Members clipari Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Love that Martin tone, but can't afford that Martin price... So, as I've been searching for a good copy, I've come across two models that I've fallen in love with: 1. Blueridge BR-160 - Solid Spruce top, Solid Indian Rosewood sides and back... $600 w/out case 2. Aria AD-80 - Solid Spruce top, Solid Indian Rosewood sides and back... $750 w/case Now, apparently the Aria AD-80 is such a good copy, Martin put an end to their production, and now there are only 40 left in the nation (According to Aria)... Also, a guy that has one is claiming to have the AD-80cev, which is apparently the cutaway version w/ Fishman electronics... However, I can't seem to find anything anywhere on a cutaway version. What's that all about? Is there such a thing, or does he have his models mixed up? Any input on any of my ramblings would be appreciated!! Any other fantastic Martin copies out there that I'm missing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by clipari Now, apparently the Aria AD-80 is such a good copy, Martin put an end to their production, and now there are only 40 left in the nation (According to Aria)... I think the operative phrase here is "according to Aria." I'm not familiar with their guitars in an up close and personal kind of way, but it could just be that they got close enough to Martin's general aesthetic to annoy Martin and perhaps that's why the kaibosh. Again, though, I've never played an Aria so I can't comment on the quality. The BR-160, on the other hand, is a model I've tried a few times and I think it's a terrific guitar for a great price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rada Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Norman ST68.... $900 Solid Spruce top, Solid Indian Rosewood back, Laminate Rosewood sides This guitar is my baby....and Martin guys really love her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 FWIW, there are various Japanese brands whose models in the 1970s were also touted as great Martin copies. Takamine with its "Martin lawsuit" F-series guitars with their blatant mimicry of the Martin headstock and logo come to mind. Though I know from experience that 70s Taks were good guitars in their price range, there just ain't no substitute for the real MccCoy IMO and in that price range a used Martin 16 series should be considered a valid consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 One question I've always had about these so-called lawsuit copies is just when does something become a "copy" that's actionable by another company. For example, builders like Bourgoeis, Collings, Santa Cruz and Dudenbostel make guitars that are all but indistinguishable cosmetically (and sonically equal or superior) from the Martins they seek to emulate. What about the Larrivee D-50 and D-60? How is the Aria any more of a copy than one of these? I'm curious if anyone knows definitively... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clipari Posted May 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Well, I know that the headstock has a lot to do with it for some reason (which eludes me)... But, just from what I've heard, the 70's Tak's and the Aria have an identical headstock as Martin's, and the Aria even mimics the Martin font... Again, not too sure why headstocks seem to come into play, especially since it's just a square. There's not even anything fancy about it. I doubt that Martin can patent a square headstock. Speaking of patents though... Where do patents and copyrights come into play in regards to all this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by DonK One question I've always had about these so-called lawsuit copies is just when does something become a "copy" that's actionable by another company. For example, builders like Bourgoeis, Collings, Santa Cruz and Dudenbostel make guitars that are all but indistinguishable cosmetically (and sonically equal or superior) from the Martins they seek to emulate. What about the Larrivee D-50 and D-60? How is the Aria any more of a copy than one of these? I'm curious if anyone knows definitively... Well, with regards to the Takamines I spoke of, it was pretty blatant. Unless you looked closely at the script on the headstock at a distance you would think that you were looking at a Martin. I could see them getting sued by CFM over that, but as for design considerations I would think that they would have to at least have patented their designs. That I'm not sure of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kap'n Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by DonK How is the Aria any more of a copy than one of these? I'm curious if anyone knows definitively... The word 'Cheap' (or 'inexpensive,' if you prefer) is implied before the word 'copy.' Bourgeois, Collings, Santa Cruz, etc. are, in general modified/improved hand-made versions of classic design that are often more expensive than the -18 and -28 series Martin instruments they are a tribute to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by Kap'n The word 'Cheap' (or 'inexpensive,' if you prefer) is implied before the word 'copy.'Bourgeois, Collings, Santa Cruz, etc. are, in general modified/improved hand-made versions of classic design that are often more expensive than the -18 and -28 series Martin instruments they are a tribute to. Yes, but legally I don't think the price of an item has anything to do with determining whether a manufacturer has a right of action or not. Also, in trademark law there's a principle that if you don't move to enforce your rights to a design when you become aware of an infringement, you lose them. Kwak, I don't think patent protection could be the issue. With limited exceptions, a patent only lasts for 17 years, and one can only be granted for something that is new in some way. To the extent that anything about a typoical Martin dread could have been and/or ever was patented, it would have expired by now. Trademarks have an indefinite life, while copyright protection is for, I believe, 50 years renewable for another 50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Blueridge usually include the case. I would check around before I bought one without the case. Blueridge and Johnson make decent Martin copies. The new Johnson line gets great reviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by DonK One question I've always had about these so-called lawsuit copies is just when does something become a "copy" that's actionable by another company. For example, builders like Bourgoeis, Collings, Santa Cruz and Dudenbostel make guitars that are all but indistinguishable cosmetically (and sonically equal or superior) from the Martins they seek to emulate. What about the Larrivee D-50 and D-60? How is the Aria any more of a copy than one of these? I'm curious if anyone knows definitively... Interesting question. The first company that comes to mind is Merrill - not only do they openly advertise guitars made to vintage Martin specs, but they use the actual model numbers. Plus their guitars are by all reports absolutely fantastic (I've never played one - can't afford to come within a 10-mile radius of one). If I were a cheap git company, it would almost seem worth my while to make a flagrant Martin rip to purposely get them to shut it down... Can't be bad for brand recognition... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kap'n Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by DonK Yes, but legally I don't think the price of an item has anything to do with determining whether a manufacturer has a right of action or not. True enough. However, the bad press of Martin squashing the true artists in the field would ultimately be harmful to their high-end, high-margin business. It wouldn't surprise me if Martin kindly asked the Merrill folks to change their nomenclature as a predecessor to a cease-and-desist order Where Martin has to defend themselves is in the arena of mass-market copies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Okay guys, information nut that I am, I did some research. As a CPA that works with medium to very large clients, many of whom have intellectual property issues, I've had to do valuations of IP rights and some of them have had litigation aspects. So I just had to find out a little more about this. Here's what I found from from a friend and business associate who's an IP attorney with an international firm in Washington, D.C. -- Most "lawsuit" guitars aren't. It's a term appended by sellers who are trying to create a certain cachet about the items they're peddling, i.e., how faithful they are to the original. It's probably understood by most buyers to mean there was an actual lawsuit, which is of course exactly what the seller intends. -- Guitar companies seldom actually file suit, but they sometimes send 'cease and desist" letters threatending to do so, especially to companies who they think will throw in the towel without a fight. -- There have bascially been only three important guitar lawsuits to date. The first was when Gretsch sued Fender for their use of the name "Broadcaster" (Gretsch had a drum set with that name). As we all know, Fender made the "nocaster" for awhile before settling on the name "Telecaster" to replace Broadcaster. Norlin, the then-parent of Gibson, sued Ibanez over its Les Paul copies; the case was settled and Ibanez changed it's headstock shape as a result. Gibson sued PRS and won in district court, but lost on appeal by PRS. My friend directed me to the case; you can read the decision here: http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:0mErcsRWazcJ:www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0387p-06.pdf+federal+district+court+prs+gibson&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1 It's pretty interesting reading if you can stomach legal analysis (I love it), but the bottom line is that the case was about trademark infringement. Gibson argued that its 1987 trademark registered with the PTO for the LP gave it exclusive rights to make a guitar with that particular single-cut design, and that PRS infringed their trademark by doing so. The appeals court first took care to distinguish between "trademark" and "trade-dress". Apparently, "trade-dress" was part of the original case but did not make it to the appeal. Anyway, there are a bunch of tests to determine trademark infringement that have been developed via court decisions; the appeals court reasoned that the only test that mattered in this case was whether there would be "confusion at the point of sale". The court said no way; a buyer would not confuse a PRS Singlecut with a Gibson Les Paul at the point of sale, and thus no other test or factor was relevant. After reading the decision, I would imagine that Martin's argument, to the extent they choose to use it, would be that the headstock shape is so associated with them that it constitutes a trademark (whether they've registered it I don't know). I'd also guess that they figure that trademark protection would probably be unenforceable unless you also had script like that on the Aria above, which would make an argument that the trademark had been infringed stronger. BTW, my friend says the PRS case will probably discourage future lawsuits by Gibson and similar companies because of the precedent set by the court in its legal reasoning, i.e., it's going to be more difficult for them to win. So there it is, more than you probably ever wanted to know about this topic. And if I came accross one of those Aria AD-80's it might be tempting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 BTW, the $750 for that Aria must be list. There are two without electronics on eBay right now at $375 and $450 BIN. The $375 guitar appears to be new; here it is: http://cgi.ebay.com/Aria-AD-80-Solid-Top-Dreadnought-Acoustic-Guitar_W0QQitemZ7415649622 And no, I don't have too much time on my hands; my wife is out with the kids so for once I can fool around doing whatever I feel like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clipari Posted May 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Well said Donk... Thanks for the in-depth research. That's interesting stuff. As for the Aria AD80, I'm excited to see it in person, but more importantly, hear how it sings. The guy that has it is maintaining that it's a cutout with Fishman electronics, which I can't seem to find for the life of me. He says it's an Aria AD-80cen, but haven't found anything online at all... Very odd. Can anyone clear this up for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Originally posted by clipari Well said Donk... Thanks for the in-depth research. That's interesting stuff.As for the Aria AD80, I'm excited to see it in person, but more importantly, hear how it sings. The guy that has it is maintaining that it's a cutout with Fishman electronics, which I can't seem to find for the life of me. He says it's an Aria AD-80cen, but haven't found anything online at all... Very odd.Can anyone clear this up for me? Well, here's one with the cutaway and Fishman electronics, but it's a CE, not a CEN. CE is the common designation used by most manufacturers to designate a cutaway with electronics, so CEN strikes me as unusual - it may just be a mistake. http://cgi.ebay.com/ARIA-AD-80-CE-guitar-SOLID-WOOD-AD80-Fishman-pickup_W0QQitemZ200000067806 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clipari Posted May 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Thanks for finding that!! And, now it seems like $750 is a more reasonable price... But, I'll try to get him lower... Thanks again!