Simple Taylor V-Class "test" / compare?

[ClayDots]

Originally Posted by Jambi

Well that settles it, my guitar and all others that came before this epiphany of luthiery are literal garbage now. I'd throw my x-braced monstrosity on the bonfire except I'm afraid it will sully the good flames. /s


In all seriousness, I'm very happy that you enjoy your new guitar. Your opinion has no bearing on how much I enjoy mine, however.

Where'd you get that from? ... I said exactly the opposite, totally agreeing with you.

Such polarity!

[ClayDots]

Originally Posted by wooglins

That diagram is different from the Taylor design, and either way it was just a diagram in a guitar forum with no actual physical design work performed. It is also just a diagram with a shape with no details concerning bridge design and other very specific details that are contained in the Taylor patent. Sorta like an idea on a napkin. You actually have to submit the idea on the napkin to a patent agency in the proper format for it to have any real bearing. Folks used to say if you have an idea mail it to yourself as proof it was your idea, but patents don't really work like that.

The Taylor design stops just below the sound hole whereas the diagram pulled the frame to beyond the sound hole at the fretboard.

What has been missed and perhaps Taylor should have shared was Andy has been working on this for four years with very large amounts of building and testing of different designs to come to the final product.

Taylor design

Notice the numbered markings, these reference details from the patent which are details explanations, not just a simple redline image.

Sketch from forum

Actually, two considerations re: any patent and "prior art":

1. Can the inventor claim ownership in light of any existing art.
2. Does the prior art make the invention obvious to "one skilled in the art".

1. If this 2012 date is before Andy's invention date (not filing but inventing) it could mean he won't be granted claims, which are the property a patent gives you right to. If the examiner (or later court?) says that the two are the substantially the same invention and there are no non-obvious improvements then no patent granted/upheld. This assume the design was published or public somehow.

2. The 2012 A/V design may not be exact, but, given it's teachings to someone skilled in the art, would the differences be obvious. So if another luthier sees the 2012 design and changes it a bit to what Taylor did, but the changes would have been obvious to most other luthiers, then also no patent (related claims) granted or upheld. The new inventor did not actually have to see the 2012 design, only if the differences would be obvious/non-unique.

If no patent based on the above, and the first designer didn't file one timely, then it's public domain. So, open up V-Class Guitars Co. and have a day!

I wonder if Taylor knows about this? If they do, then they likely changed something they feel is non-obvious to get a patent of some sort. If they knew and failed to fulfill their covenant to disclose prior art to the examiner, not good. If the examiner missed this as prior art, it's great fodder for another company to argue against the patent ... not necessarily to get a patent, but just to be able to build guitars that way freely.

If Andy and the other guy did their inventing independently but contemporaneously, then the first to file (in the US) with proper intent likely gets the prize.

If nothing else, certainly waters down the marketing hype just a wee bit, huh?

[ClayDots]

Originally Posted by FOG01

One last thing, just poking fun mind you.

People emote in binary, good or bad. It's good and bad, or a mix of both.

Good, bad, or a mix... Isn't that 3?

The mix has many, even infinite, possible values ... analog.

For example:
Son doesn't get into college: Bad.
Son gets into college, Florida Prepaid . Good.
Son gets into Harvard. Mix

[FOG01]

Originally Posted by ClayDots

[emoji38]

The mix has many, even infinite, possible values ... analog.

For example:
Son doesn't get into college: Bad.
Son gets into college, Florida Prepaid . Good.
Son gets into Harvard. Mix

You have me there. Btw, congrats on your NGD. I completely understand how excited you must be scoring a new V class 914ce. I have no doubt it's an incredible guitar. Enjoy it in good health!

[jkilgour2000]

Originally Posted by fazool

again.....

Is there a “beating the dead horse” meme for the overuse of a “beating the dead horse” meme?

[GuitarMan420]

I sold my 614 of old and bought the 614 of new...

Nothing seems different because i still suck.....

