The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 09-27-2021, 10:18 AM
SleepyAudi SleepyAudi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 44
Default Builder’s Edition Taylor’s cutting too many corners for premium pricing?

https://youtu.be/FwXzf1jCZ2Y

Apologies for the very lame cliche ‘blank - reacts’ video. But I watched it more interested in the Taylor factory tour and the commentary was there and I noticed it.

Basically the gentleman makes acoustics by hand claims Taylor has to innovated shortcuts to reduce build times further (not a crime) and offer less feautures while charging a premium via the ‘Builders Edition’ moniker.

The main sin is charging a premium for guitar with no binding and many shortcuts in construction (watch video for details) and then covering it with stains and ‘edge bursts’.

Personally I briefly owned a 717e builders and sold it promptly simply becuase I didn’t like the GP body shape. I personally having owned one actuslly think, without being an expert, that they couldn’t actuslly bind the BE and offer the chamfered edges simply becuase it’s impossible so they came up with a new build that allows for it. I also am quite fond of the neck and the details related to ergonomics and comfort. I’d be happy to have a builder’s edition again if they offered it for my model of choice and the price was right.

But I’m curious what you more experienced players would have to say. Seeing it. Is the video a bit sensational or is it fair to say Taylor is overcharging greatly in these?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-27-2021, 10:42 AM
Taylor Ham Taylor Ham is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 499
Default

The gentleman in the video makes alot of statements that are just his opinion. I would have liked to see some binding on the builder's editions, but even without it there is some extra effort that goes into them. Especially with the different type of cutaway, which needs a different neck block and more hand shaping. Same goes for the bevel armrest. Maybe his criticism falls better on the GP BE's, which have neither of those features.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-27-2021, 11:40 AM
Brick is Red Brick is Red is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Maryland
Posts: 612
Default

Interesting and informative video that was well worth watching, even if it has set me back a half-hour into my afternoon. They didn’t hold back on opinions and visceral reactions, and they were even-handed in giving respect, credit, and praise to much of what they saw.

I’m replying to simply recommend watching the video. At 37+ minutes, it’s not short.

Last edited by Brick is Red; 09-27-2021 at 01:44 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-27-2021, 12:06 PM
jim1960 jim1960 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 5,961
Default

Some observations about the video...

When DG (Driftwood guy) talks about the scarf joint on the head and the stacked pieces for the heel, DG makes no mention of the fact that doing it this way is much more ecologically friendly than making necks from a single piece of wood and that the structural integrity of the neck does not suffer because of it. DG only admits this, and to my ears a bit reluctantly so, later in the video when the Taylor employee makes a point about the ecology of glued necks. I’m not sure why DG didn’t raise that point on his own when it’s such an obvious one.

DG then goes on to say what we all know… that a glued joint is stronger than the wood itself. And then he immediately contradicts himself by saying “I think this is BS” after hearing the Taylor employee say what he just said. Then DG sets up a strawman by saying the factories tell us a glued up neck “sounds better.” Neither person in the video made that claim.

At one point, he says that all Taylors, regardless of price, are the same and all you’re paying for on the higher end models are the inlays. That’s simply not true and it’s the kind of an over-generalization and over-simplification that I’d expect from a non-builder. I’m assuming DG knows better than that and if he doesn’t, he’s in the wrong business.

Regarding purfling and binding, DG says about Taylor’s method “I don’t think it’s for the better; I think it’s faster.” Faster means the guitar costs less to build so it’s that much cheaper on the consumer end, so there’s the positive. What’s the negative? DG never tells us why it’s not better. It’s purfling and binding. It has no effect on tone or structure, so why does it matter how it’s installed?

DG criticizes Taylor for not using binding on guitars where you won’t see the binding. Unless Taylor is lying about binding being there when it isn’t, I’m not sure why DG is making a big deal about this. Binding is decorative. If Taylor chooses to decorate their guitar differently and in a non-traditional way, so what?

DG, “That doesn’t look good right there, right? The fact that you can make it look good by covering it up with paint… like that bothers the expletive out of me.” This is nothing new. Sometimes you can have a tonally superior piece of wood that doesn’t look as aesthetically pleasing as some others. Luthiers don’t scrap that wood. They use it and they often with do a burst finish to cover up the wood’s aesthetic imperfections.

The guys watching were even-handed most of the time but the criticisms came across as a bit petty to me. I get it… they’re trying to pick off a few customers that might otherwise buy a high end Taylor but I don’t think knocking the competition is a good look unless the competition is clearly building an inferior product, and that certainly isn’t what Taylor is doing.
__________________
Jim
2023 Iris ND-200 maple/adi
2017 Circle Strings 00 bastogne walnut/sinker redwood
2015 Circle Strings Parlor shedua/western red cedar
2009 Bamburg JSB Signature Baritone macassar ebony/carpathian spruce
2004 Taylor XXX-RS indian rosewood/sitka spruce
1988 Martin D-16 mahogany/sitka spruce

along with some electrics, zouks, dulcimers, and banjos.

YouTube
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-27-2021, 12:26 PM
SleepyAudi SleepyAudi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 44
Default

I agree with you mostly.

I will only say that a Martin 000-18 and a Taylor 512ce are roughly equivalent. Mahogany back spruce top and similair size. I *believe* the Taylor is less money to make based off the neck joint alone but roughly they cost the same price.