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members paulh Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why not get a real Martin, not a copy? Your price range should certainly be enough to get a used, lower end Martin. Possibly even a new for some models. You might have to accept laminated b/s, matte finish or a micarta fretboard. That 'compromise' is up to you, although many will feel that it's no compromise at all. I have a DM, which I believe can be purchased for around $750 new,w/hsc. Other Martins are available int the same price range. I haven't played either of the copy's you're looking at, so I don' t know how they compare, but my DM has the Martin sound and feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted May 18, 2006 Members Share Posted May 18, 2006 I strongly agree with Paulh. If you're thinking of spending $750 on a guitar, then you ought to be thinking of something besides the two you list. You could get a used Martin D-15 in great shape for less than that. If you're really stuck on a cutaway and electronics it'd be a little more. And if you're interested more in the cosmetics, why not check out a Sigma D-41. You could get one of these new for $375 to $400. Sigma is Martin's import line and their D-41 is a dead ringer for a real Martin D-41 cosmetically. It's not going to sound the same, but it's decent. While the Blueridge and Aria have solid rosewood back and sides, don't expect either of them to sound like the Martin they're trying to copy (a D-28). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clipari Posted May 19, 2006 Author Members Share Posted May 19, 2006 I think you guys may be right... For what I'm paying, all I'd really be getting is a look-a-like with all the cosmetic bells and whistles for cheap, as opposed to a real Martin that may not look as nice, but has that true Martin tone. Hmmm... My range is from $700 - $1K... I don't need electronics, as I can always get those installed later, but I'm also not looking to go used... So, do you think I could get myself into a new solid spruce top, solid rosewood back and sides original Martin for under $1K? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andrewrg Posted May 19, 2006 Members Share Posted May 19, 2006 Martin recently sent a cease and desist letter to several builders-nothing to do with design features but with model designations-eg OM, D-28 etc.There is something like a "use it or lose it"clause within patent and trademark legislation which makes it difficult if not impossible for Martin to claim their guitar designs as their property, since they have had nearly a century to do so, but havent bothered.On edit: Sorry DonK you already pointed this out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andrewrg Posted May 19, 2006 Members Share Posted May 19, 2006 Originally posted by clipari I think you guys may be right... For what I'm paying, all I'd really be getting is a look-a-like with all the cosmetic bells and whistles for cheap, as opposed to a real Martin that may not look as nice, but has that true Martin tone. Hmmm... My range is from $700 - $1K... I don't need electronics, as I can always get those installed later, but I'm also not looking to go used... So, do you think I could get myself into a new solid spruce top, solid rosewood back and sides original Martin for under $1K? The cheapest all solid woods rosewood dread Martin makes is the D16RGT at $1999 list. Typically Martins sell at 40% off list so that comes down to $1200. A little shopping around might get you one for a bit less. Beg, borrow or steal the balance and you get yourself a nice Martin. On edit: 8thstreet are selling these at $1099 shipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members clipari Posted May 19, 2006 Author Members Share Posted May 19, 2006 I tried a D16RGT the other day, and it just didn't strike me as having that cliched "D-28" sound that I'm looking for. But, it made me wonder why... Because, it's the same dread shape, made out of the same woods, and from the same manufacturer. So, besides looking prettier, why is the D-28 so much more expensive? What are the main differences between the D16RGT and the D-28 that make such a tonal difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rjoxyz Posted May 19, 2006 Members Share Posted May 19, 2006 Originally posted by clipari So, do you think I could get myself into a new solid spruce top, solid rosewood back and sides original Martin for under $1K? Here's your Martin: http://www.musiciansfriend.com/product/MartinD15CustomSpruceandRosewoodAcousticGuitar?sku=515888 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andrewrg Posted May 20, 2006 Members Share Posted May 20, 2006 Originally posted by clipari I tried a D16RGT the other day, and it just didn't strike me as having that cliched "D-28" sound that I'm looking for. But, it made me wonder why... Because, it's the same dread shape, made out of the same woods, and from the same manufacturer. So, besides looking prettier, why is the D-28 so much more expensive?What are the main differences between the D16RGT and the D-28 that make such a tonal difference? The main difference is in the bracing pattern. All mortice and tenon neck join Martins, including the 16 series, have a differently braced top.An M&T joint is cheaper and quicker to make than the traditional dovetail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.