Curious about Taylor vs Breedlove vs Collings vs Martin

[Nelson Peddycoart]

I am curious about Taylor, Breedlove and Collings guitars. How do they rank with you guys in general? How do they compare to the king (Martin)? Do you have a model that you'd give up your dog to keep?

[delsbrother]

It depends.

[Mike Snyder]

I do not play guitar, what I know about them is what I hear. Last year at the flatpicking contest at Winfield, a few of us nuts sat down front and rated the contestants, trying to pick the winners. The top five or six were easy to spot, but hard to rank, top to bottom. The one thing that really was striking was the sound of the guitars. There were lots of Martins, some Taylors, a few custom built, a few Mossmans (it's Winfield, after all) and a fair number of Collings. You could tell the Collings guitars with your eyes closed. Mind you, this is in a big metal farm shed type building with the doors open for circulation, not an ideal acoustic environment. It jumped out at you, the clarity, separation of individual picked notes, volume, the evenness across the fretboard. Perhaps it was the mics, the sound system, the building. I think it was the guitars. It wasn't a little difference, in most cases, it was alot. I don't play guitar, but I'd look at Collings if I was to start.

[MikeEdgerton]

I do play guitar and own three of the four mentioned and have a lot of experience with the fourth. Guitars are no different than mandolins, it's what speaks to you. I've played some dog Martins yet I own a Martin D-28 Marquis that they'll have to pry from my hands after I die. I own a Taylor that I bought in 1989 and that is my main stage guitar. I traded a Martin D-28 in when I bought it. My Breedlove is OK (I bought it for electric gigs) but the Breedlove my bandmate plays is exceptional. I know this is blasphemy but I've played Collings instruments that weren't all they should have been but another one of my friends has a Collings guitar that I'd consider trading my first born for. With me guitars strings are everything as well. I know what tickles my ears and that may not be the same for someone else. You can't just buy guitars by brand. Once you reach a certain level with a guitar it gets down to the individual instrument.

[Jon Hall]

I don't have any experience with Breedloves but I have played a lot of Martins and Taylors and a few Collings. If you play several of either you will find one you like. A friend of mine has a Collings OM tha is one of the finest guitars I've ever played but as Mike said the strings used make a BIG difference. With phosphorus brz lights it is as responsive as living creature sitting on your lap but with silk & steel lights it was dead.

[raulb]

Very little compares to my Martin mando. You cannot, however, buy a new one. It is truly a wonderful instrument, but as to your question:

Well, Taylor does not make mandolins . . . but I have played Breedlove and Collings mandolins.

I had never seen a Breedlove mando before (but knew of them) and had a chance to play one at the NAMM this year. I was impressed. It looks a bit odd, but I think that is Breedlove's intention, and I found I liked it. It sounded really nice and was easy to play.

Collings, what can I say? I made the mistake of playing a MF-5 once and have never been able to forget it. It was the easiest mandolin I have ever played. Some day I vow to own one . . . if I hit the lottery or a rich uncle leaves me enough money.

If you are talking guitars, I don't know Breedlove and I have never cared for Martin's sound, but Collings are good, yet I have never been impressed by Collings. I think I have heard folks say that Collings is Martinesque.

Taylor on the other hand, makes some fine guitars. To me they sound bright and beautiful, well balanced. I have, of course, played Taylors that I didn't care for, but most that I have are REALLY nice. I own an R Taylor and a Liberty Tree and love both.

Breedlove and Taylor are the new sound in guitars. Larry Breedlove helped with the design of Taylor guitars, so I imagine his sound much like a Taylor.

Martin to my ear sounds a little muddy or maybe "woody" is the word. Whatever it is, I have never liked the sound. Taylors sound bright to me. Both are naturally a matter of taste and there are ardent supporters for all of these guitars.

As to advice, the ONLY way to tell if you will like a Breedlove, Collings, Taylor, or Martin, or some other, is to go play them. Don't let anything anyone else says make your mind up for you. I don't care for Martin, but you may find that you love them and not like the others, or vice versa.

[allenhopkins]

There are a large number of small-to-mid-sized guitar builders whose instruments are often exceptional. In addition to those listed, I'd mention Huss & Dalton, Santa Cruz, Bourgeois, Gallagher, Froggy Bottom, Larrivee -- there are more that I'm forgetting, I'm sure. I've played examples of each in showrooms, and have been almost uniformly impressed; the sounds were different, not necessarily suited to every style of music, but workmanship, finish, design etc. were top-notch in every case. I think, as in choosing among the best mandolins, that much of the decision comes down to variations among individual instruments, and the preferences of the musician who's choosing. Mike E's post above was spot on. Right now I'm playing a small-body Martin, a 1940 00-28G classical that's been re-topped and re-necked by a C F Martin "alumnus" so it's now a 00-42. Before that, I spent ten years with a Taylor XX-MC "20th anniversary" Grand Auditorium size as my main guitar. When I was doing more bluegrass and bar playing, I relied on a Martin HD-28, and I have fond memories of my first two "good" guitars, a slope-shoulder Gibson J-50 and a Guild D-40. My usual approach is to play everything that's hanging on the wall, regardless of the nameplate, listening for the clarity, volume and tonal quality that fits with the music I'm doing at the time. You really can't go wrong in terms of overall construction and quality with any of these brands; beyond that, it's what you like that counts.

