# Are you in the Martin or Taylor camp?



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

I tend to gravitate towards the Martin (and Collings) camp of acoustics. A few years back, I went through the racks and ended up with a Taylor. Played fantastic and had a bright crisp sound that is very appealing but after a few hours, I brought the guitar back and did an exchange. The sound grew a little tiring (lack of a better word). I had a similar experience a couple month back when I purchased a Martin OM-21. The reps. were big fans of the Taylor's but after a few strums, I moved on quickly to the Martin's.

Which brand do you fancy? There is no better and it boils down to personal preference. So...Is it Martin? Taylor? or just a fan of Martin Taylor(!).


----------



## greco (Jul 15, 2007)

I prefer Taylor. I like the bright crisp sound and the neck profile.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I am definitely a Martin fanboy. Both my guitars have a very balanced sound. Very crisp, thick trebles but lots of power on the bass side. I grew up with the Martin sound and Taylors always sounded anemic on the bass side. Kind of like half a guitar there. Most of the ones I've played have not got near the volume that a Martin puts out. Botht the Martins I own are very light builds and just resonate and vibrate in my hands like no other. 
That being said I have a GS Mini in the house that I bought for my Grand daughter. I find when you get down to the GS Mini they seem to be better built and sound better than the comparably priced Martin. Namely the Martin Jr.
When you get to the higher end of Taylor and Martin its just a preference. They both make good guitars.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Taylors are nice to play and a great guitar in a multi-guitar jam (they cut well acoustically), but for pure tone, I'm more of a Martin guy. I've always loved D35s.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I am definitely a Martin fanboy. Both my guitars have a very balanced sound. Very crisp, thick trebles but lots of power on the bass side. I grew up with the Martin sound and Taylors always sounded anemic on the bass side. Kind of like half a guitar there. Most of the ones I've played have not got near the volume that a Martin puts out. Botht the Martins I own are very light builds and just resonate and vibrate in my hands like no other.
> That being said I have a GS Mini in the house that I bought for my Grand daughter. I find when you get down to the GS Mini they seem to be better built and sound better than the comparably priced Martin. Namely the Martin Jr.
> When you get to the higher end of Taylor and Martin its just a preference. They both make good guitars.


I had a Baby Taylor that i fancied quite a bit - The headstock broke off a few times and then my kids got to it and that was that....but it was a really good sounding guitar.


----------



## NoTalentHack (Jun 17, 2017)

Nothing wrong with Taylors, but the Martins I've played just sounded more "organic" if that makes sense


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

No "neither"? I wouldn't kick a D-18 out of bed for eating crackers, but I haven't fallen in love with a guitar from either company yet.


----------



## StratCat (Dec 30, 2013)

Taylor for me, but I'm guilty of not trying a lot of guitars. My side by side comparison was the Eric Clapton signature model from Martin (000) and a Taylor GA model. Don't remember any other specifics, and likely not an apples to apples comparison, but I did like the Taylor sound better. I did not purchase at that time, but the mold had set and when I stumbled on a trade in deal that made me move, a Taylor came home with me.

I'm not sure this makes sense, but to me, Taylor represents a more modern acoustic where Martin is still building the tried and true. And for an acoustic guitar, I want to play the modern.

Now when it comes to electrics, I'm the tried and true. When it comes to amps, I'm in the modern camp. Go figure!


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Either or both, it would depend on the specific instrument. I love a nice Martin D-18, but I've played a great Taylor all koa too. Most of the better factory guitars, Collings, Santa Cruz, Breedlove, Larrivee, Seagull, Gibson, et al, have their attributes and more than meet the threshold requirements of a fine guitar. Luckily, I've played scores of brands, from the big names to the unknowns. Shopping for such guitars is what led me to individual small shop luthiers and away from the factory brands. That said, there are more than a few Collings I would buy if I had the coin. As it is, I'm happy with my current crop of guitars.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Taylor over Martin, in general, but not by much. I favour the Taylor neck. I like that Taylor shimmer/chime, a little bit better. I just recently bought a Taylor CS Mini Mahogany. I slightly preferred that over the Dread Jr.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

I spent a couple hours at L&M trying Taylors and Martins, and they both sound excellent. But I preferred the Taylor over the Martin.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

I wouldn't count out owning a Taylor and they make excellent guitars but I prefer the Martin sound over Taylor. If I had to pick one or the other, it would be a Martin. But I own a nice Alvarez which is closer to the Martin sound than a Taylor but not quite as full a bass.


----------



## luker0 (Apr 18, 2017)

I've purposefully never held a Martin or a Taylor. Plan on leaving it that way 

Sent from my SM-T813 using Tapatalk


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

I want to like martins, but the Taylor's I've played just sound so lively, bright, "wide spectrum" for lack of a better term. In comparison, the martins sound a little dead after hearing the Taylor.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Diablo said:


> I want to like martins, but the Taylor's I've played just sound so lively, bright, "wide spectrum" for lack of a better term. In comparison, the martins sound a little dead after hearing the Taylor.


To me the Taylor vs Martin thing is like solid state vs tubes. Taylor is bright and brash. Martins have that low end growl and very musical complex overtones.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

guitarman2 said:


> To me the Taylor vs Martin thing is like solid state vs tubes. Taylor is bright and brash. Martins have that low end growl and very musical complex overtones.


Some of the newer designs from Taylor might surprise you. They've been redesigning their lines the past couple of years with Andy Powers and there have been some good reports. I am keen to try one of the newer 700 series models.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

jdto said:


> Some of the newer designs from Taylor might surprise you. They've been redesigning their lines the past couple of years with Andy Powers and there have been some good reports. I am keen to try one of the newer 700 series models.


