Unofficial Taylor Guitar Forum - UTGF
Taylor Acoustic & Electric Guitars => Taylor Acoustic & Electric Guitars => Topic started by: Shannon McGlathery on January 25, 2012, 06:40:28 PM
-
Hey folks,
My name's Shannon and I led the redesign of Taylor's new website.
You guys are some of our biggest fans so we'd like to know what you think of the new site:
- What do you like?
- What could be improved?
- Anything missing?
- Ideas for new features?
- General questions about the site?
To frame this up, the site we launched is just the first phase in what will be an ongoing evolution. We will continue to add content and features.
Please try to be constructive with any critiques.
The floor is now open for questions… :)
-
Shannon -- first off, job well done! I'm a designer myself so I'm well aware of what kind of undertaking something like that is.
As such, I do have some opinions. Take them with as much salt as you'd like. :)
I like that the format is going to give a more consistent experience across different platforms. It's obvious tablet and mobile use was taken into account with the new direction, and I think that's very smart.
In terms of improvement, there are a few things that are a little awkward to me. First is the navigation. It's kind of odd that it's in the middle of the home page and then goes to the top everywhere else. I feel like it should be consistent throughout. Secondly, the hierarchy seems a little awkward once you start going down the page -- lots of competing visual elements that make things hard to digest once you get past "the fold".
I don't love all the textures and the chunky typography, but that's more subjective than the other concerns above. I will say that it looks more like a Fender website now, which isn't necessarily a bad thing per se, but it's not an aesthetic I would generally expect from Taylor, if that makes sense.
All that being said, I'll get used to the new site and I'll look forward to the evolution and additions. And seriously -- job well done overall!
-
A Great BIG welcome to you Shannon! Having you AND Brian here is definitely an honor and a privilege.
I do like the website...it'll take a little time to get used to it. I will say that I love all the pictures...but at times it seems to visually over-whelming. My eyes dart all over the place...so much to take in.
All that being said, I'd rather have too much than not enough. I really DO like how all the models are grouped into sub-categories...either by body shape, woods, series or category...that part is slick! 8)
-
Thanks Shannon for providing us a venue to comment. I like the look of the website - bold, bright with great photos. However, I become easily lost in looking for specific details about a particular model, or knowing where to find things like the price list, BTO options, etc. Perhaps a site map or navigation instructions would be helpful. These are just initial comments, and in all fairness, I have to use the site a bit more to make a final judgement.
Welcome to our forum, and please stick around!
-
This makes me happy as I have been looking at the site having really only one issue and now I get to tell someone about it.
I think when you select a series (like GA) for example, the guitars should go in order-114, 214,314, etc. when you pull it up now it jumps all over the place. Some flow with the series numbers would be really nice and make it easier for non Taylor owners to find their way.
I hope that makes sense.
-
In terms of improvement, there are a few things that are a little awkward to me. First is the navigation. It's kind of odd that it's in the middle of the home page and then goes to the top everywhere else.
Overall I think the site is a nice aesthetic improvement over the previous version. I agree with ataylor regarding the navigation. I think it'd be better to stick it at the top and leave it there. Right now when I load the page the nav bar shows up at the bottom of the viewing area. To actually interact with it I'm forced to scroll way down because the drop down menus disappear off the screen otherwise.
If you click on the thumbnails below, I don't like the first one which is what how it loads by default, I prefer the latter which is how it appears elsewhere or when scrolling down the page a bit.
(http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/3797/58973234.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/58973234.png/)(http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/5769/afterz.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/696/afterz.png/)
If the nav bar menus were to pop-up on lieu of dropping down on the index page that'd be one way to fix that in lieu of moving it to the top if that's not the desired location on the home page.
-
I also prefer the navigation at the top of the page. I visited a few times before I got the whole layout on the main page. Overall, I really like the new website, and I'm looking forward to the new Taylor store, as well. All in all, I like it now that I've gotten use to it. Great work!
-
First off, thanks for asking......I'm sure we all appreciate the offer to take suggestions.
I too have been building commercial sites for the last 15 years (can it be that long?) and I'd have to agree with the others that the navigation could really use some help. There seems to be no consistancy. Sometimes the navigation is on the top, sometimes it's imbedded in the graphics, sometimes in drop down submenues, etc. Truth be told, by the time I get it all figured out I've forgotton where I wanted to go and why. I'd hazard a guess that the database navigation that is underlaying this site is fighting with the graphical navigation. Could be wrong.
Anyway, hope this is taken as constructive as that is the way it is meant.
And, sincerely, thanks for asking....
Gary
-
It's GREAT to have see Taylor looking for direct feedback from their customers/fans. Thanks so much for the opportunity! Some of my comments below were included in a different thread, and some are new:
- What do you like?
1) I really like how all different specs on the guitars are intertwined. No matter what spec is listed, ALL the corresponding models that include that spec are listed, then from any of the listed guitars, any new spec can be selected to redefine the list.
2) I also like how the shape and wood info is now integrated into the guitar section and not in the separate resource section.
- What could be improved?
1) It seems to be better suited to a larger screen. I had to zoom it out a bit when viewing. The main page doesn't even fit on my laptop screen (1366x768 pixels). The menu is cut off at the bottom of the screen.
- Anything missing?
1) I wish string spacing info was included in the guitar specs (spacing @ nut, spacing @ saddle). I had a 314ce for a short while and now have a 714ce. The nut width is the same, but the string spacing is different. I think this is good info to have readily available, and it seems to be a frequently asked general question.
2) On a related note... I wish there was more information on the various neck profiles. There's plenty of info on the NT neck, but no info on the various neck styles. Standard vs Slim vs T5 vs other neck profiles. What are the differences, on what guits are they offered?, etc.
- Ideas for new features?
1) It would be cool if you could select more than one spec to be used to build the list of results (for instance if I wanted to see all rosewood bodied, GS guits, etc).
2) I wish, when displaying the lists of results, they could have a selectable format (like small icons). This could allow many more guitars to be displayed on a single screen. There would be less pages to of results to click through.
3) Some sort of compare feature would be nice.... like a little check boxes that can be selected and a main "compare" button someplace. This would allow direct comparison of a couple models.
Overall, I think the new website is a nice improvement. I think it would have make sifting though all the various series and models much easier a few months ago when I purchased my guitar.
Thanks again!! ;D
-
Can I add one more suggestion? ;D
I'd love a virtual guitar maker...not sure what you'd call it but where you could plug in your specs like your typical BTO and it would show you what it would look like instantly.
-
Can add one more suggestion? ;D
I'd love a virtual guitar maker...not sure what you'd call it but where you could plug in your specs like your typical BTO and it would show you what it would look like instantly.
+1. This is a great idea.
-
A virtual guitar maker would be super cool!
You guys do such a great job with everything-- always appreciate and am impressed by every facet of your work! Thank you!
-
Hello Shannon. I am unable to find the tech sheet PDF's that were available on the old site. I have 11 of them including Taming the beast, breakage and buzzing, adjusting action, understanding ES, steel restringing, and bunch more related to moisture. Are they on there somewhere? It should be under "SUPPORT" or "Owner Resources". I bring it up also because one of those original PDF's would never completely load for me, there was an error in the file. It was "Adjusting the truss rod" and I could only read the first page and could never save it. I would love to finally get it. Thanks.
-
Hello again Shannon I just found some short articles under the Home tab and then Support instead of the Support tab on the top banner. They are not the same as the original Tech sheets which had much more detail. They were great.
-
Hi, Shannon.
There already is a quite long and interesting thread here about the Taylor website with loads of constructive suggestions, including my own. It's here, although I would be surprised if you had not seen it:
http://www.unofficialtaylorguitarforum.com/index.php?topic=866.msg6645#msg6645
One of the biggest things that I think needs attention is the vertical page layout. I am not used to seeing many high quality commercial sites that require a lot of scrolling to find content.
-
Hi Shannon, I just want to second the suggestion of a site map.
I know lots of people like the graphics and elaborate designs but I just want to find what I'm looking for and not have to wait for a lot of pictures and content to load.
Thanks for joining us here!
-
One of the things I always thought would be helpful is a feature that allows us to compare various models. On every model description, I'd have a check box on the page, next to the words Compare a Model. The user simply ticks the box of each model he or she is interested in, then clicks on the Compare a Model link, which will bring up a matrix of all the models checked and a short description of each. I've seen this work very effectively on other sites, like printers and cameras. It's an extremely useful feature.
-
I will 2nd (3rd), the comments on navigation being more difficult on the new site.
Also the previous limited model information is not accessible at this point (only fall 11).
It could be nice to have dynamic results showing recently viewed guitars (similar to popular, but based on what you have looked at) as I often am looking at the same 3-5 models, but each time I go to the site, I have to walk through many levels to get to the ones I want to see.
-
I've found it difficult to navigate when I'm trying to find a particular model acoustic guitar (formerly GA3 and the other acoustic only models). I clicked on Acoustic Guitars, but that brought up Acoustic-Electrics. There was a 316ce which said 300 series underneath it, but that just brought up all the cutaway electrics. I preferred the old web site's way of narrowing down the search results. This was my 3rd time trying to navigate the site, and I still didn't locate the Acoustic only models. And I've received the message that IE cannot display the web page numerous times while trying to get there which is frustrating. :( Honestly, I've now given up. If anyone wishes to help me, please list the directions on how to get there from Taylor's home page rather than to post the link. That's the only way I'll learn. Thank you.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor300series.jpg)
-
Hello Shannon
Id like to echo what everyone has said RE: A BTO "Guitar Building" page. How nice it would be to see how a certain binding/rosette/etc combination would look.
Most importantly thanks for asking. Seems inline with Taylors cust service mantra.
-
I've found it difficult to navigate when I'm trying to find a particular model acoustic guitar (formerly GA3 and the other acoustic only models). I clicked on Acoustic Guitars, but that brought up Acoustic-Electrics. There was a 316ce which said 300 series underneath it, but that just brought up all the cutaway electrics. I preferred the old web site's way of narrowing down the search results. This was my 3rd time trying to navigate the site, and I still didn't locate the Acoustic only models. And I've received the message that IE cannot display the web page numerous times while trying to get there which is frustrating. :( Honestly, I've now given up. If anyone wishes to help me, please list the directions on how to get there from Taylor's home page rather than to post the link. That's the only way I'll learn. Thank you.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor300series.jpg)
Cindy, I've had exactly the same experience, including the broken "acoustic" links. Last night the acoustic link loaded "nothing".
-
This topic will be made into a "sticky" topic. ;)
-
A simple Welcome to Shannon, and huge Thanks to the factory for asking! Like so many things "Taylor," they not only "do" but do so with an eye toward excellence.
Now on to the web suggestions, of which I have none 'cause you are all better at it! Proceed! :)
Edward
-
Hey Shannon, welcome and thank you! It looks like you've condensed your artist roster page. As someone who used to see his name on the "artists who play" section, I selfishly would love to see it added back on :)
-
and one more thought. i've done the BTO route twice now, and i think it'd would be great to really be able to see all the options in visual form, especially things you don't always think about like purfling, rosettes, etc ... hard to know what everything will look like. maybe something similar to the electric gtr configure page. thx.
-
and one more thought. i've done the BTO route twice now, and i think it'd would be great to really be able to see all the options in visual form, especially things you don't always think about like purfling, rosettes, etc ... hard to know what everything will look like. maybe something similar to the electric gtr configure page. thx.
What a way for Taylor to fuel G.A.S.
-
Great stuff everyone! :)
We love to hear how people are using and thinking about the site.
I'll try to answer a few questions now.
Keep the feedback coming.
Cheers,
Shannon
-
Hi, Shannon.
There already is a quite long and interesting thread here about the Taylor website with loads of constructive suggestions, including my own. It's here, although I would be surprised if you had not seen it:
http://www.unofficialtaylorguitarforum.com/index.php?topic=866.msg6645#msg6645
Thanks, I'll take a look.
-
1) It seems to be better suited to a larger screen. I had to zoom it out a bit when viewing. The main page doesn't even fit on my laptop screen (1366x768 pixels). The menu is cut off at the bottom of the screen.
We did design the site for larger screens (1280 x XXX) but it should look okay on (1024 x 960) as well. We are working to make sure it looks okay on an iPads and tablets.
1) It would be cool if you could select more than one spec to be used to build the list of results (for instance if I wanted to see all rosewood bodied, GS guits, etc).
The reason you can only choose 1 filter (Shape, Wood, Series or Category) at a time is that it ensures there will always be at least one guitar in the results. If we allowed 2 filters (for example, a shape AND a wood) it would often return no results which is very frustrating to users. So we did the next best thing which is a sort of the results.
1) I wish string spacing info was included in the guitar specs (spacing @ nut, spacing @ saddle). I had a 314ce for a short while and now have a 714ce. The nut width is the same, but the string spacing is different. I think this is good info to have readily available, and it seems to be a frequently asked general question.
We will be adding more specs.
2) On a related note... I wish there was more information on the various neck profiles. There's plenty of info on the NT neck, but no info on the various neck styles. Standard vs Slim vs T5 vs other neck profiles. What are the differences, on what guits are they offered?, etc.
Interesting suggestion. I'll talk to our editor.
3) Some sort of compare feature would be nice.... like a little check boxes that can be selected and a main "compare" button someplace. This would allow direct comparison of a couple models.
This is on our wishlist as well. :)
2) I wish, when displaying the lists of results, they could have a selectable format (like small icons). This could allow many more guitars to be displayed on a single screen. There would be less pages to of results to click through.
