Query failed: connection to localhost:9312 failed (errno=111, msg=Connection refused).
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Having said all that, Martin still make an excellent guitar and I'd be happy to own the right one when I meet it. (I have very nearly bought two or three and regret not getting a particular HD-28 while I had the chance.) I may well buy a Taylor one of these days too.
The big difference though is the house sound. Most Martin guitars have a warm, balanced sound overall but with a big, muffled bass. It is a very, very popular sound and nobody does it better than Martin. Taylors usually have a bright, chime-like sound with a zinging treble. Some people describe it as a "more modern" sound. I don't agree with that, it's just the Taylor sound. Neither one is "better" they are just different. I think they are both great sounds and I'd be happy to own one of each.
As for Atkin, you don't see them at all in my part of the world, so I've been reading the experienced comments of several posters above with interest. One of these days I'd like to buy a UK-made guitar and it will probably need to be completely sight unseen (no-one imports or sells them here in Oz) so the more I can learn the better.
yes i refer to cross the pond as I browse mostly us retail and forums but it’s true I’m really based Far East.
i think I hope the essentials lean closer to the Martins than even these builders.
sinkers.
It's true of *any* forum.
I tried the Atkin Essential D and the D37. They weren't for me but may be right for you.
If on the other hand you want a Martin, you have a dealer in Singapore: City Music
They do a similar thing to Atkin, only better imo.
edited...initial comment read back a little harsh I think.
Im familiar with city music. Our small city state however doesn’t get the real goodies the big markets receive. Standard line, a modern deluxe here and there.
Khaya is also not traditional pre-war.
(Asking for a friend.)
My (very) unscientific tests of trying completely different guitars made of various different woods not even necessarily head-to-head tells me I still like acoustics made from Khaya (back and sides, I mean, I'm not sure I've tried any mahogany topped ones that weren't cheaper guitars just specced as being "mahogany" and, as such, could have been anything!), and that's not necessarily always been the case with guitars made with more distantly related woods which are still called "mahogany". But it could just have been that I didn't like the guitar as much, rather than the species of wood being the culprit. And also "still like" is not the same as "sounds the same", either...
EDIT: I haven't tried any Atkins...
I can't tell a difference tone-wise and, if there *is* any, I doubt it will be much
It is red spruce ( Adirondack ) that was commonly used for braces ( as well as tops ), not redwood which is very different.
(I just walk around with these details in my head.)
(Not.)
(G.I.Y.F.)
I come to guitar timbers from a background as a bit of a field naturalist with a specialty in birds. Now say what you like about birdwatchers, but one thing we do right is names. Every single bird species in the world has a single official formal common name, and that name is unique. For example, there used to be two different "Spur-winged Plover" species, one in Europe, one in Australia. So the relevant birding organisations got their heads together and renamed the Australian one "Masked Lapwing" ("lapwing" in another word for "large plover"). And the same for hundreds of other species. The mammal people are working on a similar project, though they have a way to go yet. And the plant people .... better not to ask.
Further, common names are always capitalised. "Black Rat" indicates a particular exact species (Rattus rattus) and no other, where "black rat" indicates a rat (of any species) which happens to have a very dark colour.
This is why I always capitalise "Queensland Maple" (a particular exact species) but not "mahogany" (any of at least three different ones); capitalise "Red Spruce" (the correct formal common name of Picea rubens) but not "Adirondack spruce" (not its correct name).
Not that anyone ever notices.
Did I say I wasn't going to rant?
As far as wood naming goes, it does seem to be somewhat messy. I don't mind, and totally understand the confusion caused by using common names across different species on different continents, but what does bug me is when something is marketed with a touch obfuscation in mind. It happens in the hardwood furnishings world as much as in the guitar world.
whats with 2 different logo decals on the headstock?
Don’t fancy the yellow round one, and I see some with pearl script?
is the pearl and update on newer production? Cos their site still shows old logo in their gallery.
just because you do, doesn't mean you should.