My first impression of a 2001 Taylor 810

[hughray]

I saw, played and walked away from the a 2001 Taylor 801. It wasn't enough to draw $1650.00 out of my wallet. I got to compare it to a '98 810 in mint condition as well as several other models. The 2001 neck is an improvement, but this particular guitar was a bit flat. I realize that it will open up, but the 410 and 510 I played were fuller and more balanced in tone.

The appearance of the guitar also left me a bit underwhelmed. The neck was much lighter in color that the back and sides of the guitar. In fact, the back and sides were almost dark chocolate. It wasn't a bad look, but I am partial to the lighter color Taylors where the wood plays off the tortise shell pick guard. The white binding was so white that it clashed with the nut which was ivory.

Overall I was disappointed. I went there with the intention of liking and buying the guitar. Maybe, it was just a poor example of a 2001 Taylor 810. Any thoughts?

[mapletrees]

I'm envious of anyone with an 800 level Taylor...

but I get put off by the so so white binding, too.....

What about those inlays?....do 800 series owners like them?

Just stirring up a fuss....no one left to annoy...my mother-in-law left...

[J.R. Rogers]

I really like the cream-colored binding on the new 400 series and the AB2. I think Taylor uses the white binding on the 800 series, to contrast with the dark woods used on the fretboard and body. Some people really like it, some don't. I personally think the white plastic binding is better suited on the 600 series with their vibrant colors, contrasted by the white outline - Looks incredible and unmistakeable on stage.

However, I personally prefer the tasteful look of the rosewood binding like the 700 series on a more "traditional" style guitar like the 800 series. The cream binding looks very tasteful on the 400 series. I'll bet it would look great on the 800 as well.

J.R.

[tbondo]

A buddy tried to get me interested in a 2000 810 hanging on the Mars wall that had a great sound, but I don't like the white binding (neck or body).....very happy with my 2001 510, where the neck and body converge beautifully,,
BTW,Mapletrees....congrats on losing the MIL

[Dave F]

Seems you need to play several 810's. I had to do this before I got the one that talked to me! IMHO the new neck design is a big improvement too. The white binding at first is a turn-off, but it seems to grow on you with a little time. The really nice thing about this series is the Indian Rosewood/Sitka combo, which I feel gives a smoother sound than the maple(hard) or the mahogany (too soft) but I am sure others will disagree. Also, the 810 is the only one in the 800 series that does NOT have the electrics and conversely the big hole in the side. (well the jumbo also has no electronics) that hole IMHO is a big negative.

[ 03-11-2001: Message edited by: Dave F ]

[GRW3]

Bob T likes the 8xx series the way it is, the 810 is his personal favorite, so that's the way its going to be. Unlike Henry Ford ("any color as you want as long as it's black") he does offer other choices.

I played a new 514CE at the local planet yesterday and it was very pretty. It didn't sound so good but that was because it was about a ½ out of tune. I guessing some whiz put it in an alternate and couldn't get it back. In tune it sounded fine.

The real reason for the comment on the 514ce was to remark how good the rosewood binding looked against the mahogany body. Nice contrast. This particular unit had a very light cedar top, almost to sitka, and it made a very pleasant overall impression.

The new 700s look good too, very subtle, but I keep wishing that Taylor had chosen a binding with a little more contrast, say Koa.

[JW]

I that the blinding white looks pretty chezzy on the new 810. I think it is more suited to the red and blue 600s because I dont like them either(got my flame suit on). I saw a new 2001 514 and was not impressed. I like the tortice shell binding and diamond inlay on my 514CE. The rosewood binding looks ok but still I like mine better. I did see a 2001 414 this weekend with the same diamond inlay as an old 500. It wasnt a 500 neck but the inlay was the same shape (think it was plastic or pearloid and not the MOP on the 500s. It played like a dream and I would have loved to have a full body 414 but I am tapped out for now. TAS is kickin my AS$. The only thing that is a constant is change. Somethings we see we dont like at first glance but somethings grow on us. Somethings I didnt like What I didnt like 10 ten years ago I like now. What i find ugly today maybe my desire tommorow. What I liked yesterday may make me sick tommorow. Its just change. We must learn to accept it even if we dont like it. I dont like the new 800s but a year from now I may be deep in serch of one. I thought when the 82 camaro came out there was no other car that looked that great(glad I kept my 68) but now I wouldnt own one if they were giving them away. Its just all about change. Thats the one thing that wont change. JW

[hughray]

The look of the 810 is a minor point IMHO. The real issue is/was that this guitar sounded flat. I hava always been impressed by Taylors consistency. This particular guitar didn't have it. I haven't seen/heard/played enough of the newer guitars to know if this is a result of the new neck design. Any thoughts?

[Bill Nichols (CaptBill)]

hughray,
I have three Taylors with the New Neck. I can tell you without reservation that if the guitar sounds flat it is not a result of the neck! I'm sure with any make of guitar there are some that, due to whatever characteristics of the particular pieces of wood used, just don't sound great. Keep looking until you "Hear" what you like.

[ihs]

I'd just like to echo CaptBill's comment about the new neck. I own one of each (810-old neck, DDSM-new neck) and have played 810's with the new neck. There really doesn't seem to be any tonal difference due to the neck. I've played some brighter and fuller than mine, and some that were less. Just my two cents.

[mgracing]

As much as I thought I wanted to upgrade to the 800 or 900 series for quality of materials and asthetics when I bought my second Taylor (1st being the 310CE), I found that the white binding and more elaborate inlays were not to my liking.

Asthetically, I prefer the simplicity of the 500s and 700s. More to the point that I'd like to make though is that after playing every model they make, I really started to focus on the nuances of the wood combinations and body styles relative to my technique and musical preferences. I found that my ears are most pleased by the comination of mahagony and cedar and rosewood and cedar in the "14" body style which leads me back to 500s and 700s. I'm sure the asthetics vs. tone and functionality issues have been beaten to death, but it's good to remind ourselves sometimes of what the music is all about. Just my humble .02