I think I've offended a Taylor owner today...:(

[fendersrule]

I was talking with a colleague today, and I had no idea he had a Taylor 700 series guitar. We were discussing the unique sounds of various guitar manufacturers. I mentioned that I felt that Taylor's have no originality in tone, as well as praising them tremendously in several other areas.

Taylors to me, are the most consistent guitars on the face of the planet. I think Martin needs to adopt whatever they are doing in the factory. I've NEVER played on a bad Taylor, ever. They sound fantastic, play fantastic, and are fantastic instruments. I'd even order one blind.

I've mentioned the only pitfall, is that....there is no "unique" tone to a Taylor guitar. Guilds have a certain tone. Martins have a certain tone. Gibson's have a certain tone. But when it comes to Taylors, I cannot really think of any specialized sound that they offer.

Am I the only one? I've played on about 15 of them, so I think that's enough to form such opinion. I guess I'm saying that Taylors are missing their own identity that other guitar manufacturers have. The sound MOST EXCELLENT to my ears, but I can't really hear any type of "mojo" that I find with other manufacturers.

 

[chazmo]

Here in the house of Guild, you're not going to find a lot of concern for your friend's feelings.

Many of us do own Taylors, and even really like some of them. I own a 655 (that's a 12-string jumbo) from 1984 (that's the Prince "Purple Rain" era, though mine is thankfully not purple) that has the most spectacular, 3-D maple quilting I've ever seen. The guitar is absolutely mesmerizing to look at. That guitar turns out to be a "vintage" Taylor. But, ultimately, I whittled my collection down from two additional high-end Guilds to just the one. The other two, incidentally, were built in this century.

Taylor has built a sizable business (and viable second market) due to their consistency. You really can buy one sight-unseen and you're likely to be fine. Their web site is one of the best resources on the web. And, perhaps most important, their customer service is unquestionably the best in the world. Some of the stories I used to read on the Acoustic Guitar Forum (back when there used to be a Taylor forum) about what they'd do for customers (even non-original ones) used to blow my mind.

I don't think the acoustic guitar would've made a comeback from the depths of the early '80s without the existence of Taylor. People have claimed that the acoustic guitar is in its golden era due, in part, to Taylor. Some of their products have been magnificent works of guitar construction.

But, what does that mean about bonding with your instrument? I'm certain that some of us here prefer the complicated, underdog past of Guilds, not to mention many more years of history to delve into with all of the other American brands compared to Taylor. And, really, all that said, I've never played a Taylor that moves me the way many Guilds have over the years.

 

[Brad Little]

I've never played a Taylor that moves me the way many Guilds have over the years.

+1. I've only played a handful of Taylors, higher end models for the most part, but never played one that made me want to buy one. On the other hand, I've never played one that I couldn't stand the sound of, just no real personality to its sound. Like Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, "There is no there there."
Brad

 

[gregsguitars]

I tend to agree ,as someone who gets to put my hands on a lot of cool gear ,they (taylor) never did anything for me either...

 

[Scratch]

I've never played a Taylor that moves me the way many Guilds have over the years.

+1. I've only played a handful of Taylors, higher end models for the most part, but never played one that made me want to buy one. On the other hand, I've never played one that I couldn't stand the sound of, just no real personality to its sound. Like Gertrude Stein said of Oakland, "There is no there there."
Brad

+2. I've owned three. Each played easier than any other guitar. Their necks are unreal. That, unfortunately, is the only compliment I can offer.

They had the most montonous, bassless tones of any guitars I've owned, including low end Yamaha and Epiphone models. Zero low end. I know it may sound crast, but the only one word description I could offer is 'Gutless'. The Taylor sound turns me off completely.

 

[wileypickett]

Like Chazmo, I have a Lemon Grove-era 855 12-string (is saying "Lemon Grove" to Taylor owners like saying "Westerly" to Guild owners?), as well as a Leo Kottke signature model 12-string, both of which are very good guitars -- reliable, great necks, superb intonation, etc.

But they're no patch on what Guild has going on in the 12-string department SOUND-WISE. In fact I discovered Guild when I discovered my first JF-30 12-string. It was a case of, "Where have YOU been all my life?"

My friend Jack Rose (some of you may know the name, a superb finger-style guitarist in the Fahey vein -- Jack died a couple years ago) had an old beat-up Taylor six-string (a 510), also going back to the hand-made days of Lemon Grove, that is simply incredible, one of the best six-strings I've ever come across.

It rivals the best example you could find by any brand you care to name. (I found it used at a Cambridge music store; Jack pestered me till I sold it to him!)

Jack had some work done on it and his guitar tech (who had 45 years experience under his belt) said it was the loudest acoustic guitar he'd ever heard in his life. Jack was afraid to fly with it for fear something would happen to it, so he used a similar Taylor (a 310) as his overseas touring guitar. It wasn't Lemon Grove old, but it was old enough to be broken in.