Would allowing you to select the number of guitars to show per page work? For example a dropdown with 9,12,15,18,21 options?
-
Hi Shannon, I just want to second the suggestion of a site map.
I know lots of people like the graphics and elaborate designs but I just want to find what I'm looking for and not have to wait for a lot of pictures and content to load.
Thanks for joining us here!
The problem with site maps on a site like Taylor's where we are constantly adding content is that they easily get out of sync with the site. They are very hard to maintain manually and the site is too complex to automate a sitemap.
A better solution is to make sure every major destination is available in the dropdowns from the main nav. Have you taken a close look at the dropdowns yet?
For our powerusers looking for specific models we also added an "All Guitars" page. It's in the GUITARS dropdown on the main nav. But here's the link for easy reference: http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all
Thanks!
-
Thanks for taking interest in our input!
One thing I found confusing is that it took me more clicks to get to, for example, the 12-fret guitars page than on the old site.
Now, you hover over Guitars, then carefully slide over to "All guitars" (if you're not careful the menu collapses) and click on that, then instead of that going right to the 2 12-fret choices it just goes to a page that lists the 12-fret, the 12-string, the baritones, etc. Then you click on 12-fret and then it finally shows you the two choices.
Just seemed more 'busy' than before. More flash, less substance. At least, that's my first impression.
But, I don't want to complain too much, the site did need an update and I'm glad it's a work in progress, thanks!
:)
-Kris
-
I really miss access to past issues of W&S. There is more info there than 1 brain can hold.
-
I really miss access to past issues of W&S. There is more info there than 1 brain can hold.
Adding back issues of W&S is on our to do list. :)
-
Hello again Shannon I just found some short articles under the Home tab and then Support instead of the Support tab on the top banner. They are not the same as the original Tech sheets which had much more detail. They were great.
We will be continuing to add old and new content to the support section including tech sheets that are not out of date.
-
In terms of improvement, there are a few things that are a little awkward to me. First is the navigation. It's kind of odd that it's in the middle of the home page and then goes to the top everywhere else.
Overall I think the site is a nice aesthetic improvement over the previous version. I agree with ataylor regarding the navigation. I think it'd be better to stick it at the top and leave it there. Right now when I load the page the nav bar shows up at the bottom of the viewing area. To actually interact with it I'm forced to scroll way down because the drop down menus disappear off the screen otherwise.
If you click on the thumbnails below, I don't like the first one which is what how it loads by default, I prefer the latter which is how it appears elsewhere or when scrolling down the page a bit.
(http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/3797/58973234.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/543/58973234.png/)(http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/5769/afterz.th.png) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/696/afterz.png/)
If the nav bar menus were to pop-up on lieu of dropping down on the index page that'd be one way to fix that in lieu of moving it to the top if that's not the desired location on the home page.
Good point. We are aware of this usability issue and have a couple solutions in mind. But it's too early to say for sure how we'll fix it.
-
Can add one more suggestion? ;D
I'd love a virtual guitar maker...not sure what you'd call it but where you could plug in your specs like your typical BTO and it would show you what it would look like instantly.
+1. This is a great idea.
We would love to do this. In fact we did it for the SolidBody: http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/electric/solidbody/configurator :)
The problem with doing these virtual builders is the sheer number of options. You wind up having to photograph and/or photoshop every combo of every option. You can see how that quickly becomes a massive undertaking. Then you have to maintain it and account for changes.
I'm not saying we'll never do it. It's a great idea. Just don't hold your breath. :)
-
Thanks for seeking feedback. This is very much appreciated. Follow this path:
Home > Guitars > Acoustic Guitars > By Series > 500 Series > can't find 512 ????
I found the 512ce by using the Search function on the website. I followed the path above because it was the only intuitive thing for me, not being real familiar with the website.
Graphics are great. Don't much like the automatic magnifying glass effect, though. It's kinda distracting when you don't want it, but it does work nicely and the photo resolutions are fine.
-
- What could be improved?
1) It seems to be better suited to a larger screen. I had to zoom it out a bit when viewing. The main page doesn't even fit on my laptop screen (1366x768 pixels). The menu is cut off at the bottom of the screen.
- Anything missing?
1) I wish string spacing info was included in the guitar specs (spacing @ nut, spacing @ saddle). I had a 314ce for a short while and now have a 714ce. The nut width is the same, but the string spacing is different. I think this is good info to have readily available, and it seems to be a frequently asked general question.
that is odd as the 300 series and up have always had the same nut and string spacing since at least 2000. And I have played way to many Taylors since 2000 to say and never felt any difference either in ther neck feel of the 300s and up.
-
- What could be improved?
1) It seems to be better suited to a larger screen. I had to zoom it out a bit when viewing. The main page doesn't even fit on my laptop screen (1366x768 pixels). The menu is cut off at the bottom of the screen.
- Anything missing?
1) I wish string spacing info was included in the guitar specs (spacing @ nut, spacing @ saddle). I had a 314ce for a short while and now have a 714ce. The nut width is the same, but the string spacing is different. I think this is good info to have readily available, and it seems to be a frequently asked general question.
that is odd as the 300 series and up have always had the same nut and string spacing since at least 2000. And I have played way to many Taylors since 2000 to say and never felt any difference either in ther neck feel of the 300s and up.
once the NT was completely phased in, the standard nut width on the DN & JM went from 1 11/16" to 1 3/4" (2001) -
i can't recall seeing string spacing specs listed, but i think on some acoustic guitar video reviews in the past have
mentioned the string spacing on the 25.5" scale neck with 1 3/4" nut as being 2 3/16" at the saddle (specs at 0:25)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkMPOaP4yro (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkMPOaP4yro)
i had a 02 514ce that had the neck replaced due to transit damage & it had slightly different profile (feel) than an 814ce,
made the same year, with the same scale, nut width, string spacing at the saddle & with both necks having 'standard carves' ???
-
Another thing I'd like to see is the return of the wallpapers. I can find a hint about a January wallpaper on Google, but I can't seem to find it on the Taylor Guitars site. I *love* having Taylor guitars on my workspaces at home. In fact, with me coming late to the party (I've only been playing for 18 months or so, and have only been focusing on Taylors since the summer), I'd love see access to the older wallpapers added to the new site; I'm not sure these were even available on the old site. The photography of these featured guitars is truly amazing!!!
-
?? Back issues of W&S...
Not sure if it's been covered elsewhere here, but where are all the back issues please? I can find only a few.
Ta.
Bill
-
Dr. Martens Airwair website http://www.drmartens.com/ (http://www.drmartens.com/). Look familiar? lol
Bill
-
1) It seems to be better suited to a larger screen. I had to zoom it out a bit when viewing. The main page doesn't even fit on my laptop screen (1366x768 pixels). The menu is cut off at the bottom of the screen.
We did design the site for larger screens (1280 x XXX) but it should look okay on (1024 x 960) as well. We are working to make sure it looks okay on an iPads and tablets.
As you mentioned, the width on my screen is fine. The problem I have is that more and more screens are going to a "true HD" pixel ratio (16:9). So, my 1366pixel wide screen is only 768pixels tall. That's almost 200pixels shy of the minimum standard you mentioned (1024 x 960). Just something to consider. I've done a little web design in the past, and I certainly realize that it can be difficult to plan for EVERY hardware configuration... not to mention the browser and screen layout that every user is using.
1) It would be cool if you could select more than one spec to be used to build the list of results (for instance if I wanted to see all rosewood bodied, GS guits, etc).
The reason you can only choose 1 filter (Shape, Wood, Series or Category) at a time is that it ensures there will always be at least one guitar in the results. If we allowed 2 filters (for example, a shape AND a wood) it would often return no results which is very frustrating to users. So we did the next best thing which is a sort of the results.
I can ONLY speak for myself here, but I would have to say that I would prefer to see a set of empty results, or some message that says that Taylor does not currently build a guitar that meets the filter criteria that I've specified (then maybe point to the BTO page?). Otherwise, I might spin my wheels for a long period of time searching for something that really isn't there. However, if I wanted to search for, say an Acoustic GS, I could do that. Right now this cannot be done, and if I search for GS body shape, I have to sift though pages of xxxCE guitars in order to view the GS3 through GS8 models.
2) I wish, when displaying the lists of results, they could have a selectable format (like small icons). This could allow many more guitars to be displayed on a single screen. There would be less pages to of results to click through.
Would allowing you to select the number of guitars to show per page work? For example a dropdown with 9,12,15,18,21 options?
I think this would be a reasonable compromise, since I'm sure my suggestion would be more involved to implement. However, going back to my short screen height, this leads to a lot of scrolling that smaller images would reduce (maybe I just lazy!). But then again, multiple filters might also reduce the number of search results. ;D
Thanks again for the great opportunity share our opinions!! :)
-
The problem with doing these virtual builders is the sheer number of options. You wind up having to photograph and/or photoshop every combo of every option. You can see how that quickly becomes a massive undertaking. Then you have to maintain it and account for changes.
I'm not saying we'll never do it. It's a great idea. Just don't hold your breath. :)
This does sound like a lot of work. Rather that have a full virtual builder, it might still be helpful to at least have basic example images of the various options. I've looked through one of the BTO worksheets before. It's a little overwhelming. It would be very helpful to be able to see examples of options like the purfling combos, rosettes, fretboard/peghead/bridge inlays, etc. This might also be beneficial to Taylor from a sales standpoint. If I can't see it, my G.A.S. level is held to a minimum. Seeing what I could have might exponentially increase my desire for a BTO.
-
I like the website, and understand that the kinks are being worked out...also, thank you for asking for input! One thing I would like to see is the ability to find information on all the past limited edition guitars that have been put out previously. I own a 2005 512-L10 fall ltd, and a 2009 710ce-ltd spring ltd - it would be great to be able to find spec info on these models as well as the other LTD's that Taylor has produced over the years.
I know this is probably not a high priority, but please keep in mind for the future because a lot of us look for the LTD models on the used market, and this info would be very helpful. Keep up the good work - thank you for asking!
-
I'm late to this party, I know, but I just have to say it anyway. Shannon, it is GREAT to have you here, asking questions, listening to answers and providing answers of your own! A forum of fans can help in ways nothing else can. Of course, you already know that.
I just have to add my Thank You to the mix. Your being here will be mutually beneficial, I'm sure.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go hunt for something good to complain about... ;)
cotten
-
Thanks for seeking feedback. This is very much appreciated. Follow this path:
Home > Guitars > Acoustic Guitars > By Series > 500 Series > can't find 512 ????
I found the 512ce by using the Search function on the website. I followed the path above because it was the only intuitive thing for me, not being real familiar with the website.
You're right, you SHOULD be able to see the 512 here: http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/series/500
We'll check into that.
-
Another thing I'd like to see is the return of the wallpapers. I can find a hint about a January wallpaper on Google, but I can't seem to find it on the Taylor Guitars site. I *love* having Taylor guitars on my workspaces at home. In fact, with me coming late to the party (I've only been playing for 18 months or so, and have only been focusing on Taylors since the summer), I'd love see access to the older wallpapers added to the new site; I'm not sure these were even available on the old site. The photography of these featured guitars is truly amazing!!!
Also on our to-do list. :)
-
?? Back issues of W&S...
Not sure if it's been covered elsewhere here, but where are all the back issues please? I can find only a few.
Ta.
Bill
On our to-do list. :)
-
I was looking for the old Wood & Steel back issues, and found them here (thanks Google!):
http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/ (http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/)
Hopefully, I didn't just reveal some big ol' secret! :-)
-
Another thing I'd like to see is the return of the wallpapers. I can find a hint about a January wallpaper on Google, but I can't seem to find it on the Taylor Guitars site. I *love* having Taylor guitars on my workspaces at home. In fact, with me coming late to the party (I've only been playing for 18 months or so, and have only been focusing on Taylors since the summer), I'd love see access to the older wallpapers added to the new site; I'm not sure these were even available on the old site. The photography of these featured guitars is truly amazing!!!
Also on our to-do list. :)
Awesome! Thanks Shannon!
-
I was looking for the old Wood & Steel back issues, and found them here (thanks Google!):
http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/ (http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/)
Hopefully, I didn't just reveal some big ol' secret! :-)
Ah! The 'old' website. Good. Still loads of good stuff on there. Thanks. Bill
-
I was looking for the old Wood & Steel back issues, and found them here (thanks Google!):
http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/ (http://taylorguitars.us/woodandsteel/)
Hopefully, I didn't just reveal some big ol' secret! :-)
Ah! The 'old' website. Good. Still loads of good stuff on there. Thanks. Bill
We'll be closing these "secret" backdoors to the old website soon.
But can you be specific about what content is on the old site that is not on the new site? We'd like to address any content gaps.
-
I like the new web site do wish the acoustic guitars were in order.
-
hi Shannon,
thanks for taking the time to accept input & ideas from us -
from what i've seen, other than what has been mentioned, based on content that has yet to be added,
or is not currently on the new site, regarding guitar specs, i found the new spec list lacking these
rosette - type & material
standard nut width - 1 11/16", 1 3/4" or 1 7/8"
strings - type & gauge(s) i.e. Elixir NanoWeb 80/20 light (.012 - .053)
scale length - 25 1/2" or 24 7/8" or 27" (baritone) 22.75" BT, 23.5" Mini
# of frets
fretboard radius
dimensions - overall body height, width, depth
case - gigbag, hardshell bag, hardshell or deluxe hardshell
also reformatting the body shape dimensions
to make them more legible may be helpful
for example - Grand Syphony
Body Dimensions
Length : 20"
Width : 16 1/4"
Depth : 4 5/8"
rather than
Body Length : 20"/ Body Width : 16
1/4" / Body Depth : 4 5/8"
-
We'll be closing these "secret" backdoors to the old website soon.
