New 900 Series

[timfitz63]

Here's the latest update...I just found out that you can no longer order a 914 with the old specs...I think I'm going to go Bourgeois shopping....

There's still a few NOS 914's out there:  this one at Empire Music is a Limited in Cocobolo; this one at Willcutt Guitar Shoppe has a Honey Sunburst top.

[Strumming Fool]

Thanks Tim, but as you probably have guessed, I abhor cutaways, and I would have gone with a cedar top...not a big Sitka Rosewood fan. But again, thanks anyway.

[Strumming Fool]

Okay, I tried to go the non-Taylor route, but I just can't! Perhaps I've judged the new 900s too hastily. I'm going to go test drive as many 814s as I can to ensure that this is the sound I want. I'll then wait for the non-cutaway 914, while getting a closer look at the new 914ce when officially introduced. Of course, this could all change if the right set of cocobolo comes along... more to follow.

[GoManGo]

Strumming Fool, when you were out test driving Bourgeois Guitars... did you get a chance to play a new Aged Tone OM? Similar in size to Taylor's Grand Auditorium. Real tough to put one of those babies down.

I'm looking forward to playing a new 610 with a torrefied top whenever Taylor releases that bodystyle. Hope it's soon.

[Strumming Fool]

Yes I did - I played several OMs, of which one was an aged tone model. While it sounded different than the others, I didn't feel that it sounded better - just different.  Of all the OMs I played, the best-sounding was a standard vintage OM with Adi top (not aged) and Macassar back and sides. That was a guitar to remember, but I still like my Taylor GAs more!

[timfitz63]

Thanks Tim, but as you probably have guessed, I abhor cutaways, and I would have gone with a cedar top...not a big Sitka Rosewood fan. But again, thanks anyway.

No worries.  Well, if I stumble across a 914/914e with a cedar top, I'll point you at it.

[Evan]

I love an armrest for ergonomics, but when Andy talks about the tonal advantages, it really stretches my credulity.

Are there really any demonstrable tonal benefits to an armrest?

[Joltin' Joe]

Overall, I like the look of the new 900 series. I like the idea of an armrest and I suppose it's also good to have something other than adornments to differentiate it from the 800 series. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the abalone/ebony bridge pins; correct me if I'm wrong, but it used to be only the 300 and 400 series that had ebony.

[JosephKim]

The older 900 series with Cindy inlay was probably my least favorite aesthetically speaking. I always thought they looked so tacky with the Cindy bling. Like the looks of the newer model and sounds good!

[GoManGo]

I'm surprised and disappointed that the new 900 Series doesn't come with, or at least have as an up-charge option, their new Torrefied soundboard top. The new tops were highly touted at Winter NAMM and are standard on the new 600 series. Maybe it's a cost consideration? Maybe its done this way to pump up sales of the 600 series?

From my experience, the Aged Tone, Thermo-Cured or Torrefied tops that I've played on other builder's guitars works extremely well with Indian Rosewood back and sides when played side by side with non-torrefied topped models so I doubt if it was a detriment to the tone. I would think the new Taylor 900 Series would include or at least offer as an option all of Taylor's latest and greatest tonal innovations.

[Willhubbs]

The tonal advantage of the armrest is subtle for sure, it has more to do with the fact the players arm won't be resting on the top of the guitar, in theory preventing some dampening. Really it's that a more comfortable guitar will result in a better experience for the player.

[Nicky Midss]

Really disappointing

[Strumming Fool]

Overall, I like the look of the new 900 series. I like the idea of an armrest and I suppose it's also good to have something other than adornments to differentiate it from the 800 series. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the abalone/ebony bridge pins; correct me if I'm wrong, but it used to be only the 300 and 400 series that had ebony.

No abalone ebony bridge pins (which could be remedied with an after market upgrade), no bound sound hole, no bridge inlay like the old 900s...it just doesn't look as rich and elegant...it's almost as if the 800s and the 900s are on a more equal footing now. Why not just get an 800 and save some bucks? After all, they now will have the same tone woods, bracing and finish - the differentiators are no longer as clear cut... oh, and I'll miss the red pinstripe around the rosewood binding too...

[timfitz63]

Overall, I like the look of the new 900 series. I like the idea of an armrest and I suppose it's also good to have something other than adornments to differentiate it from the 800 series. I'm a little surprised they didn't go with the abalone/ebony bridge pins; correct me if I'm wrong, but it used to be only the 300 and 400 series that had ebony.

No abalone ebony bridge pins (which could be remedied with an after market upgrade), no bound sound hole, no bridge inlay like the old 900s...it just doesn't look as rich and elegant...it's almost as if the 800s and the 900s are on a more equal footing now. Why not just get an 800 and save some bucks? After all, they now will have the same tone woods, bracing and finish - the differentiators are no longer as clear cut... oh, and I'll miss the red pinstripe around the rosewood binding too...

I tend to agree:  If it wasn't for the armrest/bevel, the New 900 would be practically indistinguishable from the New 800.  Like some, I've never been a big fan of the excessive 'tinsel' on some of Taylor's guitar lines (the Presentation Series leaps to mind), but the outgoing 900 Series had a distinct visual presentation that instantly separated it from the 700 and 800 Series (although I'll admit I've always been a bit baffled by the Cindy fretboard inlay, which has always seemed a bit, well, haphazard to me...).

It's also a bit hard to understand why Taylor left off a number of the aesthetic touches that appear on lower-cost series, like a bound sound hole and the abalone bridge pins.

[Edward]

Totally agree with tim and SF on the dearth of aesthetic appointments on the new 900s.

To me, the 900s were not the "look at me" Presentation guitars; they had aesthetic cues that made them distinct and beautiful while not being ostentations.  Based on aesthetic features alone, I cannot for the life of me think of any reason to choose a new 900 over any of the other series guitars.

Oh, and the Powers comment on tone...c'mon!  I've had a lot of respect for what he brings to the table.  But personally --and somewhat OT-- his past comments on the revoiced 600 maples sound more like marketing spin to me, which is something I've not ever felt about the marque ever.  And "tone" from the bevel?  Sorry, but that is simply some serious stretching, bordering on ad-copy language that detracts from a company that has enjoyed serious street cred in the last decade plus.  Sorry for my meandering comments, but such verbiage is more befitting lesser companies that have to sell hard; that comment, from Powers/factory, saddens me.

Edward