|
|
#61
10-24-2023, 05:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Keep in mind that the "Taylor brightness" topic, while generally true, is also perpetuated by people who spend more of their time reading internet forums and repeating uninformed rhetoric instead of spending their time playing, practicing, and refining their craft as a musician.
I've seen some very strong opinions come from people who can barely play. Taylors, to me, do have a certain brightness and zing to them. But that general rule doesn't apply to all models I've played, and fairly big changes can be had by the choice of string, the technique of the player, the choice of pick, etc. I've owned a couple Taylors and I think they're fine guitars but their ES2 pickup system is a no-go for me. I've only heard one (out of many) that sounded nice plugged in. To my ears, and in my opinion that is. 
|
|
#62
10-24-2023, 06:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You can play and explore bluegrass on any guitar. Don't let anyone tell you different. The only reason people want a loud guitar is because they are trying to keep up with banjo, fiddle and mando for volume. If you're plugged in, it makes no difference. You can turn up as loud as you need to be.
You'll be happy if you ever need to get a neck reset on the Taylor. With bolt on neck, you can get it done for $100 or possible even do it yourself. Neck reset on a Martin is gonna cost around $500 or more
|
|
#64
10-24-2023, 11:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I thought my Collings had more clarity per se than this particular Taylor. I have reached a point where I no longer am worrying about the woods, etc. I am just focusing on playing what I have and wearing/breaking them in as much as possible. To me, the best guitars I have played are the ones that have been played the most.
__________________
"If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything." - Mark Twain Last edited by waterlooz; 10-24-2023 at 03:51 PM. Reason: spelling
|
|
#65
10-24-2023, 11:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not real bright, so it must be the Taylors.
|
|
#66
10-24-2023, 11:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I've played a couple of their mahogany-top axes, though, and they sounded good. Not good enough to want one, but good enough to enjoy playing them. They basically struck me as expensive bedroom guitars. So am I perpetuating or just opining?
|
|
#67
10-24-2023, 03:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've had a few Taylor guitars over the years, even some weird ones (Rosewood 416 and a Hog 512), and the biggest difference I noticed was how flat the fretboard radius felt (they are a normal 15" radius I think), and how little the tops vibrated. I guess I chase the vibration of the guitar almost as much as the tone. They aren't for me anymore, but they are definitely easy to play.
Oh, and they are definitely bright guitars. My Maple OM is less bright than my Mahogany Taylor was 
__________________
2017 Bourgeois OM Custom - Adirondack/Peruvian RW 2017 Brian Bishop OM Custom - Sitka/Western Maple Fender Texas Tea Ultra Tele Fender Mocha Burst Ultra Strat Fender CS '61 Strat NOS
|
|
#68
10-25-2023, 08:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I've seen manufacturer marketing language repeated verbatim on forums by posters who are representing it as their own opinion. But we all know this is the deal with forums.
|
|
#69
10-25-2023, 10:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Really don't get why that characterization is even debatable, you go into Gryphon and play 5 Taylors and 5...any other top brand, and it's obvious. Seems to me that "bright" has a negative connotation on these forums, so we get folks defending Taylor as not bright, but...I don't see how that holds up to any examination. Bright isn't bad. It's just bright. Taylor have a tonal signature that's worked for them over the years. I think it's changed a bit over time, but it's been a tweak to the signature sound, not a total revolution. Strings and picks, sure. They affect the sound of any guitar. But they don't make a Martin sound like a Taylor or vice versa. And some guitars are so bright they can't be tamed, and some so murky they can't be brought alive. What really seems to turn everyone's crank, regardless of tonal signature is responsiveness and liveliness. I've played ultra responsive guitars which had a dark tonal signature, bright tonal signature, clear tonal signature, whatever. All wonderful. And I've played hundreds of guitars which didn't have that responsiveness which didn't work even if the tone was just what I was looking for.
|
|
#70
10-25-2023, 05:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ah yes... Taylors. Thin and reedy.
I'll see myself out...
__________________
"Here is a song about the feelings of an expensive, finely crafted, hand made instrument spending its life in the hands of a musical hack"
|
|
#71
10-25-2023, 06:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Taylor brightness (guitar or player....)
Quote:
Hardly. Don't let the door hit ya......
__________________
Don't chase tone. Make tone. Last edited by steelvibe; 10-25-2023 at 11:04 PM.
|
|
#72
10-25-2023, 06:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
How is this for a take on describing tone?
Martin = old style analog TV, muddy, boomy, low resolution, low-fi Taylor = modern HD digital TV, crisp, great resolution, audiophile grade Words often fail when trying to describe sound quality or character, something that is subjectively perceived. How I hear is not how you hear. All I can say is that when I have mixed live shows, audience members have commented afterward that they could hear and understand the lyrics unlike most shows. Artists have also complimented my mixes.
|
|
#73
10-25-2023, 06:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#75
10-25-2023, 06:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
 |
|
| Tags |
| bluegrass, brightness, new strings, taylor |
|
|