But can you be specific about what content is on the old site that is not on the new site? We'd like to address any content gaps.
Yes, please. The details about previous 'Limited' edition guitars. At the moment, it's just the Fall 2011. It would be good to see details about previous issues please.
Ta.
Bill
-
Hi Shannon -
As others have mentioned, the layout of the models seems random with no order to them. Also, if you choose to "sort by series", the arrow doesn't appear on the right side of my screen to navigate to the next group of guitars after the 700 series icon. On the wesbsite, the Acoustic models seem to take a back seat to all the other models.
-
hi Shannon,
thanks for taking the time to accept input & ideas from us -
from what i've seen, other than what has been mentioned, based on content that has yet to be added,
or is not currently on the new site, regarding guitar specs, i found the new spec list lacking these
rosette - type & material
standard nut width - 1 11/16", 1 3/4" or 1 7/8"
strings - type & gauge(s) i.e. Elixir NanoWeb 80/20 light (.012 - .053)
scale length - 25 1/2" or 24 7/8" or 27" (baritone) 22.75" BT, 23.5" Mini
# of frets
fretboard radius
dimensions - overall body height, width, depth
case - gigbag, hardshell bag, hardshell or deluxe hardshell
also reformatting the body shape dimensions
to make them more legible may be helpful
for example - Grand Syphony
Body Dimensions
Length : 20"
Width : 16 1/4"
Depth : 4 5/8"
rather than
Body Length : 20"/ Body Width : 16
1/4" / Body Depth : 4 5/8"
Good feedback. We will be adding more specs in the near future.
Regarding the body dimensions, are you talking about the rollovers in the Browse by Shapes page? http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/shapes
Thanks
-
As others have mentioned, the layout of the models seems random with no order to them.
You can use the "Sort By: POPULARITY SHAPE WOOD SERIES CATEGORY" to reorder the guitars in the grid.
Also, if you choose to "sort by series", the arrow doesn't appear on the right side of my screen to navigate to the next group of guitars after the 700 series icon.
We aren't seeing that issue. Can you provide the URL of the page you are looking at?
On the wesbsite, the Acoustic models seem to take a back seat to all the other models.
Can you be more specific about what you mean here?
Thanks! :)
-
Here's the requested URL: http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/series
(There should be a visible arrow after the 700 on the right side to click on to get you to the next batch in the series. Also, the current set-up makes it difficult to scroll those icons without clicking on the 700 series icon or whatever icon is positioned at the far right side of the screen)
"Can you be more specific about what you mean here?" - the scrolling of the different series icons that are in the middle of the page... the acoustic non cut-away/non es models are shown after the baby's, baritones, etc. -just an observation.
-
Hey folks,
My name's Shannon and I led the redesign of Taylor's new website.
You guys are some of our biggest fans so we'd like to know what you think of the new site:
- What do you like?
- What could be improved?
- Anything missing?
- Ideas for new features?
It looks nice but it seems to me harder to zoom in if you are looking for a specific model. Also, where are the detailed specs that were available on the old site? Things like body width and depth, nut width, etc.
It's a good effort but wasn't ready for "prime time" in my opinion.
-
Good feedback. We will be adding more specs in the near future.
Regarding the body dimensions, are you talking about the rollovers in the Browse by Shapes page? http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/shapes
Thanks
hi Shannon,
yes, the rollovers in the Browse by Shapes page is what i was referring to -
i will be certain to add links that pertain to the areas in the future
thanks again for being here to answer our questions &
for your willingness to accept input & suggestions from us -
i realize many hours have going into the redesign of the new website &
the time & effort of those involved certainly does not go unappreciated
thanks for all of the hard work from you & your team :)
-
I've found it difficult to navigate when I'm trying to find a particular model acoustic guitar (formerly GA3 and the other acoustic only models). I clicked on Acoustic Guitars, but that brought up Acoustic-Electrics. There was a 316ce which said 300 series underneath it, but that just brought up all the cutaway electrics. I preferred the old web site's way of narrowing down the search results. This was my 3rd time trying to navigate the site, and I still didn't locate the Acoustic only models. And I've received the message that IE cannot display the web page numerous times while trying to get there which is frustrating. :( Honestly, I've now given up. If anyone wishes to help me, please list the directions on how to get there from Taylor's home page rather than to post the link. That's the only way I'll learn. Thank you.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor300series.jpg)
Cindy, I've had exactly the same experience, including the broken "acoustic" links. Last night the acoustic link loaded "nothing".
It's hard to tell what's going on from this screen shot. It looks like a connection issue which could be your internet connection or the webserver. Our webserver had a few hiccups right after launch but they should be all fixed now. Are you guys still having this issue?
Regarding finding the Acoustic guitars. We changed two major things about the way our acoustics are organized.
First, we combined what was formerly "Acoustic-Electric" and "Acoustic" into a single "Acoustic" guitars category. We found that new users were confused by the "Acoustic-Electric" naming. And really they are all acoustic guitars with or without electronic pickup systems.
Second, and this would confuse longtime fans, we got rid of the old acoustic/shape series names (e.g. DN, GA, GS...) and reorganized those models into "Acoustic # Series". The reasoning is that those models would share the same appointments and options. For example the DN7, GC7e, GS7... are all in the "Acoustic 7 Series" now because they share the same appointments, woods and options. Also having series' and shapes share the same name is confusing.
If you are looking for a specific model, like the GA3, you can either type it in the search (yes search now works on the new site) or look it up in on the "All Guitars" page ( http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all ) which you can get to from the Guitars dropdown in the main nav.
Thanks :)
-
Please don't close the back door to the past W&S til I get them downloaded and saved. Purty Please. ;)
Steve
-
Please don't close the back door to the past W&S til I get them downloaded and saved. Purty Please. ;)
Steve
Don't worry. We'll get them back up :)
-
Regarding finding the Acoustic guitars. We changed two major things about the way our acoustics are organized.
First, we combined what was formerly "Acoustic-Electric" and "Acoustic" into a single "Acoustic" guitars category. We found that new users were confused by the "Acoustic-Electric" naming. And really they are all acoustic guitars with or without electronic pickup systems.
Second, and this would confuse longtime fans, we got rid of the old acoustic/shape series names (e.g. DN, GA, GS...) and reorganized those models into "Acoustic # Series". The reasoning is that those models would share the same appointments and options. For example the DN7, GC7e, GS7... are all in the "Acoustic 7 Series" now because they share the same appointments, woods and options. Also having series' and shapes share the same name is confusing.
Thanks very much for this clarification. Allow me just a few comments.
First, this sort of change in product branding seems pretty significant. Some sort of announcement would eliminate a lot of confusion among long time Taylor owners.
Secondly, if Taylor has stopped using the terms DN, GC, GA and GS, then why are those terms still used within the variously numbered acoustic lines? For example, the "Acoustic 7" line still contains GA7s and GS7s. It appears that Taylor has substituted one layer of product organization for another while eliminating what used to be a meaningful distinction.
Much more significantly, Taylor used to claim that there were structural differences between the acoustics and the acoustic/electrics even though some numbered series guitars (6xx, 7xx, 8x, for example) could be ordered without electronics and electronics could be added to straight acoustics. As consumers we were told that the wood thickness was different and at one point Taylor said that the bracing was different. Have the structural differences been eliminated and, if so, why has Taylor apparently retained different names for the essentially the same guitars? Is the only difference now the trim level?
Are you telling me that a GA8 is now simply an 814 without the wood binding?
If there is no longer any difference, then whynot just get rid of the numbering system and designate everything by shape and additional identifiers including perhaps a word to denote the lower straight acoustic trim level? A word such as "Traditional" might be us to designate the simpler trim level. Using this approach, an 814ce would be redesignated as a GA8ce while the straight acoustic would be a GA8 Traditional. If a customer wanted the acoustic with electronics and a cutaway, then the guitar would be a GA8ce Traditional. The more nicely appointed guitar with electronics but without a cutaway would be simply a GA8e.
It' hard enough to struggle with new organization of the site but a change in the line really complicates things. I am still not even sure whether there has been a change in the line as opposed to a change in the presentation of the line.
I appreciate the earlier clarification regarding sort options on the site but am still really struggling with the need to click through nearly 20 pages of guitar pictures to find product that still seems pretty randomly organized.
I know that Taylor is trying and I do not mean to be critical but this new site is not user friendly and it is extremely confusing to me as someone who has owned your guitars for a long time and who thought that he understood the Taylor line.
There simply shoud not be this kind of confusion. If the lineup has changed, Taylor needs to say so. If the confusion is caused merely by the site organization, then that is an indication that the site is not working.
Sorry to be blunt but these comments are meant to be helpful.
-
Agree with the above post -- the issues with the site seem to go beyond navigation and aesthetics and perhaps even beyond the site itself when we get into the organization of the product lines. This goes back to the introduction of the GS body style, which was tastefully released as an exclusive, acoustic-only model in four different wood combinations. It made sense for a special release, but things got a little confusing when the acoustic series came about, stemming from the initial GS release. I too was under the impression that the acoustic line was constructed/braced/voiced slightly different from the acoustic/electric line.
If that's not the case anymore, it's not clear at all in the new W&S issue -- it seems to contradict the website in that regard. Speaking of contradictions, I still wonder about the aesthetics of the website when compared with the products Taylor offers. It feels like an electric guitar website -- I've mentioned Fender -- and seems like a bit of a disconnect when you look at the majority of guitars Taylor makes. That said, if the creative brief was to target a young demographic and to push the electric side of Taylor, I guess there's some success on that level.
Like I've said previously, aesthetics are more subjective than some of the other issues raised, and any website of this level is quite the undertaking. And like I said above, it seems there are issues that go beyond the website in terms of structure, so I don't envy having to iron out the wrinkles! Hopefully the clarity and intuitive spirit that Taylor has been known for will come out on top.
-
these last 3 posts (one duplicated) seem to be more about the designations & actual product lines of the
guitar models (which has changed over the past 6 years), rather than the navigation of the new website -
to have these questions answered, i would suggest contacting Customer Service or your favorite dealer
please keep responses to this thread revelant to the topic in which it was started & try to be
'constructive' in that if there is an area that you feel seems lacking or could be improved upon,
a suggestion or an idea that you feel would help clarify that particular area would be helpful also
thank you
Hey folks,
My name's Shannon and I led the redesign of Taylor's new website.
You guys are some of our biggest fans so we'd like to know what you think of the new site:
- What do you like?
- What could be improved?
- Anything missing?
- Ideas for new features?
- General questions about the site?
To frame this up, the site we launched is just the first phase in what will be an ongoing evolution. We will continue to add content and features.
Please try to be constructive with any critiques.
The floor is now open for questions… :)
-
Regarding finding the Acoustic guitars. We changed two major things about the way our acoustics are organized.
First, we combined what was formerly "Acoustic-Electric" and "Acoustic" into a single "Acoustic" guitars category. We found that new users were confused by the "Acoustic-Electric" naming. And really they are all acoustic guitars with or without electronic pickup systems.
Second, and this would confuse longtime fans, we got rid of the old acoustic/shape series names (e.g. DN, GA, GS...) and reorganized those models into "Acoustic # Series". The reasoning is that those models would share the same appointments and options. For example the DN7, GC7e, GS7... are all in the "Acoustic 7 Series" now because they share the same appointments, woods and options. Also having series' and shapes share the same name is confusing.
Thanks very much for this clarification. Allow me just a few comments.
First, this sort of change in product branding seems pretty significant. Some sort of announcement would eliminate a lot of confusion among long time Taylor owners........
.......Sorry to be blunt but these comments are meant to be helpful.
I clipped most of the post because Tammany seems to be confused and got off the rails a bit. Nothing has been changed with the guitars. Their names have not been changed, the structures haven't changed. Everything is the same except how they are sorted and arranged on the web page (for goodness sake). When he wrote they have done away with the series name that is only for the sorting on the web pages.
-
these last 3 posts (one duplicated) seem to be more about the designations & actual product lines of the
guitar models (which has changed over the past 6 years), rather than the navigation of the new website -
to have these questions answered, i would suggest contacting Customer Service or your favorite dealer
please keep responses to this thread revelant to the topic in which it was started & try to be
'constructive' in that if there is an area that you feel seems lacking or could be improved upon,
a suggestion or an idea that you feel would help clarify that particular area would be helpful also
thank you
I take gentle exception to the idea that my comments strayed off topic. My comments and ataylor's were in direct response to statements made by Shannon in the immediately preceding post. I also see nothing negative about my comments.
Several times on UTGF I have seen comments from moderators trying to regulate the way in which forum members say things. These comments always seem to come in response to a comment that the moderator feels is critical of something that Taylor has done. If this site is only about Taylor boosterism, then the site needs to announce that as a policy. I thought that we were here to exchange ideas about the brand.
This thread, in particular (I note that it has now achieved subtopic status), was started by a Taylor representative seeking input about how the site can be improved. Many posters over the course of five pages of comments have commented on the confusion, ungainliness and lack of clarity in the site. Anyone who has worked in website development understands that a good website begins with organization and that its effectiveness is measured by how clearly it communicates its content to users. I believe that my comments are directly relevant to the topic as well as a specific post by Shannon.
