On average how many CNC milled guitars do you need to try before buying

[gr81dorn]

Originally Posted by merlin666

Yeah and that's the mystery with Taylor for me. Given the huge variability of the woods they say they are using it is just amazing how they accomplish such homogeneity of sound and consistency for each model. I don't think that can only be attributed to CNC and automation.

They are ridiculously consistent. I've handeld a dud now and then, but of the thousands of Taylors I've handled over the years, they are so shockingly consistent you almost can't believe they're playing the same game as the others.

Their general formula isn't really that much different than the other bigger folks, either. Their design is, though, and I guess I've always attributed it to that. Is it the bolt-on neck and the UV poly finish that balances whatver nuances may have existed (toward the good or the bad) had those same pieces of wood been joined and finished the old school (ie martin) way?

Taylors definitely have their own character and sound, but if that's your thing, it's kinda killer to know you don't have to agonize quite as much.

I love that Taylor does their own thing their way and it works great. They are truly a model of efficiency, consistency and quality that manufactures in other industries can appreciate.

[Gordon Currie]

Originally Posted by Mycroft

You are asking the wrong question. The real question is: how well educated is your ear so that you can discern what is a great guitar when you hear it?

Exactly. Being able to hear tonal quality is a learned skill.

This is why I believe people's attempts to find their 'forever' guitar by some type of 'science' when they have been playing for a year are generally unhelpful. Your ability to discern more tonal aspects and their subtle gradations will only come after years of playing and listening, and will increase over decades.

There is no substitute for letting your ears guide you. All the talk about brands, woods, bracing is entertaining, but not particularly predictive of quality.

[lowrider]

So, if you played those 5 Taylors at GC five days in a row, do you think you'd pick the same favorite each time? What about when if you took all 5 home and changed the strings to your favorites and decided that you wanted bone bridge pins?

What about 3 or 4 months later when they started to open up? Do you think there would still be the same favorite.

[Simon Fay]

Taylor is one of the most consistent guitar manufacturers not because of their design but because of their process. Small dimensional changes in the top/bracing/finish can have a noticeable effect on the end product. Additionally, good build quality ensures that such no issues arise from the fret/bridge/saddle/setup that can negatively impact the sound.

Martin has come a long way in matching Taylor's consistency but I believe they have a bit more design variation in their models - whereas, it seems Taylor has always strived to create a certain sound across their lineup.

With mass produced guitars, you are trying to push the bell curve as far right as possible and to give the bell curve a tight, sharp, curve. You don't want a wide bell curve as that means you have a lot of variation in your product. Quality control and meticulous, unchanging process is how you get that result.

Occasionally, you will find a mass produced guitar that just has something special. Most deviations in mass produced guitars are just slight deviations with some guitars sounding a bit better or worse than the next but if you play enough guitars, then you might stumble across something that is on another level. It is very important to realize that CNC's and careful/exact mfg serve to elevate product quality rather than doom the entire product line to mediocrity. The guitars coming out of Taylor, Martin, Eastman, Larrivee, etc... are all quite good -- especially compared to what was being produced decades ago.

[mouks]

Eastmans are marketed as "handmade" but I think they probably use some machining process to sell them at that price

[gr81dorn]

Originally Posted by mouks

Eastmans are marketed as "handmade" but I think they probably use some machining process to sell them at that price

Literally every guitar ever is handmade. A machine can't make a guitar. Eastman and every other manufacturer of guitars uses CNCs and other machines to make many of (most of) the parts. A human has to put it together and make it a guitar.

[zmf]

Originally Posted by Simon Fay

It is very important to realize that CNC's and careful/exact mfg serve to elevate product quality rather than doom the entire product line to mediocrity.

Yes -- a very important point.
I'm not sure I buy into it, but it depends on the goal. And how close the median is to mediocre. And what one's idea of mediocre is.

I mention this in part because I played a used custom Taylor about 8-10 years ago -- long ago enough that the image is fuzzy, but still very memorable.

