Taylor Solid Bodies Discontinued! - Page 2

worshipvertical · #16 01-16-2014, 04:05 PM

Woods matter, pickups matter, nut material matters. The guitar is a system and it all matters. Now, the more overdriven and dirty the sound the less you will hear the nuances but they are there and more apparent with a clean tone.

Regarding the demise of the solidbody guitars I'm very surprised if Taylor doesn't have a tone and volume pot available. They still make the T3 so that response doesn't make sense.

terrapin · #17 01-16-2014, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psalad

I apologize if this has been a topic of contention before, didn't mean to do a thread tangent! I do think it's relevant to Taylor's discontinuing of solid body electrics though.

No problem, it's always fun to hear what other's think.

Clydeslide · #18 01-16-2014, 05:45 PM

I will not get involved, I will not get involved, I will not get involved...

Darwin · #19 01-16-2014, 06:23 PM

We all have our opinions and they have been expressed. I have Gibson, Fender, Prs, Grosh, Suhr and several other brands. I am guilty of buying a Taylor SB2 in 2011 when it was introduced. It is a different animal in that it has appointments that you would expect only on an acoustic. The Vibrato/bridge is awesome and stable. The neck is very nice and has locking tuners. The top wood is at least PRS quality and may even be better. There was many pickup combinations available, but not as many for mine as it has no pickguard. Now,back to the appointments. It has purfling (sp?), not binding around the body,neck and headstock. The quality on this guitar is nothing short of spectacular. The attention to detail is not less than high end Taylor acoustics. Others who have looked at it are blown away with the total look.

I don't think that it was over marketed or hyped but think that is is truly a fine solid body guitar and when comparing to PRS and others was not overpriced. I am happy to have it and whatever happens to the value will happen. It has been a stellar addition to the group of guitars that I have. The real bonus is that it also plays and sounds well as it looks. So in the end it appears that they have not been a success and so be it. I am happy to have it and it is going nowhere. Here it is.-- Darwin

Edit: After looking at the photos I went in and brought it out here. It is so live unplugged, almost the Gretsch unplugged tone. It is awesome and just resonates with tone and sustain when played unplugged. Just reminds me of why I bought it! That, my friends, is how it is to me and it has some pretty stiff competition in this house. Have a good evening everyone! I just did!

mikealpine · #20 01-16-2014, 07:12 PM

I had a walnut-topped version, and it was beautiful in looks and sound. I actually loved the way it sounded and thought it was missing, if anything, a Piezo option (this is Taylor, an acoustic guitar company, after all). I couldn't bond with the neck. I love the Taylor acoustic neck, but something about the flatter radius, or thickness...something...it just wasn't a good fit for my hand. Overall, though, I thought it sounded excellent. I would have fewer electric guitars if that was a good fit for my hand.

Sword Bringer · #21 01-18-2014, 11:31 AM

Yup, it's relevant and you make good points. As a player, I can tell the difference between solid body construction. i couldn't do it cold. But if you told me to play three guitars blind folded and gave me three choice to match them with, I'll bet I'd do pretty well. i know I can tell the difference between sinlge coil and humbucking pickups. I couldn't tell you which brands they were by a long shot. That's what made the Taylor solid body guitar so intriguing.

I still get a kick out of Bob Taylor and the Pallet guitar story. Here's a guy who proves to the world that he can make a great sounding instrument out of crap wood, and makes his fortune on building all these exotic wood guitars. Doesn't any one else find that amusing? I think with many guitars, most of the differences are cosmetic.. But the beauty factor is a great reason to diversify if you can.

Bottom line for me- if anyone has Taylor SB loaded pickguards to sell, let me know. I'd really like the high Gain Humbuckers and the three single coils. And, I'm still disappointed!

Psalad · #22 01-18-2014, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sword Bringer

Yup, it's relevant and you make good points. As a player, I can tell the difference between solid body construction. i couldn't do it cold. But if you told me to play three guitars blind folded and gave me three choice to match them with, I'll bet I'd do pretty well. i know I can tell the difference between sinlge coil and humbucking pickups.

I think it would be a fascinating test! My guess is most people can tell single vs humbucker but one wood vs another. I have tried to test this but I don't have the right instruments. If you do it let me know how it comes out.

imwjl · #23 01-18-2014, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrapin

To me, Collins is the ONLY "modern" primarily acoustic guitar company that has done well with initiating a line of electrics. The Collins' electrics are as good as it gets!

Yes to the Collings excellence.

IMO those Taylor electrics had their best chance as product for existing fans of the brand.

Sword Bringer · #24 01-19-2014, 08:06 AM

what if you're a guitar/bar guy? I'm not, but just saying? I agree that although the various woods sound and feel different to the player, I'm not sure the listener could tell the difference. I know for example that Alder seems to vibrate at a higher frequency in my hand than mahogany. So maybe it's more of a touch thing. I spoke with a tech at the Largest Taylor distributor in New England who told me that Taylor donated much of the left over stock to schools and other non-profits. I think that's great. But, I also think they should have kept enough on hand to support the paying customers for a year.