Yes I have heard that and as far as I know I haven't played any of those newer designs. I do pickup some of the higher end Taylors when I visit L&M.
The only other thing that would ever keep me from buying a higher end Taylor is the neck. I don't like slim necks. I think Taylor diesigns their necks to appeal to those who are used to the modern electric guitar necks. I have always preferred the Gibson 50's baseball bat necks and the Fender nocaster large necks. 
Even the standard series Martin low profile slim necks aren't to my liking. The necks on my 2 authentics are closer to what I like although the D-28A 41 just barely.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

The neck on my taylor is huge compared to the neck of my ovation. There's a guitar with an electric sized neck


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

guitarman2 said:


> Yes I have heard that and as far as I know I haven't played any of those newer designs. I do pickup some of the higher end Taylors when I visit L&M.
> The only other thing that would ever keep me from buying a higher end Taylor is the neck. I don't like slim necks. I think Taylor diesigns their necks to appeal to those who are used to the modern electric guitar necks. I have always preferred the Gibson 50's baseball bat necks and the Fender nocaster large necks.
> Even the standard series Martin low profile slim necks aren't to my liking. The necks on my 2 authentics are closer to what I like although the D-28A 41 just barely.


I just played some Taylors at the 12th Fret on my lunchtime, along with a couple of Martins and some Eastmans. My favourite of the lot was a 618e Furst Edition. So much so that I was tempted to whip out the card right there, but eventually decided to jive it some time and a few more visits to see if it really is worth the investment. I tried the 800 series, but it didn't do much for me. The 610e of the same series also sounded a bit bright and brash, but the balanced, warm sound with deep bass and some sparkle from the 618e really gave me pause. I also like a hefty neck and this didn't feel too slim. 

My favourite guitar so far is my J-45 True Vintage, so for this one to knock that off its perch it would have to be special. Most of the time, when I have a moment like this, I go home and play my J-45 and the GAS attack goes away


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

I wish the 12th fret was close enough for me to visit on my lunch. I'm in Stoney Creek so the only store close enough is the Hamilton L&M. Always the same old guitars that don't seem to sell. A couple of nice Martins a bunch of bright sounding Taylors and a whole mess of dead sounding Gibby acoustics. Having said that I'd really love to try the Hummingbird True Vintage. Gibsons for the most part all sound like they have dead strings even when the strings are new. But I remember a 60's Hummngbird that my dad owned in the 70's that was heavenly.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

guitarman2 said:


> I wish the 12th fret was close enough for me to visit on my lunch. I'm in Stoney Creek so the only store close enough is the Hamilton L&M. Always the same old guitars that don't seem to sell. A couple of nice Martins a bunch of bright sounding Taylors and a whole mess of dead sounding Gibby acoustics. Having said that I'd really love to try the Hummingbird True Vintage. Gibsons for the most part all sound like they have dead strings even when the strings are new. But I remember a 60's Hummngbird that my dad owned in the 70's that was heavenly.


It is nice to be able to hop the subway and zip over there since I'm right at Yonge & Bloor. I can also hit the Bloor St. Long & McQuade in similar quick fashion.

I've played a couple of the new Hummingbird Vintage is a very lively guitar with a nice, warm and mellow sound. They're very lightly-built. I grew up listening to my dad's 57 Southern Jumbo, so I hear that sound when I think acoustic and I like that thumpy, dry Gibson sound. The one thing I like about my J-45 TV is, perhaps due to the advanced bracing pattern and the Adirondack spruce top and bracings, is that it has a bit deeper bass than a standard J-45. If you ever play a J-35, it has a similarly light build and the same bracing pattern, except with a sitka top. It doesn't quite have the same richness of sound, but the fundamentals are similar, it just sounds a little thinner. It also has a chunkier neck like my True Vintage.


----------



## Blind Dog (Mar 4, 2016)

Born a definite Martin/Levi/Chev dude -- I'll likely leave a Larrivee/Wrangler/Tesla guy.

I'll be a dog man forever ...

It's not about brands so much anymore, for me, it's about individual soul.


----------



## cboutilier (Jan 12, 2016)

guitarman2 said:


> To me the Taylor vs Martin thing is like solid state vs tubes. Taylor is bright and brash. Martins have that low end growl and very musical complex overtones.


That's exactly how I feel too.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

Do Martin's use bolt on necks? I did not know my Taylor was bolted neck until I watched a video on YouTube.


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

guitarman2 said:


> To me the Taylor vs Martin thing is like solid state vs tubes. Taylor is bright and brash. Martins have that low end growl and very musical complex overtones.


well for me, there aren't "complex overtones" it's mostly just muted in comparison. Less complex. Vanilla.


----------



## Blind Dog (Mar 4, 2016)

knight_yyz said:


> Do Martin's use bolt on necks? I did not know my Taylor was bolted neck until I watched a video on YouTube.


They're known for their dovetail, which also use dowels, and any of their traditional guitars would be a D/T. I've read of tech's discussing the bolts on the discontinued DM's. 

The short answer would _generally_ be 'no' to bolts. 

(With the Road Series, and all the new models, exceptions would not surprise me. But I know of no bolt-on.)


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

I'd be hard-pressed to believe that a bolt-on vs. dovetail would have a great effect on sound unless all other variables were equal. That's one area where Taylor gets to come up with a modern solution that works better for repair/reset of necks vs. being hide-bound by tradition.


----------



## knight_yyz (Mar 14, 2015)

I went on youtube to see the difference in the neck reset. The taylor you can do at home with a few proper shims. The Martin I would leave to a pro, because it involves heating and steam and NO...


----------



## bolero (Oct 11, 2006)

probably good to have one of each!!

I'm sure they would compliment each other, in a mix


that said, I have a Martin ( clone ) & a Larrivee. I really like Larrivee's myself.


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

I have some Martin guitars and I like them. I've only played two Taylor guitars and both were nice but I use a lot of bass thump and palm muting as well as bluegrass sort of riffs so for me a Martin seems to be the sound that I work best with. There may be better guitars out there that'll do that but I'm set up ok and not looking to change.

However, if Walt Disney made guitars with Micky Mouse ears on the headstock and I sounded real good playing one then that's the guitar I'd have.


