V-Class bracing demo snippet from Taylor event

[lgherb]

Originally Posted by mattcran

I'm really digging the one that looks like the front of an old steam locomotive. Is that cow catcher bracing?

I thought the exact same thing. There is one that might be more of a "Petticoat Junction" bracing too.

[vindibona1]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

I think the key word is "offended". Why are they "offended"? ...I don't get the part about people being "offended" by Taylor's marketing.

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

I'm more "annoyed" than "offended" for the reason stated above...Intonation is the ability of an instrument to achieve the desired pitches. There is instrumentation that can determine how well an instrument does that. Show me the difference in accuracy of intonation between, say, their own X braced guitar and their new V braced guitar.

I agree with Charles. I'm not offended. I'm annoyed; annoyed on several levels. It's hard to be upset with a company that looks out for its own interests. And its main interest is SELLING guitars. Its second prime interest is maintaining margin and profit. MARKETING sells guitars and maintains pricing so that margin and profit can be achieved. But Taylor does this in a way that is minimally annoying. I can see how people can be disturbed because Taylor does things that confuses the market, often downgrading appointments, markedly changing a model, markets elements within the new models, so much that the only thing that the two models have in similar are the name, shape and wood.

Let's take the 614ce, as an example. My friend has a 2008 614ce. His guitar has a finger joint at the headstock, a 3 piece back, gorgeous flamed maple (maybe AAA) that is a work of art in itself. Then came my 2011 614. Now it has a 2 piece back, maple not nearly so wonderful, a scarf joint instead of finger joint and a difference pickup system. It is obvious that looking at these guitars, beyond the shape and the wood they are two different guitars, but still called by the same name with no intermediate designation. Fast forward to today. That 614 now has a torrefied top, a different pickup system yet, forward shifted bracing and stained maple. Again, keeping the same exact name without any secondary designation. Are the latter models an "improvement" to the earlier ones? Perhaps in some regard. Are they the SAME guitar that warrants the same name without designation. IMO absolutely not. This makes unknowledgeable buyers targets and owners subject to difficulty selling older models.

And in terms of "upgrades and improvements". Is the ES2 system really better than the ES1? I'll leave that to you. But what we do know is that it is far easier to bolt on a piezo pickup under the bridge than to put a magnetic pickup in the neck and connect all the wires. Again, I refer to the three piece back and neck joint. Improvements, or just easier/cheaper to build? I'll leave that to you too.

In this case, they put the V-Class bracing on the 914. What does that do to the value of the older 914? Is it the same guitar? IMO yes- but no. It the V-Class bracing that much of an improvement? Maybe it gives something, but it's got to take something away at the same time. It certainly will change the sound.

As for the "intonation" discussion...
Technically speaking, you are not going to change the string intonation with body bracing. HOWEVER we have to understand that the BODY of the guitar has it's own resonance frequencies, some respond extremely well to sympathetic vibrations of the strings and some elements within guitar bodies fight the vibrations, having their own harmonic structure. So, the more you can get the guitar tops/bodies to MORE ACCURATELY resonate sympathetically to the strings, the better the intonation will SOUND. Let me provide my own anecdote of discovery.

One thing I've noticed in my own playing is that I tend to strike the string too harshly. In doing so I can hear the "undertones" of the body producing harmonics that are slightly out of kilter with the vibrations coming from the strings. Perhaps string deflection contributes to this, but I'm hearing it in the bodies of my guitars. I've come to this conclusion, partially based on changes in resonance of my 2011 614 after 200+ hours of the Tonerite process. Whatever it is/was, something changed the harmonic response of this guitar. We don't know what the Tonerite is supposed to do exactly, but it's done something far beyond what I expected. [It is important to note that the results on the two other guitars undergoing the process, while noticeable, have not been quite so remarkable in transformation as my 614. YMMV]. My original (minor) objection to the 614 (and caused me to buy an 814) was unwanted "undertones" that I could distinctly hear. Now, I can pound on that thing and it just resonates from here to tomorrow with a warm round sound that I wouldn't expect from maple. I digress...

I'm not offended by Taylor doing what they're doing. I get it. But what they have done repeatedly has simply made me quite skeptical of any claims they make. Again, they're in business to sell guitars. And they know that without the constant CHANGE, selling new guitars to new or existing customers will be greatly limited. My only beef is that they don't designate the changes in their model numbers and leave it up to the buyer to discern which years have which appointments and structures and electronics.

[Goodallboy]

I get the frustration, thanks to those well written posts. I agree with most of the points from a Taylor owners standpoint.

