What makes the Taylor 900 series so expensive?

[Karel]

At the Amsterdam Taylor HQ they called their 900 series their “dentist guitar”. The same quality as lower ranked series but with more bling. BTW I have no problem with Taylor nor with dentists. It’s business.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Deputy289

Hey guys! I checked out a K14CE Builder's Edition the other day at my music store and it was absolutely gorgeous. Wasn't a huge fan of the sound initially, but was also told it can take a bit for the koa to open up. I went back to the store this morning and played it again when I had more time, and felt completely different on the sound. It was night and day better. I know the price tag on these are 5,000, which is certainly fair for a high end series. I'm not complaining in the least bit.

My simple question is, what gives it that price tag? Is the wood that much more quality? Is it cosmetically based? Again, this isn't a Taylor bashing thread as Martin's high end guitars are up there as well. I just want to know prior to buying what exactly I'm getting that is considered "premium" for a Taylor purchase.

Thanks,

Roger

Generally the price reflects all the costs associated with manufacture, materials and labor . The better the materials and the more labor the higher the price (simple as that)...... Do not listen to the naysayers , the Taylor 900 series guitars compete equally with any guitars in that respective price category. The only difference is subjective personal taste, not quality of build.

[Pura Vida]

Originally Posted by musicman1951

A Yamaha student flute is $1,015, alto sax $2,242. My flute, which is a really nice flute that a good hs student would play is $5,000. My piano - cheapest grand Yamaha makes - is now $24,000.

Guitars (eliminating the ridiculous ends) go from around $200 - $20,000. A guitar that cost less than $1,000 can be a nice instrument, but all things are relative - including price and quality.

I absolutely agree it's in the eye of the beholder. That they all sound great . . .

$20,000 guitars are excluded from the ridiculous end? LOL. Quality is subjective, of course, but if we looked at purchase prices (outside of the AGF bubble), anything over $3k is approaching a relatively small market.

Back to the OP, higher model costs are usually driven by the wood quality (premium = $$$), type of wood (some wood like Cocobolo can be difficult to work with), appointments (bling = $$$), and additional labor required to make that guitar. Headstock tax can come into play, as well.

[manson88]

Micro-Economics101: price is determined by supply and demand

[FOG01]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Generally the price reflects all the costs associated with manufacture, materials and labor . The better the materials and the more labor the higher the price (simple as that)...... Do not listen to the naysayers , the Taylor 900 series guitars compete equally with any guitars in that respective price category. The only difference is subjective personal taste, not quality of build.

Agreed. Taylor's pricing is not out of line with Martin, Gibson... Taylor's build quality is well established as being excellent, particularly their solid wood guitars. They come new with a lifetime warranty and I've have heard few if any legit complaints about them standing behind their work or quality control issues (dare I say less than the aforementioned other two?). Which leaves sound and appearance, both of which are subjective. Some like them a lot, some not so much. To each his or her own.

[moosedog]

As evidenced by my signature, I own what I consider 4 “small shop” guitars. Everyone agrees that Huss and Dalton and Collings are boutique builders and most agree that Martin Custom Shop guitars are a boutique build. Is it that much of a stretch to consider Taylor builders edition guitars to be a boutique build? Boutique = higher price. My k14be is a stunning build with craftsmanship simply not found on any other guitar. This is an expensive guitar to create and the feeling I experience every time I take it out of the case - both externally and internally is absolutely priceless. Best of all, I paid $3800 brand spanking new. And yes, in the 14 months I’ve owned it the sound has opened up beautifully after starting out on the tight side. Good luck KevWind

[gmel555]

Originally Posted by Brucebubs

If you take the 9 and multiply it by 5 you get the same thing in Martin-speak.

Very clever Brucebubs! To that end I wonder and ask others if they think or know that Taylor has the same practice as Martin re using higher grades of tonewoods in their higher series guitars. For example, would the Indian Rosewood in a Taylor 900 be a higher grade (*see below) than the IR in a 700 or 400. Martin says that 40 series tonewoods (e.g., IR and Sitka) used are higher grades* than than those used in a 20 series.

* A number of luthiers here on AGF have confirmed that "higher grade" (for example AAAAA vs AAA) is a cosmetic rating, not a tonal rating, but for that reason, higher grades command higher prices.

[maplebaby]

"For example, would the Indian Rosewood in a Taylor 900 be a higher grade (*see below) than the IR in a 700 or 400."

Yes, Taylor uses their top grades of wood for 900 series. The only guitars that might show a bit more 'flash' would be the Presentation Series guitars. I have two 900 series guitars, a 1999 912C, which is one of my fave acoustic guitars that i've ever owned and a much new 914CN, nylon string, pictured first below.

[zoopeda]

You lost me at V Bracing...

[Tony Burns]

They sell them for 5 grand because their are people who feel their worth
it - but for alot less than that, I can get a better level used instrument .
a higher model number does not impress me on a factory made guitar -
what impresses me is the skill of the player .
I feel Taylors are nice instruments and all -but I wouldn't be in a line to pay 5 grand for one.

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by manson88

Micro-Economics101: price is determined by supply and demand

Actually, it's price-point merchandising, which factors supply, demand and competition.

(Maybe that isn't covered until ECON 210?)

[FoxHound4690]

Originally Posted by Deputy289

Hey guys! I checked out a K14CE Builder's Edition the other day at my music store and it was absolutely gorgeous. Wasn't a huge fan of the sound initially, but was also told it can take a bit for the koa to open up. I went back to the store this morning and played it again when I had more time, and felt completely different on the sound. It was night and day better. I know the price tag on these are 5,000, which is certainly fair for a high end series. I'm not complaining in the least bit.

My simple question is, what gives it that price tag? Is the wood that much more quality? Is it cosmetically based? Again, this isn't a Taylor bashing thread as Martin's high end guitars are up there as well. I just want to know prior to buying what exactly I'm getting that is considered "premium" for a Taylor purchase.

Thanks,

Roger

The same thing that makes Gibsons so expensive. You're paying for the name rather than pay for a tone that truly blows you away

[Marley]

Originally Posted by BluesBelly

The high price tag is because it says TAYLOR on the headstock.

Much the same as if it would say Gibson or Martin.

If you like a guitar for its sound and playability buy it. But not for its pedigree.

Blues

On one hand I hear you but on the other I'm not so sure. It's like saying you're only paying a lot for a Aston Martin or a Ferrari because of the badge on the hood and not what's underneath the hood or all the other component used to build it. With the three brands you mention you are paying for more than just the name on the headstock. You're paying for the quality of the components used, craftsmanship and many lower priced brands are not using as high quality of components and their fit and finish is not the same.

[FOG01]

Originally Posted by Tony Burns

a higher model number does not impress me on a factory made guitar -
what impresses me is the skill of the player .

I'm always impressed by the skill as well, it is without a doubt the most essential component.

Can't say I agree that if a guitar is made by a brand name company it guarantees it will be inferior and/or their product line is merely cosmetic based. Sounds (and sound is) rather subjective, no?