----------



## StratCat (Dec 30, 2013)

guitarman2 said:


> I wish the 12th fret was close enough for me to visit on my lunch. I'm in Stoney Creek so the only store close enough is the Hamilton L&M. Always the same old guitars that don't seem to sell. A couple of nice Martins a bunch of bright sounding Taylors and a whole mess of dead sounding Gibby acoustics. Having said that I'd really love to try the Hummingbird True Vintage. Gibsons for the most part all sound like they have dead strings even when the strings are new. But I remember a 60's Hummngbird that my dad owned in the 70's that was heavenly.


Have you been to the Acoustic Room in Hamilton? Really nice shop and the owner (Mark) is a great help. Highly recommended.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

StratCat said:


> Have you been to the Acoustic Room in Hamilton? Really nice shop and the owner (Mark) is a great help. Highly recommended.


I've been to the acoustic room quite a few times. Attended some special events he's had there. Its a great music store for sure. So far I've only bought strings there.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

There have never been enough Larrivee guitars around for me to try out. Wished they still had manufacturing in Canada.


----------



## KapnKrunch (Jul 13, 2016)

No.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

Man. I am haunted by that Taylor 618e I played this afternoon. I actually went to check out a Godin and an Eastman semi-hollow, as my GAS has been leaning in that direction lately. I have never had GAS for a Taylor other than a GS Mini and have never even liked one other than that one for a travel guitar (but the extra-short scale ended up not being for me). That is until today, but this one is stuck in my head bigtime. 

Damned if that Taylor isn't making me think thrice. I'm gonna have to go back tomorrow and try it again.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Being primarily an electric player, the taylor necks feel very comfortable to me. That being said, the only real time I've done an "acoustic shootout" (and it was a while back) the martin (DX?) I tried just had the sound I hear in my head when it comes to acoustic guitar.

I think Fred Penner had a big impact on what I expect an acoustic to sound like, despite not being able to place it for a very long time.


----------



## Swervin55 (Oct 30, 2009)

Blind Dog said:


> Born a definite Martin/Levi/Chev dude -- I'll likely leave a Larrivee/Wrangler/Tesla guy.
> 
> I'll be a dog man forever ...
> 
> It's not about brands so much anymore, for me, it's about individual soul.


You left out HD??


----------



## Swervin55 (Oct 30, 2009)

In answer to the OP, each for a purpose. I have a J-45 KOA, D-18 1955, HD-28V and a Taylor 816CE so I have some readily available benchmarks to A-B. If any is "better" than the other it's simply a personal response and strongly influenced by my mood at the time. When on stage however, I use a Takamine with a cool tube preamp because no other acoustic I have sounds as good in that circumstance. Each for a purpose.


----------



## Davestp1 (Apr 25, 2006)

I prefer the Martin sound overall but the I like the Taylor neck a bit better (playability wise as it's a bit thinner). But my one acoustic is a Martin.


----------



## Daniel Grenier (Jun 24, 2008)

I have both... or should I say I _had_ both. I have a Martin 12 string (and love it) and had a Taylor 414ce but sold it as it was "getting on my nerves" if you know what I mean.

But next for me will be a Canadian guitar - a Boucher or Pellerin or White or .... there's so many great ones made right here now it's hard to pick!


----------



## BMW-KTM (Apr 7, 2015)

For most of my life I have believed that good tone is completely subjective; in the ears of the listener and nothing has come up yet to change my mind on that score.
What has changed is my previously held belief that a tone preference was based on what you were already used to hearing.
I thought familiarity created a preference for the familiar.
There is likely still some degree of merit to that notion but I no longer believe it to be an absolute.
I was a huge Martin fan until I played a Taylor for the first time.
The crispness, resonance, detail, note definition, lower lows and higher highs and also the absolute sheer brilliance of the neck shape sold me in about 5 minutes.
I was maybe a bit closed minded about acoustic guitars before.
I no longer simply dismiss anything out of hand and I give anything new I come across a fair trial.
The day I met a Taylor guitar for the first time was an eye-opener for me and that change of thinking has affected many other aspects of my life as well.
I am just generally more open minded.

I have an additional comment that might draw some criticism here.
I don't know if this applies to all Taylors but I do not find either of mine to be lacking in bass response.
I think some folks may possibly get that impression because of the extended high end which makes the low seem somehow less by comparison.
I actually think both of my Taylors are very well balanced that way and I now feel the kind of tone I was previously accustomed to is too boomy and muddy.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

BMW-KTM said:


> I have an additional comment that might draw some criticism here.
> I don't know if this applies to all Taylors but I do not find either of mine to be lacking in bass response.
> *I think some folks may possibly get that impression because of the extended high end which makes the low seem somehow less by comparison.*
> I actually think both of my Taylors are very well balanced that way and I now feel the kind of tone I was previously accustomed to is too boomy and muddy.


I don't think I have ever heard this before. It would be interesting to check out two similar sized guitars from each manufacturer and see what the results give.


----------



## BMW-KTM (Apr 7, 2015)

It's just a speculation on my part, which I came to a few years ago after giving thought to the many comments I had been seeing about a lack of bottom which did not ring true with me.
It seems plausible to me although I don't know how one might measure and quantify it outside of the use of an oscilloscope, which I do not own.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

The Taylors I played today certainly had plenty of bass, but they have a balanced sound and that definitely sounds brighter. The 618e (not First Edition, that was the 610e) that I tried today had a deep, rumbling bass that was very nice. I was very close to pulling the trigger, but I am going to give it the GAS test of a few weeks. If it's still there and I still want it badly, then I'll know. It's a big departure from my J-45 TV.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

The other thing is the difference string size and alloy makes in the acoustic world. That was a surprise to me.


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

Budda said:


> The other thing is the difference string size and alloy makes in the acoustic world. That was a surprise to me.


Yeah, it is huge. And pick material too is noticeable quite a bit.