From someone who isn't a Taylor owner. and never liked a Taylor until playing some of the re-voiced models, I have an observation that departs somewhat from what I've read, and may be controversial.

From the moment I played the re-voiced models, it was clear to me that Taylor was moving away from the original Taylor sound. The guitars were bold, loud and very bass heavy.

I tend (in spite of the type of new bracing) to think they are going further into that loud, resonant, sonic space. They're after that guitar player and hope the can keep those in the family, but I think they've turned the corner on the traditional Taylor sound.

That's an opinion from someone not of the family and looking from the outside. How that flies with others I'm interested in finding out. It's just what my ears tell me and nothing else.

At my age that's very suspect.

[Jeff Scott]

Originally Posted by vindibona1

I agree with Charles. I'm not offended. I'm annoyed; annoyed on several levels. It's hard to be upset with a company that looks out for its own interests. And its main interest is SELLING guitars. Its second prime interest is maintaining margin and profit. MARKETING sells guitars and maintains pricing so that margin and profit can be achieved. But Taylor does this in a way that is minimally annoying. I can see how people can be disturbed because Taylor does things that confuses the market, often downgrading appointments, markedly changing a model, markets elements within the new models, so much that the only thing that the two models have in similar are the name, shape and wood.

Let's take the 614ce, as an example. My friend has a 2008 614ce. His guitar has a finger joint at the headstock, a 3 piece back, gorgeous flamed maple (maybe AAA) that is a work of art in itself. Then came my 2011 614. Now it has a 2 piece back, maple not nearly so wonderful, a scarf joint instead of finger joint and a difference pickup system. It is obvious that looking at these guitars, beyond the shape and the wood they are two different guitars, but still called by the same name with no intermediate designation. Fast forward to today. That 614 now has a torrefied top, a different pickup system yet, forward shifted bracing and stained maple. Again, keeping the same exact name without any secondary designation. Are the latter models an "improvement" to the earlier ones? Perhaps in some regard. Are they the SAME guitar that warrants the same name without designation. IMO absolutely not. This makes unknowledgeable buyers targets and owners subject to difficulty selling older models.

And in terms of "upgrades and improvements". Is the ES2 system really better than the ES1? I'll leave that to you. But what we do know is that it is far easier to bolt on a piezo pickup under the bridge than to put a magnetic pickup in the neck and connect all the wires. Again, I refer to the three piece back and neck joint. Improvements, or just easier/cheaper to build? I'll leave that to you too.

In this case, they put the V-Class bracing on the 914. What does that do to the value of the older 914? Is it the same guitar? IMO yes- but no. It the V-Class bracing that much of an improvement? Maybe it gives something, but it's got to take something away at the same time. It certainly will change the sound.

As for the "intonation" discussion...
Technically speaking, you are not going to change the string intonation with body bracing. HOWEVER we have to understand that the BODY of the guitar has it's own resonance frequencies, some respond extremely well to sympathetic vibrations of the strings and some elements within guitar bodies fight the vibrations, having their own harmonic structure. So, the more you can get the guitar tops/bodies to MORE ACCURATELY resonate sympathetically to the strings, the better the intonation will SOUND. Let me provide my own anecdote of discovery.

One thing I've noticed in my own playing is that I tend to strike the string too harshly. In doing so I can hear the "undertones" of the body producing harmonics that are slightly out of kilter with the vibrations coming from the strings. Perhaps string deflection contributes to this, but I'm hearing it in the bodies of my guitars. I've come to this conclusion, partially based on changes in resonance of my 2011 614 after 200+ hours of the Tonerite process. Whatever it is/was, something changed the harmonic response of this guitar. We don't know what the Tonerite is supposed to do exactly, but it's done something far beyond what I expected. [It is important to note that the results on the two other guitars undergoing the process, while noticeable, have not been quite so remarkable in transformation as my 614. YMMV]. My original (minor) objection to the 614 (and caused me to buy an 814) was unwanted "undertones" that I could distinctly hear. Now, I can pound on that thing and it just resonates from here to tomorrow with a warm round sound that I wouldn't expect from maple. I digress...

I'm not offended by Taylor doing what they're doing. I get it. But what they have done repeatedly has simply made me quite skeptical of any claims they make. Again, they're in business to sell guitars. And they know that without the constant CHANGE, selling new guitars to new or existing customers will be greatly limited. My only beef is that they don't designate the changes in their model numbers and leave it up to the buyer to discern which years have which appointments and structures and electronics.

