Taylor Expression System replacement

[leeasam]

Originally Posted by steveyam

The very fact that it has been revamped and upgraded a number of times is testament to the problems that it has had. .

so Fishman and baggs should not have anything out there available except the original undersaddle piezo` they intruduced YEARS ago?? I guess the Aura was intruduced just for fun and to blow research dollars since the original pick up they had was so perfect?
The reason stuff like the Aura and other PUs from other makes come about is because the originals SUCK.

[Rick Shepherd]

Originally Posted by Side Man

http://mi-si.com/2011/01/22/align-xt/

Welcome aboard. This replacement system comes complete with vol & tone pots that will replace the the preamp in your 414CE. I'm sure others will weigh in with more options for you.

Thanks for the info, Side Man! I have an older 2003 version of the ES and I am fairly happy with it, but I have wondered about other options. BTW, what does Taylor charge for the ES upgrade?

[leeasam]

Hey Rick-- Here ya go-- it also includes refresh package-- if you have other areas the guitar needs talk to them and you could get that possibly thrown in too.
http://media.taylorguitars.com/attac...ckages3-08.pdf

I before my current 2010 816CE every Taylor I have before had the original 3V system. While I could get it to work well( I knew how to EQ it) it did take some tinkering. Now with the latest version I really like the system and would spend the money in a heart beat if I still had my older Taylors to upgrade knowing what I know now. Yes there are others systems but if you are getting along withthe older version you will LOVE the newest version!
I also like the fact I know longer need to bang the guitar against my hand to get the stupid AA batts out

[Side Man]

Originally Posted by Rick Shepherd

BTW, what does Taylor charge for the ES upgrade?

From what I recall reading in other ES threads, Taylor's current charge for ES upgrade runs about four Benjamins plus shipping (both ways). I'm sure someone else will chime in if my info is incorrect.

[Rick Shepherd]

Thanks! I may upgrade my 2003 version at some point. I have heard the latest ES and was impressed! I am fortunate to live a few miles from their factory.

[royd]

I have no doubt that the newest ES is an improvement over the earlier versions but it is still the same basic design - a magnetic neck pup and a magnetic coil SBT (there are 2 bugs & the neck pup in the earlier systems). If you really hate the earlier versions, I wouldn't expect you'd love the newest one and I would recommend going in a different direction. If you sort of like the earlier versions and are looking for an improvement rather than a replacement, then the Taylor ES upgrade is a good direction to go. The upgrade is a chunk of change even if you do the replacement yourself. From what I read this is fairly easy to do if you have the 9 volt version but requires significant cutting in the tailblock if you have the original 3 volt system.

Bottom line, if you hate the ES period, I wouldn't do the Taylor upgrade. A different system based around a UTS or a different SBT would be a much better direction for you and won't cost much or any more than the upgrade. If you like the ES and don't care for the other systems out there but still wish it was better, then the upgrade may be worth it to you.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by leeasam

so Fishman and baggs should not have anything out there available except the original undersaddle piezo` they intruduced YEARS ago?? I guess the Aura was intruduced just for fun and to blow research dollars since the original pick up they had was so perfect?
The reason stuff like the Aura and other PUs from other makes come about is because the originals SUCK.

I'm not getting drawn into petty side arguments, not interested in what Baggs or Fishman are up to in this context. Look, some companies operate a programme of 'continuous development', others are are forced into upgrading a system that basically (to use US phraseology) sucks. That - in my opinion - means Taylor's ES. I love Taylor guitars. I think the ES system was premature and in need of upgrading right from the start. Looking forwards to the day when Taylor launch a preamp system that rivals Yamaha's brilliant, market leading SRT system.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by steveyam

I'm not getting drawn into petty side arguments, not interested in what Baggs or Fishman are up to in this context. Look, some companies operate a programme of 'continuous development', others are are forced into upgrading a system that basically (to use US phraseology) sucks. That - in my opinion - means Taylor's ES. I love Taylor guitars. I think the ES system was premature and in need of upgrading right from the start. Looking forwards to the day when Taylor launch a preamp system that rivals Yamaha's brilliant, market leading SRT system.

The sound of a pickup system is a matter of personal preference and it is to be expected that any one system will have its detractors and supporters. I wonder why someone who doesn't like a system finds it necessary to make false assumptions about it or the manufacturer; why it isn't enough to simply say such and such a system is not for me for this or that reason and leave it at that.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

The sound of a pickup system is a matter of personal preference and it is to be expected that any one system will have its detractors and supporters. I wonder why someone who doesn't like a system finds it necessary to make false assumptions about it or the manufacturer; why it isn't enough to simply say such and such a system is not for me for this or that reason and leave it at that.

Subjectively, soundwise, yeah. But half of em simply didn't work! they were plagued with faults!, ask any Taylor repair centre about returns of ES equipped guitars after they came out and for years afterwards.

[briggleman]

Herb,

I just think its cute he does not want to be drawn into petty side arguments yet does his best to invoke them!!

