Perception. Martin vs Taylor.

[NotveryGood]

Last night I had an interesting discussion with three guitar playing friends here in the U.K. ,and its hopefully worth sharing. None of this is fact, just perception and opinion. Nor is it about the products. Taylor and Martin both make fine instruments, some of us favour one or the other, some like both, some like neither. So with that said ,here is the drift of the conversation.

Martin is among the very best of traditional American success stories. They have the history ,and don't seem to have the need to try too hard.
The promotional videos generally seem calm and laid back. A gently smiling Chris Martin seems happy to share with us, hopes we might make a purchase but doesnt seem to mind if we dont.
Taylor, on the other hand reminded us of those loud, brash TV adverts of the early sixties aimed at selling the great American public the latest all singing ,all dancing , Chrysler, Chevrolet or Kitchen appliance. Lots of hype then, but Taylor had a lot of catching up to do and they have pretty much done so. (we all agreed though that we have really had enough of the self congratulation and a smug looking Andy Powell re inventing the wheel!) But a great success story too, just a different approach.
So there you have it. not factual or accurate, just the thoughts and perception of four older guys over the water ,whose opinions dont matter anyway!

[warfrat73]

I think that there's something to that.

But, I also think that Martin has been actively trying harder over the last several years. All of the "reimagined" versions of classic guitars, the Modern Deluxe series, the GP series, the niche 15 and 17 series releases, cutting back on some things that have been in the line-up for many years, etc.

It sure seems like they're trying pretty hard lately, harder than they did for a long time, anyway.

[SpruceTop]

It's a Ford vs. Chevy kinda thingy .... Why not have both a Martin and a Taylor guitar?

[Silly Moustache]

I think I've recently said this elsewhere, but I feel that Taylor has replaced Ovation guitars as the acoustics for electric guitarists.

My first impression of them - probably in the '80s watching people like Nani Griffiths in concert was of a painful brittle treble sound, and I guess that set me against them.
Most American style marketing viewed through British eyes is going to appear rather brash and "in your face" - however, there is no denying that they make good instruments and have their fans.
One thing I do admire them for is that they have not "copied" Martin designs as most others have - especially my preferred luthiers - Collings, Santa Cruz, Bourgeois etc.

With Martins promo videos I have always disliked Diane Ponzio's presentation style and that she rarely gets the facts right.

These guys really grated:

But I love watching Chris Martin talking - I met him in the '80s at a rare Martin Roadshow, and he took time to chat - he seems a totally genuine chap (that's British for a nice guy).

Whilst I will always be angry with Martin for killing off the Levin/Goya company in Sweden, that was his Dad, and not Chris IV. and all things considered Martin guitars developed the finest designs, and I've had a large number over the years, and I've certainly got more books on Martin that all other brands combined.

I understand that Chris is retiring in July 2021, and I am concerned for them as to who will lead the company after he leaves.

Looking for Chris Martin's history online I stumbled on this article in which he gives his background, and his regard for Bob Taylor, and he even has a term for people like me who hate the "Grand Performance" (?) series and the latest abomination the "SC-13E" - Yes, I'm a "die hard puritan traditionalist".

I urge you to read this :

https://guitar.com/features/intervie...martin-guitar/

[DetroitDave]

Originally Posted by SpruceTop

It's a Ford vs. Chevy kinda thingy .... Why not have both a Martin and a Taylor guitar?

Why not indeed!
Plus it's financially easier to have a Martin and a Taylor than it is to have a Ford and Chevy.

[cdkrugjr]

I love the sound of both.

I find the neck of a Taylor a little cramped.

Of course I REALLY want a Collings...

[Slothead56]

Since we’re dealing in opinions and not facts I’ll throw out the following:
Taylor guitars have always felt “industrial” to me. Very well put together but lacking soul.

Martins, on the other hand, feel more like art. (Except for their lower end Mexican models, which lack soul.)

Admittedly, I’m a Martin guy....

