#1
Hi guys, I'm new here...
Soon I'll buy a new guitar, an acoustic one because I have an electric guitar yet, and I'm undecided between two models: a Martin&co DCX1AE macassar and a Taylor 114 CE. I don't really know which one should I choose, because I always play blues or rock, and I wanted to change a little bit the sound. I don't want to play always with an amplifier, I want also to play outdoor without an amplifier. I really like both of them and I've tried both. I like a little bit more the Martin, but I also like the Taylor.
Any advice? Also if you know some other models similar by sound and price, tell me! Thank you!
#3
Quote by deneillutter
They are both plywood guitars, so go with the cheaper of the two


This is pretty useless. If you don't have anything useful to contribute, please refrain from posting.
My God, it's full of stars!
#5
Well, have you played them both?

I am not impressed with the cheaper Martins at all. In fact when I was looking for an accoustic I ended up with a top of the range Cort which sounded (and still sounds) about 10 x better than a cheap Martin.

Taylors I have not played but they have a good reputation, so I suspect that it would be better.

But you must get to play them and buy the one that sounds best - the accoustic guitars you buy off the net tend to be sh*t IMO.
#6
Quote by deneillutter
They are both plywood guitars, so go with the cheaper of the two


No they aren't
#7
oettam.mt

First off, the first guy to respond to you is full of crap, that Martin and the Taylor are not "plywood guitars". They are both solid top models and both are pretty good. I'm not a "Martin" guy by any stretch, but they make some pretty good stuff. I just like Taylor's brightness better, which is personal preference rather than quality.

You like both, from what you said. I'd suggest getting the one that you enjoy playing the most.
#8
PSimonR I played them both and I liked a little bit more the Martin when it was plugged in, but I liked the taylor when it was unplugged.I think I'll go for the Martin coz it's cheaper here in Italy and because I like it estetically and I enjoyed playing it.
#9
Quote by PSimonR
. . I am not impressed with the cheaper Martins at all. In fact when I was looking for an acoustic I ended up with a top of the range Cort which sounded (and still sounds) about 10 x better than a cheap Martin. . . . .


Yeah. I bought a top end Crafter for the same reason. And I was comparing it with quite expensive Martins not cheap ones.
#10
I don't think that price and performance are related in factory in factory guitars, and tone is a matter of personal preference. However, I greatly favour the way that Taylors are built. The shim-adjustable fully bolt-on neck means that in the event of major deterioration in geometry, they are very easy to fix. If you live in the US, Martin would be a contender with the original-owner warranty, not so good if you don't live in the US and are depending on the importer warranty (that happened to me). However, it seems that Martin might be having some issues with QC, even in the US. A bit of research into neck resets would be in order if you would like to know more, because I don't want to pass on hearsay.

I think that there is a niche for steel string guitars designed for very light strings, as were the Selmer-Maccaferris, but it would create a lot of liabilities for the makers, as happened with Martins when heavy strings became popular in the 60s.
Last edited by Tony Done at Feb 11, 2017,
#11
Quote by TobusRex
No they aren't
Both are laminated another words for different plys glued together thus plywood.
#12
Tony Done Well, I won't play it always, I will probably play it only when I want to play something different,so not often. As I said before, Martin is cheaper here so I will buy it. Thanks for the help to all you guys.
Last edited by oettam.mt at Feb 13, 2017,