Another similair idea to me is the PRS Core custom 24 gold top is CNC’d to spec yet costs $1500 more than a Gibson gold top despite Gibson having far more trained hands working to complete the guitar over a longer period of time.

I don’t feel some companies are sharing the benefits of better manufacturing with consumers.

Ps. I happily own a Taylor. I’m just wanting to discuss what’s ‘fair’
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-27-2021, 01:53 PM
gfirob gfirob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Central Vermont
Posts: 1,273
Default

Taylor's were always an also-ran for me anyway...
__________________
2003 Martin OM-42, K&K's
1932 National Style O, K&K's
1930 National Style 1 tricone Square-neck
1951 Rickenbacker Panda lap steel
2014 Gibson Roy Smeck Stage Deluxe Ltd, Custom Shop, K&K's
1957 Kay K-27 X-braced jumbo, K&K's
1967 Gretsch 6120 Chet Atkins Nashville
2024 Mahogany Weissenborn, Jack Stepick

Ear Trumpet Labs Edwina
Tonedexter
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-27-2021, 03:30 PM
LakewoodM32Fan LakewoodM32Fan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,796
Default

IIRC he did acknowledge that the scarf joint and CNC shaping of the neck was indeed more environmentally friendly.

As far as I’m concerned it was a pretty balanced critique. He acknowledged where Bob changed the game for the better. And he criticized what to him, as a small builder, was important which clearly wasn’t for Taylor (the example with the painted on part of the cutaway for the builders edition). As a former owner of a Taylor K14c BE I can tell you first hand the cutaway and accompanying paint job felt like a very utilitarian design with no emphasis on aesthetics. While I loved the upper fret access and comfort while playing higher up the neck, even my untrained eye felt it was a little bit of an aesthetic let down compared to the rest of the guitar. I think DG’s point is that the BEs are sold at a premium price point and thus his feeling of “cutting corners”. If they did this on a lower priced line he’d likely just note it and move on, justifying it as a cost savings maneuver. But because it’s on their flagship line he’s pointing it out.

I don’t think he’s trying to pick off Taylor’s business. From his output and popularity, I think he’s booked for a while in advance. I think he’s just trying to make content on YT that draws views to supplement the income from building, which is a totally acceptable thing for anyone to do.
__________________
Santa Cruz | Huss & Dalton | Lakewood
Fan (and customer) of:
-Charmed Life Picks
-Organic Sounds Select Guitars
-Down Home Guitars
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-27-2021, 03:56 PM
phavriluk phavriluk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Granby, CT
Posts: 2,913
Default

This is buyer's choice market, right? If ya don't think something is worth the price, ya won't buy it. Next question please.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-27-2021, 04:32 PM
Glob Glob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 151
Default

I was expecting some serious stupidity but very balanced view and he has a point about the lack of binding on their top series. This was very informative.

He's basically just pointing that Taylor is not using the normal building where cost is directly related to the time spent upgrading the appointments. Or that Taylor has no real 'special' appointments. And it's not as transparent as it should (maybe) be? Whether you care or not, up to you.

He never complains about the level of automation (he seems to like it and not to be negative on CNC - and be excited about the tech involved). He never questions the sound implications of the Taylor building methods (none). He basically praises Bob Taylor from start to finish. He basically says there's no right and wrong way, depends on what your goal is.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-27-2021, 04:35 PM
Glob Glob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Posts: 151
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phavriluk View Post
This is buyer's choice market, right? If ya don't think something is worth the price, ya won't buy it. Next question please.
That only works if the buyer is adequately informed (if you know what you're buying). So great video in that sense.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-27-2021, 07:07 PM
Wadcutter Wadcutter is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 6,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gfirob View Post
Taylor's were always an also-ran for me anyway...
Well, there ya have it! 😂 I love the AGF!
__________________
HD-28
Hog GS Mini
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-28-2021, 12:16 AM
RalphH RalphH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Canterbury, UK
Posts: 1,285
Default

This video just smacks of someone who is bitter about the fact he can only afford to pay himself minimum wage while imagining he has far more skill and knowledge than anyone at Taylor. It's an easy mindset to fall into when you're working your butt off to make something really special and people would rather have the mass-produced stuff. I'm sure every restaurant owner has looked across the street at the Mc Donalds and thought "WTH?!?". That said, I don't think you can compare Taylor to mc d's. For a start, their guitars tend to look as good in person as they do in the product photography.

Personally, Taylors are not for me tone-wise, but every Taylor I've ever pickup up has had a build quality and fit and finish that was above anything Gibson or Martin can produce, even in their custom shops.
__________________
Gibson Customshop Hummingbird (Review)

Last edited by Kerbie; 10-04-2021 at 01:54 AM. Reason: Profanity
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-28-2021, 06:48 AM
SleepyAudi SleepyAudi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2021
Posts: 44
Default

For me Taylor was what I wanted due to the environmental policy. Wasting trees is not good.

But what you guys think

000-18 vs 512Ce

Same price. Is that fair?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-28-2021, 07:26 AM
s2y s2y is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Somewhere middle America
Posts: 6,594
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SleepyAudi View Post
For me Taylor was what I wanted due to the environmental policy. Wasting trees is not good.

But what you guys think

000-18 vs 512Ce

Same price. Is that fair?
Totally different guitars.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-28-2021, 07:31 AM
Street Glider Street Glider is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 587
Default

Honestly, to me, this sounds like a guy trying to justify charging $13,000 for one of his guitars...
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Tags
builder’s edition, taylor

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=