Regarding companies making continual changes to their products and keeping the same model name, I have one word for you:

Corvette

[N+1]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

From the moment I played the re-voiced models, it was clear to me that Taylor was moving away from the original Taylor sound. The guitars were bold, loud and very bass heavy.

One difficulty here is that we all seem to be hearing different things. I've heard and played a V-braced K24 (in a good, quiet acoustic), and it sounded like an especially carefully tuned K24. Not louder, not bassier - but significantly sweeter, more liquid.

[Nama Ensou]

Originally Posted by ntotoro

Chaotic motion? Rocks in a pool?

That’s almost embarrassing.

Absolutely embarrassing and trying too hard.

Originally Posted by Ozark

So V shaped bracing instead of X shaped bracing just gives you 3 swimming pools for notes instead of 4 in your guitar. Yeah that makes sense.

Ha! Exactly what I thought when he finally got there! Yeah, 3 pools are better than 4, but we'll tell you that it's only 1 and hope you don't notice!

Originally Posted by rgregg48

" if you can't dazzle them with your Brilliance, bore them with your "you know what"!"

I hope you don't mind but I made a slight edit there to illustrate what was actually going on in the room by the time he was half way through.

Originally Posted by Borderdon

Hard for me to get through that, my "blather alert" kept going off.

That about summed it up for me too. I'm interested, but that guy made me not want to be.

[rpnfan]

Originally Posted by barley

My guess at this point is that there has been so little innovation in the acoustic guitar industry in the past century that most of us have been lead to believe guitars reached their summit sometime in the 1930s or 40’s and any attempt to improve upon them is fruitless. In fact the manufacturers that receive the most positive attention are those who claim to make guitars that come the closest to sounding, and looking, like these “pre-war instruments. Perhaps such guitars did somehow, and beyond all likelihood, really hit the perfect tonal balance, at least for the average guitar enthusiast.

I include myself among this majority that prefers the traditional tone. However, I applaud and encourage any manufacture that pursues innovation.

I think that you're right and many are looking for a "vintage" sound, but not everybody. And there are many guitars out there today which have a new take -- sometimes a very different one.

Here are some examples of new design and sound (and great playing btw).

Casimi guitars:



Avian guitars:





or luthiers trying to create new voices, for example Wilm Stötzel (Germany).

[SprintBob]

Originally Posted by Ozark

So V shaped bracing instead of X shaped bracing just gives you 3 swimming pools for notes instead of 4 in your guitar. Yeah that makes sense.

They should have just said we have something new in design ideas and we think you will like it. It sounds like they are trying to justify their new bracing design.

This. The Taylors I currently own stand up pretty well to my recently acquired Santa Cruz, a Collings, and a Jake Robinson custom. All are X-braced. If I take Taylor’s marketing spiel literally, they are all flawed. Given two of my Taylors were bought new in the last year (over $7K), the marketing spiel comes across as insulting and disingenuous.

The V-braced Taylors might be a step forward but the marketing approach should have been to say “X-bracing is proven, we wanted to see if we could improve it, we think we have, what do you think?” I want to believe that is the approach Andy Powers would have wanted but it’s been hijacked by the marketing guys.

[Nama Ensou]

Originally Posted by SprintBob

...the marketing approach should have been to say “X-bracing is proven, we wanted to see if we could improve it, we think we have, what do you think?”

Well stated, and that would have been a lot more intriguing, not to mention, less insulting to their faithful customer base.

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by N+1

One difficulty here is that we all seem to be hearing different things. I've heard and played a V-braced K24 (in a good, quiet acoustic), and it sounded like an especially carefully tuned K24. Not louder, not bassier - but significantly sweeter, more liquid.

The "re-voiced" models I'm speaking about came out before V-Bracing. Those models were vastly different than the Taylors I've played.

I've not played a V-Braced guitar, and only suspected they were going further into that direction with the V idea.

[N+1]

Originally Posted by Goodallboy

The "re-voiced" models I'm speaking about came out before V-Bracing. Those models were vastly different than the Taylors I've played.

My apologies - I misunderstood. You were referring to the post- and pre- Andy Powers versions, and I understand the context now.

[Kitkatjoe]

Originally Posted by jrb715

I haven't felt one way or the other about V-class. It's all just advertising: not necessarily to my taste, but just selling guitars. But this???

I feel sorry for the guitar makers. They have so much that they are up against like the loss of interest in learning the guitar. I hope Taylor does very well and prospers in all they are trying to do. They build great guitars and seem to be trying to move on up while not stand still with the lack of motivation. They want to build a better guitar and that’s wonderful.