MARTIN vs TAYLOR

[Revelation]

I was able to try a Martin 000C and a Taylor 314CE N side by side. Here is my observation on them.

The Taylor has a deeper body and it's shape more like their steel string acoustic. Access to the higher strings on the E string is easier than the Martin. The string spacing is closer than the Martin making it harder to finger pick with the close spacing. The mid highs and highs were more subdued and there is more of a lower fullness. It looks great and you can tell it's very well made. But subjectively I did not care for the sound unplugged. Plugged in it sounded better and brighter. For just strumming and wanting a contemporary sound it's a good option.

Martin string spacing is wider like a classical guitar and is a lot easier to finger pick than the Taylor. It also has a more open sound on the top end and playing something like the Beatles Blackbird sounded very nice. I compared it to a Yamaha classical which has a warmer sound. The Martin sounded like a good hybrid if that's what your looking for. It won't replace a classical guitar if that is the sound you want. But for a contemporary sound, this one sounds better to my ears.

[David Rock]

I told myself I wouldn't get into one of these disscussions again...but here I go...there has been good talk here.

It seems to me there are two issues that should be considered.

The first is playability.

The second is timbre.

As an owner of a Taylor ns72ce and Ramirez 4e, both cedar top and rosewood sides and back, I have something to compare each back to back. I am no genious mucian but these two are (obviously) wildly different. K.

They are both extremely playable. The Taylor obviously feels more like a steel string AND sounds more like one too (with high or very high tesion carbon strings). They both have excellent tone but are extremely different. They both demand a different approach to application of effort for best results. So from a playabilty stand point, both are perfectly useable, but that has more to do with style than the guitar. I don't try to play one like the other and that took some real effort to get over.

I won't speak of tone because that can have some definitions that are unique to each individual, but the intonation of both is spot on. K. But, let's just for a moment touch on timbre. Just because a trumpet doesn't sound like a clarinet doesn't make either better or worse. They both play the same tonal values. The Ramirez sounds classical and wants to be played that way. The Taylor has a certainly different sound...I would call it smoother or maybe less complex for lack of the proper term. Not as loud but with just as much sustain. If I want loud, the Ramirez can't compete with a 30 or 60 watt amp, sorry guys, no way. The Taylor sounds true to itself plugged in.

As the owner and appreciator of both of these guitars I do not compare them, they are what they are and they beg for a different playing approach.

As far as playability, with enough time you can adjust to anything. In terms of timbre or sound, that might not be the case.

At the end of the day the Taylor always sounds good to me, but that is simply because of my playing style. I am not classically trained and never will be. The Taylor seems like a more creative platform to me. But, that is just me. A classical player would pick up up and be put off. K. Some say tomato.

On the other hand, there are times I pick up the Ramirez and realize how much more I could have had if I would have submitted to proper training. Oh well.

If a person wants to put their toe in the water I think one of the posters advice was sound, try it, if it doesn't work for you kick it down the road. Let's just not define what is right or wrong for someone else.

Regards
D

[Revelation]

Update: I went back to the store and tried out the Martin and the Taylor again. I also tried out the 200 series Taylor as well and plugged them into a fishman amp. I clearly like to 300 Taylor better than the 200 as it was a smoother sound, more elegant sound over the 200 series when plugged in.

The Martin seemed to lack weight compared to the Taylor. Its overall tone was more mid and high frequency pushed. I actually preferred the sound of the Taylor today in comparison to the Martin. Of course yesterday I did not try them out Amplified

[tbeltrans]

I agree with those who say that the crossover and classical are different instruments, as well as with those who say the classical training will really help to bring out the best in nylon strings. It really makes little sense to ignore a few hundred years of technique. That is plenty of time to figure out how to get the best out of the instrument.

In my collection, there are two acoustic nylon string guitars. One is a 2012 Taylor GAce-N-FLTD crossover, and the other is a single-builder handmade by Bill Brunton (www.bruntonclassicalguitars.com/). Both are very nice and very different instruments.

My experience with the Taylor nylon string instruments includes mine and one or two standard models. In my limited experience, my Limited Edition is noticeably better in both fit and finish, and tone. Taylor recommends extra hard tension strings, and that does seem to be the best for tone.

These instruments seem as if they start life as a steel string that is converted for nylon strings. I also have a 2016 Taylor 914ce, and find it very easy to go back and forth between that and my Taylor nylon string because they are so similar in shape and feel. To me, that is a real advantage.

