What makes Martin unique?

[frankmcr]

What makes Martin unique?

The way they glue their binding?

[Dbone]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

What makes Martin unique?

The way they glue their binding?

I was waiting for that one...;-0

[phcorrigan]

In the sixties, several of my friends had Martins--D18s, D28s and D35s. Of all the guitars around me in those days, the Martins sounded best, much better than the Stella and Harmony Sovereign I could afford.

I now have an HD-28V and I get comments all the time about how great it sounds, and I have no regrets for buying it. I've not been impressed by most Taylors I've heard, and the Yamahas I've heard have all been good, but not great. I have heard couple of great-sounding Taylors, but I still prefer the sound of my Martin. I've also heard some great-sounding Gibson J45s and J200s, but I've also heard some that were real dogs.

I think the Martin history and the consistency of their better guitars gives them their justly-deserved reputation.

[Rockysdad]

What makes Martin *unique* is, (ready for it?) they're the *only* ones that have *that* name on the headstock.

[phcorrigan]

Originally Posted by Rockysdad

What makes Martin *unique* is, (ready for it?) they're the *only* ones that have *that* name on the headstock.

I did run into a cheap guitar with the Martin decal on the headstock that someone was trying to pass off as the real thing.

[Jeff Scott]

Originally Posted by TJE"

As the reasonably happy owner of a mid range Martin acoustic with a distinctive bass, this is not asked as a troll like question..

Either, you "get it" or you don't (this is not a troll answer).

[zmf]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

That's interesting, if, or when, one leaves the Martin world behind - particularly for the luthier hand-built world - Martin becomes largely irrelevant as a point of comparison.

Martin makes some fine instruments, but I'm much more likely to compare a guitar I play to something that is more in line with what I consider leading edge. Martin, largely, with a few exceptions, is about what was, though they continue to do a good job of repeating that. I'm more interested in the state fo the art now and what innovations can improve the instrument. Those are to what I compare things. That's just me and doesn't make Martin any the less.

I agree with you. I wasn't implying that Martin was a gold standard. Rather a well known brand that many can relate something to. E.g., "sounds more like a Martin than a Taylor" is useful shorthand.

[Jaden]

Originally Posted by phcorrigan

In the sixties, several of my friends had Martins--D18s, D28s and D35s. Of all the guitars around me in those days, the Martins sounded best, much better than the Stella and Harmony Sovereign I could afford.

I now have an HD-28V and I get comments all the time about how great it sounds, and I have no regrets for buying it. I've not been impressed by most Taylors I've heard, and the Yamahas I've heard have all been good, but not great. I have heard couple of great-sounding Taylors, but I still prefer the sound of my Martin. I've also heard some great-sounding Gibson J45s and J200s, but I've also heard some that were real dogs.

I think the Martin history and the consistency of their better guitars gives them their justly-deserved reputation.

Nice to read this. My impression also.

[Arch Stanton]

The other makers are super awesome like Taylor, which i may even get next summer. But....the Martin heritage is still strong as ever and the sound cannot be beat, nothing rings like a Martin, and the craftsmanship is at the top. I know how they are built and i know the wood they use, but how they produce such a sound we'll never know.

[Kitkatjoe]

Originally Posted by TJE"

As the reasonably happy owner of a mid range Martin acoustic with a distinctive bass, this is not asked as a troll like question.

But I wondered if anyone had independent views or info about what is different or superior about the Martin co's construction techniques, choice of materials, etc, that explains it's dominance as a high end,'go to' brand.

For me the fact that it has been in existence since 1833 and from my understanding is still family owned seem like major pluses, but these are obviously intangibles.

There guitars are historically at the top.

[DenverSteve]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

That's interesting, if, or when, one leaves the Martin world behind - particularly for the luthier hand-built world - Martin becomes largely irrelevant as a point of comparison......

Not for me. I have several expensive guitars and custom builds, and they are always compared to specific Martins of the same, or similar, Martins.

[M Hayden]

Wha the makes ‘em different? Well, first they did the design work that a huge number of other makers have leveraged, and have been remarkably open about it. Their aesthetic has affected a huge percentage of the market, too. And thy continue to make great instruments, imho.