[rokdog49]

I’ve never been swayed by all the white noise surrounding any guitar brand. Whether that comes in the form of tradition, design, technology, marketing or whatever laundry list of stuff associated with it, I’ve always purchased guitars based on my hands and ears.
I’ve had Larrivee’, Eastman, Fender, Taylor and others.
Owning a D18 or a J45 is cool, but it wouldn’t be if I didn’t buy them because I like them for what they do.

[BigOrangeBox]

Part of this perception is with resell value. I've noticed that Taylor appear to retain less value, especially on the premium wood combinations. For instance, brazilian taylors don't command as much premium used. I've seen Brazilian Taylors floating around $3k and you would not see that with Martin..

[llew]

I have owned both. I still own several Martin's and have owned just about the entire standard line at one point or another. I've owned maybe 5 Taylor's and the only one I'd maybe like to have back was the GS7. But tastes change and the vintage voiced builders (I won't mention names as we all know who they are) are what I prefer these days. Maybe because I'm becoming a little more "vintage" myself?
Nothing wrong with owning whatever it is that floats your boat. In a different thread regarding Taylor's October release, if they were to build a 12 fret version of their Grand Pacific I'd certainly go try one. But I'm a dread guy at heart so that's where you'll have to move me.

[Jon29526]

In my opinion both are exceptional guitars. Taylor's appear put a lot of focus on the high quality precision manufacturing techniques that they use. Martin has built more along the craftsman style. To me this has made my Martin easier to love but my Taylor easier to play. I do believe Taylor has much less range between quality on individual guitars but while Martin's have more variability the best of them really shine.
I do know if I am playing outside I am taking the Taylor cause it is rock solid compared to the Martin in temp and humidity changes.
I have had 2 Taylors and 3 Martins so far but wife only allows 3 in the herd at anytime.

[archerscreek]

Those generalizations/impressions seem fairly accurate to me regarding their marketing approach. And I think in part it’s led to some false impressions among some that Martin hasn’t changed anything in nearly 100 years whereas Taylor is the super innovative, hyper environmentally conscious Mecca of modern tone.

[EZYPIKINS]

For me, growing up in the 60's. Everything I heard on the radio was either a Martin, a Gibson, or maybe a Guild. Those are the sounds of my childhood. The tones I always wanted out of my acoustics. The younger generation grew up hearing the Taylors, and I get it. But for my money. I'll stick with what I know works for me.



Gibson J- 185
Martin 000-15
Guild D25M
Dean Exotica DAO

[RoyBoy]

Originally Posted by NotveryGood

Last night I had an interesting discussion with three guitar playing friends here in the U.K. ,and its hopefully worth sharing. None of this is fact, just perception and opinion. Nor is it about the products. Taylor and Martin both make fine instruments, some of us favour one or the other, some like both, some like neither. So with that said ,here is the drift of the conversation.

Martin is among the very best of traditional American success stories. They have the history ,and don't seem to have the need to try too hard.
The promotional videos generally seem calm and laid back. A gently smiling Chris Martin seems happy to share with us, hopes we might make a purchase but doesnt seem to mind if we dont.
Taylor, on the other hand reminded us of those loud, brash TV adverts of the early sixties aimed at selling the great American public the latest all singing ,all dancing , Chrysler, Chevrolet or Kitchen appliance. Lots of hype then, but Taylor had a lot of catching up to do and they have pretty much done so. (we all agreed though that we have really had enough of the self congratulation and a smug looking Andy Powell re inventing the wheel!) But a great success story too, just a different approach.
So there you have it. not factual or accurate, just the thoughts and perception of four older guys over the water ,whose opinions dont matter anyway!

As Europeans, I'm curious as to where you feel Furch falls on that continuum? From what I see and hear on their website, they appear closer to the Taylor end of things, perhaps a little more reasonable financially? (we just don't see them stateside much). To the Taylor lover: did you compare Furch when you chose Taylor?

[bfm612]

This is largely a superficial, uninformed perspective since I've never even played a Martin (but used to own a Taylor 114). I feel like Taylor still has yet to define one of its models as an archetype the way the D-18 or the D-28 is what people think of when it comes to flatpicking. There's tradition and history behind it, and it's the go-to guitar. I can't think of an equivalent for Taylor. I liked my Taylor and they clearly make quality guitars, but Martin definitely has an image advantage.