...When they can figure out how to build a better player rather than a better guitar ill be back in the game!

[ClayDots]

Originally Posted by GuitarMan420

I sold my 614 of old and bought the 614 of new...

Nothing seems different because i still suck.....

...When they can figure out how to build a better player rather than a better guitar ill be back in the game!

I love the new 614ce, beautiful. It's about time they put something nice on the back for the player to enjoy!

Seriously though, any difference?

[zeebow]

Originally Posted by ClayDots

No, I just spend stupid money on things to talk about in forums online.

The Taylor V-Class marketing and posts all talk about
1. intonation
2. sustain
3. volume,

I did not introduce them.

Is there a purpose to your question?

I had no 2017 or 2018 914ce to see or play, within 100 miles, let alone together. I had to buy on line remotely, so this forum/topic was super helpful deciding 2017 or the new model. My buddy plays a 314ce and I am impressed by its tone range and quality, especially for $1500. I am lucky to be able to go for a higher model.

BTW, minor part? Without volume and sustain you literally have ZERO dynamics, zero "feel", no? Not so minor my friend. Without volume and sustain, isn't there just mechanical harmony left? I hope in fact volume and sustain are a major part of your music!

i know the feeling, can’t find them locally, but then again not really trying to hard

alamo music did a compare on a 2017 914ce and 2018 914ce v class.

they also have a compare video to a martin.

i listened to both videos without looking, with headphones (audio technical ath-m50x) and preferred the new 2018 914ce i’m both videos

https://youtu.be/jS0ZPNb2_NE

ill try to remember to do your sustain challenge. what chord? prepare to lose, to a smaller guitar! lol

ill battle you with my lutz/cocobolo GC 12 fret with adirondack performance bracing (another andy creation)

[gitarro]

Originally Posted by Rmz76

At Fuller's Guitars in Houston where I got to spend some time with the V-Class braced guitars, immediately after I did play a Waterloo WL-14L . The Waterloo was much smaller than the GA body styles of the V-Braced guitars and to me there wasn't much similarity (FYI the Waterloo WL-14L was a much more difficult guitar to put down than the V-braced Taylor's I tried, but that is just my preference).

I agree with what was said earlier about the volume/sustain balance up the neck on new V-class braced Taylor model being very similar to what we've always gotten on small X-braced 12 fret Parlor sized guitars. It's very similar. I would argue with anyone who claims V-bracing makes no difference. There clearly is a difference, what will always remain subjective is if the change is really superior. While it's not surprising that when a company introduces a new novelty that they would leave out the subjectivity of it's superiority in the marketing and advertising customers should acknowledge regardless how grand the changes are those changes are distancing the "new and trending" design and tone from "proven and traditional". There's a degree of bigotry to not seeing both perspectives and understand why a player may want to go one way or another. Anyone firmly planted in one mindset ready to wage war with the other camp should probably reevaluate the cause and their motives.

From Taylor's perspective, it must be nice to be the big builder that's positioned to get customers excited about innovation instead of tradition. Lots of valid negative sentiments regarding how marketing was conducted, but you have to hand it to them for knowing where their strength is in the market and what they need to do in order to keep moving the brand forward.

Did you find that the greater volume and clarity up the neck of the v braced Taylor was similar to the ladder braced Waterloo? It was a possible theory in another thread that this is what accounts for the v bracing's features. Of course we do not mean that a v braced Taylor sounds exactly like a Waterloo but what we mean is the greater perceived volume - could that feature be similar?

[Haussmann]

https://patentimages.storage.googlea.../US9520108.pdf

Read the patent in detail, with this design in mind:



Everything is there to ignore the patent..

[Rmz76]

Originally Posted by gitarro

Did you find that the greater volume and clarity up the neck of the v braced Taylor was similar to the ladder braced Waterloo? It was a possible theory in another thread that this is what accounts for the v bracing's features.

I think the up then neck consistency in volume and sustain that's always been there with the high quality Parlor's that I've tried and owned is similar to what I heard on the two V-Class braced models that I tried (2018 K24ce, 914ce).

