Martin Should consider a bolt on neck!

[RP]

Originally Posted by guitar george

Bolt on necks sound like a good idea. Why doesn't everyone use them?

In the case of Martin, I'd guess that 186 years of tradition are the roadblock to such a change....

[Paddy1951]

Originally Posted by steelvibe

Because their buyers do it for them?

Really? Show me a scientifically based study that proves that.
So far, we have nothing but opinions on either side of the debate.

I find that interesting because makers of other types of musical instruments test their design improvements or what they hope will be improvements.

[leew3]

is it me or is it getting hot in here?

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by bluesfreek

The original Norman guitars from Canada had bolt on necks like this. I had a 1971 Norman that had the same type of neck attachment. A neck reset would take literally 10-15 minutes.

What model is that?

[drplayer]

Originally Posted by Silurian

Martin have been around for a long time but they haven't had to face contemporary challenges before.

They haven't? Taylor has been around for 45-years, and Martin is still prospering. Why? Because they still make a magnificent guitar that players are eager and willing to plunk down their money for.

Originally Posted by Silurian

Many more players in the market at all levels, greater quality from competitors, etc.

And yet, Martin remains one of the very top selling brands. The implication that a dovetail neck attachment is of lesser quality is absurd. Martin, Gibson, Santa Cruz, Lowden, along with smaller builders like Bedell, Fairbanks, Kopp, Slobod and others are all doing quite well.

Originally Posted by Silurian

It may be true that today's customers aren't interested in change but every company has to keep asking what tomorrow's customers may want.

True, but since you can't please everyone, you have to understand your market niche and demographic and aim to please them.

Originally Posted by Silurian

Any company that thinks it has no motivation or incentive to change is treading on dangerous ground.

That's not what I said or implied. What I said was that Martin has no motivation or incentive to change their neck attachment design, which they don't. Players wanting a bolt on neck have many options available to them. That works for companies like Taylor who supply that demand, and has proven to have no detrimental impact on Martin.

[Paddy1951]

The traditional dovetail joint vs a bolt on joint debate, (at least the kind you get from Taylor, Collings, etc.) is not about the quality of the guitars or the joint used. It is about the + - of each neck joint design.

[Golffishny]

What timing? I was just noticing yesterday that my 2 year old Martin doesn't have much saddle left. The action on the higher frets isn't very low. And my house humidity has been around 45 all winter.

[ras1500]

I have a Martin D1-R. After the serial number plate fell off inside the guitar, it revealed a large phillips head screw going through the neck block. I'm thinking this is a bolt on neck. However, the fingerboard extension appears to be glued to the top.

[ChrisN]

Originally Posted by ras1500

I have a Martin D1-R. After the serial number plate fell off inside the guitar, it revealed a large phillips head screw going through the neck block. I'm thinking this is a bolt on neck. However, the fingerboard extension appears to be glued to the top.

From: https://www.musicradar.com/reviews/g...tin-d-1-219986

The 1s were also notable for being the first Martin series to employ its bolt-assisted mortise and tenon neck joint, which was later rolled out to the cheaper Road Series and HPL (High Pressure Laminate) Xs, and the more upmarket 15 and 16 Series.

The bolting aspect has sometimes been misconstrued. The joint is actually glue-bonded, the bolt serving as a clamp while the glue is drying, so the mortise and tenon doesn't act like a dovetail in intrinsically cleaving the neck to the body.

The bolt could be discarded afterwards, but Martin chooses to leave it in situ and there are a couple of spin-off production benefits - first, the bolt hole in the neck block allows the body to be secured tightly in its mould during assembly; second, the heel's threaded insert enables the sprayer to attach a handle to the neck to make the finishing process easier.

[drplayer]

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

General Motors set the pulse in the auto industry at one time. The company scoffed at the idea of the Japanese companies, especially Toyota being taken seriously.
GM scoffed at Demming's ideas about how to improve building autos. Toyota embraced the ideas.

Well, it wasn't just GM...it was also Ford and Chrysler

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

GM has never entirely recovered from its arrogance of the sixties.

I'm not sure there are statistics to validate this, but regardless, GM, Ford, and Chrysler are still going strong and remain insanely profitable.

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

If Martin doesn't care about what a percentage of its products owners think it may find itself in trouble one day.

Who says Martin doesn't care about what a % of its product owners think? This thread seems to be about what a percentage of NON-product owners think (or maybe more accurately, what ANTI-product owners think), which shouldn't be a concern to Martin at all.

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

It doesn't make a difference how much some owners play their guitars. It does make a difference how owners feel about Martin's products. No company can afford to rest easy as competitive as the acoustic guitar market is.

I'm pretty sure their owners are overwhelmingly happy. Their sales would seem to substantiate that.

