Looks like the new 500s missed out

[Frettingflyer]

I would not describe a different bracing pattern as a "better quality" guitar. Two thoughts here, Taylor revoiced the 800's, 900's and 600's, you may get your wish soon. Or, maybe they want to keep the older bracing patterns available for those who prefer them and they don't want 2 bracing patterns on every standard model due to manufacturing and marketing complexity?
If Taylor could please everyone we wouldn't have all those other guitars to choose from and the world would be less interesting. If you like the Martin, Maton, or any other guitar more, buy it and enjoy making music with it.
Of course, those folks at Taylor keep coming up with new ideas and maybe one of those quality guitars will speak to you and have advanced, advanced AP bracing😀

[wooglins]

It is curley mahogany but not the most figured set I have ever seen
  Stunning guitar.

Well if it IS in fact Mahogany, then my point stands - that Advanced Performance bracing CAN be used on Mahogany, but Taylor have chosen NOT to put it on the 500 series.  This business strategy of Taylor is very unfortunate for people who want the best "Quality" guitars they can.  Now it seems like if you want a better guitar, you have to go up in the series.  If you want an Abalone rosette, if you want Advanced Performance, if you want these features, you can't get a 500, you have to get a limited or a Rosewood guitar.

It is product differentiation in a lone of selections.  You have never been able to get abalone rosette as a standard, or cv bracing, or fancy fretboard inlays.

What you do get is a really nice mahogany guitar for quite abit less than the 6 series and up.  If you want some of those other things you can do a BTO or you can wait for a Ltd or special run from one of the larger dealers.  The "best" bracing and how little the side braces contribute is debatable.

[ntotoro]

I still don't get the notion that different bracing is somehow better, more expensive or whatever else just because it's a new technique. It can actually work detrimentally based on the body size and wood selection. CV bracing, for instance, can bring out more midrange in a rosewood body. Do you really want that in something already pretty mid-heavy?

My 000-18 has golden-era bracing. I really wouldn't call that new or innovative, but it really works well in that guitar.

Nick

[All Together]

It is product differentiation in a lone of selections.  You have never been able to get abalone rosette as a standard, or cv bracing, or fancy fretboard inlays.

What you do get is a really nice mahogany guitar for quite abit less than the 6 series and up.  If you want some of those other things you can do a BTO or you can wait for a Ltd or special run from one of the larger dealers.  The "best" bracing and how little the side braces contribute is debatable.

Nope, the 500s used to have Abalone rosettes and tortoise binding.

Secondly, you CAN'T do a BTO with Advanced Performance bracing.

And for all those going on about how the next level up bracing isn't necessarily better... How many people here have built BTOs with Standard II bracing instead of CV bracing?

[Strumming Fool]

[quote author=All Together

And for all those going on about how the next level up bracing isn't necessarily better... How many people here have built BTOs with Standard II bracing instead of CV bracing?
[/quote]

I did on my last one. I used CV on others, but I felt that this last BTO  would sound better with Standard II...and I was right!

[wooglins]

It is product differentiation in a lone of selections.  You have never been able to get abalone rosette as a standard, or cv bracing, or fancy fretboard inlays.

What you do get is a really nice mahogany guitar for quite abit less than the 6 series and up.  If you want some of those other things you can do a BTO or you can wait for a Ltd or special run from one of the larger dealers.  The "best" bracing and how little the side braces contribute is debatable.

Nope, the 500s used to have Abalone rosettes and tortoise binding.

Secondly, you CAN'T do a BTO with Advanced Performance bracing.

And for all those going on about how the next level up bracing isn't necessarily better... How many people here have built BTOs with Standard II bracing instead of CV bracing?

Your right quite along time ago you could get an Abalone rosette and tortoise plastic binding.  At that time all Taylor 5 series and up shared an abalone rosette.   Now you get a really nice grained ivoroid rosette that matches the fret markers with sound hole binding in tortoise.  This change matches the change that was made in the 7 series as well.  I believe Taylor is trying to move the 5 and 7 series to a more traditional look.  IMHO the nice asthetic touches far outweigh the loss of the simple abalone rosette.  Bound sound hold check, Grained Ivoroid inlay on top contrasting the tortoise check, fancy Ivoroid markers check.   Overall I think it looks more like a boutique guitar but I am a sucker for the the small details.

