for me, I'm happy with my Nagoya N-28. 35 year old solid spruce over solid Rose. All the guitar I need, and for the way I play, good as a Martin.

[rjoxyz]

Why Martin? I don't know many companies in America that have been in business for over 150 years. They are the original. They invented the flattop steel string guitar. I know there were other out there. But they popularized the X brace design and they invented the drednaught shape. Everyone else copied them. Some people value the original. Besides that...they have a long history of honoring a lifetime warrantee. Which in itself is amazing because they are waranteeing a product made of wood GUARANTEED to warp under tension over decades. THAT'S why Martin can charge what it does. Now why are these other copy companies able to charge what THEY do? That's what I want to know. Will they be around in 20 years? Will they give me a free neck reset when it will need one?

 

 

That's as reasonable an explanation as you will find.

 

I understand the concept of "relative" value and own or have owned several Asian-made dreadnaughts modeled after Martins in the price ranges discussed. Good, but not comparable to a Martin by any means, at least in the Standard Series and up. I own an HD-28 and 000-15S and they have stayed while several others have left. It isn't just because of the name on the headstock.

 

This same argument could be fostered regarding Kia versus Cadillac. But, why? Might as well discuss store brand v. name brand cereal values.

 

The "cheap and now" mentality we have adopted (I am guilty as anyone) is part of the reason we are in the midst of an economic collapse in the U.S. Our economy was built on manufacturing, exporting and buying our own products. Now what?

[rickoshea]

The sun shines in Greece, the rain pisses down in Co Donegal. PS. And I could do Ireland for