----------



## jdto (Sep 30, 2015)

Budda said:


> The other thing is the difference string size and alloy makes in the acoustic world. That was a surprise to me.


Totally.


----------



## Budda (May 29, 2007)

Wardo said:


> Yeah, it is huge. And pick material too is noticeable quite a bit.





jdto said:


> Totally.


I'm glad, to be honest. I like to be able to go out and get a pack of strings and see what it will do to my playing and my tone. Now I really want my brother's S6 haha.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

BMW-KTM said:


> I have an additional comment that might draw some criticism here.
> I don't know if this applies to all Taylors but I do not find either of mine to be lacking in bass response.
> I think some folks may possibly get that impression because of the extended high end which makes the low seem somehow less by comparison.
> I actually think both of my Taylors are very well balanced that way and I now feel the kind of tone I was previously accustomed to is too boomy and muddy.


When I think about spectrum, I don't think in absolutes but more in how balanced the spectrum is. IME, Taylors always tend towards a brighter, less bassy sound. My ex has a very nice (now discontinued) Taylor 815C Jumbo spruce over RW which (because of the woods and body shape) would probably be one of their deepest sounding guitars. And yet the brightness still keeps the overall spectrum shifted up in frequency compared to the Martins I've heard it played with.

With Martins, I find that for whatever reason, their spectrum seems to be fuller in the mids / low-mids. Gibson, brighter and thinner still than either of them. Even comparing mahogany to mahogany guitars, the Martins just have a richer, bassier tone. Perhaps it's my preconceptions but I haven't heard much to shatter them, so they persist. Some people prefer that tone and some prefer the brighter spectrum, there is no better or worse.

Speaking of shattering preconceived notions, my mahogany Lowden has the richest bottom end of just about any guitar I've ever played, especially when drop-tuned a bit. I never thought I would ever want a mahogany guitar, not even a good D18, but that F35 changed my preconceptions forever. A mind is like a parachute ..........


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

I like both--and if I ever got one it woudl be either a gift, I won it or one of the lower priced models.

Over all I prefer Taylors though because when I have played them the Taylors respond more to how I play than the Martins--so they just feel more "me"


----------



## bw66 (Dec 17, 2009)

It took me a while to warm up to the Taylor sound, though I always loved the feel. Martin would have been my first choice for many years, but now I like them both, though if I had to choose, I would probably go with a Taylor.

Whenever I try a Gibson in the store, it always seems to be a bit lacking, but a number of my friends have Gibsons and those ones seem to play and sound great when I try them. Go figure.

Like Zontar, I would probably have to inherit one before I would own any of them.


----------



## KennD (Nov 3, 2015)

Taylor for me - no contest. I recently ran the racks in L&M, Tom Lee and a few others in Vancouver & on the Island looking for a 000/OM. The Martin's, to my ear, all sounded as though they had that muffled low end which won't work for me. Also for playability, I've never played an acoustic that plays as well as a Taylor.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

My Taylor is at the lower end, a GS Mini Mahogany, but it keeps impressing me every day. I had L&M change the strings before it left the shop. Strings are Elixir Nanoweb 80/20 Bronze 11-52s. I had come to liking 11-52 80/20 Bronze strings before I got the Elixir brand.


----------



## Guncho (Jun 16, 2015)

Martin for me but my buddy has a high end Taylor that sounds and plays great.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

This and a few other threads have made me do some comparisons on some of the better Taylor's vs. Martin. I've tried to change my opinion and when I hear the Taylor's, I say, "that's really nice". Then I hear the Martin and I just like that bass sound they have better. My Alvarez Masterworks is no slouch either.


----------



## Chitmo (Sep 2, 2013)

Neither, there are things I like about both though. I have a Boucher now that takes the best of both brands and it's perfect for me.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I had no opinion of Taylors 6+ months ago until I started noodling on them at guitar shops. I would also try Gibsons and Martins. I found myself gravitating towards the Taylors. A few times I would play a Taylor GS Mini and a Martin Dread Jr. and I would end up just favouring the Mini. Then I tried a 322e that blew my mind (see my previous posts on that). I was aware of my financial limitations and the 322e was no where in site. That was when I tried the GS Mini Mahogany. I liked it more than the spruce topped ones. I had the cash, so I bought it. It has managed to alleviate GAS for other Taylor, so far.  There that is really the story on that.


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

Between the two I think I would have to put myself in the Martin camp.

I can't play acoustics worth a damn, but kind of have GAS for one right now. Maybe it is just that I have money to spare and am all set for electric gear until I can justify an ES-335.

I am considering a Mexican Martin (one of the higher level Mexican Martins) that is available used for about $300 off the new price. But at the same time I am also considering a mid-level Simon & Patrick or Seagull. If only I could play acoustics it would be easier to make the decision.


----------



## butterknucket (Feb 5, 2006)

The Martin camp for me. 

I actually owned a Taylor many years ago and ended up trading it because there was a strange midrange frequency in the guitar that really irked me after a while.


----------



## Hammerhands (Dec 19, 2016)

I'm in the Martin Taylor camp.

I almost bought a Martin HD28V this year.


----------



## merlin6666 (Oct 19, 2014)

I don't care much for either. I don't dig the Taylor sound and look, they just feel kinda generic. Martin of course set the standard for steel string flat tops, but they are so overpriced and their huge diversity of models is a big turn off. Do we really need 32 flavours of D-28 each year ... gimme a break.

What I do like are guitars that not everyone is playing and that you can't just pick up at the Long and McQuade on a whim. I really have a soft spot for guitars made in the New Hartford CT factory, so Ovations and Guilds from that period are my favourites.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

merlin6666 said:


> Do we really need 32 flavours of D-28 each year


I agree. The D-28 Authentic should be the D-28 Standard.