I understand what you are getting at, where is a premium mahogany model with all the bling.  There is not one, and there really has never been one.  What there is today is a really sweet hog 5 series with very nice appointments at a very good pricepoint. 

If you want abalone rosette you are looking at a 6,8, or 9 series guitar.  I believe the reason for this is two fold.  Price differentiation and also to drive players to sustainable woods that are offered on the 6, 7, and 8 series guitars. 

Taylor is doing something remarkable which is taking its lead position (and it is a very large lead) and making changes that the majority of their customer base accepts by moving customers to sustainable woods while upping the quantity of the fine detail items on each guitar which is more time consuming to produce.  Everything is a balancing act when you are producing such a gigantic number of guitars daily.  I am not at liberty to give that number but it is far more than their closest American made competitors.

I will say I did not like the 2016 dread, but perhaps it was a dud.  I have a feeling the shapes that are more traditional to Taylors line like the GA will be hits.

[tedtan]

And for all those going on about how the next level up bracing isn't necessarily better... How many people here have built BTOs with Standard II bracing instead of CV bracing?

One bracing pattern isn't better or worse than another as long as they both allow the top to vibrate and produce sound.

All the bracing does is effect the stiffness of the top in various locations, which in turn effects how the top is able to vibrate, which in turn effects the tone of the guitar. And since tone is very subjective (what one person likes will not necessarily be what the next person likes), which bracing pattern one will prefer on a given guitar is extremely subjective, too.

As for the CV vs. Standard II bracing, I've never ordered a BTO guitar so the question as asked doesn't really apply to me. However, to answer the question more generally, the CV bracing causes the top to produce a bit more midrange. With rosewood, which has a well defined low end and high end, but a scooped out midrange, adding some midrange is a good thing in my opinion. But for a wood like mahogany that already has plenty of midrange, the CV bracing may or may not work (depending on how you want the specific guitar to sound) as it may end up too midrangey for the player. Hopefully that helps illustrate the difference.

For what it's worth, I have a 2010 814ce with CV bracing. When I string it up with phospher bronze strings (which I've been doing since the first string change), it sounds almost the same as the new, redesigned 2014 and newer 814ce with the AP bracing. They're not identical, but they're pretty darn close - think of it as a subtle refinement rather than an improvement. So the marketing hype about new improved bracing patterns is just that - marketing hype.

It's still best to actually play a guitar you are interested in before buying so you'll know what you're actually buying (and if you like it or not) rather than just assuming that newer is better.

[All Together]

I did on my last one. I used CV on others, but I felt that this last BTO  would sound better with Standard II...and I was right!

You were right as in you had the equivalent guitar with the same woods but with CV bracing instead of Standard II to compare it to?

[All Together]

Your right quite along time ago you could get an Abalone rosette and tortoise plastic binding.  At that time all Taylor 5 series and up shared an abalone rosette.

I wasn't aware 2013 was considered "a long time ago"...  In fact, I don't think it changed until 2014.

I understand what you are getting at, where is a premium mahogany model with all the bling.  There is not one, and there really has never been one.  What there is today is a really sweet hog 5 series with very nice appointments at a very good pricepoint.

As stated above, they used to have the same appointments as the 700 series when the 700s had Abalone rosettes (but the 700s had Rosewood instead of tortoise binding).

If you want abalone rosette you are looking at a 6,8, or 9 series guitar.  I believe the reason for this is two fold.  Price differentiation and also to drive players to sustainable woods that are offered on the 6, 7, and 8 series guitars. 

Taylor is doing something remarkable which is taking its lead position (and it is a very large lead) and making changes that the majority of their customer base accepts by moving customers to sustainable woods while upping the quantity of the fine detail items on each guitar which is more time consuming to produce.  Everything is a balancing act when you are producing such a gigantic number of guitars daily.  I am not at liberty to give that number but it is far more than their closest American made competitors.

