Yamaha perceptions

Andy79

The L-6 I recently sold was just that. Very boomy but decent none the less. Different league from yours though as that L6 was all ply

Fatboylim

Basher said:

Thanks for the comments @Fatboylim and @Andy79.

It's definitely not one of the  particularly desirable ones from the Japanese workshop as mine was made in Taiwan. I did ask Yamaha if they knew anything about it and they said "There were a couple of hand crafted guitars lines from Taiwan that were excellent quality. Same techniques just different factories".  

They also told me that these are hard to date exactly as the serial numbers were just issued sequentially, rather than in a coded format that could indicate the year of manufacture.

I bought it in Workington, Cumbria where there were very few decent used guitars, and far fewer decent acoustics, for sale at the time. It was rare to find anything affordable with solid timbers so I pushed the boat out and bought this. It was in excellent condition and clearly fairly new.

Funnily enough, it appeared shortly after Bert Jansch had played at the local small theatre and I've often wondered if there was a connection. It was an odd coincidence as he was playing a similar looking L-series at  the time (with the distinctive oval inlays). I guess any connection is just fanciful nonsense but you never know. 

Anyway, it's a nice guitar. Very low action and the sound is quite ...err... "produced". Probably not a very helpful term but it sounds very even across all the strings - not particularly boomy or toppy, quite smooth. It makes it very easy to record. It's not really been used for many years so maybe it would open back up a bit if I were to play it for a bit. Some of the Yamaha dread-sized L series I've heard on YouTube have a huge bass!  

That produced sound is also referred to the modern Studio sound and it gets better with age! Usually all the depth of tone without the muddiness you can sometimes get with Martins (a good thing for some but not my thing). 

Moleman

Andy79 said:

People discount the old ones too. 

They are very underrated but I think they struggle most with the clean almost sanitised image, no soul like a Gibson or Martin but the high end stuff is magical, the craftsmanship is out of this world. Just ask the lucky buggers who scooped up those crazy deals at Peach earlier this year, the entry level stuff is dependable and the 1970s stuff is just glorious 

I must admit that missing out on those Yamaha London Centre and Peach blow outs of those Japanese custom shop crafted LL series acoustics and electro-acoustics is one of the biggest regrets of my guitar collecting.  Limited, completely handcrafted high end acoustics that originally retailed at +£3,000 being sold off half price was just unreal. The timing was ultimately wrong for me, but I recall that on that particular sale thread there were still folk wavering on whether they could be worth it at half price...!?

Slash'N'burn

Dup

Slash'N'burn

Fatboylim said:

TheMadMick said:

I still hold the "cheap and cheerful" perception of Yamaha. However, I've bought a couple over the years that should dispel that. A lovely LL6 and a great A3CR. The moral as ever is let your ears decide (although you do need to be careful - what you hear initially is not how the guitar will turn out eventually and what we hear is not what the "audience" or the microphone hear).

I totally agree, the A3CR are gems and an equal to the high end Martin Guitars I tried (18s to 28 Martins). 

Yamaha covers bespoke, high end, mid range and cheap guitars. Perhaps worth categorising where they sit.

The old classical-laminate FGs from the 70s only get 90% the way to the Standard series Taylor 400s and Martin 15s and up. They are still better/equal  to the lower standard Taylor and Martins.  I have a Yamaha FG300 that pushes a Taylor 710 but really only 90% of the way. 

The A3CR really stands out as an equal to many of the Taylor (400 above) and Martins (18 and above). 

The bespoke all solid Yamaha
90s LL500, LL400,
70s FG1500, FG2000, FG2500
really outshine the Taylor and Martins. They sit closer to the smaller luthiers like the Santa Cruz, Goodall, Collings and Atkins. At this level the quality is the same, all are hand voiced, just the style type that differs.

Then there are the aged guitars like the Martin 00-21, Gibsons and Guilds etc. There are some unique gems that just cannot be compared. I heard only that the 1960s Yamaha L53 might be close to those.  But I haven't tried that one. 

Just my personal journey to date. 

Has anyone had a chance to compare Yamahas against different brands and grades? 

I have a FG300 red label made in Japan, think it’s early 70’s. My dad bought it second hand in the seventies from the Orange factory, then gave up guitar and it lived a damp loft for 25 years until I found it, gave it some tlc and taught myself to play on it.

It’s the only acoustic I’ve ever owned, sounds great to me and so well built/well finished. I’ve never played anything else to compare it against apart from really cheap guitars that sound dead to me and it obviously blows them out of the water.

would be nice to take it to a guitar shop one day and see how much I’d have to spend to find something that matches it.

