-

eoinzy

-

Roland

It's also worth reading about Taylor's ebony project https://www.taylorguitars.com/ebonyproject/why-ebony-matters/

Epsilon

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

Moleman

Something like this really chimes with me. In all things I do try to buy from socially and environmentally responsible companies. Taylor’s change to employee ownership has definitely increased my interest in their guitars.

deejay.

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

Epsilon

deejay. said:

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

Good question. It's actually hard to pin down, but I think it's possibly more an aesthetic thing than anything else. I don't think anyone would disagree that Taylors play incredibly well and with admirable consistency. Their QA really is world-class and if I had to pick a guitar straight out of the manufacturers box and take it on stage immediately I would go with a Taylor. There are very few brands you can say the same of.

Sound is always subjective. Some criticise them for being too bright or compressed, but I think that sound has its place and Taylor does it very well, and have a claim to having created and popularised the "modern acoustic tone" that took hold in the 90s.

I also admire their commitment to innovation, and not resting on past successes (look at all the effort that went into their new bracing system).

So we're talking about very well made and consistent guitars, that do the modern acoustic sound very well. What's not to like? It might be a bit contrarian, but I actually think the consistency bothers me a little bit. The guitars that have stuck around in my collection have some identifiable character that I believe is pretty unique to that guitar. I know that if I buy a boat load of Taylor 314s, they will all be very well made and sound  but will likely be very similar to one another. If I was a touring musician that would be a dream, but as a hobbyist that really likes to understand the nuances of each of my instruments it would bug me a bit. 

So Taylors are probably too well made! It's the same problem some people have with PRS I think, and the word sterile gets thrown around a lot. I think that's probably unfair on both PRS and Taylor, but there is something in it. I think the word 'consistent' is probably more accurate.

I also prefer a more utilitarian look, and cutting my teeth on guitar in the early 2000s I always associated Taylor with putting out guitars with ornate inlays and exotic woods. This impression has kind of stuck around, even though Taylor have introduced a number of less 'pretty' models (e.g American Dream).

This is not to say that I don't like Taylors. I think they sound excellent for a number of applications and have really enjoyed playing the ones that have come through my hands. Ultimately though, I've never been inspired enough to actually put down the money down on one. Maybe one day that will change. I came pretty close with an all mahogany 12 fret 522e.

In summary, it's not Taylor - it's me!

Andy79

deejay. said:

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

The way they sound. Simple as that really. If you can’t hear the difference between a Bright, clear Taylor and a Martin for eg then you need to listen harder. Not for me but a hell of a lot of the wold love them 

deejay.

Andy79 said:

deejay. said:

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

The way they sound. Simple as that really. If you can’t hear the difference between a Bright, clear Taylor and a Martin for eg then you need to listen harder. Not for me but a hell of a lot of the wold love them 

Yes, that's really my problem - not enough experience and having not heard - in real life, not through YouTube - the two brands side-by-side. Hoping to get a morning at The Guitar Village sometime soon after we come out of lockdown, once it's safe to do so of course...that will I hope crystallise a few things for me...

wesker123

I had Taylor 614ce, very well made guitar but sold it as too bright sounding for me.
I prefer warm acoustic sound so bought Martin D28 instead. 

earwighoney

Has anyone tried any of their newer models with the new bracing? The new Andy Power designed models are supposed to be less bright than their predecessors.

I think their guitars are great, but a little over priced - I'd rather either get a MIC Guild/Eastman at around a grand or less, or for the extra amount something else with a bit more character.

deejay.

Epsilon said:

deejay. said:

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

Good question. It's actually hard to pin down, but I think it's possibly more an aesthetic thing than anything else. I don't think anyone would disagree that Taylors play incredibly well and with admirable consistency. Their QA really is world-class and if I had to pick a guitar straight out of the manufacturers box and take it on stage immediately I would go with a Taylor. There are very few brands you can say the same of.

Sound is always subjective. Some criticise them for being too bright or compressed, but I think that sound has its place and Taylor does it very well, and have a claim to having created and popularised the "modern acoustic tone" that took hold in the 90s.

I also admire their commitment to innovation, and not resting on past successes (look at all the effort that went into their new bracing system).