----------



## Guyfrets (Aug 20, 2012)

I'm in neither the Martin, nor the Taylor camp. Instead I'm in the PRS Private Stock acoustic guitar camp. Here's one reason why.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

Guyfrets said:


> I'm in neither the Martin, nor the Taylor camp. Instead I'm in the PRS Private Stock acoustic guitar camp. Here's one reason why.


Fantastic guitars. I had no intention of purchasing a PRS acoustic until I played some in a local shop. I still miss that 1st one - it kept me up for a couple nights until I went back to the shop....I brought my trusty Collings and it was no contest. Traded in the Collings.

I had a guitar builder friend over and he was totally taken back by the instrument. To a point that at 3am, I had to ask him to leave!


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Alex said:


> Fantastic guitars. I had no intention of purchasing a PRS acoustic until I played some in a local shop. I still miss that 1st one - it kept me up for a couple nights until I went back to the shop....I brought my trusty Collings and it was no contest. Traded in the Collings.
> 
> I had a guitar builder friend over and he was totally taken back by the instrument. To a point that at 3am, I had to ask him to leave!


This post is quite a feather in PRS' cap. Better than a Collings? They must be some guitar. I am going to have to try one now.

Which Model PRS was it? Forget it. I just looked them all up and they all, in PRS fashion have narrow necks. Too bad for me.................good for my wallet.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

Steadfastly said:


> This post is quite a feather in PRS' cap. Better than a Collings? They must be some guitar. I am going to have to try one now.
> 
> Which Model PRS was it? Forget it. I just looked them all up and they all, in PRS fashion have narrow necks. Too bad for me.................good for my wallet.


Some of the models like the Martin Simpson have a 1.83" nut width which i found too much (and i have a fairly big hands). Better is subjective but the PRS i bought had a maple back which you would think very bright....it sounded absolutely gorgeous.

I recorded this when i got home from the shop - just noodling, no EQ, straight into Logic Pro using the onboard preamp in the Angelus.


__
https://soundcloud.com/https%3A%2F%2Fsoundcloud.com%2Fuser-704234903%2Fangelus-cutaway


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Ricky Skaggs has been endorsing PRS guitars. To me that would say lots about PRS as he's been a lifelong Martin guitar player as well as Bourgoeis.


----------



## Guyfrets (Aug 20, 2012)

Steadfastly said:


> This post is quite a feather in PRS' cap. Better than a Collings? They must be some guitar. I am going to have to try one now.
> 
> Which Model PRS was it? Forget it. I just looked them all up and they all, in PRS fashion have narrow necks. Too bad for me.................good for my wallet.





Alex said:


> Some of the models like the Martin Simpson have a 1.83" nut width which i found too much (and i have a fairly big hands). Better is subjective but the PRS i bought had a maple back which you would think very bright....it sounded absolutely gorgeous.
> 
> I recorded this when i got home from the shop - just noodling, no EQ, straight into Logic Pro using the onboard preamp in the Angelus.
> 
> ...


Thanks, Alex, for pointing out that the nut width of the Martin Simpson PRS Angelus model is 1.83". As a classical guitarist I'm used to nut widths of about 2" so the 1.83" on a steel string was a Godsend for me. Here's a description of that model. Like the guitar described below mine is Adirondack spruce over cocobolo but the tuners on my PRS are proprietary Robson Tuners with a 21/1 ratio.


Adirondack Spruce
*Back & Sides Wood* Cocobolo
*Body Bracing* PRS Proprietary X-Brace/Classical Hybrid Design
*Binding* Curly Maple
*Neck Wood* Peruvian Mahogany
*Neck Shape* Martin Simpson
*Fingerboard Material* Ebony
*Fingerboard Inlay* Green Select Abalone "J" Birds
*Number of Frets* 21
*Scale Length* 25.25"
*Tuning Machines* PRS Tuners
*Bridge Material* Ebony
*Nut/Saddle Material* Bone
*Nut Width* 1.83"
*Body Depth* 3.625" (Neck Block); 4.5" (Tail Block)
*Electronics* Proprietary, full band width piezo pick up with a proprietary 18-volt custom-voiced preamp
*Case Included* Hardshell


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

It took me a year to minimally get used to the 1.72" nut on my S&P Woodland Pro Folk. No way in hell is this small hand with stubby fingers and a dwarf pinky gonna get used to 1.83". My weak puny little girly man hand is also why my Taylor GS Mini Mahogany fits me perfectly.


----------



## Guyfrets (Aug 20, 2012)

Robert1950 said:


> It took me a year to minimally get used to the 1.72" nut on my S&P Woodland Pro Folk. No way in hell is this small hand with stubby fingers and a dwarf pinky gonna get used to 1.83". My weak puny little girly man hand is also why my Taylor GS Mini Mahogany fits me perfectly.


The important thing from where I stand is that your Taylor GS Mini Mahogany fits you perfectly. Doesn't get any better than that!


----------



## Wardo (Feb 5, 2010)

Hammerhands said:


> I almost bought a Martin HD28V this year.


Yeah, I got an HD28V about this time last year. Wasn't looking for another guitar but this is a good one so didn't want it let slide by.

These days though, I seem to be in the Telecaster camp.


----------



## Blind Dog (Mar 4, 2016)

knight_yyz said:


> Do Martin's use bolt on necks? I did not know my Taylor was bolted neck until I watched a video on YouTube.





Blind Dog said:


> They're known for their dovetail, which also use dowels, and any of their traditional guitars would be a D/T. I've read of tech's discussing the bolts on the discontinued DM's.
> 
> The short answer would _generally_ be 'no' to bolts.
> 
> ...


Sent query to C.F. Martin, July 7th.

Question to support: _Do any of CF Martins have bolt on necks? (All mine/are D/T I think)_

Received reply, July 24th.



