Martin Dreadnought Playability

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by sinistral

What gauge strings do you have on the Sakura, and what is its scale length? The Recording King almost certainly came with light-gauge strings, and has a shorter scale length (24.9”). The Martin Ds are strung with medium-gauge strings and have a standard scale length (25.4”). A 1/2 inch might not sound like a lot, but it makes a noticeable difference in string tension. Add to that heavier gauge strings and the dreadnought is even harder to play.

The neck profile could be a factor, too, but you say that the neck of the HD-28 seems similar to your Sakura. Take some measurements—that way you’ll have a better sense of the actual differences.

I would try to go to a store where you can try a number of different guitars in one sitting.

I have mediums on the Sakura, and its scale length is the same as the Martin. But I don't have the same problem playing the Sakura.

[warfrat73]

The action at the nut on almost every guitar I've ever bought has been too high.

This makes playing in first position exhausting.

Easy to check. Hold down the string at the third fret, and look at how much clearance there is over the 1st fret... there should be just a hint of a gap there, if any at all.

[brencat]

Agreed. Sounds like nut slot depth isn’t at fret level. Get a pro setup done.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by warfrat73

The action at the nut on almost every guitar I've ever bought has been too high.

This makes playing in first position exhausting.

Easy to check. Hold down the string at the third fret, and look at ho much clearance there is over the 1st fret... there should be just a hint of a gap there, if any at all.

I'll do that.

[Troubador]

About the MLO neck: Are there other companies that use that kind of neck? Or which ones don't use it? I hope this is not the issue, or I'd have to stop playing Martins, I guess.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by warfrat73

The action at the nut on almost every guitar I've ever bought has been too high.

This makes playing in first position exhausting.

Easy to check. Hold down the string at the third fret, and look at how much clearance there is over the 1st fret... there should be just a hint of a gap there, if any at all.

So, I just checked that -- no clearance, or very, very little.

[martingitdave]

Neck shape and proper setup are key to any guitar. Martin stock setup is setup for fairly loud playing without buzz. Easy playing Martins usually require a setup tech to lower the nut slots, straighten the neck and potentially lower the saddle.

[martingitdave]

Originally Posted by Troubador

About the MLO neck: Are there other companies that use that kind of neck? Or which ones don't use it? I hope this is not the issue, or I'd have to stop playing Martins, I guess.

MLO is Martin’s take on the slim neck profile. Taylor, Yamaha, Gibson, etc. all offer something similar. All hands are unique.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by martingitdave

MLO is Martin’s take on the slim neck profile. Taylor, Yamaha, Gibson, etc. all offer something similar. All hands are unique.

I wonder if I need a chunkier neck? My hands are not large, but I learned on a wide neck guitar. Then again, I played my Sakura for 50 years without problems, and it does not have a wide or chunky neck. My hands have changed in the last couple of years, though.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by martingitdave

Neck shape and proper setup are key to any guitar. Martin stock setup is setup for fairly loud playing without buzz. Easy playing Martins usually require a setup tech to lower the nut slots, straighten the neck and potentially lower the saddle.

Action and neck angle on my Martin are perfect. I don't know about the nut slots.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by 6L6

It's the MLO neck.

I've owned several reimagined Martins myself and all are gone because I couldn't adjust to that neck. And grabbing an "F" chord with thumb over the top to catch the 6th string became very painful in my thumb joint after a short period of play.

Lots of folks out there like the MLO neck and many don't.

I don't.

What kind of neck do you prefer? Do you own any Martins now? What brands do you own?

[sinistral]

Originally Posted by j38guitar

https://www.maurysmusic.com/maury_s_...in_neck_shapes

This link has the profile of all the necks. Yours is a Modified low oval.

I don't mind it at all and actually prefer for certain things. Like for a solo or stuff like that. But I do think I have to use more pressure to bar down the strings. My Eastman has thicker neck and less pressure is needed. I am so used to playing 12 string guitars that my fingers/hands are not very picky.

If you look at the neck profiles in the link above, you can see the different profiles Martin has used over the years. The pre-reimagined HD-28 had a Low Profile neck, and the reimagined ones have a Modified Low Oval neck. The Low Profile was introduced in the 1980’s and was the standard for several decades. A lot of manufacturers gravitated to slimmer necks due to the popularity of electric guitars. Also, in Martin’s case, previous generations of guitars had beefier necks because the guitars didn’t have adjustable truss rods.

Since the neck on your Sakura suits you, it would be useful to know what it’s profile is, but neck profiles can be tricky to measure. Do you have a profile gauge? You can get one at a hardware store or online.

If the nut slots are high, it will definitely make fretting more difficult. Again, since you like the playability of your Sakura, I would try to get the Martin set up as close to your Sakura as possible—it’s a process of elimination.

[b1j]

I have played a couple of new Martins lately that have modified low oval necks. I was able to play them for the few minutes I spent in the stores without noticing any particular difficulty, although their necks were thinner than those of my guitars.

