Martin 00-17s vs. Waterloo WL-K thoughts?

[ScaryLarry]

I am considering either a Martin 00-17s or a Waterloo WL-K.
They seem to be very similar guitars, but I was only able to play the Martin, so any info fromanyone who either owns both or has played both would be appreciated.

SL

[JoeYouDon't]

Both are great guitars, but the Martin bears more in common with the WL-12X, in my opinion.

The Martin is built heavier - not overbuilt by any means, but the WL-K is the lightest full sized guitar I've ever played. The Martin can take 12s with no issue, Collings recommends using 11s at the most on the K.

An argument could be made that the Martin is more versatile, but in my experience I think the voice of the K works better for more styles of playing.

The K is really a special instrument, but I wouldn't advise buying sight unseen. Waterloos are fairly polarizing, I feel fortunate to fall on the "love 'em" end of the spectrum.

[rc3797]

I agree. It shocked me the first time I played a WL-K, but it’s downright surprising how an instrument that’s so light can feel so solid. FWIW, I’ve also played a WL-14 & 12 side by side against actual an actual vintage Kalamazoo KG-12 & 14, and there’s no denying the Collings build quality. The same can obviously be said for the K. Bill put an insane amount of R&D into guitars that, even by his own admission, they “throw together”. If you’re in the market for that type of guitar, the Waterloo’s are the most worry-free option you’ll come across, IMO.

Edit: you’ve probably seen this, but:

https://youtu.be/6tgV-FCN9MA

[stephenT]

I have a 00-15 Martin and a WL-12 Waterloo. Just speaking for my two guitars, the brands couldn't be more different, the Martin has sustain and a full sound, the Waterloo has little sustain, more initial attack and less mids.

[Monts]

I love my Martin 00-17s. I've never played a Waterloo so I can't compare. Something about the 17s just sounds like no other. I picked it up used (like new) for $1000. I always hear many people say the Waterloos are better than the 17s. I live by a dealer and I am going to check out a few at some point, but I'm in no hurry.

[ScaryLarry]

Thanks RC3797

I was wondering about the WL-14 also. How did it compare to the WL-K? I know its a 14 fret vs. 12

[ataylor]

The WL-K is easily my favorite of the Waterloo models I’ve played. That said, they seem to have jumped way up in price over the last couple years.

If you’re into the current Martin 17s and Waterloos, have a look at Iris Guitars. I think they’re in the price range Waterloo used to be at, and are built by Circle Strings and Fairbanks Guitars in Vermont.

[Jay5150]

Both 17s and WL-K the same type of sound, but the Martin has more body. Probably due to 12 gauge instead of 11 as mentioned before.
However, the neck feels completely different. Martin is thin and easy, Waterloo is thick and harder to play. Forget about using your thumb with your left hand with the Waterloo.

[rc3797]

Originally Posted by ScaryLarry

Thanks RC3797

I was wondering about the WL-14 also. How did it compare to the WL-K? I know its a 14 fret vs. 12

Personally, I prefer 12-frets, but the WL-14 was super impressive. I played the X-braced TR version. I’m a bit biased, as I’m used to slope dreads; however, for an old-timey blues or fingerstyle tone, it was killer. I can see someone putting in a Baggs or K&K with a preamp and making a great, small gigging workhorse out of them (and many have). As mentioned above, there’s not a *ton* of body in the tone, but that may work for you. They are very woody-sounding, and the decay on the notes is super quick. I would still probably take a WL-K, because my idea of a great old small-body tone is Jeff Tweedy’s tone on his solo stuff and the Wilco acoustic songs. He’s known for playing an original Kel Kroydon, but has switched over to a WL-K for most stuff in the past couple years.

Hope this helps, and as always, YMMV

[ScaryLarry]

Excellent response - thanks again!

Now, I guess I need to go play both!

[rc3797]

Yes sir, no problem! I’m sure you’ll track one down that’ll do exactly what you’re looking for. Good luck with your search!

[JoeYouDon't]

Originally Posted by Jay5150

Waterloo is thick and harder to play. Forget about using your thumb with your left hand with the Waterloo.

I disagree. The neck is comfortable, a full C, but not uber thick. I can get my thumb around and play the low E without considerable effort, and I don't have especially large hands. The Martin may be thinner, but the Waterloo isn't a baseball bat.

The Waterloo Jumbo King's closer in that vein, but still not uncomfortable.

Admittedly I'm biased, but aesthetically I think it's a runaway in favor of the WL-K too:

[lespaul_79]

Originally Posted by JoeYouDon't

I disagree. The neck is comfortable, a full C, but not uber thick.

Yep, the necks are super comfortable and they sound awesome.