Members Rada Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 I was in Florida a few days ago and went to a guitar shop and in the acoustic room there were only Taylors.....of course I grumbled under my breath, but I decided to pick a few up since they were all "Limited Editions" I picked up a 600 series one (after searching their site I think it was the 614-CE L7) and was completely blown away by the tone!!!! Balanced, articulate, sturdy, boomy, could handle heavy strumming..... I've never been a fan of Taylors because the ones I've tried have been brittle or plastic-y sounding, but this one was amazing..... What's the story with the Limited Edition ones? Also, since I found those Taylors I thought I'd give Martin another chance.....played a D-28, HD-28, D-16, special edition Brazilian Rosewood, some OMs yeah....my feelings about Martin have NOT changed. Still not worth the price in my opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 I prefer strong bass and clear defined mids. Taylor is far too bright for me. I would take a Martin over Taylor any day of the week. Years ago I didn't appreciate Martins. 20+ years of playing and my tastes have changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rada Posted April 13, 2006 Author Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by Hudman I prefer strong bass and clear defined mids. Taylor is far too bright for me. I would take a Martin over Taylor any day of the week.Years ago I didn't appreciate Martins. 20+ years of playing and my tastes have changed. So what do you play now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Tony Burns Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Im glad you found somethng you like , Martins are not for everyone - Never thought Id buy one either, I went for a larrivee and came home with a Martin - i was always a Guild person until Fender bought them - ( Fender has always made {censored}ty acoustics ! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 To each, etc. I've been living with a Taylor the better part of the last year. Never again. Gimme a big fat muddy Marty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 They would have to change a lot concerning their workmanship, tone, price structure and business practices to change my opinion. IMO Taylor is to guitars as Ford is to automobiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members studyscoot Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 the limiteds are usually much better than the regular models in my experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Queequeg Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 I have a few Martins, and don't get me wrong, I love 'em but that taylor 812ce is so sweet and nice. mm mmm. the harmonics go on and on forever on that guitar in a way that none of the CFMs do. I played it for an hour this morning before I went into work at 7:30. get's my day off to just the right start. Of course I read what FK wrote up there. I know. Something had to give.so I got a divorce. that was 14 yrs ago. the happiest 14 yrs of my life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jt93 Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 im a total martin guy, 35, 0001,00015,d12. but... recently i was gc and played a roundback with flames on the top. was actually the best sounding guitar in the store... i was amazed... just goes to show, everybody makes a good sounding guitar somewhere along the line, you just have to find it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by kwakatak IMO Taylor is to guitars as Ford is to automobiles. That's actually a pretty - IMO - apt comparison. I'd give Taylor these points: -Generally excellent workmanship (the ones I've seen, anyway)-Excellent playability (subjective)-I hate gloss but prefer Taylor's polyester gloss to others both aesthetically and qualitatively-I think Bob Taylor is a manufacturing genius & T is probably the most innovative mass git producer in existence along manufacturing lines. Here's where I think they suck.-Their processing of every single guitar in a sku is absolutely homogenous while the base materials are not. A guy like Dana Bourgeois, for an extremely contrasty example, will take each top and take it down to a thickness best suited to that particular top. He will apply a similar singular approach to the bracing for each top. Taylor, by contrast, has completely automated all of their material setup processes. So what's determining the processing of each Taylor top is the mathematics of expedient mass production rather than optimal voicing. I'm not suggesting that all Taylors sound bad. I haven't played all of them. I'm suggesting that whether they sound especially good is entirely arbitrary. Also, I don't mean to single them out as the only automated mass producer. I'm sure Martin and Larrivee are very similar operations in the most fundamental ways... My observation is that Martin and Larri just happen to get lucky with great-sounding guitars one hell of a lot more often... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by knockwood That's actually a pretty - IMO - apt comparison. I'd give Taylor these points: -Generally excellent workmanship (the ones I've seen, anyway) -Excellent playability (subjective) -I hate gloss but prefer Taylor's polyester gloss to others both aesthetically and qualitatively -I think Bob Taylor is a manufacturing genius & T is probably the most innovative mass git producer in existence along manufacturing lines. Here's where I think they suck. -Their processing of every single guitar in a sku is absolutely homogenous while the base materials are not. A guy like Dana Bourgeois, for an extremely contrasty example, will take each top and take it down to a thickness best suited to that particular top. He will apply a similar singular approach to the bracing for each top. Taylor, by contrast, has completely automated all of their material setup processes. So what's determining the processing of each Taylor top is the mathematics of expedient mass production rather than optimal voicing. I'm not suggesting that all Taylors sound bad. I haven't played all of them. I'm suggesting that whether they sound especially good is entirely arbitrary. Also, I don't mean to single them out as the only automated mass producer. I'm sure Martin and Larrivee are very similar operations in the most fundamental ways... My observation is that Martin and Larri just happen to get lucky with great-sounding guitars one hell of a lot more often... That was exactly my point knockwood! Thanks for putting it in words! I was feeling a little lazy today! I knew I could count on you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by Rada So what do you play now? Larrivee L-03 is my current guitar. It has strong bass and well defined mids with a treble that isn't too bright. I prefer Gibson acoustics over most Martin and Taylors. Part of it is price related. The Martins I like tend to be $2300+ (HD-28's and 000-28's). Gibson makes a couple guitars under $1800 with the bass response I like. The J-45 and the Songwriter Deluxe sound great. I would buy a Martin before I ever bought a Taylor. I love the looks of Taylors (even the headstock), I can't get into their tone. I tried numerous times. My 10 year old daughter's name is Taylor. It would make here happy if I bought one. I do like the Baby Taylor as a travel guitar or a student guitar for a child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 No way Kwakatak and knockwood - you didn't compare Ford to Taylor. We build the new Mustang, the GT and the F150 (F250 and F350) at Ford. All 3 have a deeper exhaust rumble than a room full of Taylors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kwakatak Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by Hudman No way Kwakatak and knockwood - you didn't compare Ford to Taylor. We build the new Mustang, the GT and the F150 (F250 and F350) at Ford. All 3 have a deeper exhaust rumble than a room full of Taylors. *foot in mouth* In my defense I was comparing Taylor to Ford mainly because of the assembly line thing. I'm admittedly a GM guy by choice (I've only owned Chevy's and Pontiacs) and a Subaru guy by necessity (currently putting around in an Outback wagon). Have pity, man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members knockwood Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by kwakatak *foot in mouth* In my defense I was comparing Taylor to Ford mainly because of the assembly line thing. I'm admittedly a GM guy by choice (I've only owned Chevy's and Pontiacs) and a Subaru guy by necessity (currently putting around in an Outback wagon). Have pity, man! I was influenced by Kwak! Actually, I was largely agreeing with the comparison on the positive side of things. I think Taylor and Ford are both brilliant manufacturing minds (overlook for a moment the fact that Ford was a rabid antisemite and I'm a Jew and yada yada - credit where it's due). Their departure in genius: In a car, I WANT tightly homogenized specs and production; in a git, not so much. Hudster, I'm sure if I slapped some DR mediums on a GT, it'd give my POS 310 a good run for its money in the tone dept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DonK Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Overall I'm more of a Martin guy, but I like Taylors too. Heck, I've owned five and currently have a 414 Ltd. (my third 414, the first one was the best and I should never have sold it; it wasn't a limited but was just so sweet). I have different guitars for different sounds, different songs. Some songs sound better on one vs. another. Some are easier to play when it comes to a certain song. For example, my Gallagher is a bluegrass cannon. The Martin can do bluegrass and hard strumming too (though it's not as loud as the Gallagher), but it also works well for fingerstyle. I use the Tak, Tacoma and Taylor are almost exclusively for fingerstyle, albeit I also strum them using fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rada