Taylor's Golden Era (?)

[Folkstrum]

Pardon the newbie question. If it's been rehashed to death, point me in the right direction.

When did Taylor make the move from Lemongrove to El Cajon and the more "factory-ized" construction? I've seen several references to the "old days" as turning out more valued (not necessarily valuable) instruments.

Also--the new neck thing, which I got the video on a couple of years ago: it seems some consider these a drawback versus the old system (just like some don't much care for the new ES electronics I surmise).

Is a pristine Taylor from say '91 or '92 considered similarly to Martin's "pre-war" builds? (maybe a lousy comparison, but it's the best I could come up with on short order). So many questions; so little time; so little money!

[Jeff M]

Originally Posted by Folkstrum

......).

Is a pristine Taylor from say '91 or '92 considered similarly to Martin's "pre-war" builds? (maybe a lousy comparison, but it's the best I could come up with on short order). So many questions; so little time; so little money!

Not that I have noticed. From what I can tell, in the used guitar market a Taylor from the "Lemon Grove" days commands no more than a later date Taylor.

[flyfis4fun]

I own a 97 614c and a 2000 LOTF 310 as well as a 2004 30th Comm 355. Here are some personal observations:

Neck: The NT necks are easier to play and feel better in my hands.

Fit and Finish: The post NT neck guitars fit is amazing. However the quality of wood on my two 2000 era Taylors can't even compete in the same ballpark as the wood on my 97. The fit on my 97 is good but not quite as precise as the 2000 era but the spruce top on my 614c is stunning as is the maple. Definetly a higher grade of wood was used on the 614c. (I should note that I am not just comparing the wood used in a 600 series to a 300 series. The 600 series should always have a higher grade of wood then a 300 but in comparisons to current day 600-800 series, the 97 spruce is a much higher grade then any 2000 era Taylor I have played.)

Tone: I get a ton of compliments on how good all 3 of my guitars sound.

Taylor has put out so many guitars in several different development phases I am not sure you will see a golden era develop. In my opinion, the late pre NT neck to the early post NT neck era is my favorite because this is where I think Taylor found their groove. By 2002-03 you start seeing different tuners used, a scaleback in ornamentation on several models and the cases being made in Mexico vs. the USA. Just my opinion, I am sure others will disagree and have their favorite era.

[Curly]

I wouldn't draw any generalizations from this, but ..

a friend of mine bought a nice old Dreadnought model from probably the American Dream days, or shortly after.
I thought it had a very good mellow tone, similar to my Martin Dreadnoughts.

It was traded to the factory for a beautiful koa guitar.

I preferred the tone of the older one though.

I would expect if you were to ask Taylor, they would say they are making as fine of guitars as ever, and any differences in tone are likely attributed to maturing, and the differences between individual guitars.

[jsuk]

im not sure if this was characteristic of the early 90's
but i really like the thin neck on my taylor 710
its almost like an electric guitar, so playable

and for the tone, it sounds a lot nicer than the new 700s
in my opinion, but then again, maybe its cause they
havent had time to really open up


but hey those are just my thoughts.

[wthurman]

This is definitely a rehash. Me, I generally prefer the pre-NT necks, and have personal preferences about Taylor's apparent philosophy in the late 90's - I think there was more value then. But that's really opinion, and there are still great Taylors. My two favorites have both come from the last two years (2003, 2004): A 915C LTD Maple Jumbo and a 2004 XXX-MC.

As some have mentioned in the past, Taylor really has barely been around long enough to have more than one 'era' although you could say there is "pre-NT" and "post-NT". And it's too early to call something "golden" when compared to a second era 5 years long. I'd say the jury is out - and it will depend on whether Taylor keeps going with vision gained lost and gained again over time, like Martin, or passes into mediocrity when Bob Taylor and Kurt Listug are no longer around. Heck, who knows? It might even get better!

Well, we'll see... or our children and grandchildren will.

Take care,

Wade

[aLbie]

Ive owned a and played several NT neck guitars, and I must say its comfortable; it truly pertains to the ease and playability that Taylor has upheld throughout the past years. But the pre-NT necks are no better no worse. Theres much dispute over whats "better", which I find too vague to answer. Personally, quality-wise, the pre-NT neck is worth more. A solid piece of high grade mahogany vs a 3 piece formed joint neck is something I dont have to have second thoughts about. However, whats more efficient, is probabely the NT neck; its one of the reasons they designed it. The bolt-on lock system is documented as "easier to reset/adjust and structurally stronger". The neck lends off some factor of tone, but its not a big one: like spices on your food; the foods fine without it, it just tastes better with it.

But take into account; a well kept guitar only needs a neck reset maybe once every 10 years. Although technically the pre-NT necks is "harder" to reset, its not something you need to take into high account when purchasing a guitar. unless of course you plan on playing baseball with it

Taylor has seen some very major and minor changes throughout its production years. I think in a nutshell, the guitars of today got more efficient; thanks to all that technology has to offer. However, the quality of materials available is much less in general. I think in that sense, Bob Taylor has done a great job at approaching efficiency appliance in a more demanding yet continuously rationing world of luthiery. The NT neck design is a great example of this

So... thats my stab at it, but if i had to say one thing to sum it up; We here at the forum often talk about technical details and examine every aspect of any given taylor or guitar, which is not a bad thing. But sometimes, I think its best to know: Majority of Taylor guitars old or not, are wonderfully constructed, its hard to run into a bad one. Hence, let your ears tell you whats better or worse for you

[cpmusic]

For whatever it's worth, all the Lemon Grove Taylors were hand-built in the manner that a small or solo shop would follow, because in those days Taylor was a small shop. Therefore, there's a little more variation among instruments, both visually and tonally. They also tend to be plainer looking. For example, my '83 615 has the same visual appointments as the current 400 series, without so much as a hint of abalone or gold-colored plating. It also has a rosewood fretboard and bridge.

Taylor moved out of their Lemon Grove shop in the mid to late 80s, and started using CNC machines sometime after that. I don't have this on any great authority, but it seems to me that their necks have gotten progressively meatier over the years, with the greatest bulk coming with the NT design.

[Rich from Milwaukee]

Taylor's golden era was before they were bought by Fender.



RfM