#16
|
|||
|
|||
As a disclaimer I am not in the Martin "camp" Nor in the Taylor camp. I own both brands as well as others...
But the truth is that Taylor shifted the paradigm of guitars sound and build. While some folks simplify it and say that Taylor guitars are "brighter", IMO that is an oversimplification. While some lower end Taylors and those with Cedar tops are brighter guitars overall, the higher end Taylors aren't generically brighter, but fuller and richer sounding with extended overtones and resultant harmonics. And Taylor guitars exemplify today's "modern" sound. And Martin is following suit- starting with the D28 redesign. I believe that Martin has recognized that the only way forward is to go along. While there are folks that still love the old traditional acoustic sounds, many our sonic expectations have migrated to that that modern sound. And while every hand has it's own neck preferences, perhaps Martin is following Taylor into the world of wider nuts and shallower necks. I don't know, but how would you explain changing the nut width on such an iconic guitar as the D28? Actually, from a sound standpoint I think Martin is doing the right thing, but should have a different model designation. I know that Taylor does this and IMO it a disingenuous marketing ploy, confusing the unwitting buyers who don't know the difference between a 2016 and 2018 model called by the same name.
__________________
Assuming is not knowing. Knowing is NOT the same as understanding. There is a difference between compassion and wisdom, however compassion cannot supplant wisdom, and wisdom can not occur without understanding. facts don't care about your feelings and FEELINGS ALONE MAKE FOR TERRIBLE, often irreversible DECISIONS |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
I'm not sure about the New Coke analogy. If anything, the changes Martin is making to their standard lineup are more akin to Coca-Cola going back to their tried and true recipe and iconic bottle shape. These guitars will look and sound closer to their golden era instruments of the 30s and 40s and less like the overbuilt instruments of the 60s and 70s.
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Sometimes I wonder if we aren't kindred spirits.
__________________
Nothing bothers me unless I let it. Martin D18 Gibson J45 Gibson J15 Fender Copperburst Telecaster Squier CV 50 Stratocaster Squier CV 50 Telecaster |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Again, I do agree with you, I am just saying that their sound in theory is actually a homage to more vintage Martins. Where they are becoming modern is in their specs and feel, not necessarily sound. If anything I've noticed, Martin is getting more clarity and top movement out of there guitars, which is indicative of what people really want...prewar guitars. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
I also like Taylors and Martins. The post above reminds me that when I was visiting the Martin factory in 2015, I noticed a couple of Taylors in the Martin "sound lab."
When I mentioned this to the tour guide, he said, "Trust me--they're doing the same thing with our guitars."
__________________
2015 Martin D-18 1982 Martin HD-28 2013 Taylor 314ce 2004 Fender Telecaster MIM 2010 Martin DCX1RE 1984 Sigma DM3 Fender Mustang III v2 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I don't know that I agree. The new D28 is more resonant and vibrant than any of it's old guitars. I was in Miami a few weeks ago and got to play some expensive vintage guitars. And while it was cool to hold history in my hands, the sounds they produced were what I perceive as "vintage" but not something I'd go out of my way to own because of the sounds. I'm not into "forward shifting" of the braces or any construction mumbo-jumbo, but am solely interested in sound and feel. And my impression of the new D28 is a modern sound, not a vintage one. And the nut width... How can you argue that they are not following Taylor? Don't get me wrong, I think the new Martin guitars will capture back a lot of the buyers who like the Martin brand but previously prone to buy Taylors for the sound. My gripe is calling it a D28 when it needs its own designation, if only adding some letters to it like the HD28. Taylor btw is notorious for making radical changes to it's models and keeping the name. Look at a 2008 614ce, then compare it with a 2011 614 and then a 2016 614. They all have the same model name and the only thing that makes these guitars remotely similar are the maple back and sides and sitka top.
__________________
Assuming is not knowing. Knowing is NOT the same as understanding. There is a difference between compassion and wisdom, however compassion cannot supplant wisdom, and wisdom can not occur without understanding. facts don't care about your feelings and FEELINGS ALONE MAKE FOR TERRIBLE, often irreversible DECISIONS |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Yes, I do think that spec wise, as far as nut width and neck profile are concerned, Martin is taking a play from the Taylor playbook. But Martin is not angling braces, changing their patterns, or creating any "innovation" in bracing (see what I did there?). Are they doing this as a result of Taylor? Oh definitely, I agree with you! But I can't say that just moving braces forward catches Martin's hand in Taylor's cookie jar so to speak. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I own a revamped 00-18 and i couldn't imagine Martin calling it anything else but maybe they could add an *asterisk meaning 2016 on. Now my 000-15m has the same exact neck shape as my 00-18 and also the same neck shape as all the updated models. If you don't like the MLO neck, as i didn't at first but grew accustomed to it, you will have to adapt, overcome and improvise as gunny highway once said. Tom
__________________
E10 00 Eastman 00-18 Martin 000-15 SM Martin E20 OM-SB Eastman |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Business is business. The first task of ANY business is to STAY in business.
This was a business decision on Martin's part, and a good one, so far as I can tell. More power to them. Wade Hampton Miller |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
well, since you've tried all the new ones and have that viewpoint, then taylor or gibson may be more to your making. everything on the agf, is subjective.
play music!
__________________
2014 Martin 00015M 2009 Martin 0015M 2008 Martin HD28 2007 Martin 000-18GE 2006 Taylor 712 2006 Fender Parlor GDP100 1978 Fender F65 1968 Gibson B25-12N Various Electrics |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Uh, I'm betting you're wrong. I used to be in a competitive business and you wouldn't believe the lows that competing companies will stoop to if they think it will give them a millimeter advantage against a competitor. It's ugly out there, believe it.
|
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
Actually, from a sound standpoint I think Martin is doing the right thing, but should have a different model designation.
I agree 100% as well. And I'm someone inclined to buy the new D-28 with the wider spacing. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
OK -- how about this? D-28+, 000-18+, etc for revamped post-2016 models. Not unlike the Ford Escort versus the Escort LX model. Then in a couple more years they can call those modifications the ++ version.
I don't have a dog in this fight, since all of my Martin's are now sold off and I am quite unlikely to ever buy another. I will try them out as the opportunities arise, but I've "been there, done that". For those of you that want them, I'm leaving extra stock available in the marketplace -- more for you. |