Posted April 13, 2006 Author Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by Hudman Larrivee L-03 is my current guitar. It has strong bass and well defined mids with a treble that isn't too bright. I prefer Gibson acoustics over most Martin and Taylors. Part of it is price related. The Martins I like tend to be $2300+ (HD-28's and 000-28's). Gibson makes a couple guitars under $1800 with the bass response I like. The J-45 and the Songwriter Deluxe sound great. I would buy a Martin before I ever bought a Taylor. I love the looks of Taylors (even the headstock), I can't get into their tone. I tried numerous times. My 10 year old daughter's name is Taylor. It would make here happy if I bought one. I do like the Baby Taylor as a travel guitar or a student guitar for a child. I know what you mean....if I'm going to spend over $1000 on a guitar, it's going to have Gibson on the headstock! Seems like your experience with Taylor is like my experience with Martin. I would love to come across a Martin that blows me away, but I haven't. I found a Taylor that did, but I'm sure as hell ain't going to pay what they were asking! I'd get an SJ-200 over that Taylor any day of the week I'm just shocked that I actually found a Taylor that I liked....now, I can't say they're all crap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Queequeg Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 I agree with DonK on this subject. I have an old Gibson, and only certain pieces sound right on it and it has to be played with a flatpick. I play lots of traditional civil war era pieces fingerstyle and they sound best on a CFM, but I like to play lots of 1930s/40s era standards fingerstyle and the Taylor is the best thing for them, plus it plays jazz best, too. I've never put a flatpick to the Taylor.So I was wondering what style(s) you taylor bashers play that might explain why you can't get the sound you want from a Taylor.For me, it's like comparing a strat to a Les Paul. they're different as night and day; but better? I'm not so sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fireproof Posted April 13, 2006 Members Share Posted April 13, 2006 Originally posted by Hudman I prefer strong bass and clear defined mids. Taylor is far too bright for me. I would take a Martin over Taylor any day of the week. I agree - I like the dirty, bluesy sound of a Martin. I like me some bass!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members onewhiteduck Posted April 14, 2006 Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 Originally posted by Rada I was in Florida a few days ago and went to a guitar shop and in the acoustic room there were only Taylors.....of course I grumbled under my breath, but I decided to pick a few up since they were all "Limited Editions" That shop had a lot of cool stuff...acoustic guitars, electric guitars, picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rada Posted April 14, 2006 Author Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 HAHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jbird Posted April 14, 2006 Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 My next acoustic http://www.rainsong.com/Rainsong.mpg Whenever I get a spare 2 grand to be able to spend on an acoustic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted April 14, 2006 Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 Originally posted by Rada I know what you mean....if I'm going to spend over $1000 on a guitar, it's going to have Gibson on the headstock! Seems like your experience with Taylor is like my experience with Martin. I would love to come across a Martin that blows me away, but I haven't. I found a Taylor that did, but I'm sure as hell ain't going to pay what they were asking! I'd get an SJ-200 over that Taylor any day of the week I'm just shocked that I actually found a Taylor that I liked....now, I can't say they're all crap That's cool Rada - we both like Canadian guitars and Gibsons. Don't get me wrong, if I had a guitar collection like DonK, I would probably have a Taylor or two for stuff that requires a sweet treble tone. (DonK - is the man). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members min7b5 Posted April 14, 2006 Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 I think since Taylor rebraced/ revoiced the whole line in recent years I hear lot people that used not cafe for the tone now liking them now. Taylor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members martingibson70 Posted April 14, 2006 Members Share Posted April 14, 2006 I was always leary to criticize Taylors before. I feel better about that now. I think they sound tinny and lack bass. Also, the price!? I did pick up a really attractive maple 600? with great inlay. It is well balanced, feels great, and sounds really good. At $1800 used it is a steal in the Taylor world. However, as I've said before, my used Guild F47RCE ($995) is perfect and my D28 is one hell of a backup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.