Martin Guitars

[mgap]

I wouldn't trade my D18 (crisp) nor my D28 (warm and powerful), but that Taylor 360 12 string (mellow) spoke to me from day 1.  I don't really understand guitar snobbery.  There is a lot I don't like about Gibson's CEO, and I've seen lots of inconsistency between identical models, so I'd avoid them, but some of them are keepers too.

I agree with the snobbery part.  I will never give up on Taylor, I love mine.  But, I Love my Martin M-36 also

[Soof]

it's all down to personal preference of the sound, isn't it?  It's the old Ford/Chevy debate that lives on in the guitar world.  Fortunatley, I have one of each and love them both equally.

[donlyn]

My Martin story.

Back in the sixties during the folk music boom, you almost couldn't find a folk artist without a Martin. Played a really nice Martin 12 string in a shop one day. Thought it over, decided to upgrade from the 12 I had, and went back the next day. It was gone before I could buy it. As the guy used to say on TV, missed it by that much. Never came close to getting a Martin since. For many years I was Gibson-centric, especially Les Paul models. But I was very, very picky about what I wanted in a 12. Fast forward quite a few years, and I happened to try a Taylor 355 12 string. Darn thing sang to me. Asked the salesman to hold it while I thought it over to make sure it wasn't just an impulse buy. After a cup of coffee and some BS with some friends, I went back about 2 hours later and bought it; I guess hesitating and losing that Martin 12 was still on my mind. Been Taylor-centric ever since and haven't looked back. Guess it wasn't in the cards for me to own a Martin. Oddly enough, played a nice Martin 12 string last year, but I'm not in the market for one now. Still happy with my Taylor 355.

Don

[Epic Audio]

I think the loyalty of players to Martin (est. 1833) or Gibson (est. 1902) is in large part due to the long and iconic history these brands have as well as their consistency (for the most part). There is a trust in these brands; I define trust as predictability (or consistency) over time. The mystique of a 'pre-war' guitar or one made with 'Brazillion Rosewood' (the old, real wood) or historic references such as appearances at Woodstock, or played by Bob Dylan or  as used by Eric Clapton on his MTV unplugged performance... don't exist in as great a quantity (if nothing else) yet for Taylor. I believe, over time, for better or worse, as future players know and care less about these historic players, references and events (as I have already had to explain 'pre-war' to younger players) there will be an evening out of stature between Taylor, Martin and Gibson as all three make great guitars and are being used by many contemporary artists. This will take time and evolve slowly. Perhaps a catalyst, such as a new great Taylor playing singer/songwriter breaking on the scene giving performances received like the Beatles or Elvis (Presley not Costello), will expedite this change. For what it's worth I believe all 3 of these companies make very fine instruments. Each brand's guitars tend to have unique characteristics. Some players may gravitate toward one brand or the other while other players will use different brands to achieve the sound and feel they are looking for at a particular time or for a particular song. The only thing one can gather from this post is that I am old. In fact I am older than my age as I was born old... but not quite 'pre-war' (WWII for those that need it explained).

[StrummingMadMan]

My dad was the typical “Martin Guy.” He didn’t speak poorly of other brands, but he also never played any. I grew up playing them and still have a few that were my fathers. I can’t argue that Martin makes beautiful instruments that sound great, but it’s Taylor all the way for me. My 614ce for example, feels like it was custom made just me more so than guitars I’ve actually had custom made.

[mgap]

I feel the same way about Taylors.  I have owned several Martins and I think the M-36 is still my favorite(from the Martin's I have owned) but it is just not my first pick from my small herd. 

[mindhorn]

Having had a very nice playing low end USA Martin DCX1E for years. I can say that a low end Taylor is easily comparable with it's own unique sound, once the guitar has opened up a bit. Trebles are much more pristine. Both have their faults that improve higher up the price range. But at the lower end it's even stevens.

[ClassicRock]

Coming from a Martin-Centric perspective, I have to agree with Kurt Listug’s characterization of the two companies as a legacy company and an innovation company. This is deeply embedded within each company’s culture. It is apparent in how the companies are run and in their respective products.

Here’s a couple of 2018 examples. Taylor sees innovation as a revolutionary overhaul of the guitar’s bracing, in a somewhat risky attempt to make a guitar work better than it ever has. Martin sees innovation as attempting to replicate what they built in the 1930’s. Think about this. It is a profound difference. Taylor sees founder succession as a search for the most passionate, knowledgeable, creative and experienced luthier, player historian he can find—Andy Powers—which allows BT to move on to investing in sustainable reforestation. Martin sees succession as finding the next person with the right initials regardless of background, experience or desire for the job. I am a retired businessman and view these companies through the lens of my business experience. I can tell you with a high level of confidence that Taylor is poised for great success, Martin for stagnation, perhaps even decline unless they find leadership with many of the qualities that Taylor possesses.

So, I have my Martins. I doubt that I will buy another. As you know, I did just buy a K24ce V-Class which I’m enjoying very much. It has really been a pleasant experience to have a full month with this V-Class to really acclimate to what it can do. I have gained so much admiration for Taylor as a result, much more than is possible with a tryout at a guitar store. I’m a believer and I will continue to vote for Taylor with my dollars.