Moleman

My experience of guitar collecting is that once we allow ourselves to make the mental leap to discounting, overlooking or maybe even looking past the brand name on the headstock, then that is when the magic happens. Stop behaving like a marketing man (or woman’s) dream and start assessing the instrument on it’s own merits. You don’t need a guitar with Gibson, Martin or Taylor, etc) on the headstock to own a quality instrument and be a real person! Quite often an ‘off-brand’ instrument has something exceptional to offer at the price.

I related above how when Yamaha were developing their SG and SA series of high end electrics to take on Gibson in their own home market, they knew that they had to build a better guitar: binding, fretwork, finish - everything had to be better! They knew that as a ‘new brand’ in high end electric guitars in a global market, they simply had to offer a better designed, better made product in order to succeed. No one ever talks about ‘good years’ and ‘bad years’ in Yamaha guitar production, the way that they do for the volume US manufacturers. 

Apologies if I’m starting to sound like a stuck record and repeating myself here...

pintspiller

I had a Yamaha acoustic twenty years ago and was really annoyed when it was stolen. It houghthoughtsounded much better recorded than live I thought (strange considering my Amstrad 4-track!).

A school I worked in had Pacificas and I always vowed if I was in a pub duo that I'd use them, as they were great sounding guitars and cheap enough not to get annoyed if broken or stolen... I never got to be a guitarist yet, having had more success as a bassist. I play a Squier.

Fatboylim

The Yamaha FG2000 regarded as their best ever made acoustic.  $7000

https://img.youtube.com/vi/3ZAffDC6YXY/0.jpg

meltedbuzzbox

I think the next classical range was excellent

For me the magic has gone from the lower priced yamahas in the last 20 years or so. Things like the apx5a are just hateful things.

Basher

Fatboylim said:

That produced sound is also referred to the modern Studio sound and it gets better with age! Usually all the depth of tone without the muddiness you can sometimes get with Martins (a good thing for some but not my thing). 

Hadn't heard of the term but it seems wholly appropriate. Thanks for the info.

All this Yamaha-talk has made me get the old thing out and actually start to play it properly (or as near as I can manage) for the first time in many years and I'm really enjoying it.

Having got used to my OM, picking up a dreadnought feels like playing a stringed wardrobe at first but thankfully that's only temporary. 

Also did a bit more research and the Yamahaguitars.nl site has a page on the L series which has some handy information on my guitar:

In 1978 Yamaha introduced a second line of L-series guitars for the export markets. These were all handmade in Taiwan and also regarded as guitars made with fantastic craftsmanship. It was the first handbuilt Yamaha series from Taiwan and some presume Taiwan wanted to show Yamaha that they could build high end handmade guitars as good as in Japan.

Production of L-series guitars in Taiwan stopped in 1984, so a year earlier as in Japan.

The series consisted of a L-5A, L-10A, L-15A, L-20A, L-25A and a L-25AT.

There was a kind of a shift in model number. The L-5A had mahogany back and sides. None of the earlier L-series had. The L-10A is similar to the L-8 2nd generation. The L-15A has similarities with the 1st generation L-8 and the 2nd generation L-10. The L-25A has much in common with the L-15, especially the beautifull 3pc Jacaranda back

Which, if true, narrows mine down to a build date of '79 to '84 at the latest but, given it was already used and in the UK, I'd guess at no later that '83, possibly earlier. I might be a but out with my purchase date but what shocks me more is that I've had it for nearly 40 years! 

artiebear

I've been playing an LJ56 ( single luthier built Yamaha ) for the last few months alongside the rest of my guitars ( everything from the usual US names, smaller US makers  to great builders closer to home like Sobell. HJ Williams, Lowden, Fylde etc.). The Yamaha kicks any perception of lower tier brand into oblivion, then again it is hardly a budget price guitar. I do not get the Yamaha = cheap perception. Right now my living room electric is an SG3000, last week it was a 2000s. There are quite a number of vintage and CS US guitars currently in cases elsewhere, because the Yamahas are such a pleasure to play.  Yamahas are as good, and often better, than many other factory produced guitars.

Moleman

TBH, I’m quite happy for folk to indulge in these lazy, ill informed, ‘perceptions’ around Yamaha guitars. It simply leaves the path clear for those of us who know their quality to snap them up without paying inflated asking prices on the secondhand market.

richman6100

I've never owned a Yamaha acoustic, but I've played a few. Without exception, they all punched well above their weight. 

