Quote:
Originally Posted by asilker
Background
In December I purchased my first high quality acoustic guitar. After over a decade of playing, I nabbed a Martin 000-18 2018. I had read a bit about the updates to the Martin standard line and got to play through the whole series at CME. The 000-18 was the one that connected for me.
When I was shopping, I purposely did not compare Martin to boutique (not sure if this is the correct term)guitar brands like Collings and Santa Cruz. In terms of cost, the Martin was an enormous reach up for me and I am in no way able to afford a guitar in a price class above that. That's not a complaint, I feel very fortunate and I think it's great that people can afford the next models up.
My question is this
My understanding is that companies like Gibson and Martin did quite a bit to establish what a flat top, steel string acoustic guitar is and how it's made. Vintage examples, especially pre-war, seem to be regarded as a sort of pinnacle.
Does anyone have examples of nicely made Martin or Gibson guitars competing with smaller, more detail oriented manufacturers? Perhaps it is a case where more cost does usually represent a better final product. Has anyone transitioned from a highly regarded small builder back "down" to a Martin or Gibson? Are any of these guitars comparable?
I am comfortable with the fact that there are finer guitars out there than mine. It's good that they exist, and I am not trying to justify my purchase as the wisest. Just interested to gather information. Thanks folks
|
The most noteworthy difference in why Martin and Gibson's prices are less is just scale/volume. They have a lot larger capacity, a lot larger investment, but also buying power for lumber/hardware, etc so their cost to manufacture is greatly in their favor over the smaller guys, even with a bigger overhead. They simply have a different model.
That being said, I've had incredible stuff from most of the bigger names in the boutique space (Collings, Bourgeous, Huss and Dalton, Lowden, etc). Martin's standard series stands right there.
Probably the biggest difference is just approach. Martin is trying to make a 1000 of something that those other guys are trying to make 10, so they can be slower and take some more attention to certain elements. That, in my experience, really just means that more of those guitars from the smaller brands are consistently winners, whereas Martins may take some more review to find the best of a bunch.
There's a lot more to all of this, but I'll just say that I don't see anything far-and-away better with anyone than what Martin does with their standard series on up.
Some of the higher end Gibsons I've played the past few years have been as nice as anything I've seen from anyone.