Did Martin 000-18 ever have 1 3/4 nut?

[fongie]

Originally Posted by ♏artin

Very strange. Guy seems like an honest person though. Spoke with him. Confirmed the nut width many times before he knew of my interest. Claims Martin confirmed.

If he's being dishonest id be pretty pissed.

I would too........good luck

[bozz_2006]

Would he be willing to give you the serial number? Then you could call Martin and get straight info.

[♏artin]

Got off the phone with the guy. Gave me a serial number, a guy named Henry at Martin and their number. Unfortunately their office was closed.

He did claim he calls them all the time with specs so...


Got him to crack out a tape measurer over the phone and he gave me the following:

1 3/4 at the nut
1.5 string spacing at the nut
2 1/4 string spacing at the saddle

Sounds promising so ill report back.

It will either be a good score or a cautionary tale.

[John Arnold]

The seller should not mind giving you the serial number, so you can call Martin and confirm it.
I have seen this very thing on several Martins, so it is a possibility.

[fongie]

Sounds promising..........

[OneMansGuitar]

Well there is much to say in favor of the straight braced 000-28 that does not translate as well to the 000-18, which is why one survives in the Martin catalog today but the other does not. But that version of the 000-18 isn/t "bad." It is just kinda quiet and subdued, unless you really dig in and attach the thing.

Both of them, I believe, were built to withstand Medium strings and steel fingerpicks, to make up for the lack of electric amplification during the 1950s and 1960s.

Todd is correct that Martin would allow "one or two changes" at the time the guitar was claimed to be built, and the width at nut was one of the acceptable changes. I have seen Standard D-18s and D-28s ordered with 1-3/4" width at nut being the only change, without a change to the model stamp.

The string spacing may also have been changed to 2-1/4", I do not now remember.

BUT, in my experience, this was limited to BATCHES ordered by a dealer. I wonder if today's Customer Service at Martin could confirm that aspect with this particular serial number.

[fongie]

Cheers Todd.........actually your demo on the 000-28 on youtube is what inspired me. Something about these 5/16"straight bracing that's starting to tickle my fancy. Just love that clear crisp tone, I just hope they are all consistent.

[♏artin]

Well 4 hours of driving later....


















*drumroll*








It was a Martin 000-18 with standard specs. 1 11/16 at the nut and I believe 2 3/16 at the saddle in less than excellent condition. A straight forward 000-18 (with a nice voice however) but clearly not what I was looking for.

Was a waste of an afternoon however I did meet a very nice gentleman and got to play a few other vintage instruments of his.

I really do appreciate all the help. Unfortunately the search goes on....

[fongie]

Sorry to hear that Martin, that was disappointing. BUT like you said, you met a nice gentleman.

Anyway hope you find what you are looking for soon. Like Buck say........2014+ 000-18. Mate I have one and I can tell ya, it's worth the dough. Think about it.

[Joe McNamara]

Originally Posted by OneMansGuitar

Todd is correct that Martin would allow "one or two changes" at the time the guitar was claimed to be built, and the width at nut was one of the acceptable changes. I have seen Standard D-18s and D-28s ordered with 1-3/4" width at nut being the only change, without a change to the model stamp.

The string spacing may also have been changed to 2-1/4", I do not now remember.

BUT, in my experience, this was limited to BATCHES ordered by a dealer. I wonder if today's Customer Service at Martin could confirm that aspect with this particular serial number.

I can only speak to my time there , '96-'13, but prior to 2006 only up to two changes from stock were allowed before requiring the guitar to go through the custom shop process, which would change a model name to "Custom" on the neck block. These allowed changes were defined as "Control Number" instruments and while I can't find a copy of the pre 6/2006 policy to confirm it exactly, I remember it as somewhat loose. Besides the minimal impact changes - tuner swaps, UST additions, sunbursts, pick guard swaps/deletions and the like, all of which did carry a charge (without applying the additional formula used to figure CS instrument prices) there were a few surprising CN changes that allowed a '99 000-18 w say, a 1 3/4" x 2 1/4" nut and saddle to retain its' model # stamp. Essentially if you needed to "cut" it "cost". eg Changing scale length was custom, changing f-board material was NC. As I said, it was pretty loose, with one person the lone arbiter of CN/CS status most of the time, and that person was sometimes amenable to a reasoned argument. So the rule was "maybe".
Todd, I never had to order in batches to effect a CN change like the one above, but that may have well been due to my charm, good looks and amazing, amazing humility. So humble, so very,very humble I can tell you - nobody is humbler than me, bigly.
In 2006 the CN program was tightened dramatically - no CNs were allowed to Authentic, or GE/Marquis instruments. Limited Editions only were allowed a CN to add or upgrade electronics, however deletion of stock LE electronics was NOT allowed. The rest of the line were only allowed 1 (one) deviation from the following list:
addition, removal or upgrade of a pickguard
tuner changes, w/o any headstock change
electronics upgrade
sunbursts

I'm pretty sure I remember nut and saddle (spacing and/or material) changes being allowed under the old CN policy, which would be in line with the OPs post, but I can't speak definitively. My amazing memory - so, so amazing - nobody has a more amazingly memorable memory than me.

Hope that helps.
Joe

[♏artin]

Thanks!

The 2014 (or later) Martin 000-18 is on my very short "short list".

Looking at a Webber OM too so I may be better off in the end.

[fongie]

Originally Posted by OneMansGuitar

Well there is much to say in favor of the straight braced 000-28 that does not translate as well to the 000-18, which is why one survives in the Martin catalog today but the other does not. But that version of the 000-18 isn/t "bad." It is just kinda quiet and subdued, unless you really dig in and attach the thing.

Both of them, I believe, were built to withstand Medium strings and steel fingerpicks, to make up for the lack of electric amplification during the 1950s and 1960s.

I'm sure it is safe to hijack this thread.........

Todd I'm still thinkin to purchase the used 2006 000-28 I mentioned in this thread. The owner is askin 2,600K AUD here in Australia. Do you think these 000-28 are worth it or should I hold back for something better?

I'm thinkin I want a cheap, new or used short scale, 1 11/16" nut Rosewood. Most of my small bodies have been scalloped 1/4" bracings, 1 3/4" nut Rosewood or hog with an exception with my OMJM. I have never played or own a 5/16" straight bracing before.

I'm not sure if my ears are playing games with me but I seem to like the sound of straight bracings lately. Are they as good as some say or do you think I should wait for a scalloped bracing? Keep in mind that I would love a 000-28H or a Custom but I won't order from the US because of the cost. And finding a 000-28H here in Aust. is near impossible. Cheers