I agree that any single builder's style is not for everyone, and hope I didn't give the opposite impression. Sometimes I feel as if I would have to write a book length post to clearly cover everything I touch on well enough to be clear. But, then, I see that as being a more common problem than with just me. You can really see it in the "Open Mic" section of AGF.
What I am saying is that being a guitar player himself, Andy Powers has first-hand knowledge and sense of what a player's guitar will be. For me personally, I find these Taylors to be much easier to play than most any other acoustic I have played, and this seems to be consistent across all the (especially most recent) Taylors I have played. Even those who choose other guitars over Taylor will say that one thing they like about Taylors is how easy they are on the hands.
Everybody has different priorities when choosing a guitar. For many, according to what I have read over at AGF, sound is paramount. I am sure I could find other makers whose guitars might sound better to my ears than a Taylor, though I am *NOT* saying there is anything wrong with the Taylor sound - I like it a lot. However, I think I would be hard pressed to find a guitar that is as easy on the hands right out of the box as a Taylor. For me, especially as I get older, this is a very important thing, and is quickly becoming my highest priority. Another aspect of Taylor guitars that works in concert with the fretboard/neck shaping is the body shape. With the GA body shape, we don't have to compromise sound with a smaller body size, and yet that body is quite comfortable to hold and play.
These are guitars that are produced in relatively large numbers (compared to small shop boutique instruments), yet they have aspects one might normally expect in a guitar custom built for a specific owner. I have owned enough of these over the years (Collings, SCGC, etc), so I am basing my statements on my own experience and observations. I really believe (and could well be very wrong...) that Andy Powers, as a player, understands this, though I realize he didn't define the standard Taylor body sizes and shapes. He has done a lot to maximize what was already there when he started with Taylor, and made "good" even "better".
As a bit of background, I am a late comer to the Taylor line of guitars. I have long been aware of them, but seemed to end up with some typically more expensive small shop brands. I did own a 1997 Taylor 912c a few months ago, but did not bond with it. I decided to try some of the new Andy Powers era Taylors, despite reading often enough that the mid 90s were supposed to be Taylor's "golden years". I guess I didn't find those Taylors particularly compelling for me personally, either that 912c or others I had tried from time to time. However, the new crop of Taylors are (to me) extremely high quality and much improved even in terms of the playability that Taylor is known for. Clearly, many here who have been Taylor owners for some time will know much about Taylor as a company and the guitars themselves than I do. So it may well be that what is a revelation to me is common knowledge to everybody else here.
Obviously, as with any guitar one size does not fit all, and there are those who would choose the older Taylors over the new models. So I suppose I can say that Taylor is now building the kind of instrument that I would purchase, and therefore have purchased. Maybe it is just that if Andy Taylor was a run-of-the-mill guitar consumer like me, we would likely choose very similar guitars, because what he seems to think a guitar should be, more closely matches what I think a guitar should be than anything I have played in recent history. I like the way he plays, and he seems to do similar things fingerstyle that I do, so if a Taylor is a good fit for him, it likely would be for me too.
Tony
