Jump to content

Martin SLAM! Thread


JasmineTea

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members
Originally posted by Queequeg


winner: top 10 most ridiculous postings this week.



I have probably owned more guitars then you will in your lifetime, along with 24 years of playing them. My post is certainly not "rediculous".

Marting guitars gained their notoriety during a time when the choices were much fewer, and most guitars actually found in everyday households were the Ward's Catalogue variety.

They were great guitars then and great guitars now, however, take the D-28 for example: $2000 for the base model, stripped down as all hell. Some models carry a price tag that makes me wanna hurl, and I'm not cheap. I only invest in high end instruments. My comment was to imply that one who would spend martin money on a Martin is pretty much going for the investment or the name. As a player, I decided on the Westerly Rhode Island Guild D55 NTE as my primary performance Drednaught. I get an even louder, clearer and sustaining tone than ANY Martin guitar I've played (and I've owned maybe 6 or so and played countless examples)regardless of body size or style, and superb craftmanship. It cost me $1450 in 1998 and that was custom ordered with Fishman system and I chose the woods based on photos. I had a continous dialogue with the builder during construction of the instrument.

Kinda makes Martin look like chumps, I'd say. ;)

Martin is doing nothing criminal at all. They're exploiting buyers who actually believe they're "da bomb". How little they really know. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by derivicus



I have probably owned more guitars then you will in your lifetime, along with 24 years of playing them. My post is certainly not "rediculous".


Marting guitars gained their notoriety during a time when the choices were much fewer, and most guitars actually found in everyday households were the Ward's Catalogue variety.

Kinda makes Martin look like chumps, I'd say.
;)

Martin is doing nothing criminal at all. They're exploiting buyers who actually believe they're "da bomb". How little they really know.
:(


Hi-
24 years ago I had already been playing guitar for a very long time, and I've owned a lot more guitars than that, too. More than I can count now. Some of my current guitars are Martins and some aren't. I bought each of them for different reasons. I don't think I bought any of them because I thought Martin was "da bomb". I don't disagree with all you've said here, and I'm not Martin's biggest cheerleader. If you're serious about your claim that they market to the uneducated and foolish, then I stand by my original statement. I'm glad you found a good Guild guitar that you like. And if it makes you feel smarter than everybody else, then that's just a bonus for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by derivicus



I have probably owned more guitars then you will in your lifetime, along with 24 years of playing them. My post is certainly not "rediculous".


Marting guitars gained their notoriety during a time when the choices were much fewer, and most guitars actually found in everyday households were the Ward's Catalogue variety.


They were great guitars then and great guitars now, however, take the D-28 for example: $2000 for the base model, stripped down as all hell. Some models carry a price tag that makes me wanna hurl, and I'm not cheap. I only invest in high end instruments. My comment was to imply that one who would spend martin money on a Martin is pretty much going for the investment or the name. As a player, I decided on the Westerly Rhode Island Guild D55 NTE as my primary performance Drednaught. I get an even louder, clearer and sustaining tone than ANY Martin guitar I've played (and I've owned maybe 6 or so and played countless examples)regardless of body size or style, and superb craftmanship. It cost me $1450 in 1998 and that was custom ordered with Fishman system and I chose the woods based on photos. I had a continous dialogue with the builder during construction of the instrument.


Kinda makes Martin look like chumps, I'd say.
;)

Martin is doing nothing criminal at all. They're exploiting buyers who actually believe they're "da bomb". How little they really know.
:(



There is no number of guitars that can be owned in anyone's lifetime that will translate to the nullification of someone else's taste. The suggestion that Martin appeals to the uneducated and foolish is to me just plain wacky. This particular uneducated fool has a degree in comparative literature and has in all likelihood read more books than you will in your lifetime... if that kind of logic counts. Yet clearly I only "believe" Martin is "da bomb" because I'm a dupe who hasn't owned as many guitars as some of their detractors...

"My comment was to imply that one who would spend martin money on a Martin is pretty much going for the investment or the name."