If these kinds of comments are viewed as negative, I respectfully suggest that we simply put up a comment saying, "Hooray! The new Taylor website is great!" and then close the thread. I actually thought though that Taylor was soliciting user opinions from a community that is already appreciative of its products. I certainly am and I would hope that Taylor would appreciate that input.
If you read through all of the posts in these threads it is impossible not to notice significant confusion about what Taylor is trying to communicate and practical difficulties that people are experiencing receiving that information. Sorry if my comments were out of line. I certainly intended no offense to Shannon.
-
First, we combined what was formerly "Acoustic-Electric" and "Acoustic" into a single "Acoustic" guitars category.
Second, and this would confuse longtime fans, we got rid of the old acoustic/shape series names (e.g. DN, GA, GS...) and reorganized those models into "Acoustic # Series".
I clipped most of the post because Tammany seems to be confused and got off the rails a bit. Nothing has been changed with the guitars. Their names have not been changed, the structures haven't changed. Everything is the same except how they are sorted and arranged on the web page (for goodness sake). When he wrote they have done away with the series name that is only for the sorting on the web pages.
Not to be disputatious but my comments were a direct response to the quoted language from Shannon who clearly said that Taylor had "gotten rid of the old acoustic shape series names" and that this would be "confusing for longtime fans." Glad to hear that nothing has changed but that's not really apparent from his comments or from the site.
-
Hi Shannon, I understand the issue with the site map - thanks for the explanation.
I thought of a few more things I would like to see and they may have already been mentioned:
1 - W&S back issues
2 - info on the LTD series put out over the years, I have a 2010 Fall LTD and can't seem to find much info as well as info on the other limiteds
3 - it was fun to see your picture in W&S since you have been participating here at the forum it feels like I know you (not stalking you or anything :D), just nice to put faces with names - Brian S.'s pic shows up now and again when I am looking at articles/books etc.
Thanks for all you hard work.
-
One of the things I always thought would be helpful is a feature that allows us to compare various models.
Great idea! :)
-
Hello Shannon
Id like to echo what everyone has said RE: A BTO "Guitar Building" page. How nice it would be to see how a certain binding/rosette/etc combination would look.
Most importantly thanks for asking. Seems inline with Taylors cust service mantra.
As I mentioned in another post it would be very difficult to do a virtual BTO builder. But we are planning on adding more BTO photos, especially of inlays.
-
Thanks for seeking feedback. This is very much appreciated. Follow this path:
Home > Guitars > Acoustic Guitars > By Series > 500 Series > can't find 512 ????
I found the 512ce by using the Search function on the website. I followed the path above because it was the only intuitive thing for me, not being real familiar with the website.
You're right, you SHOULD be able to see the 512 here: http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/series/500
We'll check into that.
This has been fixed. Thanks again for letting us know.
-
Just to clarify, we're fine with negative comments. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. We want to have an honest discussion.
But the ultimate goal of this thread is improve the website by getting feedback from you guys.
So please be specific and constructive with your feedback as much as possible.
-
Shannon,
Here's some specific feedback. Something I noticed when looking through the site yesterday.
I wanted to find Taylor's section on different wood types, and it just seems like it's more of an ordeal to get somewhere like that than it used to be. I wonder if there's a way to eliminate a step in there by refining the menu? Also, once there, the woods can only be seen five at a time in the menu at the top, and the only way to see all the wood choices is to cycle through. Maybe adding an option to expand/drop the menu down or expand a text-only list would be helpful? Then, after clicking on a wood choice, the menu refreshes to its default position, which is especially frustrating when one is exploring options deeper in the body woods section or in the top woods section (it defaults to the first five choices of body woods no matter what section you're clicking in).
I also miss the "tone" section with the visual illustration of ranges and attributes -- something like that would be a nice feature to build into the "woods" section, perhaps allowing a user to compare several wood types and their attributes. I'd suggest the same for body shapes as well -- being able to compare body shapes with a feature that overlays the shapes and compares the tones and attributes would be really cool.
I think there's lots of potential for some really great interactive stuff -- which I'm sure is in the works -- but I think the basic usability of the site needs to be refined a little first. The old site certainly wasn't without fault, but the navigation felt a little more intuitive. Excited to see how things turn out -- thanks for putting up with our questions and opinions!
-
Secondly, if Taylor has stopped using the terms DN, GC, GA and GS, then why are those terms still used within the variously numbered acoustic lines? For example, the "Acoustic 7" line still contains GA7s and GS7s. It appears that Taylor has substituted one layer of product organization for another while eliminating what used to be a meaningful distinction.
Much more significantly, Taylor used to claim that there were structural differences between the acoustics and the acoustic/electrics even though some numbered series guitars (6xx, 7xx, 8x, for example) could be ordered without electronics and electronics could be added to straight acoustics. As consumers we were told that the wood thickness was different and at one point Taylor said that the bracing was different. Have the structural differences been eliminated and, if so, why has Taylor apparently retained different names for the essentially the same guitars? Is the only difference now the trim level?
....
Sorry to be blunt but these comments are meant to be helpful.
Product line changes are beyond the scope of this discussion. But they are announced in Wood&Steel and in our email newsletter.
As user ataylor noticed, there is an inconsistency between the last Wood&Steel and the website in the way the Non-cutaways are presented. In W&S they are organized by shape. So the DN-K, DN-Ke, DN8... are all listed under the "DN" series.
But after W&S went to press we decided that a "series" was really defined by guitars that have the same woods and appointments. This is consistent with how they are shown in the 2012 Price List specifications. The GA7, GS7, GS7e-12, DN7... are all listed under the "Acoustic 7" series.
So this is how they are presented on the website. It's a change from the past but it's actually more consistent organization.
If there is no longer any difference, then whynot just get rid of the numbering system and designate everything by shape and additional identifiers including perhaps a word to denote the lower straight acoustic trim level? A word such as "Traditional" might be us to designate the simpler trim level. Using this approach, an 814ce would be redesignated as a GA8ce while the straight acoustic would be a GA8 Traditional. If a customer wanted the acoustic with electronics and a cutaway, then the guitar would be a GA8ce Traditional. The more nicely appointed guitar with electronics but without a cutaway would be simply a GA8e.
The model naming system is another whole ball of wax. As an information architect I would love for it to be 100% logical and descriptive. But it's been around for a long time and everyone knows it, so it's a tough thing to alter.
-
But after W&S went to press we decided that a "series" was really defined by guitars that have the same woods and appointments. This is consistent with how they are shown in the 2012 Price List specifications. The GA7, GS7, GS7e-12, DN7... are all listed under the "Acoustic 7" series.
So this is how they are presented on the website. It's a change from the past but it's actually more consistent organization.
Interesting -- I think the way the series lines were presented on the old site was much clearer and consistent. I think there's some merit to separating the acoustic lines from the acoustic/electric series lines, if only just so it's not totally messy and overwhelming to someone who's not intimately familiar with the Taylor naming structure.
Again, when exploring the series page, it's the same five-at-a-time menu, which takes four clicks to get through to the end. There's no way to see all the series options, even just by name (seems like something like this should at least be on a drop-down menu somewhere). Navigation like that just isn't intuitive and seems like a big step back from the old site.
-
Hi Shannon,
I was looking through the website, and I think I found a mix up. With so much material, I am sure some things get missed in a "proof read".
I followed this path: Acoustic guitars > By Woods > Body Woods > Tropical Mahogany. The description I got for tropical mahogany as a body wood was the same as the description for mahogany as a TOP wood. When I compared descriptions for koa as a top wood or body wood, I got different descriptions (as expected).
So something else to check on, as if you didn't have enough already.
Greg
-
I must confess to significant confusion over what Taylor is trying to accomplish with the site re-design.
If Taylor's concern is presenting accurate and understandable information regarding its product line, it seems to me that there is no meaningful difference between "product line changes" and "information architecture."
There are a couple of essential points as far as I am concerned.
First, focus and discipline are core values at Taylor. In fact, a one sentence description of the company's full size guitars might well be "Five shapes in an endless variety of woods and options." That essential character of Taylor guitars remains consistent but the new web site makes the product line seem confusing and arbitrary. Instead of communicating focus and commitment to five basic shapes, the site makes the line seem haphazard, particularly to customers who are new to the brand. All of the back and forth in this thread confirms that confusion exists.
I think that a significant source of confusion is the linear presentation of information that requires users to click through page after page of information to find what they are looking for. The other night, for example, I was trying to find information about GS5s. It took two or three searches involving non-intuitive site architecture and about ten clicks to find what I was looking for. On the old site I could have retrieved the information in about three clicks with no confusion caused by the site structure.
A cascading presentation of information fixes these problems. The fixed opening page for acoustics ought to be something like five banners, each representing a Taylor shape. Each banner in turn should open onto the two series (acoustic/electric and straight acoustic), and then each of those should cascade into the wood options, and from there to the cutaway and electronic options available within each combination.
The current architecture has no intuitive structure and it serves to obliterate the focus and discipline inherent in the Taylor line. Its sole virtue is that it allows products to be sorted by wood, shape, popularity, series (a term with no intrinsic meaning), and something called "category" (another term which is difficult to understand). I guess that the sort feature is nice but who really cares, especially when the sort options lead only to more piles of largely unsorted pages? What user comes to the site wanting to know which guitar is most popular? Or which shapes are available in rosewood or mahogany? I think that the answer to the last question is "all of them" so where is the need to sort?
This lack of structure is contributing significantly to user confusion.
The second big point is that another core Taylor value is outstanding aesthetics. This site does not reflect that defining characteristic. Instead, it resembles the Dr. Martin's site that someone remarked about on another forum:http://www.drmartens.com/
Sorry, Taylor, but you are not selling "subculture" clothing which is Dr. Martin's own description of its niche (http://www.dmusastore.com/t-history.aspx). Taylor is selling products with a minimum entry price of around $500 and price points that quickly escalate to luxury levels. I cannot imagine a Lexis or BMW site looking like this.
Again, these comments are only intended to get at what is so disconcerting about the site apparently to a large percentage of users.
No offense or criticism for the sake of criticism is intended. Just one person's opinion. Other people may disagree. Your mileage may vary, etc., etc., etc.
-
The two points brought up in the post above are right on.
Let me add another observation I came across today.
While my initial reaction to the website was mixed, one thing that I remarked was that the new site seemed to have been designed with other platforms in mind and would probably translate over to tablet/mobile fairly well. I realized today that I hadn't really tested that theory.
The first thing I noticed was that the website doesn't fit in the iPad's browser. I rotated it to landscape and still had the issue. Pulled out my iPhone and had the same problem. I use a 27" monitor at home, so the dimensions of the site haven't been an issue for me, but I wonder what it looks like for folks on 13" laptops. I suspect they're getting content clipped as well.
Another issue that I found was in the main navigation on touch devices. When touching a category at the top (or, at the bottom/middle if on the home screen -- a design problem we already covered) it brings the drop-down menu up but touching the category has already started loading the link for that particular category's main page, which means adding yet another step/click to a website that has proven to have a few too many of those already. For example, if I click on "Guitars" with the intent of searching by series, I'm whisked away to the main "Guitars" page before I can click on the series link.
The menu/link issue is probably a fairly easy fix. Not sure about the resolution/sizing issue. I'm sure there was incredible pressure to get this site launched for the NAMM show and the new year, but I just can't help but wonder if it was rushed a little -- hopefully you won't be under the gun as much on version 2.0 so these things can get ironed out! Good luck.
-
I think some of you are being overly critical. I just used the Taylor site to look up specs on an 814ce and it took me only three clicks to get to a large picture and all the info I needed. Tried it on my iPhone with the same results and the site looks great both on my phone and my 13" laptop. Sure it doesn't offer as much technical info about the guitars as the Martin website, but I'm guessing kids today don't look for that anyway, and from the looks of it Taylor is going after a younger demographic.
Shannon, with all due respect, what kind of feedback are you expecting on a forum with only a dozen or so members logged in at any given time? Wouldn't it be more productive to solicit feedback from a few hundred of your employees or even on your Facebook page?
-
I used the website yesterday to find an authorized repair center in my area. Worked out great I saw a new BTO Koa I'm now in love with....thanks alot Taylor.......oh yeah they are going to make a few minor adjustments to my 516 so I found a great music store I will definitely be frequenting when my GAS flares.
One thought on the dealer feature would be to present a map of the dealers so one could get an idea of the locations of said dealers......
For instance, I am going to be visiting the Martin Guitar Factory in PA (am I allowed to say that? ::)) and I saw that Taylor has alot of dealers in PA. In order for me to figure out where these dealers are I have to pull up google maps (or whatever one uses for mapping) and put in the cities and see where they are on a map as I don't know much about PA geography and this was a bit time consuming.
A feature where one could select a state and have a map of that state pop up to show all the dealers/repair centers would be very convenient.
-
I think some of you are being overly critical. I just used the Taylor site to look up specs on an 814ce and it took me only three clicks to get to a large picture and all the info I needed. Tried it on my iPhone with the same results and the site looks great both on my phone and my 13" laptop. Sure it doesn't offer as much technical info about the guitars as the Martin website, but I'm guessing kids today don't look for that anyway, and from the looks of it Taylor is going after a younger demographic.