I'm disappointed because of the hype and fanfare that accompanied the solid bodies around the world. Guitar Magazine in GB, did a major spread on them just last year and sponsored a giveaway contest. They raved about them. I just don't know why the PR dept. didn't just tell us what was happening. Business is business, but a heads up to owners would have been nice. I have been deprived of making improvements that I have been planning for some time because the inventory vanished. I'll always be a loyal Taylor player, but I calls them as I sees them.

Sword Bringer · #25 01-19-2014, 08:13 AM

Also, for the nay sayers, who think these guitars weren't that great. I wish you could play mine for five minutes. The action and string command is second to none. It was an uphill battle for sure with all those brands out there. I thought they would turn the corner because of a fiercely loyal base. I respect what they have built over the years. Taylor fans are rabid about their company. I mentioned a couple of problems I had with my SB and you'd think I insulted the Lord himself! Taylor certainly put their reputation on the line with winning products to earn such devotion. That's why I'm puzzled by the "now you see 'em now you don't." It's just not like these guys.

Sword Bringer · #26 01-19-2014, 08:20 AM

That is a stunning guitar! I played a couple of Standards and was surprised to find that I liked the Classic much more. I think the Standard has a chambered body. Appearance wise, that blue is stunning!! I now wish I saw a few bands on stage playing these things. I think that's all it would have taken. Everyone would have said -"What's That and how do I get one!"

Ruppster · #27 01-19-2014, 08:26 AM

[QUOTE=Psalad;3778262]I have different electrics including a vintage telecaster.

I don't want to be "that guy"... but let me put it this way. If there was really a huge difference you'd be able to tell from a recording what electric was being played.

We can't tell. Well, at least I cannot.

QUOTE]

I don't want to turn this into a food fight either but surely many folks, not just guitar players, can recognize certain guitars when they hear them. Strats and Teles have a pretty unique signature sound. David Gilmour's Strat solos with Pink Floyd, Mark Knopfler's Strat work with Dire Straights, Steve Howe's Gibson 175 with YES. Granted, it's the pickup and not the wood but still...to suggest that you can't tell what type of guitar is being played by listening to a recording is a bit of a stretch. IMO.

Clydeslide · #28 01-19-2014, 10:48 AM

Ok Ruppster, what guitar is Page playing on Since I've Been Loving You? Because both Page and the sound tech don't remember and can't tell.

imwjl · #29 01-19-2014, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sword Bringer

Also, for the nay sayers, who think these guitars weren't that great. I wish you could play mine for five minutes. The action and string command is second to none. It was an uphill battle for sure with all those brands out there. I thought they would turn the corner because of a fiercely loyal base. I respect what they have built over the years. Taylor fans are rabid about their company. I mentioned a couple of problems I had with my SB and you'd think I insulted the Lord himself! Taylor certainly put their reputation on the line with winning products to earn such devotion. That's why I'm puzzled by the "now you see 'em now you don't." It's just not like these guys.

It was not my intention to say they were not great.

My experience was getting into electric guitars when these came out so I didn't have the bias many have from growing up with Fender, Gibson, and a few others. I did however have either being conditioned to certain tones or knowing some and that goes for acoustic or electric. I also knew what a few classic or enduring designs were.

The Taylor solid and PRS build quality stood out against Gibson's for sure, and they seemed more sophisticated than many Fenders. Still, characteristics of a PRS or a few designs decades old were what grabbed me. That's why I felt these guitars had their best chance with fans of the brand.

If these Taylors, PRS and the Collings electrics are iconoclasts PRS and Collings did or do more for me to like the new and get some of the old. The market ultimately wins. I remember when Dave's stocked a lot of these Taylors. It moved toward 0 and occasional used ones taken in trade while PRS stock would top 100, and Collings 12 - 20+.

I have items (wristwatches, pens) that didn't win in the market long term but I still love them and enjoy them years and decades later. Go go for the same if you love these guitars and maybe the discontinuation will mean some bargains in the short-term! The last used Taylor solid body I saw at Dave's was minty condition and a true bargain for the build quality.

I probably digress here but it may apply to accepting a new guitar model such as the Taylors. The tribal and fan boy nature with the guitar brands is really something. I have a firm belief that in general we love some designs that just get it right. Players AND listeners love them. Still, there are some who think certain styles, tones and builds must have a particular logo even if their originators are long gone. I confess that it can strike me but hasn't stopped me. I've owned and own some iconoclasts but just not the Taylor.

Clydeslide · #30 01-19-2014, 12:13 PM

Honestly, I think new guitar brands succeed because of marketing and endorsements. Without Knopfler I don't think Suhr would be where they are today, similar to PRS and Santana (both brands also have other big name endorses which helps). Can any of us name anyone who is really associated with Taylor electrics?

Both would have survived as small shop luthiers, many whose instruments are worse manage it, but I don't think Taylor were aiming for that and it seems the business just couldn't support them.

Shame, they seemed like good guitars, but others do similar work for less money and the market they were aiming for is willing to go small shop luthier as it can give them a few more options.