So we're talking about very well made and consistent guitars, that do the modern acoustic sound very well. What's not to like? It might be a bit contrarian, but I actually think the consistency bothers me a little bit. The guitars that have stuck around in my collection have some identifiable character that I believe is pretty unique to that guitar. I know that if I buy a boat load of Taylor 314s, they will all be very well made and sound  but will likely be very similar to one another. If I was a touring musician that would be a dream, but as a hobbyist that really likes to understand the nuances of each of my instruments it would bug me a bit. 

So Taylors are probably too well made! It's the same problem some people have with PRS I think, and the word sterile gets thrown around a lot. I think that's probably unfair on both PRS and Taylor, but there is something in it. I think the word 'consistent' is probably more accurate.

I also prefer a more utilitarian look, and cutting my teeth on guitar in the early 2000s I always associated Taylor with putting out guitars with ornate inlays and exotic woods. This impression has kind of stuck around, even though Taylor have introduced a number of less 'pretty' models (e.g American Dream).

This is not to say that I don't like Taylors. I think they sound excellent for a number of applications and have really enjoyed playing the ones that have come through my hands. Ultimately though, I've never been inspired enough to actually put down the money down on one. Maybe one day that will change. I came pretty close with an all mahogany 12 fret 522e.

In summary, it's not Taylor - it's me!

I understand what you mean. I think it's a little bit like how I felt about screw-cap wine bottle closures versus cork closures - the consistency is fantastic, but there are no surprise gems - no surprise dogs, though either!

jaymenon

Epsilon said:

deejay. said:

Epsilon said:

I do like and respect Taylor's ethos. I just wish I found their guitars more interesting.

What is it that you find is lacking - for you, I mean? This isn’t a set-up for trolling, btw - I’m genuinely interested to know: I’ve only been playing for 2-and-a-half years, and I’m not Taylor through-and-through by any means (there are just so many lovely instruments out there - it’d be very hard to commit to a single brand/manufacturer); I’m keen to understand the viewpoints of other, more experienced players than myself.

Good question. It's actually hard to pin down, but I think it's possibly more an aesthetic thing than anything else. I don't think anyone would disagree that Taylors play incredibly well and with admirable consistency. Their QA really is world-class and if I had to pick a guitar straight out of the manufacturers box and take it on stage immediately I would go with a Taylor. There are very few brands you can say the same of.

Sound is always subjective. Some criticise them for being too bright or compressed, but I think that sound has its place and Taylor does it very well, and have a claim to having created and popularised the "modern acoustic tone" that took hold in the 90s.

I also admire their commitment to innovation, and not resting on past successes (look at all the effort that went into their new bracing system).

So we're talking about very well made and consistent guitars, that do the modern acoustic sound very well. What's not to like? It might be a bit contrarian, but I actually think the consistency bothers me a little bit. The guitars that have stuck around in my collection have some identifiable character that I believe is pretty unique to that guitar. I know that if I buy a boat load of Taylor 314s, they will all be very well made and sound  but will likely be very similar to one another. If I was a touring musician that would be a dream, but as a hobbyist that really likes to understand the nuances of each of my instruments it would bug me a bit. 

So Taylors are probably too well made! It's the same problem some people have with PRS I think, and the word sterile gets thrown around a lot. I think that's probably unfair on both PRS and Taylor, but there is something in it. I think the word 'consistent' is probably more accurate.

I also prefer a more utilitarian look, and cutting my teeth on guitar in the early 2000s I always associated Taylor with putting out guitars with ornate inlays and exotic woods. This impression has kind of stuck around, even though Taylor have introduced a number of less 'pretty' models (e.g American Dream).

This is not to say that I don't like Taylors. I think they sound excellent for a number of applications and have really enjoyed playing the ones that have come through my hands. Ultimately though, I've never been inspired enough to actually put down the money down on one. Maybe one day that will change. I came pretty close with an all mahogany 12 fret 522e.

In summary, it's not Taylor - it's me!

My thoughts exactly. I couldn't have put it any better.

Taylors are very very consistent - and they sound and play really good. And interestingly I do have an all-mahogany 512e 12-fret Taylor.

CF Martin - a lot less consistent, and you do come across a few dogs. But when Martin get it right - the instrument is truly breathtaking.