Call it whatever you want. But in any case, it's feedback that is meant to help improve an important aspect of a brand and experience some of us have invested in and want to continue investing in. And let's not forget -- the feedback was solicited and pinned to the top of the forum. Otherwise, the "look, there's a new website" thread would have been buried a few weeks ago along with our first impressions.
You unintentionally bring up a great point -- if the Taylor website has fallen behind what Martin is offering, there's a problem.
There's nothing wrong with marketing to a young demographic, unless it's not representative of the product being offered. Last I checked, Taylor's bread and butter isn't $400 electric guitars made in Mexico. But in any case, "kids today" are extremely tech-savvy and as demanding as ever in terms of user experience -- there are issues to be ironed out no matter what the age of the person using the site.
I think everyone has tried to be positive. If you're going to fault someone like me for being picky, fault me for caring too much about the brand. And I think it's great for people like Shannon and Brian to get feedback -- it falls in line with the rest of Taylor's great customer service and experience, which is an even more important brand value than the website. :)
-
I think some of you are being overly critical. I just used the Taylor site to look up specs on an 814ce and it took me only three clicks to get to a large picture and all the info I needed. Tried it on my iPhone with the same results and the site looks great both on my phone and my 13" laptop. Sure it doesn't offer as much technical info about the guitars as the Martin website, but I'm guessing kids today don't look for that anyway, and from the looks of it Taylor is going after a younger demographic.
Call it whatever you want. But in any case, it's feedback that is meant to help improve an important aspect of a brand and experience some of us have invested in and want to continue investing in. And let's not forget -- the feedback was solicited and pinned to the top of the forum. Otherwise, the "look, there's a new website" thread would have been buried a few weeks ago along with our first impressions.
You unintentionally bring up a great point -- if the Taylor website has fallen behind what Martin is offering, there's a problem.
There's nothing wrong with marketing to a young demographic, unless it's not representative of the product being offered. Last I checked, Taylor's bread and butter isn't $400 electric guitars made in Mexico. But in any case, "kids today" are extremely tech-savvy and as demanding as ever in terms of user experience -- there are issues to be ironed out no matter what the age of the person using the site.
I think everyone has tried to be positive. If you're going to fault someone like me for being picky, fault me for caring too much about the brand. And I think it's great for people like Shannon and Brian to get feedback -- it falls in line with the rest of Taylor's great customer service and experience, which is an even more important brand value than the website. :)
I agree.
I was thinking about the whole demographic issue today. Why not add a page or series of pages that is an online "Find Your Fit Event"? It could be some sort of wall or slide show with images representing the target market and by clicking on the image users would open up a page geared specifically to that demographic.
As for being critical, see the earlier disclaimer:
"These comments are only intended to get at what is so disconcerting about the site apparently to a large percentage of users.
No offense or criticism for the sake of criticism is intended. Just one person's opinion. Other people may disagree. Your mileage may vary, etc., etc., etc."
-
You unintentionally bring up a great point -- if the Taylor website has fallen behind what Martin is offering, there's a problem.
As far as I'm concerned the Taylor website was never ahead of the Martin site. Sure the Martin site is not as flashy but it has always offered more information than the Taylor site and that is all I am looking for from a manufactures website.
There's nothing wrong with marketing to a young demographic, unless it's not representative of the product being offered. Last I checked, Taylor's bread and butter isn't $400 electric guitars made in Mexico. But in any case, "kids today" are extremely tech-savvy and as demanding as ever in terms of user experience -- there are issues to be ironed out no matter what the age of the person using the site.
None of us really know what Taylors bread and butter is now do we?
-
As far as I'm concerned the Taylor website was never ahead of the Martin site. Sure the Martin site is not as flashy but it has always offered more information than the Taylor site and that is all I am looking for from a manufactures website.
Great point. And I think that's really the core of what we're trying to get at.
None of us really know what Taylors bread and butter is now do we?
Not entirely. But I stand by my claim that it's not imported electric guitars in the $500-and-under range. :)
I guess I just wonder if Taylor is trying to sell Audis with a Ford Mustang website. Nothing wrong with either, but they don't necessarily match up. There's a time and a place for using that kind of style. For example, I think the current look of the website would be perfect for a campaign or mini-site dedicated to the solidbody electric guitars. Look at the main page, and you'll see that the styling goes absolutely perfect with the double-cutaway electric to the right underneath the navigation bar. But when you pull up a 914ce on the site, it (the guitar) feels a little out of place in its surroundings.
In any case, I'm done posting in this thread. I hope my feedback ends up being helpful in some way or another and I'm truly hopeful and excited for version 2.0 of the website. I know the kind of effort and hours that go into this kind of project and how frustrating it is to be under the gun of a looming deadline. Taylor has a great track record and I'm confident things will eventually come together nicely. Many thanks to Shannon and Brian for interacting with us here and soliciting feedback. I'm sure (I hope, anyway) they realize that we're a passionate bunch and that even our sharpest criticisms are well-meant. There's a certain amount of salt that should be taken with our comments, but I do think it's important to get this kind of feedback in the long run.
Thanks for the thread and good luck ironing out the wrinkles.
-
once the LTD section has been added, perhaps when a specific model is clicked on
a link that will direct one to a list of dealers that have ordered that particular guitar :-\
it would up to the person to contact the dealer to verify the guitar is still available &
the dealers would have to contact the web-maintenance team to help keep it current ...
hmm ???
possibly a good idea in theory, but in reality an e-mail or
a call to customer service might work out better overall
just a thought -
figured i'd toss it out there & let it get 'kicked around' :)
-
once the LTD section has been added, perhaps when a specific model is clicked on
a link that will direct one to a list of dealers that have ordered that particular guitar :-\
Martin does something like this on their really high end "limited editions." I think that it is a great idea.
Also, some of the smaller builders who have some variety in even their standard builds--Santa Cruz and Huss & Dalton come to mind--have pages that show guitars that have recently been shipped with the name of the dealer.
-
You unintentionally bring up a great point -- if the Taylor website has fallen behind what Martin is offering, there's a problem.
As far as I'm concerned the Taylor website was never ahead of the Martin site. Sure the Martin site is not as flashy but it has always offered more information than the Taylor site and that is all I am looking for from a manufactures website.
I have an opposing view. I much preferred Taylor's old website to that of Martin's. I had no difficulty finding what I needed on the old Taylor site but finding certain Martin pages was so tedious that I finally bookmarked one of the them I needed for occasional reference. I also found the way the information was presented on the old Taylor site was more readable, comprehensible and esthetically pleasing than the style and layout of Martin's website.
-
You unintentionally bring up a great point -- if the Taylor website has fallen behind what Martin is offering, there's a problem.
As far as I'm concerned the Taylor website was never ahead of the Martin site. Sure the Martin site is not as flashy but it has always offered more information than the Taylor site and that is all I am looking for from a manufactures website.
I have an opposing view. I much preferred Taylor's old website to that of Martin's. I had no difficulty finding what I needed on the old Taylor site but finding certain Martin pages was so tedious that I finally bookmarked one of the them I needed for occasional reference. I also found the way the information was presented on the old Taylor site was more readable, comprehensible and esthetically pleasing than the style and layout of Martin's website.
I agree with Herb. The Martin site has always been cumbersome to me and a little overwhelming in the way information is presented. Model specs, for example, are buried in one place and listed by shape with exception after exception for no conforming models of the same shape.
-
One thought on the dealer feature would be to present a map of the dealers so one could get an idea of the locations of said dealers......
We are working on a dealer and repair center locator with Google maps integration at this very moment. We hope to roll it out soon.
-
Shannon, with all due respect, what kind of feedback are you expecting on a forum with only a dozen or so members logged in at any given time? Wouldn't it be more productive to solicit feedback from a few hundred of your employees or even on your Facebook page?
That's a very good question.
When you develop a site like this you have to take into account all kinds of users. It needs to work for the total novices who know nothing about guitars but are thinking about starting to play as well as the experts who know our guitars and old website inside and out.
In terms of sheer numbers there are way more of the novices than the experts. But both groups are very important. So it becomes a balancing act to meet the needs of both.
The fans on our Facebook page are generally more in the novice and casual category. We've asked them for website feedback before. We did get some good feedback but we also got a lot of answers involving "free guitars". Heh heh
The folks who hang out here definitely skew more toward the expert end of the spectrum which is why I started this thread. You'll notice a lot of feedback about guitar specs here. The specs feedback is totally valid but it's something experts care about way more than casual fans.
BTW, we're working on adding more specs. :)
-
Hey Shannon, tell me more about these free guitars... 8)
-
Shannon, with all due respect, what kind of feedback are you expecting on a forum with only a dozen or so members logged in at any given time? Wouldn't it be more productive to solicit feedback from a few hundred of your employees or even on your Facebook page?
That's a very good question.
When you develop a site like this you have to take into account all kinds of users. It needs to work for the total novices who know nothing about guitars but are thinking about starting to play as well as the experts who know our guitars and old website inside and out.
In terms of sheer numbers there are way more of the novices than the experts. But both groups are very important. So it becomes a balancing act to meet the needs of both.
The fans on our Facebook page are generally more in the novice and casual category. We've asked them for website feedback before. We did get some good feedback but we also got a lot of answers involving "free guitars". Heh heh
The folks who hang out here definitely skew more toward the expert end of the spectrum which is why I started this thread. You'll notice a lot of feedback about guitar specs here. The specs feedback is totally valid but it's something experts care about way more than casual fans.
BTW, we're working on adding more specs. :)
cool :)
perhaps the additional specs might be in a 'complete specfications' link,
rather than having it all 'right there', because to someone that is just
starting to look around, something like this could be a little undaunting, imho
specifications
shape bracing (pattern, material, width)
type (6/12 string) finish
back &sides color options
soundhole rosette sunburst option
neck cutaway
fretboard electronics
fretboard inlay left-handed
headstock overlay body width
binding (purfling) body length
bridge body depth
nut & saddle overall length
strings string spacing
scale length tuning machines
truss rod pickguard
neck width at nut case
number of frets U.S. suggested
fretboard radius retail price
i like having this kind of detailed info,
but to others it could be a little :o
-
....We did get some good feedback but we also got a lot of answers involving "free guitars". Heh heh...
What, we get a free guitar for our thoughts...... ::) I'll take a Koa BTO please, oh and if it's not too much trouble you could throw in the new uke if you have one lying around.
Seriously, thanks for soliciting our feedback - we all do love our Taylors here.
-
Personally I like the older site better. Always thought it was easy to get around and find what you wanted. on another forum that seems to be the feeling too.
-
Personally I like the older site better. Always thought it was easy to get around and find what you wanted. on another forum that seems to be the feeling too.
Hi leeasam,
Can you be more specific?
Thanks,
Shannon
-
Personally I like the older site better. Always thought it was easy to get around and find what you wanted. on another forum that seems to be the feeling too.
Hi leeasam,
Can you be more specific?
Thanks,
Shannon
I can't speak for leeasam, but the other day I was searching for the burst colors but gave up after coming up empty-handed. The old site was just much easier to navigate...almost intuitively if that makes sense.
-
Personally I like the older site better. Always thought it was easy to get around and find what you wanted. on another forum that seems to be the feeling too.
Hi leeasam,
Can you be more specific?
Thanks,
Shannon
I can't speak for leeasam, but the other day I was searching for the burst colors but gave up after coming up empty-handed. The old site was just much easier to navigate...almost intuitively if that makes sense.
Hi Cindy,
Can you elaborate? What were you expecting to find? Where did you think it should be?
There is no wrong or right answer. I'm just curious to know how you think bursts should be on the site.
Thanks,
Shannon
-
Hi Shannon,
I honestly haven't spent that much time on the new site but things like full specs of the guitars seem to be missing and I think customers would want to know what options are available for each model such as different finishes and materials that they can chose from without having to go to another page. I would also think a super duper modern website would have sound clips of the guitars, but I'm sure you will get to all that in time.
BTW, I had my first website built back in 1995 and one thing I noticed was that anytime I made a change it would lower the hit count. People hate change regardless if they admit it or not so you should take some of the comments with a grain of salt. Overall it's an awesome website that I'm sure will keep getting better and better. A big thumbs up for the Taylor staff.
Ted
-
I had wanted the newness of the replacement website to wear off before commenting on it but as I think about it now, I'm finding it difficult to describe what characteristics the old site had that made it easy to find whatever information I needed. I suppose it is because the site was intuitive. One could find things naturally without giving it any thought. Of course that virtue made it very frustrating use competitor's websites that were much less intuitive. On the other hand, those sites made me appreciate the old Taylor site even more.
I've been using this page as my default page in order to make it easier for me to find things on the new website:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all.
-
I don't think the old site was any more intuitive Herb, I think you were just used to where everything was. Every once in a while Helene will re organize the kitchen cupboard and I will stand there with my hands where the peanut butter used to be asking her where it is now even though it's only two inches from my hand. It's just how the human brain works.
BTW, has anyone seen the new Martin website?
-
I don't think the old site was any more intuitive Herb, I think you were just used to where everything was. Every once in a while Helene will re organize the kitchen cupboard and I will stand there with my hands where the peanut butter used to be asking her where it is now even though it's only two inches from my hand. It's just how the human brain works.
BTW, has anyone seen the new Martin website?
That is a possibility I considered which is why I chose to wait awhile before commenting on the new site. I wanted to allow time to familiarize myself with the changes. That I was sensitive to that possibility and gave myself time makes it rather unlikely that I mistook familiarity with intuitiveness. I wonder how I might have given you the impression that I'd be inclined to confuse the two.
