[evileye]

I'm wondering could anybody give me a breakdown of the martin models, D18 D28 etc etc, and the difference between the various models? Also, what models are the cheap mexican made ones? I'm hoping to find a model of martin to drool over for the next two years on Ebay (to eventually buy one) and I could do with some help.
Cian

[grzegorz_panek]

You probably know the site. Just in case you didn't:

http://www.martinguitar.com/guitars/


That's all I can say though.

[Cacstus]

$100,000 Are you kidding me???

[pimp_vince]

$100,000  Are you kidding me???

that is the sexiest, most over-decorated acoustic EVER!!!

i love the inlays on the back, but not the headstock.

[adds]

$100,000  Are you kidding me???

that is the sexiest, most over-decorated acoustic EVER!!!

i love the inlays on the back, but not the headstock.

I think the thing looks great and if i won the lottery this weekend id buy it.Its alot of money but alot of works gone into that.They have used all good woods ect.The only things i think the sould have done different is used ivory to bind the neck insted of ivoroid and used rogers machine heads rather than waverlys.

[joeybcdt]

I own a HD28 and a Taylor 810, among others. The Taylor is brighter and is an excelent guitar. They both play excellent. I like the Martin better.

The D series is the "standard". HD's are Herringbone D series. When you get in to the dread D series they are all pretty much the same except for cosmetics. Ex: A D35 is the same as a D28 except has a 3 piece back. A D28 and a HD28 are the same except the HD's use scalluped bracing and have the Herringbone "package".

Most Martin lovers want a pre-1969 model....brazillian rosewood. But the newer ones are excellent also. I'd stay away from the 70s-80's year models unless I could actually play it before I bought and the price was very right.

My favorite is the HD28.

Go here to learn more: UMGF

Joey

[adds]

you sure you want a martin? ive played a few and compared to taylors they are nothing.

Doesnt that bolt on neck put you off though.

Id take gibson over either off them personly.

[annoying_2001]

martin's aren't really all that they're cracked up to be. i really wish they were though. there's just something about them. but i agree, i'd go w/ a taylor in a heartbeat. but as for the gibsons, they play wonderfully, but not my type of guitar although i wouldn't mind having one.

[evileye]

you sure you want a martin? ive played a few and compared to taylors they are nothing.

Let's not try petty persuasion now shall we, I know what i'm after.

[evileye]

Thanks for that, joey.

[evileye]

Ah, no bother! I love the tone of taylors, but... I dont know, I dont LOVE love them. I've got a gibson J185 and if I can sell all my electric equipment I would be looking at something in the up to 2,000 dollers category. Granted, it might be another year or two before I do anything, but still. I'd also love a lowden, but I'd like to do more research.

[evileye]

If I were to buy second hand, I'd buy near vintage. And if I were to go brand new, i'd have to buy off Ebay because the new prices are ridiculous in Ireland...! By the way, does anybody know what the BIGGEST guitar is by martin? I mean big as in bigger than dreadnought big, I mean one big' mofo'!
Even any other companies that make BIG guitars? Dreadnought, even a bit bigger... Just curiosity.. Yeah...That's it...

Yeah, if I dont get an answer in here i'll go make a topic...

[goldrush]

My first question if you're in the market for an acoustic guitar is "what kind of music do you intend to play on it?" Strumming chords in a rock band? Aggressive or soft fingerpicking? Bluegrass flatpicking? A combination of styles? etc. For most applications the dreadnought guitar (the "D" in Martin's models) will suffice. If you prefer a more balanced sound (such as for fingerstyle) I recommend a smaller body guitar (such as an OM or 000). In the end the only thing that matters is how the guitar feels, plays, and sounds to YOU! Everybody has their own opinions and beliefs about what they think is good.

As for purchasing a Martin: they are the preeminent American acoustic guitar manufacturer and most of their guitars appreciate in value after a while. The company stands behind their instruments and they are famous for a reason. True, there are other outstanding manufacturers out there, like Taylor, Collings, etc., but Martin is the grandfather of them all.

In Martin's modeling numbering system the higher the number the more expensive and ornate the guitar usually is. Things like wood selection, fingerborad inlays, binding, and wood type all come into play. My suggestion is play a bunch of different models in your price range and go with what feels and sounds right to you. In general I would try to get a solid wood guitar (top especially), although there has been some progress made in wood laminates lately.

Hope this helps!

[adds]

My first question if you're in the market for an acoustic guitar is "what kind of music do you intend to play on it?" Strumming chords in a rock band? Aggressive or soft fingerpicking? Bluegrass flatpicking? A combination of styles? etc. For most applications the dreadnought guitar (the "D" in Martin's models) will suffice. If you prefer a more balanced sound (such as for fingerstyle) I recommend a smaller body guitar (such as an OM or 000). In the end the only thing that matters is how the guitar feels, plays, and sounds to YOU! Everybody has their own opinions and beliefs about what they think is good.