Also wacky. Why - and on what earthly basis - presume to know the motives of the millions (edit: is it that many?) of people who've spent Martin money on a Martin? If I decide to spend Martin money on a Martin - which is almost sure to happen again because I happen to love their instruments - it will have nothing to do with their name or any considerations about investment, resale value, etc. I can understand and sympathize with anyone who finds Martin overpriced or otherwise not to their liking... because I respect individual taste. If I spend Martin money on a Martin I do so strictly because doing so will make me happier than spending Larrivee money on a Larrivee or Guild money on a Guild on that particular occasion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by knockwood



There is no number of guitars that can be owned in anyone's lifetime that will translate to the nullification of someone else's taste. The suggestion that Martin appeals to the uneducated and foolish is to me just plain wacky. This particular uneducated fool has a degree in comparative literature and has in all likelihood read more books than you will in your lifetime... if that kind of logic counts. Yet clearly I only "believe" Martin is "da bomb" because I'm a dupe who hasn't owned as many guitars as some of their detractors...


"My comment was to imply that one who would spend martin money on a Martin is pretty much going for the investment or the name."


Also wacky. Why - and on what earthly basis - presume to know the motives of the millions (edit: is it that many?) of people who've spent Martin money on a Martin? If I decide to spend Martin money on a Martin - which is almost sure to happen again because I happen to love their instruments - it will have nothing to do with their name or any considerations about investment, resale value, etc. I can understand and sympathize with anyone who finds Martin overpriced or otherwise not to their liking... because I respect individual taste. If I spend Martin money on a Martin I do so strictly because doing so will make me happier than spending Larrivee money on a Larrivee or Guild money on a Guild on that particular occasion.



Nice! :thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by studyscoot



just a side question. Why is it socially acceptable for average Americans to get pissed off at more wealthy Americans for no other reason other than their wealth?

 

 

That's the principle America was founded on. You have the right to get rich, everyone else has the right to be pissed off at you for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by onbongos



That's the principle America was founded on. You have the right to get rich, everyone else has the right to be pissed off at you for it

 

 

Yea, I think its in the Bill of Constitution or sumthin'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by Queequeg


....And if it makes you feel smarter than everybody else, then that's just a bonus for you.



I am no smarter than anyone else here, i'm sure. But.....

I perfectly understand the market. I perfectly understand marketing strategy. Martin has some great players and intelligent consumers as customers too. They make a fine product, i'm not bashing that. You sound like an old timer to me, and I respect that, but if you don't see what's happening with some of the major manufacturers' pricing, shame on you. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by knockwood



There is no number of guitars that can be owned in anyone's lifetime that will translate to the nullification of someone else's taste.



It wasn't to nullify anyone's taste, but to validate my learned experiences.

The suggestion that Martin appeals to the uneducated and foolish is to me just plain wacky. This particular uneducated fool has a degree in comparative literature and has in all likelihood read more books than you will in your lifetime... if that kind of logic counts.



You misunderstand what type of education applies here.


If I decide to spend Martin money on a Martin - which is almost sure to happen again because I happen to love their instruments



My statement wasn't meant to include everyone who buys a martin instrument. It was meant to explain the overall modern era popularity. I collect guitars, along with firearms. Some of the products I own are ridiculously overpriced most notably my Gibson guitars and my H&K firearms. They both rank among the finest out there, but are manufactured by arrogant companies who exploit their legacy and are WAY overpriced. An overwhelming number of buyers of these companies' products are attracted by the fact that the price is high if that makes any sense. I love and own products by them, but I aint afraid to call a spade a spade. ;) You would do well to admit the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Originally posted by derivicus

I collect guitars, along with firearms. Some of the products I own are ridiculously overpriced most notably my Gibson guitars and my H&K firearms. They both rank among the finest out there, but are manufactured by arrogant companies who exploit their legacy and are WAY overpriced. An overwhelming number of buyers of these companies' products are attracted by the fact that the price is high if that makes any sense. I love and own products by them, but I aint afraid to call a spade a spade.
;)
You would do well to admit the same.



