Perception. Martin vs Taylor.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by NotveryGood

I never said Andy Powers was smug, just that he looks it in the videos. One of the points we discussed in our little group was that Taylor do push their new bracing as if they have re invented the wheel. And they may well have done! There is no need to be defensive on their behalf, it wasnt an attack! (Christopher Martin might well have given the same impression had the video technology been available in the 1840s!) We were talking about our perception of the advertising, and as I said before its just a perception, an opinion. We felt their self congratulatory stuff does wear thin after a few issues of "Wood and Steel" though. You obviously disagree and enjoy their promotional campaign so thats fine too. Proof that it works!

So, even though I wasn’t intending to come off as defensive, apparently, I did. And you may not have intended for your post to be an attack yet it did read like typical Taylor bashing.

Your clarification that Powers merely looks smug in the Taylor videos still leaves me mystified as to why he appears self-satisfied to you and your friends.

[SpruceTop]

Frankly, I think Andy Powers deserves kudos for taking Taylor designs, IMHO, in new and better directions. His altering of the X-Brace design, along with his back-brace designs, and various thicknessing of woods, as well as the introduction of the V-Class bracing, have improved Taylor tone. Bob Taylor and Kurt Listug didn't select Andy Powers to lead Taylor Guitars because he was some flunky but because Andy has a clear vision of what Taylor Guitars can be and the skills to help take the company forward to realizing its goals.

[cedartop52]

If we are discussing primarily marketing strategies, it strikes me that Taylor's assertive approach is in synch with their progressive stance and much of the contemporary marketplace. Alternatively, Martin's more restrained approach is in keeping with a more traditional product and consumer. Full-disclosure: I currently own neither brand.

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by cedartop52

If we are discussing primarily marketing strategies, it strikes me that Taylor's assertive approach is in synch with their progressive stance and much of the contemporary marketplace. Alternatively, Martin's more restrained approach is in keeping with a more traditional product and consumer. Full-disclosure: I currently own neither brand.

+1! I've owned numerous examples of both brands and love them both! No tribalism on my part.

[jaymarsch]

I have owned one Martin and one Taylor over the years and no longer have either. I will say that the Martin tone is closer to what I like than most any Taylor I have played. Doesn't make them inferior guitars - they just don't fit my tonal preferences. Given the fact that probably no two set of ears hears the same thing, it is no wonder that they and other brands seem to find customers that love many examples of each. I tend to be a both/and kind of person as opposed to an either/or.

Best,
Jayne

[ChrisE]

I have a Taylor 314ce and it’s a fine guitar. I’ve played hundreds of gigs with it. It’s a real workhorse and if I could only have one guitar, it would be a nice one to have.

That being said, I like my D-18 better; it just sounds perfect to me and actually even plays better than the Taylor.

Taylor seems like a great company and Bob and Andy seem like great guys who make great guitars.

[L20A]

Yup.
Apples vs Oranges.

Both companies have a signature sound.
Some will like one and some will like the other the other.
Oh Bladi Oh Blada,
Life goes on.

[NotveryGood]

Originally Posted by cedartop52

If we are discussing primarily marketing strategies, it strikes me that Taylor's assertive approach is in synch with their progressive stance and much of the contemporary marketplace. Alternatively, Martin's more restrained approach is in keeping with a more traditional product and consumer.

That is a much more articulate, measured ,and sensible post than the one we four guys came up with originally over a beer for sure. Thankyou.

[Mike McLenison]

To my ears Martin always sounds bigger.

[buddyhu]

It does seem like this discussion is mostly about impressions gleaned from marketing materials of various types, with less discussion of actual guitars. Even the discussion of guitar related stuff (bracing patterns) is focused upon individual (seemingly negative) reactions to the marketing of the V bracing innovation.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, as I do not own a Martin or a Taylor right now, though I appreciated both the Martin and the Taylor that I did own.

I do think that Martin tends to be associated with particular, characteristic tonal profiles, especially the much desired “pre-War” profile.

[rokdog49]

And at the end of it all, another example of how threads about brands always seem to end up going sideways. We went from an innocent OP about two guitar brands and their approach to marketing their product and image to which guitar brand is better and a whole bunch of other stuff.
Just a Sunday morning observation.

[Coop47]

Okay, since we're talking perception, eye of the beholder stuff, I'll admit that way deep down I think of a Taylor as a more feminine guitar, akin to a Luna. I can't really explain why, I just can't ever see myself owning one even if I found one that I really loved. I know it's stupid headstock bias, but I can't get past it.

There, I said it. Fire away.

[Kerbie]

What is a feminine guitar? I didn't know they had genders.

[Coop47]

Originally Posted by Kerbie

What is a feminine guitar? I didn't know they had genders.

They don't. Thus the adjective "feminine" as opposed to "female".

[Ludere]

Originally Posted by L20A

Yup.
Apples vs Oranges.

Both companies have a signature sound.
Some will like one and some will like the other the other.
Oh Bladi Oh Blada,
Life goes on.

when I’m watchin my TV
and a man comes on and tells me
how white my shirts can be
but he can’t be a man cause he doesn’t play
the same brand of axe as me

I can’t get no ...