My musings on Martin vs Taylor (part 2 - semi-pro)

[Taylorfanguy]

Here is Part 1

Guitars in this price range :

Taylor 300 series (310, 314, 312, etc) $1699-1899 new; $700-$1000 used;
Martin Grand Performance series (GPCPA4 and DCPA4, sapele and rosewood models) $1599-$1899 new; $800-$1100 used;
Martin D-16 (E, RGT, etc) $1699-$1899 new; $800-$1100 used;
Martin D-15M $1599 new, $800-900 used

This comparison is primarily going to be between the Grand Performance and the 300 series, specifically the GPCPA4-Rosewood and a 2002 Taylor 310CE. I've played a couple D16's and they are nice as well, and I especially like the binding and D35-esque look of the RGT model. The D-15's are a little bit of a different monster as it's all Mahogany, but for sake of conversation since they are roughly the same build-wise and feel-wise, I thought I'd throw it in here as an option.


I'll preface this by saying I recently bought my 310CE for $750 used (plus a $120 courtesy refund for getting it reconditioned and set-up due to misrepresentation on the auction, so technically around $690 once it was all said and done plus strings), having the wonderful Fishman system onboard, although most of these examples run between $850 and $1,000 used. I believe new 310ce's are not widely available anymore, but the 314ce's are, and they are just as comparable.

The GPCPA4 Rosewood is my wife's guitar purchased locally for $800 out the door, and I think it is a very good value for the money.

So let's break this down.

Both guitars feature a solid sitka spruce top. The sides are solid wood (as well as on all of the models above). The back and sides are satin on both guitars, and the necks are also satin. Rosewood bridge and fingerboard on the Martin, Ebony bridge and fingerboard on the Taylor. Both guitars are set up to roughly the same specifications, both set to factory set ups by the same luthier.

• On fit, finish, and feel, it's a close call as both guitars have an excellent hand-rubbed feel. The thin UV-cured polyurethane finish on the neck of the Taylor makes it noticeably more enjoyable to play, dare I say on a large level. It's fast, tight, and smooth, and even rubbing it brings a certain warm joyous satisfaction (don't go there, perverts!). The back and sides are likewise smooth and slick as well, but to a lesser extent - mainly to let the natural wood grain sparkle and shine through. The sapele is very well done on my 2002 model, and the gloss finish on the solid sitka top seems to be just the right level of coating - not too thick and not too thin. The Martin on the other hand seems to have a cheaper feeling top coating, and while the back and sides are exquisitely hand-rubbed, the wood grain doesn't sparkle nearly as much and the neck is quite a bit more raw to me - but some may equate that to more "natural" feeling and would prefer that, so take that as you may. The neck is not at all bad in any way, but it's hard to compete with a neck that feels like velvet on Taylor's 310. As for the binding, the Martin wins there. Nice shining white binding compared to Taylor's boring black binding. On the D16RGT this would shine even moreso. Due to the neck, which is probably the most important part for me, and the general excitement I have when I pick this instrument up and give it the tactile treatment, I give the edge to Taylor.
  
• For playability, both instruments again display strong qualities. Unlike Martin's dreadful X series, the action is fantastic all the way up the neck here. But it simply cannot compete with Taylor's buttery smooth action, and the string spacing once again wins me over. When an acoustic guitar has the smoothness of an electric guitar even with medium gauge strings, I can't be unhappy. For playability, Taylor wins again.
  
• For durability, I haven't had either instrument slip severely out of tune since they've both been professionally set up, and they both look like they could survive the hardiest of gigs. Both have tough finishes in their own right, and neither have developed any humidity issues or cracking or checking. I'm calling this one a tie.
  
• For sound, although both of them display great tonal properties, I have to hand this one to Martin. It's painfully obvious when I strum the Taylor and then strum the Martin that the Martin has complex overtones that seem to create a choir-like quality with bell-like highs beyond my hearing threshold and rolling mid-lows that tumble into each other and spill out into the open. I would hand this advantage to the solid rosewood being a (here comes a controversial opinion) more complex tonewood, though the sapele models while closer in sound have also sounded quite good to my ear as well. It's an obvious win and it has character and depth that the Taylor does not possess. I've heard it said "Taylor if you want to hear the strings, Martin if you want to hear the wood" and that saying is incredibly true in this comparison. Here's what the Taylor does have going for it in sound - bright, chiming highs, a belting sustaining high-midrange, and a great tonal curve for singing over. Fingerpickers will want the Martin no contest in this comparison.
  
• For electronics, without trying to be too biased, I'll forge ahead. My Taylor has what I consider to be one of the best onboard preamp systems ever made. How someone can prefer the expression system to these infinitely tweak-able, naturally rich and full sounding Fishman systems is a mystery to me. You can't pick your soundman, folks! The first time I played an Expression equipped Taylor back in 2005, I thought, "they'll discontinue these and go back to the Fishman models within a year or two". *off my soapbox* So for that reason, in my personal comparison, the Taylor wins handily. However - your model will likely come with an Expression system as there are more Taylor models with it than without it now, probably an 80/20 split out there honestly. I'll be blunt - I hate the Aura system. I like the tuner, but the learning curve while not difficult is a weird one, I want my knobs to do what they say, and not have to press them in a number of times like dialing a telephone to change what the knob does. Both systems suck! I was gonna give this category to Taylor, especially since you have the option of buying a 300 series with a Fishman, but since the Aura has a tuner, call me vain, but this one's reluctantly a tie.
  