Well, at least we agree about H&K. If you're gonna blow a zillion dollars on a premium pistol, think Sig. I'm personally a single-action Browning fan.

The fact that I completely disagree with your assessment of Martin's general value and pricing practices is not indicative of an unwillingness on my part to "admit" that they're arrogant and exploitative; it merely indicates that I don't share your perspective. So there's nothing to admit. What determines market value is what the market is willing to bear - as Clippity has already pointed out. Martin seems to be doing fine - even in an atmosphere of increasing availability of lower-cost products from Asia of increasingly good quality. Clearly the trade-off is worth it to the customer. There's nothing arrogant in this; it is merely typical free market behavior. I'm not going to sell my product for $1,200 if I know the market will pay $1,500 for it - I'd have to be a moron. And if a customer pays the $1,500, this doesn't make him a moron; it makes him someone who knows what he wants and what it's worth to him. If you think Guild wouldn't raise the D-55 to twice its current retail price if they thought the market would go for it, you've got some admitting to do yourself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by onbongos



That's the principle America was founded on. You have the right to get rich, everyone else has the right to be pissed off at you for it

 

 

I'm not talking about why we have a right to be pissed off, I asked why it is socially acceptable. Oh, and your answer sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

back to martins:

The observation that they are ripping people off is a bad one. As long as they are honest, and they are, then they should be able to sell their stuff at any price that they want. Welcome to America, and it is called free market capitalism. If you don't like it, you are welcome to buy from the competitors or start your own guitar company. Please go ahead and invent the next X-Brace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Nice spat, folks. Lots of good punches thrown, but in the end, closed minds are not likely to be immediately impacted. It is good sport to exercise the gray matter though...

BTW, free market is a beautiful thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Originally posted by studyscoot



just a side question. Why is it socially acceptable for average Americans to get pissed off at more wealthy Americans for no other reason other than their wealth?

 

 

jealousy is the reason behind it obviously, but why it's acceptable? probly cause the wealthy don't give a {censored}, and everyone else is just happy being mad.. ya know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Walp, y'know, I jus' GOTS ta say the I LOVE my new Martin Limited Edition----#127 outta 625, gots C. F. Martin IV's personal hand-written (in INK!!) autograph ALONG with Don Oriolo's, AND it's got FELIX, in his most inimitable poses, ALL OVER THE TABLE TOP (apt word for a gitbox made of HPL, Corian and Micarta). and it sounds all sparkley an' resonant an' {censored}.:thu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

http://www.mguitar.com/guitars/choosing/guitars.php?p=m&m=FeLiX%20II

 

Honestly, it's stable. fun to play, well-intonated, cuter'n {censored}, and (something to consider for some of y'all), it doesn't take itself too seriously (an attitude that it benevolently passes onto its player).

 

It does have a nice sparkle above pleasant mids, closely voiced/complex chords fall very easily to hand, and it does have a valid "alternate" voice* (just as a tres or cuatro, or ukelele, or Portuguese guitar does), and though I plan on getting a Collings Loar L-5 inspired archtop (when/if they finally ramp up production of THOSE beauties), I really like it as a simple, sweet little player, bijou as it is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

* 'Course , my other two acoustics are both Nat'l-Resophonics tricones, one steel and the other the nickel-plated brass cutaway, both of which are used for Faheyism or ragtime/swing/jazz and almost NEVER for slide----so I guess it's ALL about the alternate voice for me (the tricones have a beautifully PURE steel string tone with remarkable harmonic complexity, and and are surprisingly well-intonated considering their saddle and bridge design), and I think it's a shame they've been, like Rickenbackers**, so ghettoized in terms of being suitable only for a certain era/type/genre of playing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

** Got two of those too--- free of the Beatles/Byrds/Who/Petty/R.E.M. ghetto mind-set, they make great "crunchers", jazzers, and country guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...