Now to everyone..... Do you think it is really strange that most if not all of the acoustic pickup manufactures, are rethinking designs, and most are trying to pick up the body vibrations of the actual guitar wood resonance. Cannot be done with typical UST's but body sensors can do this. Again, others before Taylor did this, but Taylor keeps on improving and striving to perfect. Others keep trying the same old thing. A guitar sound, its tone, its voice, is the sum of its parts.... its wood density, its bracing, its construction, and all of these and more impart the vibration and the sonic signature that hits our ears. I do not mean to say Taylor has the answer, but to keep insinuating that it is defective is just plain ignorance of some in the acoustic challenge in trying to electronically replicate the natural sound of our guitars. Steveyam, you need to provide helpful answers, not ambiguous generalized statements with little merit and no facts.

Brad

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by briggleman

Herb,

I just think its cute he does not want to be drawn into petty side arguments yet does his best to invoke them!!

Now to everyone..... Do you think it is really strange that most if not all of the acoustic pickup manufactures, are rethinking designs, and most are trying to pick up the body vibrations of the actual guitar wood resonance. Cannot be done with typical UST's but body sensors can do this. Again, others before Taylor did this, but Taylor keeps on improving and striving to perfect. Others keep trying the same old thing. A guitar sound, its tone, its voice, is the sum of its parts.... its wood density, its bracing, its construction, and all of these and more impart the vibration and the sonic signature that hits our ears. I do not mean to say Taylor has the answer, but to keep insinuating that it is defective is just plain ignorance of some in the acoustic challenge in trying to electronically replicate the natural sound of our guitars. Steveyam, you need to provide helpful answers, not ambiguous generalized statements with little merit and no facts.

Brad

Ok, get a load of this SRT technology as being used by Yamaha and very similarly by Fishman's Aura. Streets ahead of what Taylor are up to. Taylor probably couldn't afford the years of R&D expense that went into developing it. Make sure to go through and read thoroughly the stuff in the drop down menus in the features section:

http://www.yamaha.co.jp/english/product/guitar/srt/

When you play one of those guitars into a good clean reproduction system you hear that guitar being mic'd - with the best mics in the world, in the best studio, by the best engineers (with various options all along); not the sound of its top with a couple of magnetic transducers stuck to it. The SRT system is all about the sound of an acoustic guitar as picked up by a mic. Most people accept that mic'ing is the most accurate way to amplify an acoustic guitar, but the method is fraught with problems when trying to do this live - for reasons we all know too well - feedback, volume swells/dropouts, extraneous noise collection etc etc. SRT gives you beautiful, clear, mic'd sound - without the associated problems.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by steveyam

Subjectively, soundwise, yeah. But half of em simply didn't work! they were plagued with faults!, ask any Taylor repair centre about returns of ES equipped guitars after they came out and for years afterwards.

Half of them? Taylor sold more than 150,000 Expression System equipped guitars in the first three years. To profess that 75,000 of them were defective is preposterous.

[steveyam]

Originally Posted by Herb Hunter

Half of them? Taylor sold more than 150,000 Expression System equipped guitars in the first three years. To profess that 75,000 of them were defective is preposterous.

You know what I mean..

[briggleman]

Originally Posted by steveyam

Ok, get a load of this SRT technology as being used by Yamaha and very similarly by Fishman's Aura. Streets ahead of what Taylor are up to. Taylor probably couldn't afford the years of R&D expense that went into developing it. Make sure to go through and read thoroughly the stuff in the drop down menus in the features section:

http://www.yamaha.co.jp/english/product/guitar/srt/

When you play one of those guitars into a good clean reproduction system you hear that guitar being mic'd - with the best mics in the world, in the best studio, by the best engineers (with various options all along); not the sound of its top with a couple of magnetic transducers stuck to it. The SRT system is all about the sound of an acoustic guitar as picked up by a mic. Most people accept that mic'ing is the most accurate way to amplify an acoustic guitar, but the method is fraught with problems when trying to do this live - for reasons we all know too well - feedback, volume swells/dropouts, extraneous noise collection etc etc. SRT gives you beautiful, clear, mic'd sound - without the associated problems.

I agree with most of your statement above, except of course the Taylor remarks. The Yamaha SRT system is trying to do what the Fishman Aura Spectrum DI (I own it) and some of the other Fishman boxes can do, using modeling (Fishman says imaging) to replicate a mic'ed guitar. I do not need the modeling or imaging with my Taylor GA8. The ES system does a great job of bringing out the natural sound of my guitar. When played straight into a QSC K10, ... all I can say is wow!

Your method of making a point is what I have an issue with.... you make generalized and inaccurate statements. I have no problem with you not liking the Taylor ES system, none at all, just your method of promoting one system by making false statements about the other is the issue.

In my previous remark about other companies, most are now going down the road that Taylor has taken. Trying to capture the actual vibrations of the tone wood, the strings, by making a better device to capture those and get them out and amplified. Some like the SRT system, take a UST and try to fix its inherent weakness by modeling the sound so it sounds like a natural mic'ed guitar.... I get that.... but I like the idea of trying to get it right from the start, without placing or blending images of different microphones. I want to hear what my EAR hears when played.

[Herb Hunter]

Originally Posted by steveyam

You know what I mean..

I presume that you mean a far greater incidence of problems than actually occurred but, as you have no data, you don't know the actual incidence yet are willing to make a grossly exaggerated claim as if you did. The question is why? Why isn't it enough to say one doesn't like the Expression System's sonic character without serving up disinformation?