[Christhee68]

I've got a couple of stories to share on this topic:

I was at the Martin factory in Nazareth a couple of years ago for a tour. Our tour passed by the "sound lab" where they test various instruments and I noticed several Taylors there. I asked the tour guide about it, and he said, "You can be they're doing that to ours, too."

I also have a couple of Martins that I really love--my grandpa's HD-28 and my new D-18. I love the D-18. It sounds great and plays great. I used it for all my gigs last summer. This year, though the binding started to come loose. It's a warranty repair, but I haven't taken the time to get it fixed yet. The end result is that my D-18 has been in it's case all summer while I've been playing my 314ce at all my gigs. The Taylor just seems "sturdier" if you know what I mean. It plays great and sound good, too. Not as good as the D-18, but still I like it a lot.

Oh, one more Taylor/Martin story. I was at a gig a while back and was playing my 314ce. When I finished, a guy came up and said, "Taylor huh? You should get a real guitar; you need a Martin!"

I replied, "Martins are great--I've got two of them. What do you play?"

He kind of hemmed and hawed and said, "Well...right now I've got a Peavey, but my next guitar is going to be a Martin."

[Stringband Eric]

Have owned many guitars over the years. Martins, Taylors, Gibson, etc. Like all of them. Martin has a sound. Nothing wrong with it. Have played a few recently that caused some GAS symptoms, but the price tag stopped me.

My last one was a D Jr. Fine guitar. But once I got the GS Mini, didn't need 2 travel guitars. So the Martin went away. 

A couple of other stories - I now find that Martin is to the point where I don't worry if I sell a modern one, I won't be able to find another one with the sound I like. They have reached a level of consistency that Taylor has had for years. Yes, there are still differences between instruments, but not what it once was with Martin.

In a different vein - at the Aura Jamboree (in Aura, MI of all places) there were a lot more Taylor guitars than Martin. That actually surprised me. Figured with all the tradition of the music, that Martin would win out.

[misterlutherman]

I agree 100%, but I am amazed by the people who belittle my Taylor's. Why?    I say, play what works for you and let others do the same.  We can all be happy with our choices. 
[/quote]

What is it that appeals to you about Taylor guitars? I'm new to this forum, and am interested in being aware of why people like Taylor guitars.

[Earl]

What is it that appeals to you about Taylor guitars? I'm new to this forum, and am interested in being aware of why people like Taylor guitars.

Very playable neck profiles, excellent intonation, the NT neck that makes a neck reset a trivial matter versus a dovetail joint, and a more modern sound that is generally described as being more balanced tonally, instead of the bass-heavy Martin sound.  It is hard to describe tone in words, but it kinda comes down to clarity against boominess, or tubby sounding if you were being uncharitable toward Martin.

I was originally a Martin player, having come from a Virginia family where blue met grass.  For bluegrass the ONLY socially acceptable guitar was a Martin D-28.  At one point I was up to four of them, and enjoyed their tone.  But the silky playability of my 414ce lured me away.  Then about age 48-50 the Martin neck profile and nut width started being painful for my fretting hand.  These days the Martin's are all gone, and the only wood guitars remaining are Taylor.  Sometimes I miss that classic Martin tone (a little) but being able to play for more than 20 minutes at a time more than makes up for it.  And I really DO like the tone of my Taylor's now that I've grown accustomed to them.

[DenverSteve]

... Taylor sees innovation as a revolutionary overhaul of the guitar’s bracing, in a somewhat risky attempt to make a guitar work better than it ever has. Martin sees innovation as attempting to replicate what they built in the 1930’s.....

Interestingly, when Martin was in their first 35 years they were making guitars for other sellers. They were designing new body shapes and styles.  Changing string types and manufacturing...... Today they continue to innovate with new woods, shapes, laminates.....  I play both brands and find nothing stagnate about either one.  Maybe when Taylor decides which bracing makes their guitar’s sound just the way they want them to, they will come up with a formula that makes people nostalgic about the “golden years” 80-100 years before. 

[ClassicRock]

Oh, Taylor has decided on bracing in a big way. There can be no doubt about that. Don’t get me wrong, I like Martin guitars and in fact, my second high end custom this year is due in any day now. But when it comes to innovation, Taylor is running circles around Martin. Quite simply, Taylor’s management team is head and shoulders above Martins due to many retirements such as Dick Boak. Nazareth needs new leadership in my not-so-humble opinion. They are falling behind catering to well-to-do Boomers who want 1930’s style guitars and can afford to buy 5-10 of them. But, this too shall pass.

Many Martin owners do look down their noses at Taylor and won’t even try them. Is there any doubt Taylor is making high quality, good sounding guitars?  I like to think about guitars as food for the soul. I think both lobster and filet mignon are excellent and I enjoy both. I don’t try to debate which is best. Why deny myself the pleasure of enjoying all the guitar industry has to offer? The Martin-Only guys are only hurting themselves when they cut themselves off from the excellence of other makers.

[Marco Polo]

...I don’t try to debate which is best. Why deny myself the pleasure of enjoying all the guitar industry has to offer?...

Well stated!