[mandroid]

got the made from what area to resolve too .. Mahogany or rosewood or maple for body's back and sides .

another case of .. go forth and play a bunch, and there will be one you cannot bear to leave in the store , and can afford.

[Dagger Gordon]

I played an Art and Lutherie guitar the other day. It had really old looking strings but it sounded great.
To tell you the truth, I'd never played one before and I hadn't expected it to be such a good guitar.

[...and Master of None]

Best dreadnaught I've ever owned was a $350 Seagull (this was cherry-picked from every Seagull I could find in the Fort Worth area at the time and some of them were dogs so don't consider this an overwhelming endorsement of the brand). Loudest/best projecting acoustic was a Taylor jumbo - I called it my Martin killer

I would never have let the Seagull go but I started playing smaller body guitars and found that I liked them much better - I don't like letting acoustic instruments sit neglected in a closet for years so I gave it to a friend who had broken the headstock on her guitar. Gave the jumbo to my son-in-law for the same basic reason.

Edited to add - just mentioned this because of the previous post about Art & Lutherie - A & L is the less expensive (usually laminated tops) line from the same company that makes Seagull.

[jim_n_virginia]

in a nutshell ...

Taylor is for finger picking ...

Martin is for flat picking ...

Breedlove is for nonconformists ...

Collins is for those with a lotta spare cash!

[...and Master of None]

Oh, no, Jim! What's a non-conforming, finger-picking dude with a lot of spare cash supposed to do?! (Not that I've known any that meet the final criteria, in the last couple of years...)

John

[Rob Gerety]

Get a Collings or a Bourgeois or a Santa Cruz. Buy used. You'll be happy.

[JeffD]

Do you have a model that you'd give up your dog to keep?

I would give up my dog for two ham sandwiches and tickets to a ballgame.

[Earlyman67]

I run a weekly Acoustic open mic and The players playing Taylors ALWAYS sound better then the ones with Martins. Not to many come down with Collings or Breedlove, don't really remember any at all and I have been doing the open mic for a year, wonder why?
The Taylor's seem to just have a better tone both plugged and unplugged.

[Greg H.]

in a nutshell ...

Taylor is for finger picking ...

Martin is for flat picking ...

Breedlove is for nonconformists ...

Collins is for those with a lotta spare cash!

Of course Dan Crary my think differently about Taylors. . . .and Eric Clapton may think differently about Martins as he does a good bit of finger picking with his martin(s). Collings have there own tone. . ...and some really like it and others don't so much. Breedlove. . . .I can't really say not having tried one.

But then again, my old beat up Martin can't beat from my view (but then again....it my view and I'm sticking with it) :-)

[Randy Smith]

I run a weekly Acoustic open mic and The players playing Taylors ALWAYS sound better then the ones with Martins. Not to many come down with Collings or Breedlove, don't really remember any at all and I have been doing the open mic for a year, wonder why? The Taylor's seem to just have a better tone both plugged and unplugged.

If I were singing by myself at an indoor open mic, I'd use a Taylor. A Martin might sound ok too, but the Martin would sound really better to play in a bluegrass group or acoustic ensemble. Though there's a bit of mix and matching of the guitars, I think of them as having a strong point the other doesn't: balance for the dreadnaught Taylor, but bass for the D Martin. Both guitars are high quality guitars; personally I'm just not interested in calling one always better than the other. One guitar might often be better than the other in *one* place or circumstance. If one just always sounds better than the other, then that's a person's taste. Some people just might plain like how a Taylor sounds better than how a Martin sounds.
Does your preference have anything to do with one guitar being more microphone-friendly?
Or maybe the Taylor players sound better because they practice more?

[Fretbear]

I heard a tiny (and I do mean tiny) bodied Collings that was simply the loudest acoustic guitar I have ever heard. It was brand new. My eyes couldn't believe what my ears were hearing. My friend has an old Taylor that is extremely even, it records rhythm excellently, but has no balls whatsoever.
I make do with a 40 year-old Yamaki Dread. Like mandolins, they are all different.

[GRW3]

Over the years my advice has narrowed to: Find the guitar that sound good to you. Buy it.

I mean really, no matter how many people say Brand X is the cats meow for your particular flavor of music if you don't like it you won't play and then what's the point.

It is true that each of the brands you mentioned have specific characteristics that reflect the company's philosophy. Knowing those things may help you clarify for what you are looking but they won't affect the sound you want to hear. You may be all gobsmacked with Martin's history but if you like the sound of a Taylor better you aren't changing that. Maybe you've had an eye on a top of the line Taylor and that Collings you picked up just knocks your socks off. Be prepared for what your ears tell you. The worst thing in the world would be to analyze yourself into a guitar of which you don't like the feel or sound.