There are subtleties in tonal color and a fullness in sound that you just can't get from a crossover model, but that a decent classical instrument readily yields, if you have the technique to bring it out.

As for the OP's question regarding Martin vs Taylor, I have no opinion because I have no experience with a Martin nylon string instrument.

For those who are interested in getting some classical training, this is a really good and active site: www.classicalguitarshed.com

The teacher, Allen Matthews, reminds me of a few of the professors I had in college who really loved their subject and went above and beyond to bring that sense to the classroom. I wish all teachers were like that, but they aren't, and really good ones are hard to find. Because of this, I highly recommend this site.

Tony

[SprintBob]

I recently got a Cordoba GK Pro Negra, slightly less expensive than the Taylor and Martin models you referenced. I could not be happier with it. I was a bit worried as the lower end Cordobas (less than $500) did nothing for me and the one Martin nylon I tried was DOA in tone (and it had a price of nearly $2k). Several on this forum recommended the GK Pro series to me. There are two models. The GK Pro which is spruce/cypress and the GK Pro Negra which is spruce/rosewood and what I choose. My Negra has a loud, clear, sweet tone. The neck was easy to adjust to also. I did not play it before buying it but got it from Sweetwater and they gave me a 30 day trial period with it. Took only a couple of days to decide it was a keeper.

Good luck.

[Dylan]

Don't buy a Taylor or Martin crossover. They are acoustic guitar builders and a classical guitar is a completely different beast. If you are looking for an in-between or crossover model, I can personally recommend the Cordoba Fusion. This has a neck that is closer to a traditional acoustic, but is built by a decent Classical brand/builder. Used, these instruments are cheap. The other option would be to go all in and get a standard classical which is never a bad choice.

Best of luck

[David Rock]

Wow!

David

[Revelation]

I played the Martin and Taylor again today and concluded after listening to Lindsey Buckingham that the Martin is the better choice for me

[MikeBmusic]

I knew I didn't want a 2" neck width classical guitar. The only guitars in my price range (well under $1000) that I could play around here did nothing for me acoustically, and there were very few hybrid choices.
I had tried a Taylor 314ceN a couple of years ago, but it wasn't set up well (too low action) and buzzed a lot.
When I tried the new 114ceN (walnut laminated), though, the tone spoke to me, just what I needed, and a good feel to the neck, too.
I would say that for someone looking at hybrids, advising them to go to a full-widthed neck classical is not helpful.

[dosland]

Originally Posted by MikeBmusic

I would say that for someone looking at hybrids, advising them to go to a full-widthed neck classical is not helpful.

You're probably right, but here the initial request for advice was preceded by something like "my initial thoughts are a Martin or a Taylor." There are a lot of reasons to like those options (resale value being the top reason in my book), but there are a lot of other options out there for people who aren't committed to a particular brand. It is also frequently the case (on this forum) that people post asking for information on a particular type of guitar and they eventually end up with something quite different. And I think it's fair to say that some who aren't especially familiar with nylon strings think neck width variation could be a deal breaker until they've actually had chance to play lots of crossovers and classicals. So I'm saying we don't know exactly what the opposition may find useful, and any personal experience may resonate with them. They're under no obligation to listen to everything posted here, and I surely hope they won't.

[Guitar Slim II]

Originally Posted by StephenHD35

I've played the Taylor and I own the Martin. I wouldn't bother with either one. My 000C nylon is either going to be donated or traded in toward the purchase of something else.

Sorry, but I've never played a Taylor or Martin nylon-string that I liked much. I was considering a Martin Millenium a decade or so ago, but after I tried one I decided it sure wasn't several thousand dollars worth of tone. And it sure wasn't a Humphrey...

The skinny-neck Taylor hybrids I've played have sounded dull and uninspiring.

Go with a Spanish or Asian maker. They seem to be the ones who know how to make decent classicals, IMO. Córdoba, Takamine, Ramirez...the usual suspects. They all make a variety of models, with different necks, nuts and saddles, cutaways, electronics, etc.

American makers (big and small) make the best steel string acoustics in the world. Classical/nylon? Not so much.

EDIT: Talking about commercial manufacturers here, not individual luthiers. Plenty of great builders from the USA - not least the aforementioned Thomas Humphrey, gone too soon.