Jack once A / B'd the two guitars for me. Man!, his old reliable stood out miles ahead of the other!

The point is that Taylor, once upon a time, turned out the odd incredible guitar. Just like you find with most brands, everything else being equal, some guitars just sound better than others.

Taylor, in going after absolute consistency, and designing machines that can deliver absolute consistency (to within .000whatever), may have traded the ability to make guitars that are occasionally knock-'em-out-of-the-park home-runs for the ability to turn out guitars that are reliable, well made, with great necks, superb intonation, etc.

And as they've proved, there is a market for that. A beginning guitarist today can, for a fairly modest price, get a guitar that won't fight him or her every step of the way, that you can play barre chords on easily, etc.

* * *

Does anyone know if Taylor's annual profits exceed Martin's at this point? If they don't yet, I bet they will by 2020. Taylor appears poised to be the #1 guitar maker in the U.S.

Glenn//.

 

[Scratch]

Does anyone know if Taylor's annual profits exceed Martin's at this point? If they don't yet, I bet they will by 2020. Taylor appears poised to be the #1 guitar maker in the U.S.

Glenn//.

Perhaps, but I hope not. I've also owned a few Martin guitars, and although I don't presently own one, I consider them the ultimate American made guitar. Since 1833 in one location, consistently producing quality instruments. That's pretty awesome.

Taylor came along 140 some odd years later, and they have left their mark, but to me, they'll never come close to being the icon Martin is considered by most to be. Innovative? Yes. Popular with the younger set? Yes. Consistent fine crafters and recognized leader in the production of legendary American made acoustic guitars? In their dreams...

Until they learn how to put some oomph in their guitars, they'll continue to be looked at as innovative creators of so-so sounding instruments.

No flames intended; to each their own. My opinion only.

 

[wileypickett]

I hear ya!

It's not a wish by any means, just recognition that Taylor has made some remarkable strides in a relatively short time and there's no sign of 'em slowing down.

Who would have guessed that one day Taylor would be providing Martin with some of their wood? For years it's been the other way 'round -- Martin provided wood to other builders.

 

[davismanLV]

This is one of those threads that pose a problem. To me anyway. I like Taylor guitars. I like them a lot. However, I don't like ALL Taylor guitars. Just like I don't like ALL Martins, or Guilds. I tend to like MORE Guilds (within a brand name) than any other.

When you say, "Taylor guitars", that encompasses a WHOLE LOT of sizes and shapes and woods and styles of guitars. They make tiny baby guitars and they make big baritone guitars. Of many different styles and woods.

To me generalizing across a brand name is like stereotyping people, and although most stereotypes ring true to a point (they came from somewhere, right?) when you make broad sweeping generalizations you do a disservice to a lot of people.... or guitars.

As far as Taylors having their own distinctive tone, I think they DO have some common sound qualities. Here in Las Vegas a lot of restaurants and bars (even chain restaurants) have individuals playing music in the lounge. Many times I don't enter through the lounge and I just get sat by the host at a table in the restaurant. It's become a little game I play with the roomie, and I listen for a while and 10 times out of 10 I can tell you if it's a Taylor that's being played. There's a distinctive sound that Taylor has, to me anyway. Now, many times I'll not be able to tell what brand of guitar is being played, but I can tell you if it IS or IS NOT a Taylor. And I've been right every time. So I do think that Taylors have a distinctive sound. It's a very piano-like quality that they all seem to have.

That being said, whether you LIKE that distinctive sound or like the tone of a Taylor guitar is a whole different subject. I've pulled Taylors off the wall to play that I wouldn't waste my money on, and I've found ones that I'd buy in a HOT MINUTE if I had the money. But that case seems to run across all brands.

The last four Gibsons that I pulled off the wall to play sounded horrible. Not only that, the finish and details were horrible, with sloppy finish and binding and trim pieces not matching up and ..... I was shocked. Does that mean Gibson makes bad guitars? Well, they make SOME bad guitars. We all know they make some stellar ones too.

My point in all this is I think that broad sweeping generalizations across a brand name are dangerous. They're fun, don't get me wrong, because they get people all riled up and emotional about their favorite brands and then you get to watch the mayhem that ensues when people get emotional.

I like Taylor guitars as a general rule. I don't like all of them. But I don't like all Martins or Gibsons or Collings, either. I try to take them all as individuals, and I'll love picking each one up and giving it a shot. That's my rant for a HOT Friday morning!!

8)

 

[Scratch]

Good point, Tom; guess my previous post could be considered by some as stereotyping. I tried to qualify it with the last statement as my opinion only...

I tend to prefer guitars with a nice low end punch usually found in Gibson, Martin and Guild although I've played Gibsons, Martins and Guilds that left lots to be desired. They're not in my closet.