DavidR

On the Yamaha's are cheap issue. I think they have this perception because a lot of people have learnt on Yamahas over the years and they were often their first instruments. Loads of people must have kicked off their lessons or self-taught journeys on CS40 classicals or FG acoustics for example. And the lower end of Yamaha's range are cheap but I would call it brilliant value to the extent that I wonder if they don't loss lead. For me familiarity has never bred contempt for low end Yamahas. They have a lot of competition though now. Lucky us!!

Fatboylim

Slash'N'burn said:

Fatboylim said:

TheMadMick said:

I still hold the "cheap and cheerful" perception of Yamaha. However, I've bought a couple over the years that should dispel that. A lovely LL6 and a great A3CR. The moral as ever is let your ears decide (although you do need to be careful - what you hear initially is not how the guitar will turn out eventually and what we hear is not what the "audience" or the microphone hear).

I totally agree, the A3CR are gems and an equal to the high end Martin Guitars I tried (18s to 28 Martins). 

Yamaha covers bespoke, high end, mid range and cheap guitars. Perhaps worth categorising where they sit.

The old classical-laminate FGs from the 70s only get 90% the way to the Standard series Taylor 400s and Martin 15s and up. They are still better/equal  to the lower standard Taylor and Martins.  I have a Yamaha FG300 that pushes a Taylor 710 but really only 90% of the way. 

The A3CR really stands out as an equal to many of the Taylor (400 above) and Martins (18 and above). 

The bespoke all solid Yamaha
90s LL500, LL400,
70s FG1500, FG2000, FG2500
really outshine the Taylor and Martins. They sit closer to the smaller luthiers like the Santa Cruz, Goodall, Collings and Atkins. At this level the quality is the same, all are hand voiced, just the style type that differs.

Then there are the aged guitars like the Martin 00-21, Gibsons and Guilds etc. There are some unique gems that just cannot be compared. I heard only that the 1960s Yamaha L53 might be close to those.  But I haven't tried that one. 

Just my personal journey to date. 

Has anyone had a chance to compare Yamahas against different brands and grades? 

I have a FG300 red label made in Japan, think it’s early 70’s. My dad bought it second hand in the seventies from the Orange factory, then gave up guitar and it lived a damp loft for 25 years until I found it, gave it some tlc and taught myself to play on it.

It’s the only acoustic I’ve ever owned, sounds great to me and so well built/well finished. I’ve never played anything else to compare it against apart from really cheap guitars that sound dead to me and it obviously blows them out of the water.

would be nice to take it to a guitar shop one day and see how much I’d have to spend to find something that matches it.

Those FG300 guitars are great and I still own one myself. 

What I love about this guitar is how unique it sounds AND plays! Who would think to make an dread/mid jumbo with an OM depth with an adjustable height and intonating bridge.

The unique size gives it an OM eveness with that extra dreadnaught low end. It cured my GAS for a Martin 0000-28 which really are stellar guitars too.  If I were to compare honestly, the FG300 is 95% the way to the Martin but it's uniqueness keeps me from ever selling it or replacing it.

A joy to play! 

Slash'N'burn

Fatboylim said:

Slash'N'burn said:

Fatboylim said:

TheMadMick said:

I still hold the "cheap and cheerful" perception of Yamaha. However, I've bought a couple over the years that should dispel that. A lovely LL6 and a great A3CR. The moral as ever is let your ears decide (although you do need to be careful - what you hear initially is not how the guitar will turn out eventually and what we hear is not what the "audience" or the microphone hear).

I totally agree, the A3CR are gems and an equal to the high end Martin Guitars I tried (18s to 28 Martins). 

Yamaha covers bespoke, high end, mid range and cheap guitars. Perhaps worth categorising where they sit.

The old classical-laminate FGs from the 70s only get 90% the way to the Standard series Taylor 400s and Martin 15s and up. They are still better/equal  to the lower standard Taylor and Martins.  I have a Yamaha FG300 that pushes a Taylor 710 but really only 90% of the way. 

The A3CR really stands out as an equal to many of the Taylor (400 above) and Martins (18 and above). 

The bespoke all solid Yamaha
90s LL500, LL400,
70s FG1500, FG2000, FG2500
really outshine the Taylor and Martins. They sit closer to the smaller luthiers like the Santa Cruz, Goodall, Collings and Atkins. At this level the quality is the same, all are hand voiced, just the style type that differs.

