Taylor or Martin?

[Curly]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

IMO, Martins sound better, Taylors are easier to play.

However, it's really better to discuss individual models rather than blind brand loyalty.

Also, the old adage "you have to play them" is especially true for acoustics, since they vary and have their own personality, even moreso than electrics.

For instance, I'm interested in an OM, and I'd consider a Martin, Santa Cruz, or Goodall, but I would prefer a Collings. OMs actually vary in specs from maker to maker, so it's important to try them all.

It's interesting that Martin has such a long history, their instruments are considered heirlooms, but I really think Taylor sort of forced Martin to update their playability, and Collings made them reconsider some of the historical models they had quit making, especially smaller body models.

Fortunately for me, I'm about 30 minutes away from Buffalo Brothers, so I can go play most of the models I'm interested in, such as this one:

 

[beandip]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

They both have their place. One is not better than the other to my ears. That includes other makers such as SCGC, McPherson, Collings, and Gibson.

I do find that on the lower end models (Taylor 100 and 200 series) and the Martin 1 series, that Taylors seem to have a little more attention to detail.

But no matter what the maker, or what the voice of the guitar is, they all have their place. It might not be the voice for you, or for what you're going for in a particular song, but they do have their place.

That being said, most of my instruments are Martin copies of some sort, except for the Seagull, which copies the size, shape, and bracing pattern of a Gibson J-45 but with a cedar top.

I would still love to have another Taylor one of these days. But right now, I can wait. I'm blessed to have what I do.

 

[Funkfingers]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

Both makes are fine. My money went on a Martin. That is how I shall vote.

 

[theboatcandream]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

Taylor makes great guitars, but I'm going with Martin.

Taylors generally sound brighter and more dry / sterile, although they're also more consistent.

 

[Philcguitars]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

Well, it does depend on the model, but...

Taylor.

Two mates in the same Trio have both options.

The Taylor is a 'classic' acoustic model. and has stood the test of time and the knocks of many years gigging!

The Martin is an all Mahogany model, and is not standing up to the test of [a very short period of] time! In three years the finish on the edge of the sound hole has worn, and it's had to be repaired at least once, as being made of thin wood it managed to get knocked with a mike stand and acquired a hole. That said, it has a gorgeous tone!

Both guitars were in the £1K plus bracket new.

 

[That90'sGuy]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

I like Martin tone more than the Taylor. Taylors are made for electric guitar players (they do play easier), but I just like the traditional warm and full Martin tone.

 

[beandip]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

The whole "Taylor's play better" thing bothers the hell out of me. People think that because Taylor's are set up lower with an easier action from the factory that they automatically "play better" compared to Martin. Martin sets their action at a medium-high level for a reason. They cater to everyone from the soft fingerpickers who need a low action the the heavy handed top beaters (also known as rhythm guitarists) who like a higher action to remove fret buzz. Just because a guitar comes from the factory with an action that you don't like and more relief than you would add to your own instrument doesn't mean it's not meant for an electric player.

/RANT

 

[DLT]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

I see more bluegrass players playing on Martin than Taylor. Is that because Martin guitars are louder acoustically?

 

[beandip]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

I see more bluegrass players playing on Martin than Taylor. Is that because Martin guitars are louder acoustically?

A lot of it has to do with tradition. Martin's do tend to be louder, due to their more prominent bass and midrange frequencies, which I'm sure doesn't hurt the reason they're favored.

Any vintage voiced acoustic is great for bluegrass, but Martin certainly has set the standard. When you think about it, bluegrass has it's roots based in songs that are sometimes centuries old. It really came about in the 20's through the 40's, and a lot of players either play instruments from that era to carry on the tradition and tone found in those early recordings, or modern instruments that are voiced after guitars from said time. It's just what's "right". Like many would find it to be wrong to play SRV on a Les Paul through a Recto, many would find it to be sacrilegious to play traditional bluegrass music on anything other than a Martin or Martin styled guitar or Gibson styled mandolin.

That said; Taylor, McPherson, Lowden, McKight, SCGC, and others have found their way into Newgrass music (which I personally love), and they seem to fit the bill quite well.

 

[ImmortalSix]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

I have to go with Martin.

Their bass response, that "Martin woof" is basically un-imitatable.

I will agree that Taylors are more consistent. I went shopping last year and all they Taylors were very good players with a very good sound. I see Taylors like a lot of folks see PRS: if you walk into a store and pick any one of 'em off the rack, it's going to play well and sound good, for sure.

But, I just don't "vibe" with them. Martin is "it" for my style of playing and my ear's and mind's definition of how an acoustic should sound.

All that said, I went out looking for Martins and Taylors in 1998 and came home with a Guild, from the Westerly, RI days. I play Guild to this day, but if I had to get a second "life guitar," I'd be looking at Martin.

-Hunter

 

[Robert S.]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

I prefer the tone of Martins, hands down but Taylor makes a fine if not somewhat bright guitar.

 

[Gearjoneser]

Re: Taylor or Martin?

IMO, Martins sound better, Taylors are easier to play.

However, it's really better to discuss individual models rather than blind brand loyalty.

I agree with what Curly said. Martin acoustics have THE sound, but Taylors tend to have an irresistible feel. But Martins do too, when setup nicely.

I'm a bigger fan of the way Martins sound though.

But Curly's second point is very valid. Model to model, both companies have proven winners.

If I had to choose one company though, it'd be Martin.