Both my new "50s" Gibson and actual 50s Martin have chunkier necks, which I seem to like. Gibson calls it "Rounded." Based on Maury's chart, I'd say my 0-18 neck is "full profile." I've heard it described as "gentle C" shape. I have wide hands with medium-length, stubby fingers.

For what it's worth, the Gurian is a different beast, with its neck tapered along its width, but when it comes to barre chords, I'm using the thicker part near the bass strings, so it's kind of the best of both worlds (love the Gurian; so unique in many ways!).

The 1952 Martin neck is not fooling around. Already chunky near the nut, it gets thicker as you move up the frets, not a feature folks seem to want in a new Martin. The Shubb capo needs to be adjusted (opened) every 2 or 3 frets as it goes up! But to my hands, it's very comfortable. I'm not sure I'd like a contemporary, Reimagined 0-18 because of the modified low oval neck. Gibson makes the Standard J-45 with the "Slim Taper" neck, which I suspect might be like Martin's modified low oval (not sure about that). I played a J-45 Standard but did not prefer the thinner neck.

So both Martin and Gibson are implying that
– a rounded, thicker neck is a 50s feature (Gibson) or "Authentic 1937" (Martin), while
– a thinner neck is "Modern" (both Martin's and Gibson's word). Why modern? Maybe because it plays somewhat like an electric?

Troub, maybe you would like a thicker neck? Or maybe the HD-28 is still rather new to you and you will adapt to it nicely in time. Let's hope for that.

I could think of worse things than having an HD-28. Even with my thick-neck habits, I'd love to have an HD-28 in the corral. I'd probably end up playing different things on it. I'm beginning to sense that it's asking a lot of a single guitar to excel at everything. This may be the etiology of GAS. Good luck!

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by sinistral

If you look at the neck profiles in the link above, you can see the different profiles Martin has used over the years. The pre-reimagined HD-28 had a Low Profile neck, and the reimagined ones have a Modified Low Oval neck. The Low Profile was introduced in the 1980’s and was the standard for several decades. A lot of manufacturers gravitated to slimmer necks due to the popularity of electric guitars. Also, in Martin’s case, previous generations of guitars had beefier necks because the guitars didn’t have adjustable truss rods.

Since the neck on your Sakura suits you, it would be useful to know what it’s profile is, but neck profiles can be tricky to measure. Do you have a profile gauge? You can get one at a hardware store or online.

If the nut slots are high, it will definitely make fretting more difficult. Again, since you like the playability of your Sakura, I would try to get the Martin set up as close to your Sakura as possible—it’s a process of elimination.

Thanks for the information. I don't have a profile gauge, but I'll look into getting one.

[Troubador]

Originally Posted by b1j

I have played a couple of new Martins lately that have modified low oval necks. I was able to play them for the few minutes I spent in the stores without noticing any particular difficulty, although their necks were thinner than those of my guitars.

Both my new "50s" Gibson and actual 50s Martin have chunkier necks, which I seem to like. Gibson calls it "Rounded." Based on Maury's chart, I'd say my 0-18 neck is "full profile." I've heard it described as "gentle C" shape. I have wide hands with medium-length, stubby fingers.

For what it's worth, the Gurian is a different beast, with its neck tapered along its width, but when it comes to barre chords, I'm using the thicker part near the bass strings, so it's kind of the best of both worlds (love the Gurian; so unique in many ways!).

The 1952 Martin neck is not fooling around. Already chunky near the nut, it gets thicker as you move up the frets, not a feature folks seem to want in a new Martin. The Shubb capo needs to be adjusted (opened) every 2 or 3 frets as it goes up! But to my hands, it's very comfortable. I'm not sure I'd like a contemporary, Reimagined 0-18 because of the modified low oval neck. Gibson makes the Standard J-45 with the "Slim Taper" neck, which I suspect might be like Martin's modified low oval (not sure about that). I played a J-45 Standard but did not prefer the thinner neck.

So both Martin and Gibson are implying that
– a rounded, thicker neck is a 50s feature (Gibson) or "Authentic 1937" (Martin), while
– a thinner neck is "Modern" (both Martin's and Gibson's word). Why modern? Maybe because it plays somewhat like an electric?

Troub, maybe you would like a thicker neck? Or maybe the HD-28 is still rather new to you and you will adapt to it nicely in time. Let's hope for that.

I could think of worse things than having an HD-28. Even with my thick-neck habits, I'd love to have an HD-28 in the corral. I'd probably end up playing different things on it. I'm beginning to sense that it's asking a lot of a single guitar to excel at everything. This may be the etiology of GAS. Good luck!

That post is a good read. Yes, maybe I'll adapt to the HD-28 in time, hopefully. It seems to be set up well; Manchester Music Mill checked it out before shipping it to me to see if it needed any adjustments -- my salesman assured me of that.