Then there are the aged guitars like the Martin 00-21, Gibsons and Guilds etc. There are some unique gems that just cannot be compared. I heard only that the 1960s Yamaha L53 might be close to those.  But I haven't tried that one. 

Just my personal journey to date. 

Has anyone had a chance to compare Yamahas against different brands and grades? 

I have a FG300 red label made in Japan, think it’s early 70’s. My dad bought it second hand in the seventies from the Orange factory, then gave up guitar and it lived a damp loft for 25 years until I found it, gave it some tlc and taught myself to play on it.

It’s the only acoustic I’ve ever owned, sounds great to me and so well built/well finished. I’ve never played anything else to compare it against apart from really cheap guitars that sound dead to me and it obviously blows them out of the water.

would be nice to take it to a guitar shop one day and see how much I’d have to spend to find something that matches it.

Those FG300 guitars are great and I still own one myself. 

What I love about this guitar is how unique it sounds AND plays! Who would think to make an dread/mid jumbo with an OM depth with an adjustable height and intonating bridge.

The unique size gives it an OM eveness with that extra dreadnaught low end. It cured my GAS for a Martin 0000-28 which really are stellar guitars too.  If I were to compare honestly, the FG300 is 95% the way to the Martin but it's uniqueness keeps me from ever selling it or replacing it.

A joy to play! 

Absolutely. I love the low flat frets and chunky V shaped neck, and thin neck binding. 

They have lots of low end, and a very warm thick sound, almost jazz guitar like.

Andy79

Fatboylim said:

Slash'N'burn said:

Fatboylim said:

TheMadMick said:

I still hold the "cheap and cheerful" perception of Yamaha. However, I've bought a couple over the years that should dispel that. A lovely LL6 and a great A3CR. The moral as ever is let your ears decide (although you do need to be careful - what you hear initially is not how the guitar will turn out eventually and what we hear is not what the "audience" or the microphone hear).

I totally agree, the A3CR are gems and an equal to the high end Martin Guitars I tried (18s to 28 Martins). 

Yamaha covers bespoke, high end, mid range and cheap guitars. Perhaps worth categorising where they sit.

The old classical-laminate FGs from the 70s only get 90% the way to the Standard series Taylor 400s and Martin 15s and up. They are still better/equal  to the lower standard Taylor and Martins.  I have a Yamaha FG300 that pushes a Taylor 710 but really only 90% of the way. 

The A3CR really stands out as an equal to many of the Taylor (400 above) and Martins (18 and above). 

The bespoke all solid Yamaha
90s LL500, LL400,
70s FG1500, FG2000, FG2500
really outshine the Taylor and Martins. They sit closer to the smaller luthiers like the Santa Cruz, Goodall, Collings and Atkins. At this level the quality is the same, all are hand voiced, just the style type that differs.

Then there are the aged guitars like the Martin 00-21, Gibsons and Guilds etc. There are some unique gems that just cannot be compared. I heard only that the 1960s Yamaha L53 might be close to those.  But I haven't tried that one. 

Just my personal journey to date. 

Has anyone had a chance to compare Yamahas against different brands and grades? 

I have a FG300 red label made in Japan, think it’s early 70’s. My dad bought it second hand in the seventies from the Orange factory, then gave up guitar and it lived a damp loft for 25 years until I found it, gave it some tlc and taught myself to play on it.

It’s the only acoustic I’ve ever owned, sounds great to me and so well built/well finished. I’ve never played anything else to compare it against apart from really cheap guitars that sound dead to me and it obviously blows them out of the water.

would be nice to take it to a guitar shop one day and see how much I’d have to spend to find something that matches it.

Those FG300 guitars are great and I still own one myself. 

What I love about this guitar is how unique it sounds AND plays! Who would think to make an dread/mid jumbo with an OM depth with an adjustable height and intonating bridge.

The unique size gives it an OM eveness with that extra dreadnaught low end. It cured my GAS for a Martin 0000-28 which really are stellar guitars too.  If I were to compare honestly, the FG300 is 95% the way to the Martin but it's uniqueness keeps me from ever selling it or replacing it.

A joy to play! 

Are we talking the same FG300? Full blown dreadnaught so far as I can tell

Fatboylim

The 1970s FG300 is OM death. The Newer FG300d is the low end 2000s that are dreadnought depth. 

Andy79

I have 2 FG300s here and never noticed. I’ll have to get the tape out 

Fatboylim

This from a pro musician now in his 50s on Japanese guitars.