When they say "biggest," it truly better be
the biggest, otherwise, they risk making a fool of themselves, like so many other companies that claim "innovation" when it is little more than updates or changes.
IMHO:
1. The change
to the ES was big! All R&D done in house; truly a game changer. All the ES changes thereafter, including to ES2, are just "changes."
2. The NT system: revolutionized guitar making, period. Initially dismissed by the so-called big boys as a mere "bolt on" --ergo "cheap"-- build process, it has proven itself over time. Witness the innumerable
notable makers who have done similarly. Huge!
3. The brand R.Taylor: bold, sweeping, and well executed. That it did not survive beyond its ~6 year life speaks more of the market and its perceptions than the nature of these stellar guitars and mini company, itself.
All other "big" stuff Taylor has done is, IMHO, simply changes they make to keep themselves relevant and in the forefront. Amps, new models, changes to the product line are merely that: changes. The Bari, the GO, GSm, et.al. were additions, but hardly as revolutionary as the aforementioned. Necessary, but not monumental.
So yes, I think this "biggest" thing they are touting is more a "direction" than a "thing." Namely, Andy at the helm, in concert with a "thing" he's brought to the table, and Bob taking a wholly different role. Bob, himself, has alluded to such in recent years. So maybe it incorporates a bracing change, but not merely a bracing change. Afterall, that's just a "revoice" of a guitar. I'm waiting, but not with baited breath.
Edward