Doubt it's to do with driving players to sustainable woods...  If you want to drive players to sustainable woods, you do not make them more costly than unsustainable woods.  It's to do with marketing them as "exotic" woods with nicer appointments, kind of like how the Presentation Series with Cocobolo or Ebony have all that bling and you need all that bling to get such exotic woods.  It's marketing, not sustainability.  It's sustainability dressed up as marketing.  It's confirming people's biases that Mahogany is not as premium or high quality as Rosewood.

[Strumming Fool]

I did on my last one. I used CV on others, but I felt that this last BTO  would sound better with Standard II...and I was right!

You were right as in you had the equivalent guitar with the same woods but with CV bracing instead of Standard II to compare it to?

I have had enough examples of the various bracing patterns to make an educated guess as to what would work for me. Having an understanding of the  tonal properties of both cedar and spruce, I felt that CV bracing on cedar would make the guitar midrange-heavy. Older 714s with standard bracing have always appealed to me, so I simply replicated that model while using Adirondack spruce for that bracing. The result was spectacular to my ear and to  many others who have heard it. At the end of the day, it's about what you want to hear, and bracing is but one of the contributors to that sound.

[All Together]

I have had enough examples of the various bracing patterns to make an educated guess as to what would work for me. Having an understanding of the  tonal properties of both cedar and spruce, I felt that CV bracing on cedar would make the guitar midrange-heavy. Older 714s with standard bracing have always appealed to me, so I simply replicated that model while using Adirondack spruce for that bracing. The result was spectacular to my ear and to  many others who have heard it. At the end of the day, it's about what you want to hear, and bracing is but one of the contributors to that sound.

So you would advise people who prefer scooped mids to go for Standard II bracing rather than CV bracing. Interesting.

[Strumming Fool]

I have had enough examples of the various bracing patterns to make an educated guess as to what would work for me. Having an understanding of the  tonal properties of both cedar and spruce, I felt that CV bracing on cedar would make the guitar midrange-heavy. Older 714s with standard bracing have always appealed to me, so I simply replicated that model while using Adirondack spruce for that bracing. The result was spectacular to my ear and to  many others who have heard it. At the end of the day, it's about what you want to hear, and bracing is but one of the contributors to that sound.

So you would advise people who prefer scooped mids to go for Standard II bracing rather than CV bracing. Interesting.

I wish it were that simple. There are too many other infuencing factors to create such a hard and fast rule that fits everyone's personal taste. But I  guess you already knew that.

[steelerboy329]

I really like the look of the new 500 series.  Especially compared to last years model.  Only thing I don't like is the pickguard on the cedar tops.

[wooglins]

Doubt it's to do with driving players to sustainable woods...  If you want to drive players to sustainable woods, you do not make them more costly than unsustainable woods.  It's to do with marketing them as "exotic" woods with nicer appointments, kind of like how the Presentation Series with Cocobolo or Ebony have all that bling and you need all that bling to get such exotic woods.  It's marketing, not sustainability.  It's sustainability dressed up as marketing.  It's confirming people's biases that Mahogany is not as premium or high quality as Rosewood.
[/quote]

Lutz is used on the the new 500 series which is a sustainable spruce.  The 500 series is the second series to get a change that directly places a major component of the guitar in the sustainable range.  The 600 series has long used very sustainable maple but has changed the appearance and bracing to look and sound more like a cross between a rosewood and mahogany guitar.   If you read W&S regularly you will find articles that highlight Taylors slow march to the use of sustainable woods while maintaining the highest level possible of tradition.   This is the recipe that Taylor has that is unique compared to their competitors with artificial replacements for unsustainable materials.

[mkitman]

Not to threadjack, but I don't understand why, if you are ordering a "Custom built" guitar, can't (won't) they allow you to order (& pay for) ANYTHING that you want, as long as they offer it?  Isn't that a definition of "Custom"?