Are you asking which one of those is good to buy?
I personally play a taylor and think it blows fender and gibson out of the water.
others may disagree
A&W, Barq's, Hire's, or Dad's? I mean, come on! One root beer has to be definitively better than all the others!
...if you're asking about acoustic guitars specifically, then Taylor, Martin, and Gibson are all pretty close, and the people who own one of them think theirs is superior to the others. That's because they've all got different features, advantages, and trade-offs, which will fit certain players and playing styles better. I will say that generally, Fender hasn't been a great acoustic maker, although about 6 years ago, they got a LOT better. I'd say that any Fender acoustic is at least as good as similarly-priced models from anyone else.
I can also tell you that I have a $240 acoustic made by Godin under the brand-name of Art & Lutherie that I like as well as any of the Martins or Taylors I've played. And my all-time favorite acoustic I've ever played is a 1970's Gibson jumbo dreadnaught, even though I tend to hate dreadnaughts. That specific guitar (belongs to a friend's dad) just has serious mojo.
If you're looking for a guitar for yourself, then go to a store (or many stores) that sell those brands (and others!) and try a bunch out. You'll find a few that you really like, and a few that you hate. Then you'll start to figure out if you're a Taylor, Martin, Fender, or Gibson guy (or Ibanez, or Seagull, or Takamine, or Washburn, or...)
...and if you don't like it, you can suck on an egg.
A&W, Barq's, Hire's, or Dad's? I mean, come on! One root beer has to be definitively better than all the others!
...if you're asking about acoustic guitars specifically, then Taylor, Martin, and Gibson are all pretty close, and the people who own one of them think theirs is superior to the others. That's because they've all got different features, advantages, and trade-offs, which will fit certain players and playing styles better. I will say that generally, Fender hasn't been a great acoustic maker, although about 6 years ago, they got a LOT better. I'd say that any Fender acoustic is at least as good as similarly-priced models from anyone else.
I can also tell you that I have a $240 acoustic made by Godin under the brand-name of Art & Lutherie that I like as well as any of the Martins or Taylors I've played. And my all-time favorite acoustic I've ever played is a 1970's Gibson jumbo dreadnaught, even though I tend to hate dreadnaughts. That specific guitar (belongs to a friend's dad) just has serious mojo.
If you're looking for a guitar for yourself, then go to a store (or many stores) that sell those brands (and others!) and try a bunch out. You'll find a few that you really like, and a few that you hate. Then you'll start to figure out if you're a Taylor, Martin, Fender, or Gibson guy (or Ibanez, or Seagull, or Takamine, or Washburn, or...)
I agree with you completely except that Martins. Taylor & Gibsons all pretty much sound "the same"
Gibsons sound nothing like Taylors or Martins...Gibsons are really best for studio work IMO, Taylors & Martins are much higher quality, despite offering really nice models (like the taylor 214, one of THE best acoustics for any price at only $800 NEW) for significantly less than any Gibson.....
"No way to save someone who won't take the rope,and just lets go..."
I agree with you completely except that Martins. Taylor & Gibsons all pretty much sound "the same"
Gibsons sound nothing like Taylors or Martins...Gibsons are really best for studio work IMO, Taylors & Martins are much higher quality, despite offering really nice models (like the taylor 214, one of THE best acoustics for any price at only $800 NEW) for significantly less than any Gibson.....
I never said that Gibson, Martin, and Taylor SOUND the same... I was trying to say they were approximately on the same general level of quality. Each one sounds completely different from the others, as I tried to explain, and each one fits certain players better than others. Personally, I like models from all three, understanding that a Gibson won't sound like a Martin, a Martin won't sound like a Taylor, and a Taylor won't sound like a Gibson.
I also think there are other guitar manufacturers who aren't as well-known who blow Gibson, Taylor, and Martin completely out of the water. I'd take a Webber, a Larrivee, a Collings, or a Bourgeois over any of the others. And when you're talking about mass-produced guitars, there are so many variables that you can't suss out. A $2400 Taylor could sound worse than a $300 Yamaha. I've seen it myself, played them myself.
...and if you don't like it, you can suck on an egg.
musicismylife78
Posts: 6,116
Comments
I personally play a taylor and think it blows fender and gibson out of the water.
others may disagree
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=99395
...if you're asking about acoustic guitars specifically, then Taylor, Martin, and Gibson are all pretty close, and the people who own one of them think theirs is superior to the others. That's because they've all got different features, advantages, and trade-offs, which will fit certain players and playing styles better. I will say that generally, Fender hasn't been a great acoustic maker, although about 6 years ago, they got a LOT better. I'd say that any Fender acoustic is at least as good as similarly-priced models from anyone else.
I can also tell you that I have a $240 acoustic made by Godin under the brand-name of Art & Lutherie that I like as well as any of the Martins or Taylors I've played. And my all-time favorite acoustic I've ever played is a 1970's Gibson jumbo dreadnaught, even though I tend to hate dreadnaughts. That specific guitar (belongs to a friend's dad) just has serious mojo.
If you're looking for a guitar for yourself, then go to a store (or many stores) that sell those brands (and others!) and try a bunch out. You'll find a few that you really like, and a few that you hate. Then you'll start to figure out if you're a Taylor, Martin, Fender, or Gibson guy (or Ibanez, or Seagull, or Takamine, or Washburn, or...)
I agree with you completely except that Martins. Taylor & Gibsons all pretty much sound "the same"
Gibsons sound nothing like Taylors or Martins...Gibsons are really best for studio work IMO, Taylors & Martins are much higher quality, despite offering really nice models (like the taylor 214, one of THE best acoustics for any price at only $800 NEW) for significantly less than any Gibson.....
I never said that Gibson, Martin, and Taylor SOUND the same... I was trying to say they were approximately on the same general level of quality. Each one sounds completely different from the others, as I tried to explain, and each one fits certain players better than others. Personally, I like models from all three, understanding that a Gibson won't sound like a Martin, a Martin won't sound like a Taylor, and a Taylor won't sound like a Gibson.
I also think there are other guitar manufacturers who aren't as well-known who blow Gibson, Taylor, and Martin completely out of the water. I'd take a Webber, a Larrivee, a Collings, or a Bourgeois over any of the others. And when you're talking about mass-produced guitars, there are so many variables that you can't suss out. A $2400 Taylor could sound worse than a $300 Yamaha. I've seen it myself, played them myself.