It was larger than a GA, with tonewoods of red spruce and Madagascar. The tone was so sweet and lush that of it hadn't had "Taylor" on the headstock, I wouldn't have guessed what it was. My wife loved the tone, and wanted me to buy it, but it was too sweet and rich for my taste.

Never did learn the story behind that guitar, but it was way outside Taylor's normal production curve.

Would we want Taylor to offer custom guitars like this?

[Tony Burns]

Don't they have a guitar replicator on Star Trek ?

CNC -sounds creepy !

[Br1ck]

You may not want to believe this, but auditory memory is very short. Something like twenty minutes, so the only good comparison is side by side in the same store. When evaluating a guitar, I have a few mistake avoidance rules.

First, if I can put a guitar down in less than half an hour, I don't consider it.

Second, if I think about a guitar's resale value, I don't consider it.

Third, if a guitar costs 50% more that my comfort zone, I don't even play it.

Forth, if I think a guitar makes me play better, I slap myself in the face.

I have come to realize finding a guitar worth buying is a rare experience. If time doesn't disappear, move on. What you have is probably good enough. Of course this is once you have reached the level of something like a Martin D 18.

[mouks]

Originally Posted by gr81dorn

Literally every guitar ever is handmade. A machine can't make a guitar. Eastman and every other manufacturer of guitars uses CNCs and other machines to make many of (most of) the parts. A human has to put it together and make it a guitar.

If you look at this video from 2013, at around 5min the rep says they weren't using any cnc machines, he also said they would have to do it in the near future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACmfpnYlOJc

[EZYPIKINS]

Been looking for a Taylor that sounds good to me for the past 30 years now. I'm beginning to think it's not out there. Grand Pacific came close.

[gr81dorn]

Originally Posted by mouks

If you look at this video from 2013, at around 5min the rep says they weren't using any cnc machines, he also said they would have to do it in the near future

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACmfpnYlOJc

Yep and as he alluded to, as soon as they got popular enough to get some traction and demand for more, they got CNC machines. If they didn't, you wouldn't have the PCH series, etc. They couldnt make a guitar that good for $250 and they, even with chinese labor costs, couldn't make enough stuff to be profitable.

Ironically, that video is from the time when they were just really growing and if you talked to any dealers around that time, the quality control was truly awful and inconsistent. Since their investment in production, they have broadened their line-up considerably and the quality has gone up considerably.

CNC's aren't bad at all. They make making guitars faster and better. The humans can focus on the stuff that humans can do that a computer never could.

[merlin666]

Originally Posted by gr81dorn

Any info to support this claim? Not calling you a liar, just surprises me that anyone would have that information.

Sorry this is just info that had popped up on various guitar related forums over time and I thought this was common knowledge.

[gr81dorn]

Originally Posted by merlin666

Sorry this is just info that had popped up on various guitar related forums over time and I thought this was common knowledge.

Mostly just curious how anyone would really know that info. Taylor is a privately held company, no doubt they wouldn't divulge that information to anyone. Not sure of Eastman's status, but that would seem true of them, too, so how would anyone be able to make that claim about profitability without having insider information.

[merlin666]

Originally Posted by gr81dorn

Their general formula isn't really that much different than the other bigger folks, either. Their design is, though, and I guess I've always attributed it to that. Is it the bolt-on neck and the UV poly finish that balances whatver nuances may have existed (toward the good or the bad) had those same pieces of wood been joined and finished the old school (ie martin) way?

These features as well as extensive CNC use were all introduced as standard methods of guitar production by Ovation decades ago. Yet it didn't help them stay profitable, likely due to poor marketing of the brand after they were taken by Fender. It's interesting that my local luthier who builds guitars one by one does well without CNC (I hope). But I also visited the three ukulele factories on Hawaii that are small family operations and they all rely on CNC for neck carving and some other time consuming repetitive cutting tasks. So it has its place in the process and for consistent results. But there is still a lot of manual skill needed for instrument building, though it diminishes with division of labour among many workers.