So I read that as: _*no*_ conventional/traditional *bolt ons*, except the single bolt used for alignment (not structural connection) during drying -- on Road Series', & X Series' (likely discontinued DM?) new mortise & tenon joints. With Martins, 18 series & higher, I would expect only dove tail joints used. Dowels used in D/T joints, while quite possibly helpful in alignment, also would add significantly to the structural integrity of the joint imo.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Guyfrets said:


> I'm in neither the Martin, nor the Taylor camp. Instead I'm in the PRS Private Stock acoustic guitar camp. Here's one reason why.


Hey, that's not fair cricket. It was supposed to be between those two brands. 

If we deviate from that, I can name at least a half dozen guitars I'd choose ahead of either of those. Or at least give their very top models a hell of a run for their money: Kevin Ryan, Lowden, Froggy Bottom, Bedell, SCGC, Collings, H&D ...........


Nice PRS, BTW!


----------



## Guyfrets (Aug 20, 2012)

High/Deaf said:


> Hey, that's not fair cricket. It was supposed to be between those two brands.
> 
> If we deviate from that, I can name at least a half dozen guitars I'd choose ahead of either of those. Or at least give their very top models a hell of a run for their money: Kevin Ryan, Lowden, Froggy Bottom, Bedell, SCGC, Collings, H&D ...........
> 
> ...


Okay, I stand corrected. If I had to choose between Martin and Taylor I'd abstain. For many years I owned a Taylor W14ce (sitka spruce top, walnut back and sides, acoustic/electric with a cutaway). There was nothing wrong with the guitar but it just never moved me. When I finally put it up for sale at a very highly reputable guitar shop in my area the owner of the store waxed poetic about the guitar's virtues and it sold for a very good price (enough to pay for extensive acoustic treatment in my home recording studio). My hope is that the new owner of the Taylor W14ce I sold is moved by it and gets many years of joyful music making from the guitar. Likewise I've heard many fine Martin guitars but never played one that moved me. The PRS I bought in 2012 on the other hand "blew me away" the first time I played it. What's really amazing is that I played classical pieces like Estudio Brilliantè (Allard/Tarrega) as well as folk and Celtic pieces like Jock O'Hazeldean and my own arrangement of Lightfoot's Pussy Willows, Cat Tails on the PRS that first time I sat down with it. Everything sounded just the way I wanted to hear it and still does. In other words, the PRS just moved me then and continues to do so to this very day.


----------



## High/Deaf (Aug 19, 2009)

Guyfrets said:


> Okay, I stand corrected. If I had to choose between Martin and Taylor I'd abstain. For many years I owned a Taylor W14ce (sitka spruce top, walnut back and sides, acoustic/electric with a cutaway). There was nothing wrong with the guitar but it just never moved me. When I finally put it up for sale at a very highly reputable guitar shop in my area the owner of the store waxed poetic about the guitar's virtues and it sold for a very good price (enough to pay for extensive acoustic treatment in my home recording studio). My hope is that the new owner of the Taylor W14ce I sold is moved by it and gets many years of joyful music making from the guitar. Likewise I've heard many fine Martin guitars but never played one that moved me. The PRS I bought in 2012 on the other hand "blew me away" the first time I played it. What's really amazing is that I played classical pieces like Estudio Brilliantè (Allard/Tarrega) as well as folk and Celtic pieces like Jock O'Hazeldean and my own arrangement of Lightfoot's Pussy Willows, Cat Tails on the PRS that first time I sat down with it. Everything sounded just the way I wanted to hear it and still does. In other words, the PRS just moved me then and continues to do so to this very day.


To me, buying an acoustic is more complex than buying an electric. The differences are obvious back-to-back, but our sonic memories fail us after some time. Remember and comparing months apart takes repeated playing, IME.

The first time I heard a D35, I thought "that is it". And for many years after that, I kept to that opinion. I was young and working in a music store so I could compare that 35 to the 28 and 18, some Gibsons and even a D45 that I guy I played with had. I ended up with a decent Japanese D35 copy that did me just fine for decades.

But when I went out last year on the quest, I started hearing things that I wasn't prepared for in high-end acoustics. And especially (again) playing good ones back-to-back. So I base my preference on that historic moment with the 35, and I could be very happy with either a nice Martin or Taylor. But I know there is so much more than that out there now. He ever thought they made great guitars in Northern Ireland or the Czech Republic, let alone Toranna or 'Couver? 

It's a pretty big, complicated world out there, after all. Which makes that 'best guitar in the world' thread to absolutely ludicrous.


----------



## Alex (Feb 11, 2006)

I expected the results of the poll to be 50/50...pretty close.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

Guyfrets said:


> Thanks, Alex, for pointing out that the nut width of the Martin Simpson PRS Angelus model is 1.83". As a classical guitarist I'm used to nut widths of about 2" so the 1.83" on a steel string was a Godsend for me. Here's a description of that model. Like the guitar described below mine is Adirondack spruce over cocobolo but the tuners on my PRS are proprietary Robson Tuners with a 21/1 ratio.
> 
> 
> Adirondack Spruce
> ...


I don't see that one on their site and none of the four shown on their site have the nut width mentioned.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

This is a bit like the old Gibson VS Fender thing. I always considered my ideal electric guitar to be a modern stratocaster that sounds like a vintage Les Paul.


----------



## Guyfrets (Aug 20, 2012)

Steadfastly said:


> I don't see that one on their site and none of the four shown on their site have the nut width mentioned.


"The Martin Simpson signature model guitar is simply the result of the PRS team being truly attentive to the feedback of a player. I have felt privileged to be able to tell them what I think will make a better guitar for great acoustic playing, and they have listened to my input from materials to neck width and string spacing, pick up sound and inlays....and when the final model arrived, I was blown away by the results. This model is entirely the best materials, and the specs which I asked for, presented in a deluxe version. It is a great instrument made by people who care and strive always for the highest standards in tone, playability, workmanship and aesthetics."? Martin Simpson.