-
....BTW, has anyone seen the new Martin website?
Yes, they sure swapped it quick today - I was there this afternoon and went back later and wham - all these changes. Again, it looks like a work in progress but since the changes are here to stay what can you do. Maybe they are consulting the UMGF...as it's slow, slow, slow.....
Signed, old cronie who doesn't like computers that much but has learned to live with them....
-
i feel that the information/specs could have paralleled the content of
the previous website a bit more initially, which much has now been added &
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/614ce (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/614ce)
i believe that there is also a point to where the decision has to be made to go live & then make
additions & adjustments from there (it happens in operating systems & other products as well) -
imho, is one thing to allow something that has inherent problems in to be released regardless &
quite another to continue to make improvements based on input from various sources that will
make up the most complete coverage of 'the big picture' as possible, as it constantly changes &
if i recall correctly, this is 5th major revision to Taylor's site (98-00, 01-03, 04-06, 07-11)
perhaps these ideas/suggestions have already been mentioned
having the tool bar at the top on the opening page could
go a long way, imho, in terms of site navigation consistency
a greater number of guitars, albeit with smaller pictures, shown on each page, especially
when the shape or wood search is used, so that there are fewer pages to scroll through
(i.e. GA - perhaps 18 per page & 3 pages, rather than 9 per page & 6 pages)
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/shapes/grand-auditorium (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/shapes/grand-auditorium)
having all of the series on one page, rather than the 5 selection
horizontal scroll window (4 clicks to get from one end to the other) -
the baby/big Baby could be combined & all 24 put on a single page
non-Taylor website content -
i was able to get on Martin new site today & granted the speed in loading was a bit slower
(& i feel that it is more due to the limitations of my laptop & economy ISP), but having the toolbar
at the top, the operation of the mouse-over window & getting to the info works quite well, imho -
the Custom Shop configurator is not up & running yet & i haven't seen a way to directly
compare models, which i can't remember if it was an option on the older site & i've done it
manually in the past with earlier versions of IE, by opening the site in 2 or 3 windows,
getting to the specs & adapting the window sizes to allow them to be viewed side by side
Jim's website, i believe, is currently geared toward the guitars that he sells the most of -
the quality of pics is vastly improved & i especially like the zoom feature allows a hi-res
movable area view, without having to download a huge picture & having to scroll the edges
not to get further away from the Taylor site discussion, but i feel that
this site, in terms of navigation & content, works particularly well -
http://www.daddario.com/DaddarioHome.Page?ActiveID=1740 (http://www.daddario.com/DaddarioHome.Page?ActiveID=1740)
2-window vertical scroll main page, tool bar & mouse-over window at the top,
2 clicks to get to a specific product, all specs & comparison window are there
ymmv
-
not to get further away from the Taylor site discussion, but i feel that
this site, in terms of navigation & content, works particularly well -
http://www.daddario.com/DaddarioHome.Page?ActiveID=1740 (http://www.daddario.com/DaddarioHome.Page?ActiveID=1740)
2-window vertical scroll main page, tool bar & mouse-over window at the top,
2 clicks to get to a specific product, all specs & comparison window are there
ymmv
+1.........That's how its done. Taking into account that D'Addario most likely has way more string catagories than Taylor has guitar catagories, this is an amazingly good design. No muss, no fuss. Click on "products" and you get everthing at your fingertips. Don't know what is right for your acoustic, just click on "Acoutsic" and in a few seconds you can get to the right string for you.
D'Addario's baseline design is clean, and obvously was designed by someone with a good understanding of the D'Addario customer. I fear that the underlying design of the Taylor site may be flawed and no amount of tweaking is going to bring up to the standard of the D'Addario site.
-
I like the new web sight except the electric guitar configuar doesn't work correctly. I can't see the selections and there not a way to scroll down.
-
I was just at the site for 2 reasons - to look at the Taylorware - and to look at the schedule of events for Road Shows and Find your Fit.
I had to wait for the main page to load and scroll down to get to the menu bar - please move that to the top of the page - then I clicked on Events, All Events, and had to scroll thru 5 or 6 pages after waiting for the graphics to load - the lists begin at about the half way mark of the page - to see everything BC there were only about 5 events listed per page.
This was very tedious - is it possible to just present things in a list format, using a line or two for each event and not have to wait for the graphics to load each time?
-
I don't think the old site was any more intuitive Herb, I think you were just used to where everything was. Every once in a while Helene will re organize the kitchen cupboard and I will stand there with my hands where the peanut butter used to be asking her where it is now even though it's only two inches from my hand. It's just how the human brain works.
BTW, has anyone seen the new Martin website?
That is a possibility I considered which is why I chose to wait awhile before commenting on the new site. I wanted to allow time to familiarize myself with the changes. That I was sensitive to that possibility and gave myself time makes it rather unlikely that I mistook familiarity with intuitiveness. I wonder how I might have given you the impression that I'd be inclined to confuse the two.
I think Ted might be on to something here. It has now been a few weeks and a dozen or so visits and I'm starting to get used to the new layout, in fact I think I'm getting used to the new site faster than I got used to the old one. Is it possible that the new site might be more intuitive? ???
-
Hi Shannon.
So where did you hide the 2012 List Prices of the guitars? It used to be on older versions of your website, but I can't find it anywhere on this new one.
Jim
-
I have been finding list prices at the top of the "specification" list for each guitar. I always go to Guitars>All Guitars then a particular model. I haven't found a list of all prices in one spot like you might find in the Guitar Guide in "Wood and Steel".
Greg
-
Thanks, Greg.
The Taylor website used to have an all of their guitar MSRPs/list prices in one place. It was a very useful webpage because you could look at everything in your price range all in one place so you could know all of your options that are affordable to you personally of their many guitars. It did not adversely affect any of their dealers since they were free to give whatever discounts from the official list prices they wished.
If this handy page of all list prices is still on the redesigned webpage I am not able to find it, and I would like to ask how to find it if it is there, or if not to ask that they put it back on their website.
Regards,
Jim
-
I've been using this page as my default page in order to make it easier for me to find things on the new website:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all.
That's great. We specifically developed the "All Guitars" page for powerusers like you so you could easily get to specific guitar models.
Let me ask you, do you feel like "All Guitars" is a good description what the page is?
-
If this handy page of all list prices is still on the redesigned webpage I am not able to find it, and I would like to ask how to find it if it is there, or if not to ask that they put it back on their website.
Good point. We are going to put up a PDF of our price list. I'm curious, if you were going to the site to download it, where would expect to find it?
Thanks
-
We added more specs and adjusted the default sorting for the By Shapes, By Woods, By Series and By Category views.
Are there any specs missing you guys are craving? :)
-
I've been using this page as my default page in order to make it easier for me to find things on the new website:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all).
That's great. We specifically developed the "All Guitars" page for powerusers like you so you could easily get to specific guitar models.
Let me ask you, do you feel like "All Guitars" is a good description what the page is?
I think, All Current Guitars, would be a good description. Without the, current, qualifier; one might expect to find discontinued models like the Liberty Tree Guitar, the Cujo Guitar, the Pallet Guitar or the Turtle Guitar in addition to the current models.
-
I've been using this page as my default page in order to make it easier for me to find things on the new website:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all).
That's great. We specifically developed the "All Guitars" page for powerusers like you so you could easily get to specific guitar models.
Let me ask you, do you feel like "All Guitars" is a good description what the page is?
I think, All Current Guitars, would be a good description. Without the, current, qualifier; one might expect to find discontinued models like the Liberty Tree Guitar, the Cujo Guitar, the Pallet Guitar or the Turtle Guitar in addition to the current models.
Eventually I think all guitars, currant and legacy, would be listed there. But there would need to be some distinction between current and legacy on the page.
Do you think "Guitar Index" or "Guitar Model Index" would be more intuitive names for the page?
-
I've been using this page as my default page in order to make it easier for me to find things on the new website:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/all).
That's great. We specifically developed the "All Guitars" page for powerusers like you so you could easily get to specific guitar models.
Let me ask you, do you feel like "All Guitars" is a good description what the page is?
I think, All Current Guitars, would be a good description. Without the, current, qualifier; one might expect to find discontinued models like the Liberty Tree Guitar, the Cujo Guitar, the Pallet Guitar or the Turtle Guitar in addition to the current models.
Eventually I think all guitars, currant and legacy, would be listed there. But there would need to be some distinction between current and legacy on the page.
Do you think "Guitar Index" or "Guitar Model Index" would be more intuitive names for the page?
Yes. Guitar Index, is better than, All Guitars. Why didn't I think of that?
-
If this handy page of all list prices is still on the redesigned webpage I am not able to find it, and I would like to ask how to find it if it is there, or if not to ask that they put it back on their website.
Good point. We are going to put up a PDF of our price list. I'm curious, if you were going to the site to download it, where would expect to find it?
Thanks
The first place I would look would be at the bottom of the page that comes up when you click on "Guitars". If I did not see it there, I might try the page that comes up when you click on "Support".
Thanks, Shannon!
-
Here are some of the reasons why I find this new web site difficult to navigate:
First I went to search for woods and scrolled down the page. I accidentally scrolled too far and wound up being overwhelmed by so many choices that were not organized by woods. When I did find the wood info, I still had to scroll side-to-side to see all the info. I'd prefer to have all of it on one page rather than to see all these guitars. The following pic is what I initially saw before I realized I scrolled too far. Pity the actual info on the differences between woods only takes up at most 20% of the page (and I still have to scroll sideways to access all of it).
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor%20web%20site%20pics/woods.jpg)
Then I decided to search by series and brought up the following page. I'd rather have ALL the series listed on one page for side-by-side comparisons rather than to be inundated with a bunch of guitars (all of which happened to be koa...if I weren't in the market for a koa guitar, I'd be pretty frustrated).
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor%20web%20site%20pics/series.jpg)
Then I chose to search by category. Underneath the choices of Nylon, 12-String, Travel/Small Body, 12-Fret, Baritone, and 6-String were a bunch of guitars that I have no idea how they were supposed to be categorized.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor%20web%20site%20pics/category.jpg)
Lastly I chose Top Woods and would once again preferred the option of side-by-side comparisons of information.
(http://i831.photobucket.com/albums/zz235/MusicForumPics/Taylor%20web%20site%20pics/topwoods.jpg)
And I still couldn't find the burst pics that Michael found previously even though I knew the 6-series uses bursts. I even did a search for bursts but still didn't find the graphic with the side-by-side comparisons.
IMHO it just seems like the site is one huge ad showing a bunch of guitars rather than to be helpful in finding the specific info one is searching for. I definitely preferred Taylor's previous web site and felt it was MUCH easier to navigate.
-
Hi Shannon,
Are there any plans to have information on the Spring/Fall Limited Edition runs? I used to be able to look up the specs of mine - and other - but I haven't been able to locate that on the new site.
-
... And I still couldn't find the burst pics that Michael found previously even though I knew the 6-series uses bursts. I even did a search for bursts but still didn't find the graphic with the side-by-side comparisons...
hi Cindy,
here it is :)
http://taylorguitars.us/guitars/features/finish/Colors.aspx (http://taylorguitars.us/guitars/features/finish/Colors.aspx)
i hope it is alright to post these links from previous iterations, NOT for the
basis to say that the past sites had more content, but to show what could be
integrated into the new site, perhaps using the older 'spinners' as temporary
place holders & adding the latest model pic updates as needed later on ???
-
Hi Shannon,
thanks for asking for our input. From a visual perspective, the new website is excellent, from a navigational perspective, (in my opinion) it could use some tweaking...
Improvements:
1) please add back the detailed guitar specs of the measurements, upper bout, lower bout, waist, etc , they used to be on the old website.
2) Navigation, yes echoing what others have said, please put on top. I started by looking for 12 Fret models so I opted for Shop by Category, so, If I click on the 12 Frets wanting more information, the navigation pane for Nylon, 12 string, Travel, Baritone & 6 string remains in the middle of the page. Users of the site, when the make a selection are drilling down for information and I find the middle navigation pane somewhat confusing
So I am looking at the 12 Fret picture on top, and I have the middle screen navigation panes, and below that are the two choices, 12 Fret or 12 Mahogany. At first I am wondering why I still have the middle navigation pane or perhaps that these models shown, all have 12 fret options based on the 2 wood choices below? Once I select the 12 Fret, then the navigation is back on top again for Options, Specifications, Media, News/Events, and Artists. As for the 2 options for 12 Frets, I would suggest you add "click here for details" or hypertext"Details" to each box. Not everyone is computer savvy and my best friend is one of them...and did not realize you had to click on the box (his comments not mine)
thanks again for asking for input....
-
Are there any plans to have information on the Spring/Fall Limited Edition runs? I used to be able to look up the specs of mine - and other - but I haven't been able to locate that on the new site.
I to would like to see past limited edition runs. Also maybe more history in general, and on past models.
-
Are there any plans to have information on the Spring/Fall Limited Edition runs? I used to be able to look up the specs of mine - and other - but I haven't been able to locate that on the new site.
I to would like to see past limited edition runs. Also maybe more history in general, and on past models.
+1 Specs on past Limited Editions as a part of history would be a great addition.
-
Hi Shannon,
Are there any plans to have information on the Spring/Fall Limited Edition runs? I used to be able to look up the specs of mine - and other - but I haven't been able to locate that on the new site.