[jim_n_virginia]

I run a weekly Acoustic open mic and The players playing Taylors ALWAYS sound better then the ones with Martins.

The Taylor's seem to just have a better tone both plugged and unplugged.

So I guess you just prefer the high jangley chimey sound a Taylor makes then?

Seriously I have never heard a Taylor that could touch a D-28 or 18 in power or tone.

I own a Taylor 810 and the few times I took it to a jam an autoharp could drown it out! Going up against a banjo or a couple of fiddles? Forget it you need a D-28!

And as far as plugged in ... there is a reason why the Taylor is the guitar of choice for Praise Team Worship in fact Taylor came out with Praise Team model!

[Flattpicker]

I firmly believe that the boutique shops make better Martin dreads than Martin, for the most part.
Of the ones you name I much prefer Collings, though I probably prefer Santa Cruz above them. I like Taylor for their 12's. I think of Taylor players, for the most part (from the vantage point of long-time teacher and player) as guys who want an acoustic that plays almost as easily as their electric.
My favorite guitar maker is Ed Claxton of Santa Cruz, CA. He mostly makes fingerstyle guitars but he can make a beautiful, well-balanced dread. Froggy Bottom also makes a great product IMO. If you want a Martin-sounding dread (traditional sound, but typically accentuates certain frequencies at the expense of certain others), then I'd go with a Santa Cruz or Collings. If you have to have Martin on the head, then there's nothing that will do but a Martin.

Just my two cents worth...

[Paul F]

Someone stop me. I just bought my 4th Martin (if you count the little laminate LXM). I have a D-35 which I've played for 38 years, but bought a M-38, and compared them. Granted, it was not a fair comparison (the D-35 had old strings, light gauge, and the M-38 were new mediums), but the M-38 blew me away, so I compared it to my other guitars. I'm in love with guitar all over again. I've always loved Collings, but I feel I could not have done better than this instrument, which was likely less money than an equivalent Collings. I play fingerstyle, and it is loud, clear, focused, and punchy. It makes me feel disloyal to my partner of so many years.

[mandroid]

Friend has a Rosewood Collings D , heavy strings ''because that's where the tone comes from'' so what it's set up for makes a difference , I tried it briefly ,broke out in a sweat playing it , with those heavy strings..

.. but for even the smaller gigs plays an older Martin. He Flew to Nashville to shop around all the shops for that one ..

[Stamper]

I'm familiar with many of these:

My first serious guitar was a Martin circa early sixties D-18 which I had to give up in grad school and wish I never had given up; I now have a eighties D-35, and I keep it around, but for me it's a spare (also a gift, so I'll never let it go);

I've had a Taylor Walnut Dred which I liked A Lot, but not enough to keep: the Walnut was nice, and it projected like walnut, and the sitka top was remarkable, and the guitar had great playability (like a Taylor) and nice and very modest appointments (I like modest), but it also felt a little, not chimey, but sort of thin in the higher registers and not as full in the lower, and after a while I realized that it had opened up probably as much as it was going to (which I attributed, perhaps mistakingly, to an overly thick finish);

Breedloves, the one's made in the states, make for nice fingerstyle guitars (in my experience): they have that odd suspension system in them that I've never been quite sold on, and they get overdriven easily, I think; but boy can the like of Ed Gerhard make one sing. Also, I do love their F series mandolins! Talk about natural and pretty wood and handmade bang for the buck. Plus they look neat, also modest, and funky!

My main guitar is a Goodall, all mahogany, grand concert, which rings beautifully, but it's not really a flat-picking instrument; I've also had a Lowden, stolen, which was to my mind priceless (I hope whoever has it now loves it as much as I did);

If I were to go flatpicking, I'd go with the Collings D1A. I've two shots at them over the past year, both of which I let go (economy), but now that I've joined at the hip with my mandolin (also a Collings), I keep being drawn to flat-picking styles and the D1A is to my sensibility just remarkable.

I don't mean to be sacrilegious, either, but the Martins of today just don't seem to me to be the Martins (or the beautiful old Guilds) that grew I up with. The flavors that most turn my head these days are Santa Cruz, Collings, Lowden (for symphonic sound w/ finger work), Goodall (for the orchestral sound?). I think Taylors are dependable and playable, but I'm not a wired guy, and it seems as if the companies increased emphasis on electronics has sort of permitted the brand to let go of the genuinely acoustic qualities of the earlier models; the finishes, also, seem to me really thick and sort of muffling? I don't know if others feel that way or not. That said, when my eldest gets ready for a serious guitar, I'll probably look for a used Taylor (in our climate the neck is really nice and easily adjustable).

Not sure if this is useful, but I'm glad to be here among the brethren --

S

[Douglas McMullin]

I don't mean to be sacrilegious, either, but the Martins of today just don't seem to me to be the Martins (or the beautiful old Guilds) that grew I up with.

I feel the same way. Older Martins in particular tend to be fabulous, but I have never played a recent Martin (say 80's on) that I was wowed by. Still a great guitar for sure, but probably the last thing I would consider given all of the other great builders out there.