Of course we do not mean that a v braced Taylor sounds exactly like a Waterloo but what we mean is the greater perceived volume - could that feature be similar?

Yes. Similar does not mean the same. From my experience the V-Class bracing delivers something new, but I think the consistency in volume and sustain consistency on a Parlor gives those who haven't tried one of these an idea of what to expect but volume and sustain are separate from timbre. The timbre of these guitars still sound like "that Taylor sound" to my ears.

I found the small loss of mid-range to be the only downside of V-Class bracing and it's a very nuanced thing. Playing the 914ce, I expected a certain richness in open chord strumming from Spruce and Rosewood and there was a thinness to the tone that I didn't care for. On the K24 the Koa seemed to compensate. When it comes to sound properties in every way the V-Class braced K24ce was better than it's 2017 X-braced counterpart. I can't say the same in my 914 to 814 comparison. This left me curious to know how the V-Class bracing will impact my likeness of other models. What will it do for the Maple? Mahagony? Western Cedar Top?

[wooglins]

Originally Posted by Haussmann

https://patentimages.storage.googlea.../US9520108.pdf

Read the patent in detail, with this design in mind:



Everything is there to ignore the patent..

4c, 7, and 10 are completely missing from the hobbyists sketch. Also missing is any detail as to what it does. It is a sketch, an idea. Ideas are not patents, they can be the start of a patent.

I have diagrams from my childhood detailing electrotechnical shocks that are computer controlled. Are those diagrams worth anything now that someone else actually patented and made my idea? Nope they are worth nada.

[Haussmann]

Did you notice the word 'may' in the patent, Wooglins?

And did you ever publish the diagrams of your childhood?

The (public) Dutch sketch from 2012 is very useful for everyone who wants to build and sell a V-braced guitar..

[Nelson]

There are some points that I believe some here are missing. New innovations or features do not necessarily make older ones obsolete. I own a 2002 514ce, a 2003 414ceLTD and a 2015 150e. Each sporting the latest innovations of it’s time, each offering the best Taylor had to offer at the time and each a great guitar for what it offers. None are obsolete and none worth replacing as far as I’m concerned.

The new V bracing sounds like a neat innovation and I’m sure it offers something new and nice, but for me, it’s nothing worth rushing out and purchasing. In a few years it’ll be something else that is the greatest innovation since whatever the last one was and folks will rush out to buy it because they want the newest whatever.

It’s called “planned obsolescence”. Everyone from car makers to computers to clothes and such do it. Change or innovate your product over time to boost interest and sales. They want you to think that what you have is no longer any good and you now need to replace it for the latest and greatest iteration.

All three of my Taylor’s play fantastic, sound great, and I love them. Over time I may save up my money add something new but rushing out to get that latest version just because it’s available seems a bit foolhardy.

[Picker2]

Originally Posted by wooglins

4c, 7, and 10 are completely missing from the hobbyists sketch. Also missing is any detail as to what it does. It is a sketch, an idea. Ideas are not patents, they can be the start of a patent.

I have diagrams from my childhood detailing electrotechnical shocks that are computer controlled. Are those diagrams worth anything now that someone else actually patented and made my idea? Nope they are worth nada.

You are right - your childhood diagrams are worth nada. But that's not the point. The 2012 V-bracing diagram of the Belgian luthier Tee is also worth nada, because he published it in the public domain. As a result, any builder can now create "V-braced" guitars, as long as they state that they got the idea from the 2012 diagram.

By the same argument, Taylor's patent is also worth nada now. Ideas published in the public domain cannot be patented. Even though Taylor's patent has all kinds of little details in its description, the most important part of it is the V-brace, two single braces running from the tail block along both sides of the sound hole. That part of the patent can no longer be protected, because it was published in the public domain prior to the patent application date.

I am pretty sure that if the patent office had seen the 2012 diagram, they would have rejected the patent application.