Yes, we will be putting up info on the new 2012 Spring limiteds soon. Yay! At some point we also want to start backfilling info for old limiteds as well. :)
-
... And I still couldn't find the burst pics that Michael found previously even though I knew the 6-series uses bursts. I even did a search for bursts but still didn't find the graphic with the side-by-side comparisons...
hi Cindy,
here it is :)
http://taylorguitars.us/guitars/features/finish/Colors.aspx (http://taylorguitars.us/guitars/features/finish/Colors.aspx)
i hope it is alright to post these links from previous iterations, NOT for the
basis to say that the past sites had more content, but to show what could be
integrated into the new site, perhaps using the older 'spinners' as temporary
place holders & adding the latest model pic updates as needed later on ???
Those colors are out of date. Use at your own risk ;) . But to Cindy's point we added a standard model options overview page to our list of things to do.
-
+1 on Cindy's recent post, she sums up the kind of experience I've had with the site too. No problem with the look, just it's much slower to navigate then before and seems less clearly organised. Scrolling side to side is quite a nuisance if your connection speed isn't fast, and not worth it just to have bigger pictures of stuff you're not looking for. This is a widespread problem on new media styles - a lot of MSN UK articles are very similar, where you can waste ages sideways scrolling though something you should just be able to scan on a single page in a few seconds.
Anyway hopefully the model overview page will solve this.... a comprehensive model list would be fine - doesn't need to be flashy, just everything more or less in one place, and where a single click will get you where you want to go. I think this is what people liked in the previous site - you scroll down a list and it takes you to right where you want to be.
-
I visited the "new" website for the first time a few days ago.
I think it is a HUGE improvement over the old website.
Nice Job!
-
Getting more used to the website. One question: are you still able to send a letter to W&S or write to "Ask Bob" on the website? I couldn't find a way to do this as I have in the past....
-
Hi, a couple of pages don't open for me:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/sites/default/files/10_UnderstandingES.pdf (http://www.taylorguitars.com/sites/default/files/10_UnderstandingES.pdf),
http://www.taylorguitars.com/sites/default/files/Taylor-Guitars-Acoustic-Electric-2012-PriceList.pdf?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Support%20Sidebar%20Link&utm_content=PDF&utm_campaign=Price%20List%202012%20Download (http://www.taylorguitars.com/sites/default/files/Taylor-Guitars-Acoustic-Electric-2012-PriceList.pdf?utm_source=Website&utm_medium=Support%20Sidebar%20Link&utm_content=PDF&utm_campaign=Price%20List%202012%20Download)
I was able to quickly open both the Understanding the Taylor Expression System tech page and the 2012 Price List and Specifications PDF.
-
Hey folks,
I just wanted to give you guys a quick update.
We haven't forgotten about all the stuff we've talked about on this thread. We'll get to it all as soon as possible. To say our plate is full is an understatement. :o
Some of the recent updates we've made include the ability to search for Events by City, Zip or postal code, the Spring Limiteds and Builders Reserve (which turned out to be more work than we expected) and numerous small bug fixes
We are going to roll out a dealer locator in the next few days and are hard at work on a new TaylorWare webstore.
Please keep the feedback coming. :)
Cheers!
-
Hey folks,
I just wanted to give you guys a quick update.
We haven't forgotten about all the stuff we've talked about on this thread. We'll get to it all as soon as possible. To say our plate is full is an understatement. :o
Some of the recent updates we've made include the ability to search for Events by City, Zip or postal code, the Spring Limiteds and Builders Reserve (which turned out to be more work than we expected) and numerous small bug fixes
We are going to roll out a dealer locator in the next few days and are hard at work on a new TaylorWare webstore.
Please keep the feedback coming. :)
Cheers!
Shannon you and the Taylor Co are doing a stellar job. It's been said a million times over but you all at Taylor are going beyond the call of duty even by asking for input.
Stop making us feel valued! ;)
-
Shannon, thanks for listening to our concerns and ideas! Taylor Guitars is top notch with customer service, and many of us appreciate that we've been asked to offer input. You are doing a terrific job! 8)
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
We've talked about an archive of models/specs for older models. How much interest do you think there would be in such an archive?
-
Gosh, I have been hoping for this for some time, I haven't posted here BC it's been mentioned in previous posts. Put me down for a yes vote, I would like to be able to look up older models and see what makes them stand out.
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
We've talked about an archive of models/specs for older models. How much interest do you think there would be in such an archive?
Man I'd think there'd be a TON of interest! It would be a great resource! Especially if one was looking at buying a used/older Taylor...to be able to look up the specs etc would be awesome! ;D
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
We've talked about an archive of models/specs for older models. How much interest do you think there would be in such an archive?
If you included older models along with all past LTDs you would see loads of traffic. That would be a phenomenal resource.
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
We've talked about an archive of models/specs for older models. How much interest do you think there would be in such an archive?
If you included older models along with all past LTDs you would see loads of traffic. That would be a phenomenal resource.
i agree :)
as of the 9th, there really isn't anywhere (that i've been able to find)
that has complete specs (other than my old printed copies of W & S)
-
I think specs of all models (discontinued as well) should be somewhere in an archive page with a picture. I was able to find old models on the webpage before the upgrade.
We've talked about an archive of models/specs for older models. How much interest do you think there would be in such an archive?
I think this would be terrific. By the way, thanks for getting the guitar model index page up there, just what I was hoping to see.
-
Can I add one more suggestion? ;D
I'd love a virtual guitar maker...not sure what you'd call it but where you could plug in your specs like your typical BTO and it would show you what it would look like instantly.
agree! even though we won't make out the sound as per virtual BTO, the aesthetics and the overall visual impact makes a lot of difference that may influence on pulling the trigger.
-
Ever since the upgrade, I never visit the Taylor website anymore.
Same here. I still don't care for the way the site looks and functions and it's not touch/mobile-friendly (the big culprit being the drop-down menus), which is a big oversight by today's standards. A simpler site design with an adaptive grid would have been the right solution IMO.
I wait for news to come to me via the forums and the Taylor newsletter now and I do my "window shopping" at dealers with good product photography comparable to the Taylor site (often better since it's not quite as processed).
-
something i've found that can be confusing is that if a direct search is
performed, it can result in a page that has redirects that go nowhere -
from the home page, i put 'koa' into the search bar & then clicked on the first result
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/koa-series (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/koa-series)
if it went here, to me that would seem more intuitive
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/woods/body-woods/hawaiian-koa (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/woods/body-woods/hawaiian-koa)
a 'specs' search can bring one here
http://www.taylorguitars.com/search/site/specs (http://www.taylorguitars.com/search/site/specs)
clicking on DN-Ke Specs goes here
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/dn-ke/dn-ke-specs (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/dn-ke/dn-ke-specs)
there is a redirect to the guitar, but to me it seems like it could
make more sense if the DN-Ke Specs link went directly here
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/dn-ke#specifications (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/dn-ke#specifications)
other than the current LTDs (that show full front & back views),
most of the guitars seems to have one pic of the correct corresponding model &
the others are of a different model (same series, possibly of a different year)
http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/316ce (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/316ce)
the default pic (last in the series) is of the 2012 316ce, the other 5 are of a 2011 314ce
-
great site.
just one improvement. more pictures.
i find four times more pictures on the elderly guitars website than the taylor site.d
nothing sells more products than pictutres. i, for example, am considering purchasing a third guitar. my choices right now are 814ce, ga8, martin 000-28.
a picture is worth a thousand words.
one more thing, what if you linked a sound link to each model of the same song. add to that the capability of comparing the sound clip to another model.
that would help me decide and probably keep me from pursuing the martin 000-28.
-
I really miss access to past issues of W&S. There is more info there than 1 brain can hold.
Adding back issues of W&S is on our to do list. :)
Shannon, please! You do have a few back issues, but not many. I think many of us would like to be able to access back issues as far back as they go. I wouldn't think this would be a time-consuming project...I hope, I hope, I hope!
Also, I'll echo what many have asked for: tech sheets! I'm frustrated going to the support page and only finding a few random articles on things, and not being able to delve deeply enough to find what I'm looking for. Adjusting the truss rod, for example. That's still not on the site, as far as I can see. Fortunately, someone posted a link on here...somewhere...and I got the article, but it should be easy to find on your site. Even just a simple list of them, nothing fancy, would let us find and download what we want. We really need the site to provide us access to things like that. Shouldn't have to prowl around an unofficial guitar forum to find your official tech sheets!
Thanks.
-
in the owner resources FAQ 'when my guitar was made'
http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/faq-when-was-my-guitar-made (http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/faq-when-was-my-guitar-made)
serial numbers for the 90-92 models, including the 400 series (4-XXXX) &
code digits for baritone, 12 fret, GS Mini & T3 would be nice additions, imho
also, the scroll bar for the series seems to be having an issue -
sometimes it is not possible to scroll far enough to the right to access the acoustic 3-8 series &
it allows scrolling to the left of the koa series to the point to where the windows disappear from view
-
Several times in your Support section you say:
For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Yet it's not a hyperlink, and the tech sheet cannot be found.
Example: String Buzz, Multiple Strings http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/string-buzz-multiple-strings
excerpt:
- Truss rod adjustment. Taking all the strings off at once allows the neck to relax. Restringing doesn’t always bring the neck back to exactly where it was. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. See our tech sheet on adjusting the truss rod. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
- Did you change to a different string gauge or tuning? Either of these can change the amount of tension on the neck, making it backbow and cause buzzing. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Unless I'm imagining it, it appears you're working on this section right now. It looks different than yesterday. So hopefully you'll address this soon.
Thanks.
-
Hi Shannon, some models have different color options for the top and/or the whole guitar. It would be nice if there is a page that shows actual pics of guitars that have different colors. Something like a color chart I guess. Thanks.
-
Hi Shannon.
First and foremost, I think its great you are asking for constructive feedback. Good move! You certainly have received more than an earful.
Personally, I thought the old site was actually quite good (sorry!!). I found things so much faster, and the site had a ton of class. All has changed now. At first I thought I had the wrong site! Not sure what Taylor was trying to achieve here ( if it aint broke...) , but as there is no turning back now, let me just make a few comments. I apologize if these have been noted already.
1) MAIN NAVIGATION BAR - This should always (vs sometimes) be in the same persistent postition. It's perfect at the top of the page. It's therefore quite annoying when its the middle of the Home page. I am always jumping around.
2) JUMPING SUB MENU DROPDOWNS- I find this quite annoying on two levels. First when they pop out unexpectedly, and second when you try to hover over to use them they dissapear on you! For example, if I am on Support and slide diagonally over to Owner Resources, it dissapears . Rather one needs to carefully move the mouse straight down and straight across. Personally, I would just delete them altogether.
3) FINDING A MODEL - Most frustrating now. I think the old site had a simple drop down. I could find my 214e right away. On the new site, there are a few teaser samples in each group, and one needs to continually navigate to find it. Worse, as you navigate, pictures of other models pop out as you hover the mouse and they get in the way to what you want. Some even bolck the navigation arrow. Totally frustrating.
4) FONT/STYLES - I lost track of the number of different fonts and font sizes on this site. It's completely distracting, confusing and takes away from the 'class' of the site. Can you not stick with one theme??? and one main font style?? I tried to isolate the one that is throwing me off the most , and its the large bold serif font. At least all the other fonts are sans serif. I think this was refered to in other posts as well as "chunky typography".
5)RELATIVE SIZING- I found everything super-sized and way too big. I'm over 55 and freely admit I actually like things a little bigger as they are easier to read, but this site seems way too big for comfort. And ironically I dont think you are after the over 55 demographic. I zoomed my window down to 75%, which I never do, and now it looks about right!
Thanks.
-
I finally found the page for my 214e model, http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/214e (http://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/214e), and several of the pics were wrong (214e is not a cutaway)
-
Hey Shannon, I gotta' tell you, man, I'm not a fan.
It seems cumbersome. The old site just seemed to flow a lot better. And I'm all about the flow.
The old site just made sense to me. You know me, I fear change, but this is more than that. This is a change which, if it was going to happen, I think could've happened differently. I know you guys worked your collective butts off on it, and kudos for that, but I was wondering if there was, perhaps, a particular driving force behind the look of the website that, um, maybe might not be a factor anymore (if you hear what I'm sayin'), or if it was all you and Shane.
Either way, the site still works, just not as well, at least not for me...
-
Yeah, I really don't think there is going to be much change to the website. Both Brian and Shannon have not signed on here at UTGF for quite some time.
I don't even use it anymore for checking on Road Shows I just check with my local music store.
-
Both Brian and Shannon have not signed on here at UTGF for quite some time.
Folks don't have to be logged on to read the different forums etc. I'm definitely glad that they're here. ;D
-
Yeah, I really don't think there is going to be much change to the website. Both Brian and Shannon have not signed on here at UTGF for quite some time.
I don't even use it anymore for checking on Road Shows I just check with my local music store.
If Brian signs on here, it'll be a just as a fan of the guitars, and not as a representative of the company. He resigned from Taylor Guitars last week...
-
If Brian signs on here, it'll be a just as a fan of the guitars, and not as a representative of the company. He resigned from Taylor Guitars last week...
:o
-
Yep.
There's been at least one other change, too.
These things happen, though. People leave and new people come in and, somehow, the company continues to do great things...
-
Wow.... ???
-
Yeah, I really don't think there is going to be much change to the website. Both Brian and Shannon have not signed on here at UTGF for quite some time.
