Taylor Neck playability across product lines.

[Fastal]

In theory, Should all newer Taylors have the same play ability? Regardless of series.

[The Growler]

If you're talking abut the neck, yes. Different models like 12 fret or 14, short scale etc. may change that answer for some people, but as far as the neck goes, yes.

[Earl49]

All of my Taylors have come from the factory with a good set up and playing very well. I don't recall ever having to do a custom set up on any of them.

All the necks are carved with the same CNC machinery, so they are nearly identical. If you think it needs help, take it to a Taylor-certified tech for evaluation.

The 100's, 200's and GS Mini have a 1-11/16" neck width, while all others 300 series and up are 1-3/4" wide. That can change the feel., as can shorter scale lengths (24-7/8" versus 25.5"), or twelve frets versus fourteen frets to the body.

[Fastal]

Originally Posted by Earl49

All of my Taylors have come from the factory with a good set up and playing very well. I don't recall ever having to do a custom set up on any of them.

All the necks are carved with the same CNC machinery, so they are nearly identical. If you think it needs help, take it to a Taylor-certified tech for evaluation.

The 100's, 200's and GS Mini have a 1-11/16" neck width, while all others 300 series and up are 1-3/4" wide. That can change the feel., as can shorter scale lengths (24-7/8" versus 25.5"), or twelve frets versus fourteen frets to the body.

I did not realize the 100 and 200 had different neck width.

I currently have a short scale GC8. It's good for me. I have issues with left wrist and fingers. I even tune it down. I am hoping to get a 12 fret cutaway. I would love 812 or better but 412 series might be more in the budget. So either way both would play the same.

[Earl49]

Taylor targets the 100 and 200 series, plus the GS Mini and Baby at the entry level / beginner market, so they chose the narrower nut width deliberately for those. There is plenty of chatter around here wishing for a Mini or a 214 with the wider nut, but Taylor has held their ground.

There is nothing wrong with the 400's. My favorite gigging guitar is a fifteen year old 414ce. At one point I owned three different 400's, but have never owned an 800. It wasn't worth the extra cost to me. Certainly they are very nice, I just never pulled the trigger at the considerably higher 800 series price point.

A short scale GC8 is a sweet guitar. Not sure if the twelve fret version would help or not. Try tuning down further and using a capo at fret two to simulate that.

[ewalling]

Taylors and Ovations - the best necks in the business!

I have a 1999 714ce and I have never had to touch any aspect of the set up in all those years. It started out great and it still is.

[tbeltrans]

My initial intent of a recent purchase was a Taylor 814ce. However, after playing both an 814ce and a 914ce for a couple of hours, I decided on the 914ce. For whatever reason, the neck just felt better to me - a bit smoother and somehow easier on my hands. This is just my own experience, and others may swear that every Taylor neck is the same. I have no answer for that, but I do know what my hands like.

There is also an overall sort of "finish" to the 914ce that is, in my personal opinion, better than the 814ce. That said, both are fine guitars, so I am not saying that there is anything wrong with the 814ce - I just chose the 914ce, and the differences were more subtle than so clearly obvious that everyone would have to agree with my take on it. The approximately $1500 cost difference was worth it to me, considering that I plan on keeping this guitar for a long time. I would rather go this route than be wondering later on if I should have done so.

Also, I did take my new 914ce in for a professional setup, and it was well worth it because the action is now lower than I have had on any other acoustic guitar I have owned, without any issues with buzzing. The guitar is now extremely easy on the fingers. As good as the factory setup would have been, the guitar is just that much better for me now.

Tony

[Jimmyohio75]

Originally Posted by Earl49

Taylor targets the 100 and 200 series, plus the GS Mini and Baby at the entry level / beginner market, so they chose the narrower nut width deliberately for those. There is plenty of chatter around here wishing for a Mini or a 214 with the wider nut, but Taylor has held their ground.

There is nothing wrong with the 400's. My favorite gigging guitar is a fifteen year old 414ce. At one point I owned three different 400's, but have never owned an 800. It wasn't worth the extra cost to me. Certainly they are very nice, I just never pulled the trigger at the considerably higher 800 series price point.

A short scale GC8 is a sweet guitar. Not sure if the twelve fret version would help or not. Try tuning down further and using a capo at fret two to simulate that.

If the 214 DLX had a 1.75" nut width I would own one. Currently saving for a used 314 strictly to gain access to a Taylor with the more spacious nut width and string spacing. (All solid wood too, I know )

[RP]

Originally Posted by Jimmyohio75

If the 214 DLX had a 1.75" nut width I would own one. Currently saving for a used 314 strictly to gain access to a Taylor with the more spacious nut width and string spacing. (All solid wood too, I know )

Good decision. I would probably still have my old 214 if it had a 1 3/4" nut. On second thought, I probably would have sold it along the way, but I would have enjoyed it more with a wider neck....

[Earl49]

Cannot disagree with either post. I happen to own a 114ce that I keep with friends in Alaska for limited use when I'm visiting. I can live with the narrower neck for a few days, but I probably should have held out for a used 314 for that purpose. In my case, I got a pretty good deal locally and did not have to fly a guitar up there for the purpose.

[TBman]

I've never played a Taylor neck that I didn't like. Why I don't have a Taylor is a mystery to me. Hmm...

[sbeirnes]

My DN3 and GS8 have identical feeling necks. The 414 I had was also the same.