• For value, this is a mixed bag since you have two guitars that are very, very good and one of them is specifically priced for value (as well as the other Martins listed). Here's what it boils down to :

..............Martin's likely going to discontinue this Grand Performance series in a couple of years - in fact they've already began to phase out some of the models in lieu of other models. What you're getting is a budget-conscious line from Martin who feels sorry for you that you can't afford their expensive (and rightfully so) standard series (D-18 and above). While that's thoughtful, and I appreciate the introduction of the D-15 and D-16, I feel Martin as a company should have built standard series guitars all the way down the line...case in point - Taylor. Taylor didn't give us an IG100ce (intermediate guitar 100 series cutaway electric) or a BFEM300ce (Budget friendly economy model 314ce with laminated back and sides with plastic nut and bridge). They created an expansion to their standard line with the 100 and 200 series, firmly showcasing them as their standard series but with laminate backs and sides. Attention to detail and materials and build quality was very comparable, dare I say equal, but due to the quality of the materials, they don't quite stand up to 300+ series, and that's to be expected.

What you are getting for value in this category is Taylor's standard series guitar in the 300 flavor. You're getting all the attention to detail and craftsmanship that you would get if you purchased a maple flavored 600 series or a cedar-topped 500 series. If you want more bling, it's easy - you pay more for the 700+ series models or shell out for a deluxe series Taylor. The point being - you still own a Taylor, cut and dry - not an economy model, not a budget-conscious model, you own a standard model Taylor. While technically any guitar below the top echelon is "budget priced", there's a clear difference between the focus that brands place. When you own a Martin like the Grand Performance series, you get the feeling that you're compromising in some way. I own this Martin, but...... I secretly wish I owned a real one. *i.e. HD-28*. That blow is lessened with the expansion of their standard D series (15, 16) but still the feeling of not fully stepping into that camp remains. "Someday" you say. There's an emptiness. A goal, sure. But you haven't arrived. Sometimes that's fun, but sometimes it's frustrating.

For value, Taylor wins.

Again, YMMV. Some folks don't mind having economy-based models as long as they sound and play well, and this one certainly does all of that. But I think I speak for a lot of people when I say - don't all of us Martin owners wished we had a real Martin (until that day finally comes when we bought one and what a glorious day that was)?

Even a 110 or a 210 can leave you satiated without much compromise.

The bar is much lower for "having arrived" with a Taylor - $1799 street price, versus $2499 street for a D-18. Those two would actually be a more fair comparison, but price wise they are quite far apart.

Ultimately it's what you're looking for as a guitar player. Installment #3 will go into the professional level series, and what a knockout really can be!

This was more long winded than I intended, but Martin will get its due...

[Rev Roy]

Nice, thoughtful report. Thanks for posting!

You might also take a look at the 17 series (same price point as the 16s). Gets a lotta love on AGF and UMGF. The new slope dread announced at Winter NAMM (DSS-17) is something special. Spruce over hog (Honduran or Sipo depending on what’s available on build dates), feather light, iconic Martin dread tone and lots of volume. Lot of guitar for the money. So far mine is getting the same daily playing time as my D-41...which is saying a lot.

[Taylorfanguy]

Originally Posted by Rev Roy

Nice, thoughtful report. Thanks for posting!

You might also take a look at the 17 series (same price point as the 16s). Gets a lotta love on AGF and UMGF. The new slope dread announced at Winter NAMM (DSS-17) is something special. Spruce over hog (Honduran or Sipo depending on what’s available on build dates), feather light, iconic Martin dread tone and lots of volume. Lot of guitar for the money. So far mine is getting the same daily playing time as my D-41...which is saying a lot.

Good to know!

D41s are sweet.

[IndyHD28]

Your screen name says it all.

[CylinderBear]

Good one! Keeping going!

I can’t wait for part 3 of this.

[Taylorfanguy]

Originally Posted by IndyHD28

Your screen name says it all.

Well I try to not be biased; if you look at my signature, I'm mostly a Martin owner. The whole purpose of this project is to give an objective look at the guitars. If the Taylor offers more value and satisfaction to me than the Martin in the same price range, so be it - but I won't be shy if the opposite is true as well.

Bottom line, everybody has their own opinion, but I have the pleasant advantage of having some great guitar shops nearby, and a nice collection of these guitars I've bought and sold and still own. I'm sorry if you don't agree with me (if that was your intention) but you are also entitled to your opinion. All the best.

[ataylor]

I dunno. The 15 style Martins and the newer 17 style models — now aimed squarely at the Waterloo brand — really seem to be wonderful guitars that are just as deserving of the Martin brand as the standard series models.

Martin has had the 15/17 styles for decades — these aren’t a new entry for people they feel sorry for. It’s just a different combination of features at a different price point to get folks into the Martin brand. In the 20s and 30s, that meant an all-mahogany guitar with no binding. That’s more or less the spirit behind the current offerings and it’s no different to what Taylor is doing.

As far as value goes, Taylor’s prices have gone up more than Martin in recent years. I’d argue that at street prices, the Martins are more competitive at every level now, except maybe the Mexican-made models, where it’s probably sixes.

[Taylorfanguy]

Originally Posted by ataylor

I dunno. The 15 style Martins and the newer 17 style models — now aimed squarely at the Waterloo brand — really seem to be wonderful guitars that are just as deserving of the Martin brand as the standard series models.

Martin has had the 15/17 styles for decades — these aren’t a new entry for people they feel sorry for. It’s just a different combination of features at a different price point to get folks into the Martin brand. In the 20s and 30s, that meant an all-mahogany guitar with no binding. That’s more or less the spirit behind the current offerings and it’s no different to what Taylor is doing.

As far as value goes, Taylor’s prices have gone up more than Martin in recent years. I’d argue that at street prices, the Martins are more competitive at every level now, except maybe the Mexican-made models, where it’s probably sixes.

Cool, thanks for sharing