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

There are guitars that approximate the sound of Martins guitars. What if a company decides to build a guitar with a Martin sound but with a modern bolt on neck ?

This has been tried, and it still doesn't produce a Martin. And, Martin continues to sell an astronomical number of guitars.

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

What if that guitar has the QC of Taylor?

What on earth would lead you to believe Taylor has better QC than Martin?

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

What if Taylor were to build a new line of guitars that had a Martin kind of sound with an NT neck? Taylor has just demonstrated a willingness to produce a guitar with a different sound. Taylor isn't afraid to push boundaries.

Push boundaries to what end? The jury is still out on the V-bracing, and despite Taylor's marketing claim of superiority, there are as many (maybe more) Taylor aficionados who aren't impressed with the V-bracing as there are those who have bought into it; so, what has Taylor gained from this exactly?

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

What if a multiple Martin owner has several guitars that need $400 resets?

If you're a Martin owner and your guitar needs a neck reset you get a neck reset. This thread would have you believe that the need for neck resets is running rampant, when it fact, they are rare considering the amount of Martin guitars in existence. I've owned probably a dozen Martins and have only had one neck reset done...when the guitar was 17-years old. It really didn't even need to be done yet; but, it was heading that way, so I opted to get it out of the way. It cost me $400 (or $23.53/yr. if you break in down)...a price I gladly paid to maintain my favorite guitar. It costs me a helluva lot more than that in oil changes to maintain my car, and my car won't be around decades from now still giving me joy.

Originally Posted by Paddy1951

No, Martin better be concerned about what all owners and buyers think. Martin better start looking forward instead of backward.

Martin is doing quite well with their strategy, and have been longer than any other major guitar manufacturer in history. Wonder if Taylor will still be around in 2160???

[bluesfreek]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

What model is that?

I have no idea, it's a random photo from Google. The Norman I had was an old B20 made of laminated birch with a maple neck. I bought it off a guy for $50 about 5 years ago and did a lot of gigs and it was used for 3 years when I hosted a local open mic.

Here it is.

[Silurian]

Originally Posted by drplayer

They haven't? Taylor has been around for 45-years, and Martin is still prospering. Why? Because they still make a magnificent guitar that players are eager and willing to plunk down their money for.



And yet, Martin remains one of the very top selling brands. The implication that a dovetail neck attachment is of lesser quality is absurd. Martin, Gibson, Santa Cruz, Lowden, along with smaller builders like Bedell, Fairbanks, Kopp, Slobod and others are all doing quite well.



True, but since you can't please everyone, you have to understand your market niche and demographic and aim to please them.



That's not what I said or implied. What I said was that Martin has no motivation or incentive to change their neck attachment design, which they don't. Players wanting a bolt on neck have many options available to them. That works for companies like Taylor who supply that demand, and has proven to have no detrimental impact on Martin.

I used the term contemporary in relation to 186 years of history, 45 years could be described as relatively recent.
I apologise for my akward use of the term "greater quality" I meant that the competition in general is producing better quality instruments than it had in the past, not better than Martin, and not a specific reference to neck joints.

I wasn't suggesting the Martin would or should produce bolt on necks, simply that in a competitive environment, taking any type of innovation completely "off the table" for any reason seems to me to be a mistake.

[Monsoon1]

Originally Posted by drplayer

They haven't? Taylor has been around for 45-years, and Martin is still prospering. Why? Because they still make a magnificent guitar that players are eager and willing to plunk down their money for.



And yet, Martin remains one of the very top selling brands. The implication that a dovetail neck attachment is of lesser quality is absurd. Martin, Gibson, Santa Cruz, Lowden, along with smaller builders like Bedell, Fairbanks, Kopp, Slobod and others are all doing quite well.



True, but since you can't please everyone, you have to understand your market niche and demographic and aim to please them.



That's not what I said or implied. What I said was that Martin has no motivation or incentive to change their neck attachment design, which they don't. Players wanting a bolt on neck have many options available to them. That works for companies like Taylor who supply that demand, and has proven to have no detrimental impact on Martin.

You don't think Martin would sell more guitars if Bob Taylor had never made guitars?

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by drplayer

I'm pretty sure their owners are overwhelmingly happy.

Indeed. Happy guitarists play Martins. This will never change.

[drplayer]

Originally Posted by Monsoon1

You don't think Martin would sell more guitars if Bob Taylor had never made guitars?

Sure...and Ford would sell more automobiles without GM, and General Electric would sell more televisions without Magnavox, and my corner Shell station would sell more gasoline if there wasn't a Marathon station on the opposing corner. It's what makes a free market economy thrive, and why monopolies are largely illegal in the U.S.