We each have preferences in music and that's a good thing. I've been to LV and heard some nice shows, but they tend to be entertainment oriented, not the intimate Texas Americana/Acoustic Folk sound so popular here. I'm sure there are others who like the Taylor sound, but piano qualities are not what you find in the 'Austin' sound. I amend my post accordingly... :wink:

 

[davismanLV]

I had no issues with your post, Ken. It was an honest opinion and we all have one. The kind of music I was talking about is a vocalist with a guitar and a microphone. Intimate stuff of a personal nature ranging from old classics to new popular material. Not what I'd consider a "show" and many times I don't even consider it entertainment, although every now and again there comes one with a phenomenal voice, good guitar playing, and a really great selection of material. I'm always pleased to find that. Probably more the style of what you're talking about in your local Texas venues.

So there's no need for any amendment to your post. In fact you proved my point by saying:

I tend to prefer guitars with a nice low end punch usually found in Gibson, Martin and Guild although I've played Gibsons, Martins and Guilds that left lots to be desired. They're not in my closet.

If every guitar sounded the same, think how boring life would be..... :wink:

 

[evenkeel]

I do not own a Taylor. When I hear other peopel play them I'm always impresed. When I play them, not so much. I do not think of it as good or bad, better or worse. Just not a good fit for me. I do however think Taylor has a very unique voice, a "Taylor" sound and a distinct personality. Martin is all about that classic low end rumble with a sharp and crisp top end. Bit dry in some ways. Neil Young Heart of Gold is a good example. Guild has a lot of that, but to me anyway, a bit warmer sound. Gibson I think of as having a kind of hollow sound, bit more twangy. Warmer sound vs Martin. Taylor to me is much brighter with an airy quality. Lots of mid range w/o the in your face bottom end. I also think these generalities cross different guitar types. Martin OM/000 vs a Gibson LG for example. Some of the above still applies.

Describing tone is always difficult. Hard not to sound a bit like a wine snob.

 

[idealassets]

I felt that Taylor's have no originality in tone

A consensus from acquantences is that Taylor was noted to have a trademark "bright", or treble orientated sound. I found that statement to be accurate. Most Taylor guitars immediately "grab" me with their sound, until I prefer a more full sound, after just a few songs. -my 2c worth.

I may someday own a Taylor, since I have a nitch to fill with a well used 12 string to play outdoors. This guitar I will loose no love for, if it succombs to unfavorable weather, such as fast temperature/ humidity changes that occur in Michigan.

So many instruments serve their purpose. I really am not bashing Taylor. I just like the class of a nice Collings, Gibson, Guild, Martin, or Rickenbacker (in alphabetical order).

 

[adorshki]

There's a distinctive sound that Taylor has, to me anyway. Now, many times I'll not be able to tell what brand of guitar is being played, but I can tell you if it IS or IS NOT a Taylor. And I've been right every time. So I do think that Taylors have a distinctive sound. It's a very piano-like quality that they all seem to have.

Ok I'll believe that. That must be why all Dave Matthews songs sound the same. (ducks and covers) :lol: (No slight intended to Mr. Matthews either. A million college students can't be wrong.... :lol: )

 

[fronobulax]

My point in all this is I think that broad sweeping generalizations across a brand name are dangerous.

I tend to agree but I am reminded of my experiences asking why people disliked GADs. I got three reasonable answers: They are not made in the USA; As a generally sub-$1000 instrument they don't sound like or compare well to the more expensive instruments; and they don't sound like a Guild. Clearly the latter group would disagree with you about generalizing across a wide swath of a brand.

And when I want to offend a Taylor owner I refer them to the Viva Viagra commercial and assert that there is a reason they use Taylor guitars in the commercial.

 

[davismanLV]

Oooooooh, feel the burn!!! :lol: :lol:

 

[Ridgemont]

I wonder how many Taylor bashing threads have popped up on LTG over the years. :?


While I have tended to veer away from Taylor, I did play a GS8 (small body, EIR/Sitka) that was fantastic...and their GS Mini is one of the loudest tiny guitars I have played.

 

[Ridgemont]

Taylors to me, are the most consistent guitars on the face of the planet. I think Martin needs to adopt whatever they are doing in the factory.

I have found similar consistency issues among every brand. Each build from each maker will have some variety in tone. The one brand that seems to have the broadest spectrum is Gibson.

 

[fronobulax]

I wonder how many Taylor bashing threads have popped up on LTG over the years. :?

To answer a rhetorical question, what I have observed is that LTG members do not universally and consistently bash any brand. Most folks who have a negative impression or experience will post something and be joined by several people with similar experiences. Then other folks who have had good experiences will chime in as a counterpart and eventually the thread will die out with either comments about Guilds being better or "different strokes for different folks" and "we do not have to tear down other brands just because we like Guilds". Most comparison threads I can recall have not gotten nasty enough to be considered "bashing" in my opinion. In fact the nastiest threads about guitars that I can recall were about GADs.

 

[chazmo]

We definitely gave a collective bandwagon-y bash to Ovations when the move to New Hartford happened. In retrospect, that was awfully silly of us!