If I've Learned Anything...

[guitararmy]

I own two Martin dreads and two Larry dreads, including a D03R. I love them all, but can certainly hear differences between them. My D03R has a midrange bump which I like, and my other Larry a D09 doesn't have.

If you hear a Larrivee that speaks to you, grab it!

[TBman]

Strings....How old were the strings used on both guitars?

[JohnW63]

You know that $2900 doesn't go away, it's not like the Larrivee and Martin are worth the same thing on the used market the next day, when you spend more it's worth more, and Martins are excellent at holding their value.

This makes little sense to me.

Spend more money now, even if the guitar doesn't seem better to you, so you can get more money back when you sell it. Of course the whole time you own it, that "extra" money is tied up in the guitar and you can't use it.

[musicman1951]

I think it's always good advice for people to not pay for qualities they can't hear. We all have different ears and different musical development - along with different desires in tone quality.

[pieterh]

I think that Larivee is such a hugely respected guitar builder and brand that it is not surprising that, leaving cost out of the test, it compares favourably with the Martin, even coming out ahead subjectively. A well made guitar is a well made guitar regardless of the name on the headstock. Bling certainly seems to add a lot to the cost of the Martin 40+ guitars and if that is what you want then fine.

I had been GASslng for a Martin 000 or OM28 for a while for a number of reasons: I wanted a Martin, I wanted a slim neck OM and I wanted a guitar with rosewood back and sides. Then along came a high end Furch at the right time (and right price!) and that cured my Martin yearnings immediately. Beautifully built, less bling than an OM41 (but more than an OM28), and a joy to play. Better than a Martin? Possibly not but definitely not inferior either. Even if it had cost the same as a Martin (which of course it didn't) I would still be happy with the guitar I bought.

[crikey]

Originally Posted by slice

inciting a verbal war? not seeing it.... one person posts an opinion... others are posting favorable/dissenting opinions... no biggie

My thoughts too. We all have opinions and people don't generally start threads expecting like minded opinions on such topics.

To the OP: There is nothing that is better sounding and better playing "for the money." It either is or it isn't (or maybe undeterminable?) to the ears and hands of the evaluator, regardless of cost. Expecting comparisons of overall evals + $$$$ cost + budget to all line up linearly - unrealistic. Determining one of them to be overpriced - meaningless. Finding one you like that also fits your budget regardless of all else - works for me!

[Treenewt]

Originally Posted by crikey

My thoughts too. We all have opinions and people don't generally start threads expecting like minded opinions on such topics.

To the OP: There is nothing that is better sounding and better playing "for the money." It either is or it isn't (or maybe undeterminable?) to the ears and hands of the evaluator, regardless of cost. Expecting comparisons of overall evals + $$$$ cost + budget to all line up linearly - unrealistic. Determining one of them to be overpriced - meaningless. Finding one you like that also fits your budget regardless of all else - works for me!

My bad then...just how I was reading some of the replies to the OP. I'll go back and change my original post to a less dramatic term.

[Sprikitik]

Originally Posted by rmyAddison

Proving what?

So you and a few friends preferred the Larrivee, fine, does that mean someone else who prefers the Martin is wrong?

It's the Martin fanboy to the rescue.


He didn't say that someone who prefers the Martin is wrong. Where in his post did you read that?

[crikey]

Originally Posted by Treenewt

My bad then...just how I was reading some of the replies to the OP. I'll go back and change my original post to a less dramatic term.

Again, we all have opinions! You included! I always appreciate your opinions even if one time I may disagree! No need to revise!

[Treenewt]

Originally Posted by crikey

Again, we all have opinions! You included! I always appreciate your opinions even if one time I may disagree! No need to revise!

Thanks for that Crikey. My choice of wording was poor, and your post helped me see that. I appreciate the reply!

[00-28]

Well, we got to 23 posts before "Martin Fanboy" name calling came up. That's not bad. Just don't bring up Wannabe.


.......Mike

[cotten]

I understand the OP completely! His qualifier, "for the money" is one that every last one of us contends with daily, else we'd all be playing guitars that cost more than our cars! (Wait, some of us do!)

The Law of Diminishing Returns, applied to guitars, says that for $x you get guitar that does a pretty decent job of being a guitar, maybe 90% of it. For $xx, the guitar gets up to, say, 95% of whatever an Ideal Guitar does. For $xxx you might get up to 98%, but that last 2% might cost you $xxxxx! Is it worth it, "for the money?" It is to some folks, but not to others.

I knew a kid in Rwanda who was overjoyed with his new, locally made guitar-shaped instrument, built for less than $10 US. He could only dream of having a "real" guitar, perhaps a $100 Rogue. To him, in a country where the per capita income in 2014, in US dollars, is just under $700/yr., that Rogue was not worth it. There's a real lesson here for all of us, even those for whom that $100 Rogue is "inexpensive."

"For the money" means different things to different people.

cotten

[muscmp]

wait a minute...what about the taylor????

stir, stir, stir

play music!

[BFD]

Originally Posted by cotten

..."For the money" means different things to different people.cotten

Amen! And is quite often tied quite closely to the value (and brand!) of their most expensive guitar. I doubt you'll find many posts by the OP touting the virtues of guitars costing much more than $1300, or guitars that aren't Larrivees. Yet you WILL find plenty of them by other folks.

Funny how that works

[Goodallboy]

Originally Posted by rokdog49

Did an actual side-by-side comparison of a Larrivee D-03R against a Martin D41 last week with two other "witnesses" who also played both.

First off to get it out of the way, a Martin is a Martin and has that Martin vibe and tone so I get it.
The Martin was $4200 with the Sitka Spruce Top and East Indian Rosewood back and sides and the bling.
The Larrivee was $1298 with the Italian Alpine Spruce Top and east Indian Rosewood back and sides. No bling.

After spending a good half hour back and forth and doing a literal side-by-side simultaneous strumming the same chord patterns and doing some picking, all three of us had raised eyebrows.
For a difference of $2900, the real or perceived difference just didn't manifest itself profoundly. In fact, we all agreed that for the money, the D03R was the better sounding of the two and...better playing.

What did I learn?
Acoustic Guitar comparisons are at the end of the day, extremely subjective. (Kind of knew that)
While I can appreciate the beauty and Martin Vibe wholeheartedly,
I just didn't see the extra $2900. Neither did my friends.

That's kind of amusing.....obviously Mr. Larrivee and the marketplace don't agree with your blanket assessment. I'm pretty sure if he thought his guitar would merit the additional cost, he would tack it on.

I will concede that to you and your friends, the Larrivee sounded better and that's basically all you're saying, I hope. If you're trying to say the Martin is overpriced, understand that the guitar buying public sets that price, not Martin.

When the buyers begin to tell Martin the price is too high, the price will be lowered. At present, they disagree with you and your friends.