If Bob Taylor can convince you, a maple acoustic is in your GAS future....

[Brucebubs]

mmmm ... I have 2 Maple bodied guitars.
One is a jumbo 12-string that I love.
The other is a Grand Concert 6-string made by Bob that I don't.

[epluribus36]

Wouldn't a maple guitar be all sticky?

[mickey66]

"Martin does the same thing with their X-series HPL "environmentally friendly" guitars." Yep.....good ole martin guitars! Save a tree build them gits out of plastic! pretty soon all guitars will be plastic & some kind of laminate material....god help us all! I never did like maple on guitars

[mhs]

Originally Posted by epluribus36

Wouldn't a maple guitar be all sticky?

Of course it would. But on the bright side, you can eat the maple sugar candy tuning heads if you get hungry on stage.

[franchelB]

Well, I use to see more 600 series from Taylor than many of their other series.

[Ted @ LA Guitar Sales]

Originally Posted by rmyAddison

...I am not a fan of Taylors (Martin guy, suit yourself), and I have never played a Maple guitar any brand that I liked, and that's 48 years of playing...

Given you preference for Martin I am not surprised that you don't care for Maple. I have owned more guitars than I can remember, yet I don't recall ever playing a Maple Martin that grabbed me. On the other hand, some of my favorite Taylors and Gibsons had Maple back and sides, as did my all time favorite Paragon. In my experience some tone woods just go with some brands better than others.

[sprucedup]

Originally Posted by Guitarsan

".... our project [Andy Powers and Bob] for this whole year has been to redesign the maple guitars. Why don't we sell more maple guitars? One, people think they're too bright sounding. Well, Andy can fix that. Two, 90 percent of people simply don't want a blonde guitar.......Andy figured that out. He just dogged it until he came up with a staining method that gives us beautiful colors......"

I think it's pretty clear from the quote that the redesign is 100% a business decision. They have a line which uses a cost-effective material that has underperformed in sales compared to their other existing lines. They've identified the reasons why they believe it has underperformed. They've discussed potential solutions to the issues that people have with maple guitars in general. Sounds like a legitimate business strategy. I'm pretty excited to see what they end up doing with the redesign.

[44Runner]

I think the hate for maple is unfortunate and stems from companies using maple in different situations where 98% of people would prefer almost any other wood.

But if you are a Maple hater, I challenge you to seek out a good Gibson J-200 or a Taylor 618 to play and tell me those guitars don't sound awesome. There is just something about maple that makes such a good jumbo.

[Dru Edwards]

The 618 (GO) I played was an amazing sounding guitar. I'm looking forward to see how Andy is going to redesign that for the 'better'.

Originally Posted by sprucedup

I think it's pretty clear from the quote that the redesign is 100% a business decision. They have a line which uses a cost-effective material that has underperformed in sales compared to their other existing lines. They've identified the reasons why they believe it has underperformed. They've discussed potential solutions to the issues that people have with maple guitars in general. Sounds like a legitimate business strategy. I'm pretty excited to see what they end up doing with the redesign.

But it's clearly not 100%. Of course they have to increase marketing and demand for these woods because if people don't want them, they won't make them, and will end up using other woods that aren't as sustainable. To me, it comes across as an ideal mix of both business and environmental consciousness. And it's also obvious to me that the environmental consciousness is driving the business model, not vice versa.

[cke]

Originally Posted by Guitarsan

Oh boy, as much as I try to address the lowest common denominator with my OP (see brackets, etc.) something flares up that wasn't there. Since you don't know my heart, I'll declare it here. I worship only One. But there are a number of us mere mortals I admire and would aspire to be more like, some I call heroes.

So, keeping score:

Those who believe Bob is 100% altruistic: 0
Those who don't believe Bob is 100% altruistic: 1

Those who think he's a saint: 0
Those who don't think he's a saint: 1

Those who think he's a god: 0
Those who don't think he's a god: 1

Those who worship him: 0
Those who think he shouldn't be worshipped : 1

OK, carry on.

Be careful! This could get you banned! Half the AGF will call for your head!

How can you question the motivations of someone who corned the market on low quality low cost ebony and then launches a campaign to convince everyone that it is the only moral way to go - which has to be bought from him? Who built a guitar out of scrap wood which cost nothing (but it did sound like a a taylor ) to show that wood is not important? Now trying to get everyone to use less expensive wood? And who won't be lowering his price by so much as a cent? Don't look for a pattern in all that!

[mickey66]

Originally Posted by joemcg

I play maple mandolins, why not maple guitars?

Also for those of you that seem to think Bob Taylor is strictly motivated by profit, please explain the economics of the GS Mini Holden Village to me (which by the way has laminated MAPLE b&s.)

Joe

Every time Gibson guitars(btw i love them)introduced a maple guitar back & sides they sounded like crap! Way too bright! NOW, Taylor wants us to buy maple gits that Bob Taylor will build? The same guitar company(Taylor) that builds the brightest sounding guitars on the planet....???

[jimmy bookout]

Originally Posted by cke

Be careful! This could get you banned! Half the AGF will call for your head!

How can you question the motivations of someone who corned the market on low quality low cost ebony and then launches a campaign to convince everyone that it is the only moral way to go which has to be bought from him? Who built a guitar out of scrap wood which cost nothing (but it did sound like a a taylor ) to show that wood is not important? Now trying to get everyone to use less expensive wood? And who won't be lowering his price by so much as a cent? Don't look for a pattern in all that!

The funniest thing about a post like this is that it is so DRAMATIC.

BTW, high quality (aka HIGH FIGURE) Maple is NOT cheap, certainly much more expensive than those staples of the flat top, Indian Rosewood and Honduran Mahogany.

I am amazed at the "glass half empty" viewpoint of some of you.

Jimmy

PS. This "low quality" ebony (i.e. not uniformly black) can be put in the same category with:
Bearclaw Spruce tops: Show me ONE 1940's Martin with a bearclaw top....you can't, because bearclaw used to be considered a flaw. Now, it's an option and costs more!
Sapwood: Show me ONE 1940's Martin with sapwood showing in the back....you can't because sapwood used to be considered a flaw. Of course, back then they just stained it to match.

[grim83]

Idk where they've been but maple has been on my gas list for a while in the form of jumbos and mainly that of a sj200.

Originally Posted by jimmy bookout

The funniest thing about a post like this is that it is so DRAMATIC.

BTW, high quality (aka HIGH FIGURE) Maple is NOT cheap, certainly much more expensive than those staples of the flat top, Indian Rosewood and Honduran Mahogany.

I am amazed at the "glass half empty" viewpoint of some of you.

Jimmy

Yep, it amazes me too, Jimmy. Hard to start a thread here anymore without bringing out negativity. Doesn't matter the topic.