Born in the PRS Maryland shop, PRS Acoustics are heirloom-quality instruments with remarkable tone and exquisite playability. A small team of experienced luthiers handcraft all Maryland-made PRS acoustics with passion and attention to detail. The Martin Simpson acoustic comes standard with our customized pickup system. The PRS Acoustic pickup system is a proprietary, full band width Piezo pick up that is combined with a proprietary 18 volt custom-voiced preamp.

*Specification:*

Shape: 15 1/2" Cutaway
Depth (At The Neck Block): 3 5/8"
Depth (At The Tail Block): 4 1/2"
Bracing: PRS X-Brace/Classical Hybrid Design
Back and Side Woods: Private Stock Grade Cocobolo
Top Wood: Select Adirondack Spruce
Top Purfling: Green Select Abalone
Top and Back Binding: Curly Maple
Rosette: Curly Maple and Green Select Abalone
Neck Wood: Peruvian Mahogany
Neck Shape: "Martin Simpson"
Strength Rod: High-Modulus Carbon Fiber
Number of Frets: 21
Scale Length: 25 1/4"
Nut Width: 1.83"
String Spacing: 2.36"
Fretboard, Headstock Veneer and Bridge Wood: Ebony
Fretboard and Headstock Veneer Purfling: Green Select Abalone
Fretboard Inlays: Green Select Abalone "J" Birds
Headstock Veneer Inlay: Private Stock Eagle
Nut: Bone
Saddle: Bone
Tuners: PRS Tuners
Electronics: PRS Pickups System: Proprietary, full band width piezo pick up with a proprietary 18-volt custom-voiced preamp.


Here's the link - PRS Private Stock Martin Simpson Angelus Electro Acoustic #4707


----------



## colchar (May 22, 2010)

My comments in my previous post are out the window - I didn't buy that used Martin, nor did I buy anything from the Godin line. As it turns out, I bought a Yamaha LL6 and am blown away by how easily it plays and how good it sounds.

So I guess I would now have to say neither and that I am, instead, in the Yamaha camp.


----------



## Jeremykeys (Aug 30, 2015)

For my 62nd birthday my wife bought me; with a little of my help in choosing; a Martin D1XRAE and I love it. She sounds great, looks great and was around $800 with a gig bag. The salesman, Mike, at my Long and McQuades in Scarboro told me that since I live in an apartment there may be an issue with the lack of humidity. I had been considering a Taylor in the same price range. He told me that if the Taylor developed a crack because of a lack of humidity the warranty would be void. That's not the only reason we went for the Martin though. I had him play both guitars so I could hear them from the front and I just preferred the Martin. Also, since I'm pretty much a flat picker and a very hard hitter, I found the Taylor kind of choke up sound wise, if that makes any sense. I tend to play guitar the same way I like to play my primary instrument, piano. And I pound on it! Not fast and flashy but definitely a hard hitter. Been playing for 55 years and that's just the way I like it!
My first guitar was a Norman B20 which I bought in the late 70's. Wish she was still playable but alas, ka ka has occurred and She's now a wall ornament.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Played an acoustic blues shuffle on a Martin 000-17L recently. Liked the sound of that song a bit better than on a Taylor 612ce, but my hand did not like the feel of the Martin neck all that much.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

luker0 said:


> I've purposefully never held a Martin or a Taylor. Plan on leaving it that way


Well, I tried Martins and Taylors yesterday for the 33rd time or so today. And I figure the 34th will be before the end of the months. Yes, I am a masochist.


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I tried out about four or so songs on a couple of Martins and Taylors. An acoustic blues shuffle sounded better on the Martin - 00017L, but the other three songs (an acoustic Pete Townshend mashup) and two other sounded better on the Taylor. I also determined for sure that I prefer the a 14 fret Taylor grand concert over the 12 fret, even with a cutaway.

Also, to compare a Taylor to a a solid state amp and Martin to a tube amp is just WRONG!!


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

Okay not feeling irritable right now. Taylor vs Martin. more realistic comparison are these two amps on their clean settings. '65 Fender Deluxe Reverb (Taylor) and '59 Fender Tweed Deluxe (Martin). I'd rather play a blues shuffle on a Tweed Deluxe, but other styles on a Deluxe Reverb.


----------



## King Loudness (May 3, 2010)

Martin without a shroud of doubt. They still make the best sounding and most reliable production acoustic as far as the "big names" go IMO. I've had an 0015M since new that just keeps getting better and better. I'm a fan of vintage or vintage style acoustics, and while Taylors are made very well and play like a dream, I don't always love the sound of them, especially not plugged in. Their Expression system is a hunk of crap that they should've abandoned years ago; a $150 Schatten Design pickup kicks the crap out of any pickup Taylor has ever made IMO. I actually owned a Taylor GA3 for a while and while I liked it, I only bought it because it was stupid cheap and I ended up trading it off after a/bing with my Martin.

W.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

King Loudness said:


> Martin without a shroud of doubt. They still make the best sounding and most reliable production acoustic as far as the "big names" go IMO.
> W.


I always thought they had the most popular or most liked sound of the production acoustic mfrs. One thing that may be happening more in the acoustic field are more models with different size necks. I would like to see that in the electric guitar field but doubt it will ever happen in the near future.


----------



## luker0 (Apr 18, 2017)

Robert1950 said:


> Well, I tried Martins and Taylors yesterday for the 33rd time or so today. And I figure the 34th will be before the end of the months. Yes, I am a masochist.


Hehehehe...I'm staying far away from that section of the store


----------



## King Loudness (May 3, 2010)

Steadfastly said:


> I always thought they had the most popular or most liked sound of the production acoustic mfrs. One thing that may be happening more in the acoustic field are more models with different size necks. I would like to see that in the electric guitar field but doubt it will ever happen in the near future.


I think you'd be correct in your assessment. Martin has history behind them, and unlike Gibson they've proven that they're able to build a fairly consistent guitar and also read market trends while still keeping their bread and butter going. No denying that Taylor has a (rightful) share of the market these days but I'll never be buying one again.

W.