I don't even use it anymore for checking on Road Shows I just check with my local music store.
If Brian signs on here, it'll be a just as a fan of the guitars, and not as a representative of the company. He resigned from Taylor Guitars last week...
Just to be clear, are you referring to Brian Swerdfeger?
-
Yeah, I really don't think there is going to be much change to the website. Both Brian and Shannon have not signed on here at UTGF for quite some time.
I don't even use it anymore for checking on Road Shows I just check with my local music store.
If Brian signs on here, it'll be a just as a fan of the guitars, and not as a representative of the company. He resigned from Taylor Guitars last week...
Just to be clear, are you referring to Brian Swerdfeger?
I am...
-
Hi Shannon:
Love the design, but--and I haven't read all the responses so forgive me if I'm repeating--the new site is a nightmare to negotiate on an iPhone.
Bill
-
Hey folks, sorry I haven't been here in a while.
We have been working on some large behind the scenes projects. That has slowed our progress on some of the issues we are talking about here. I know, it chaps my hide too. ;)
But we haven't forgotten you guys and I'll try to log in more often.
Hope you are all well.
Cheers!
-
We have been working on some large behind the scenes projects.
So are you talking about large behind the scenes projects for Taylor?
-
Hi Shannon:
Love the design, but--and I haven't read all the responses so forgive me if I'm repeating--the new site is a nightmare to negotiate on an iPhone.
Bill
You're right. The mobile experience is not great - functional, but frustrating. We're talking about possible solutions.
-
We have been working on some large behind the scenes projects.
So are you talking about large behind the scenes projects for Taylor?
Yep. Don't want to say more until we are closer to launching them. I'll let you guys know more as soon as I can.
-
Several times in your Support section you say:
For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Yet it's not a hyperlink, and the tech sheet cannot be found.
Example: String Buzz, Multiple Strings http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/string-buzz-multiple-strings
excerpt:
- Truss rod adjustment. Taking all the strings off at once allows the neck to relax. Restringing doesn’t always bring the neck back to exactly where it was. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. See our tech sheet on adjusting the truss rod. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
- Did you change to a different string gauge or tuning? Either of these can change the amount of tension on the neck, making it backbow and cause buzzing. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Unless I'm imagining it, it appears you're working on this section right now. It looks different than yesterday. So hopefully you'll address this soon.
Thanks.
Thanks for the heads up. We'll look into it.
-
Hi Shannon, it looks like you guys are doing a great job but I generally feel like the more content there is, the better. I wish you would add some of the old content that used to be available. For instance, showing the pics and specs for pre-2011 "limited edition" guitars would be a good example, they used to be there. Keep up the good work!
-
Hi Shannon, as a Taylor fan I'm very upset you guys took off all the PDF files of the Wood&Steel magazine that were available online up to the year 2000. Is there any way you guys can post those back again?
-
Sucks that for some reason Taylor took off the archive pages, where you used to get
specs on the earlier guitars. Now we have to get information, if we can find it on the
internet....we all know the internet is correct, right? >:(
If you are going to keep Taylor customers, and make new ones it would be a wise move
in my opinion to list the specs (all the specs) on ALL of the guitars from day one.
Mike (trying to become a Taylor customer)
-
If you are going to keep Taylor customers, and make new ones it would be a wise move
in my opinion to list the specs (all the specs) on ALL of the guitars from day one.
Mike (trying to become a Taylor customer)
The website needs help. It needs a lot of help. Compared to the old one, the current one is amateurish.
With that said, though, if someone leaves the Taylor fold because of the website, they're leaving for the wrong reason.
-
Consistency between the information on the website, Wood and Steel, and the Price List is lacking.
I was considering ordering a 214ce BLK guitar because I had played a 2012 model which I liked very much, but it was sold before I had a chance to make the purchase.
It appears that the 214ce BLK is now made of the same woods as the 114ce, which will likely give the guitar a tone that differs from the 2012 model.
I did not put down a deposit to order one, but I will wait to play a new model before I consider making an investment that size.
-
Consistency between the information on the website, Wood and Steel, and the Price List is lacking.
I was considering ordering a 214ce BLK guitar because I had played a 2012 model which I liked very much, but it was sold before I had a chance to make the purchase.
It appears that the 214ce BLK is now made of the same woods as the 114ce, which will likely give the guitar a tone that differs from the 2012 model.
I did not put down a deposit to order one, but I will wait to play a new model before I consider making an investment that size.
I asked my dealer about that. My dealer asked the Rep, and the Rep said that the black 200's will be laminated Maple.
-
I asked my dealer about that. My dealer asked the Rep, and the Rep said that the black 200's will be laminated Maple.
Actually saw a video from NAMM re the new Koa 200's and they made it clear that tone wood doesn't matter on laminates, that a Koa 214 will sound just like a rosewood one.
-
I asked my dealer about that. My dealer asked the Rep, and the Rep said that the black 200's will be laminated Maple.
Actually saw a video from NAMM re the new Koa 200's and they made it clear that tone wood doesn't matter on laminates, that a Koa 214 will sound just like a rosewood one.
The point I was making actually had nothing to do with the sound. The point I was making was with regards to the materials used to build the guitars. If they're saying a guitar is made from a particular type or wood, and it's not, that would be problematic for them.
-
Can I add one more suggestion? ;D
I'd love a virtual guitar maker...not sure what you'd call it but where you could plug in your specs like your typical BTO and it would show you what it would look like instantly.
Sure would be nice and would have been helpful when building my BTO!
-
Thanks for asking! I will echo those who feel the site is a little trickier to get around on, which for a non - Taylor lover, could be challenging. I'd like to see a bit more history retained. I have a 2010 Limited model and I can no longer pull up the specs and info.
Thanks,
Terry
-
Have you thought about adding a guitar archive to the site? I couldn't find one...though, I didn't spend a lot of time looking.
-
+1 for making archive material available.
PDF full specs for older models would be a great help when looking to buy (or sell) guitars that are not in the current catalogue.
I used to read PDF versions of the early 'Wood & Steel' editions online and always meant to save them to my local PC - but I left it too late! Please make them available again.
-
Old back issues of Wood and Steel are available at: http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/woodandsteel/
They go back to Spring 2001.
Hope this helps.
Greg
-
Old back issues of Wood and Steel are available at: http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/woodandsteel/
They go back to Spring 2001.
Hope this helps.
Greg
Thanks, Greg - very much appreciated. I'm off there right now to start downloading! :)
-
Old back issues of Wood and Steel are available at: http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/woodandsteel/
They go back to Spring 2001.
Hope this helps.
Greg
Super helpful, Greg. Thanks!
-
What's wrong with Taylor's website?
Only "CE" models are shown from the 500 Series down. I tried to find info on the 314, and it's not even shown. I started pokin' around, and couldn't find any other non-CE models, unless it was in the 600 Series and above.
Seems pretty poorly managed. Did Taylor yank these models and not tell anyone?
-
It seems there is a bit of a desire to have older issues of Wood and Steel available to view on the website . . . perhaps the entire library. It's a delicious treat. And while some info gets stale, insight, specs and great writing never do . . . and it's fun to survey the aging of Taylor's cast of characters along with our own.
-
It seems there is a bit of a desire to have older issues of Wood and Steel available to view on the website . . . perhaps the entire library. It's a delicious treat. And while some info gets stale, insight, specs and great writing never do . . . and it's fun to survey the aging of Taylor's cast of characters along with our own.
Not that there wouldn't be value in that, but they need to iron out the problems with getting the website to reflect what's actually current first, and then worry about the old stuff.
-
Thanks to jivauk:
-"Old back issues of Wood and Steel are available at: http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/woodandsteel/
They go back to Spring 2001.
Thanks to greg947 for this info - originally published as reply #183 in the Taylor's New Website Q&A thread.
Have followed the link and downloaded them all."
It seems they are available.
-
Where are the tech sheets?? What Taylor page can I find them on??
Eg, where would I find Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment that is referenced here:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/string-buzz-multiple-strings?
I googled it and eventually found it here:
http://www.taylorguitars.com/global/pdfs/truss_rod_adjustment.pdf
But where are all the others??
What Taylor page can I find them on??
-
Several times in your Support section you say:
For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Yet it's not a hyperlink, and the tech sheet cannot be found.
Example: String Buzz, Multiple Strings http://www.taylorguitars.com/blog/taylor-support/string-buzz-multiple-strings
excerpt:
- Truss rod adjustment. Taking all the strings off at once allows the neck to relax. Restringing doesn’t always bring the neck back to exactly where it was. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. See our tech sheet on adjusting the truss rod. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
- Did you change to a different string gauge or tuning? Either of these can change the amount of tension on the neck, making it backbow and cause buzzing. If this is the case, a simple truss rod adjustment will fix it. For more information, review Taylor Tech Sheet “Truss Rod Adjustment.”
Unless I'm imagining it, it appears you're working on this section right now. It looks different than yesterday. So hopefully you'll address this soon.
Thanks.
Thanks for the heads up. We'll look into it.
Still cannot find this tech sheet as links were never added and the search function does not return the tech sheet. Would be great if a higher degree of technical information be made available on Taylor's site. It would benefit alot of us who setup our own guitars and such.
Thanks
Site
-
....Still cannot find this tech sheet as links were never added and the search function does not return the tech sheet. Would be great if a higher degree of technical information be made available on Taylor's site. It would benefit alot of us who setup our own guitars and such....
For now, its here: http://www.taylorguitars.com/global/pdfs/truss_rod_adjustment.pdf
-
....Still cannot find this tech sheet as links were never added and the search function does not return the tech sheet. Would be great if a higher degree of technical information be made available on Taylor's site. It would benefit alot of us who setup our own guitars and such....
For now, its here: http://www.taylorguitars.com/global/pdfs/truss_rod_adjustment.pdf
Thank you for that link!!!
-
You can also use for now this link (it;s a google search string) and you see about a dozen tech sheets:
https://www.google.ca/#sclient=psy-ab&q=http:%2F%2Fwww.taylorguitars.com%2Fglobal%2Fpdfs&oq=http:%2F%2Fwww.taylorguitars.com%2Fglobal%2Fpdfs&gs_l=serp.3...27302.31227.0.31967.12.12.0.0.0.0.177.1393.1j11.12.0...0.0...1c.1.18.psy-ab.7UTCsOZxQ6g&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=ba31a0e8fb3e40fd&biw=1413&bih=919 (https://www.google.ca/#sclient=psy-ab&q=http:%2F%2Fwww.taylorguitars.com%2Fglobal%2Fpdfs&oq=http:%2F%2Fwww.taylorguitars.com%2Fglobal%2Fpdfs&gs_l=serp.3...27302.31227.0.31967.12.12.0.0.0.0.177.1393.1j11.12.0...0.0...1c.1.18.psy-ab.7UTCsOZxQ6g&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=ba31a0e8fb3e40fd&biw=1413&bih=919)
I absolutely do not understand why they refuse to post their own tech sheets on their own web site!!!
-
Thanks for the link. I just saved all of them to my PC.
-
You could also go here (Taylor's old website stuff): http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/contact/customerservice/
On the second menus bar you will see "Tech Sheets". Go there and find the original 20 tech sheets.
Hope this helps.
Greg
-
You could also go here (Taylor's old website stuff): http://legacyweb.taylorguitars.com/contact/customerservice/
On the second menus bar you will see "Tech Sheets". Go there and find the original 20 tech sheets.
Hope this helps.
Greg
I see the button for Tech Sheets, but it no longer works (for me anyway). I am on IE10, Windows 7, desktop.
-
That's weird. I just tried it again, and it worked for me. I also clicked on one of the pdf's and that worked, too. I am using Firefox as a browser on a Mac. I don't know if that would make a difference.
Greg
-
Howdy,
Satisfied Baby Taylor owner here. At the risk of offending, I find it confusing trying navigate my way through Taylor's line of fine guitars. We can navigate by shape, by wood, by category and by series..and that's just the acoustics. This isn't necessarily the fault of the website designer! I'm probably in the minority here, anyway. I'm interested in adding an affordable, made-in-the-USA Taylor to my collection in the next year and enjoy this forum.
-
Excellent job. There was a bit of a learning curve for this mid boomer, but I've gotten used to it.
Suggestions:
1. We need a more obvious link to tech sheets - the kind that come with the guitars, and others that might be of help
2. I've noticed that people often have a hard time finding basic pages such as where we change our address
3. Something I would really like to see is a section where you can find specs and pictures (where available) of TG's vintage/older guitars. Oftentimes we find them for sale, but the seller doesn't have much info on them.
4. Have a "Build Your Taylor Knowledge" section that takes us in depth with guitar construction and related issues.
5. A better video archive section that searches all of TG's videos, even their older ones. I've tried finding a video about the GS models (three guys and Bob playing and talking about the new model) and can't for the life of me find it even on Youtube.
Thanks for asking for input. This should keep you busy for a while 8)
-
This link for the Taylor Tech Sheet on truss rod adjustment works today (Nov. 23, 2014) ... not sure if it's the latest version Taylor issued:
http://c3.zzounds.com/media/truss_rod_adjustment-c53669fbee160b82ed2b3d44fed49ac3.pdf
-
about halfway down the page 'topics' shows the tech sheets currently on their 'site -
http://www.taylorguitars.com/support (http://www.taylorguitars.com/support)
it's been a while since a truss rod tool has been included with the guitar,
hence the reason why the truss rod adjustment tech sheet is not currently listed