As for purchasing a Martin: they are the preeminent American acoustic guitar manufacturer and most of their guitars appreciate in value after a while. The company stands behind their instruments and they are famous for a reason. True, there are other outstanding manufacturers out there, like Taylor, Collings, etc., but Martin is the grandfather of them all.

In Martin's modeling numbering system the higher the number the more expensive and ornate the guitar usually is. Things like wood selection, fingerborad inlays, binding, and wood type all come into play. My suggestion is play a bunch of different models in your price range and go with what feels and sounds right to you. In general I would try to get a solid wood guitar (top especially), although there has been some progress made in wood laminates lately.

Hope this helps!

All that said and done.Martins have nothing on Gibsons .

[pimp_vince]

My first question if you're in the market for an acoustic guitar is "what kind of music do you intend to play on it?" Strumming chords in a rock band? Aggressive or soft fingerpicking? Bluegrass flatpicking? A combination of styles? etc. For most applications the dreadnought guitar (the "D" in Martin's models) will suffice. If you prefer a more balanced sound (such as for fingerstyle) I recommend a smaller body guitar (such as an OM or 000). In the end the only thing that matters is how the guitar feels, plays, and sounds to YOU! Everybody has their own opinions and beliefs about what they think is good.

As for purchasing a Martin: they are the preeminent American acoustic guitar manufacturer and most of their guitars appreciate in value after a while. The company stands behind their instruments and they are famous for a reason. True, there are other outstanding manufacturers out there, like Taylor, Collings, etc., but Martin is the grandfather of them all.

In Martin's modeling numbering system the higher the number the more expensive and ornate the guitar usually is. Things like wood selection, fingerborad inlays, binding, and wood type all come into play. My suggestion is play a bunch of different models in your price range and go with what feels and sounds right to you. In general I would try to get a solid wood guitar (top especially), although there has been some progress made in wood laminates lately.

Hope this helps!

All that said and done.Martins have nothing on Gibsons .

kind of a low blow.... i like taylors better than gibsons, but gibson's have better low-end response.

[evileye]

Martin make cheap low end acoustics which are quite simply put, rubbish. Gibson do not. It's all a matter of taste, I have a gibson which (in decoration and finish) beats a martin twice over. Tone wise? Well, in my opinion (Compared to the 1960's D28 I played) it sure kicks that thing's arse too. All a matter of taste.

[evileye]

My first question if you're in the market for an acoustic guitar is "what kind of music do you intend to play on it?" Strumming chords in a rock band? Aggressive or soft fingerpicking? Bluegrass flatpicking? A combination of styles? etc. For most applications the dreadnought guitar (the "D" in Martin's models) will suffice. If you prefer a more balanced sound (such as for fingerstyle) I recommend a smaller body guitar (such as an OM or 000). In the end the only thing that matters is how the guitar feels, plays, and sounds to YOU! Everybody has their own opinions and beliefs about what they think is good.

As for purchasing a Martin: they are the preeminent American acoustic guitar manufacturer and most of their guitars appreciate in value after a while. The company stands behind their instruments and they are famous for a reason. True, there are other outstanding manufacturers out there, like Taylor, Collings, etc., but Martin is the grandfather of them all.

In Martin's modeling numbering system the higher the number the more expensive and ornate the guitar usually is. Things like wood selection, fingerborad inlays, binding, and wood type all come into play. My suggestion is play a bunch of different models in your price range and go with what feels and sounds right to you. In general I would try to get a solid wood guitar (top especially), although there has been some progress made in wood laminates lately.

Hope this helps!

What type of music? No band, no singing. Just me in my room playing chords to myself. Mostly folk. I've got a Gibson J185 jumbo and i'm looking to contrast this, something mid rangey. Gibson J45 style, but rather than look at Gibson's I'd like to look at fenders too (Gibson country & westerns are impossible to find ).

As regard to Martin bieng the best? Personally i'd disagree, no company is the best, it's just personal taste, but theres no doubt about it, i'd think that the main players would be Martin, Gibson and Taylor. Gibson is just "What does it for me" strictly speaking.

[goldrush]

I never said Martins were the best (read carefully my first response), only that they were the grandfather of American acoustic guitars. I also said it is all a matter of personal preference. Your original question had to do with Martins, so that is what I addressed. That said, anyone who categorically claims one brand is the best and another is "rubbish" is demonstrating complete ignorance of acoustic guitars. If Martin's are so terrible (as one responder put it) why do so many of the world's best guitarists play them? Think about it...

In the end, pick one to play and ignore everyone's opinions.

[adds]

Who said Martins were crap?

[goldrush]

Martin make cheap low end acoustics which are quite simply put, rubbish. Gibson do not. It's all a matter of taste, I have a gibson which (in decoration and finish) beats a martin twice over. Tone wise? Well, in my opinion (Compared to the 1960's D28 I played) it sure kicks that thing's arse too. All a matter of taste.

The guy who posted the above response.

This post has been edited by goldrush: 25 March 2004 - 03:39 PM