----------



## mawmow (Nov 14, 2017)

Keep in mind I came to understand I need 1 3/4" nut width...
The first solid wood I got (in 2006 and still owned) was a brand new Taylor 510 : love the neck and sound equilibrium.
Then got a brand new Martin D-35 for boominess : loved it but came to find nut width too narrow.
Recently got a Martin 000-18 (2014) : just love it !
Also got Taylors 512 and GS-5 ("516") : neck of the GS-5 had to be realigned which was easy to do on a bolted neck while the 1995 512 is on the verge to need a neck reset since Taylor began to bolt necks in 1996.

Though I like Martin sound, the fear of an eventual costly neck reset appears a serious drawback to me while Taylor offers the promise to make it easy.

Now, my problem is that Taylor is expanding and changing models year after year while Martin appears to keep steady while making some welcome technical upgrading.

I also have Larrivées and Gibsons...

Why so many brands ? To play different repertoires... and MAYBE do I enjoy GAS ? ;-)


----------



## Robert1950 (Jan 21, 2006)

I like the necks on Taylor guitars more.


----------



## Judas68fr (Feb 5, 2013)

If I had to choose I'd say Martin. Never been wowed by any Taylor I've tried (and I've tried a few!). They just don't work for me! I play with my fingers a lot though, I think that's why.


----------



## bluesguitar1972 (Jul 16, 2011)

There's not a neither option? 
If I had to pick, I'm more of a Martin fan for tone, and rarely do I really like Taylors though there are some... but there's other makes I prefer than both brands.


----------



## Kerry Brown (Mar 31, 2014)

I prefer the tone of Taylor’s but this may be because according to the hearing test posted elsewhere I have no hearing much above 8,500.


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

I picked Martin because there was no "other" choice. My preferred brand is the one that sounds and plays best for my budget.


----------



## Morkolo (Dec 9, 2010)

Martin for the sake of the poll, I have a D18 that I will never let go. But my favorite acoustics have to be my Gibsons.


----------



## Ricardio (Nov 16, 2017)

Neither. I love US made Guild acoustics.


----------



## zguitz (Aug 18, 2017)

Taylor for sparkling, Martin for tradition, but I'm a Gibson freak


----------



## Steadfastly (Nov 14, 2008)

zguitz said:


> *Taylo*r for sparkling, *Martin* for tradition, but I'm a *Gibson* freak





Ricardio said:


> Neither. I love US made *Guild* acoustics.


Well, between your two posts you have what most would call the top four names in the acoustic world. I would hang any and all of those on my wall.


----------



## toocommercial (Feb 18, 2009)

I find Taylor guitars to be set up better in the stores, so they generally feel better to play "out of the box." They're also strung with Elixir strings, so the feel is generally smoother to a player coming in off the street and trying them out. Martins don't also have the best setup happening out of the box. They're also not as consistent as Taylors. Some $800 Taylors sound as good as some $3,000 Martins. But when you get a "good" Martin, look out. I tend to go for build quality as a major factor in an acoustic guitar - as important for me as the sound of the guitar. And Martin wins in that category for me. 

Having said all this, I use Gibson acoustics almost exclusively for a number of reasons. But I've tried scores of Taylors and Martins, and above is my comparative take on them.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

toocommercial said:


> I find Taylor guitars to be set up better in the stores, so they generally feel better to play "out of the box." They're also strung with Elixir strings, so the feel is generally smoother to a player coming in off the street and trying them out. Martins don't also have the best setup happening out of the box. They're also not as consistent as Taylors. Some $800 Taylors sound as good as some $3,000 Martins. But when you get a "good" Martin, look out. I tend to go for build quality as a major factor in an acoustic guitar - as important for me as the sound of the guitar. And Martin wins in that category for me.
> 
> Having said all this, I use Gibson acoustics almost exclusively for a number of reasons. But I've tried scores of Taylors and Martins, and above is my comparative take on them.


In the past couple of years I've bought 2 brand new Martins that came perfectly setup. Many in the stores I've played have felt great. Its not that Taylors come better setup out of the box. Its that they've designed the necks to play like slim electric guitar necks. this is one thing I don't like about Taylors. I prefer my necks to be chunkier. Instead of my acoustic necks playing like electrics I prefer my electrics to play more like my acoustics. Bigger chunkier neck heavier gauge strings.
When it comes to Gibsons, for the most part I don't prefer them. It always seems that the bass strings seem clunky and dead. When I pick up an acoustic I expect the bass strings to have snap and be lively like on a Martin or Collings. Even the Taylors are better in that respect. Not saying the Gibsons are bad just not the sound I generally go for.
Having said that I wouldn't mind someday owning a True Vintage Hummingbird. When I go in to the Long and Mcquade I also like to pickup the SJ 200 which I find the exception.


----------



## Duffman (Oct 29, 2014)

Taylor right now....314ce ......but I could easily be in both clubs soon.


----------



## SWLABR (Nov 7, 2017)

I like the mystique of Martin, but of all the Martins vs all the Taylor's I've played, Taylor wins. One of the nicest guitars I've EVER played was a Martin, but I've played some that felt pretty cheap. Not priced cheap, but certainly felt it. I knew a guy who had a Martin (??) and a Parkwood. The Martin didn't hold a candle to the Parkwood! He told me what he bought them for, both brand new. I knew which one I'd buy from him if he was reselling. Plus, the Martin had 2 giant cracks across the top. From both ends of the bridge to the tail. He said he was diligent with humidifying... That can happen to any solid top though... 
A few years back I was in a music store jamming with one of the employees and a customer, all of a sudden the (coveted) Taylor 12 string (that hung above the cash register un-played for years) was in my hands. I had to run out of the store before I had no choice but to buy it... or trade my car!


----------



## Diablo (Dec 20, 2007)

I was firmly in the Taylor camp, but when I looked at some smaller acoustics for my daughter, we both liked the sound of the mini Martin better than the equivalent Taylor.
So I guess, for me....it depends.


----------

