[samkim108]

Hi my name is Sam and im trying to decide which one i should get. A Martin DC16Gte or a Taylor 310CE. Ive tested them both and i love them Lol. i was wondering what you guys would get

[burningtr33]

Originally Posted by samkim108

Hi my name is Sam and im trying to decide which one i should get. A Martin DC16Gte or a Taylor 310CE. Ive tested them both and i love them Lol. i was wondering what you guys would get

personally i would get the taylor 310ce cuz of the ES system and i heard it plugged in and it lives up to the expectation. The taylor 310ce also sounds clean and crisp unplugged and its great for sitting on porches or watever.

I like martins too, but if your gonna use this guitar for lots of stage works than go with the taylor.

[thyfunkispure]

I'd get the Taylor definitely

[thesteve]

because Taylor puts on Elixirs in the factory, they tend to sound better in store after being played and being on the shelf for awhile. I can't say the same of Martin because their factory strings tend to sound junky whenever I pick one of their guitars up. On the Martins that I've played that were my friends' guitars (and thus had pretty much new strings) the tone was great.

I don't really know what I'd get. I've been a die-hard Taylor fan in the past, but this new "string-theory" of mine has put me back on the fence.

[Art]

I prefer the Taylor. It is all preference.

[Nathanael]

I don't know either guitar personaly, so this is a name debate. I own a Martin. I've played Taylors. They're both good guitars. Martin holds a serious attraction for me that I can't explain. They're very honest guitars with great sound. I can't describe it outside of words like "personal" and "human". As well as any Taylor preforms, Martin will always be my favorite because they have very traditional and respectable qualities.

Not to mince words or be ignorant, I've always thought of Taylors as a little cheaper, and a lot more trendy.

[everyman]

All things being equal between the two guitars (they probably aren't but we're just supposing), I'd say get the Martin. As Nathanael said above, the Martin brand carries more respectability and is more time-tested -- practically speaking, that may have an effect on the resale value. In fact, I'd say that if you're going to get a Martin, get the best one you can possibly afford. You should also consider used Martins, especially the familiar models such as D-18 and beyond or the OOO line.

I played guitar in a new venue this past weekend. The soundman saw me take a Martin D-35 out of my case and he marked me as a "player" without hearing me play a note. That's how potent the Martin name can be.

[gtrdave]

I'd avoid them both and buy a Seagull.

[elijah77jc]

Originally Posted by thesteve

because Taylor puts on Elixirs in the factory, they tend to sound better in store after being played and being on the shelf for awhile. I can't say the same of Martin because their factory strings tend to sound junky whenever I pick one of their guitars up. On the Martins that I've played that were my friends' guitars (and thus had pretty much new strings) the tone was great.

I don't really know what I'd get. I've been a die-hard Taylor fan in the past, but this new "string-theory" of mine has put me back on the fence.

this has been the single factor that has kept me from liking Martin. Their guitars might sound beautiful, but I wouldn't know because whenever I play one at the store the strings are dead. The Taylors always sound great though.

+1 for elixirs

and the music store employees will never let me change the strings on the Martin

[S.B.Nichols]

Originally Posted by gtrdave

I'd avoid them both and buy a Seagull.

Amen to that.

However, given only these two options, at this price range, I'd say get the Taylor (actually, I would spend the extra 100 bucks to get the 314, but thats just me...I think it looks nicer).

In this price range, at least from what I've played(never owned), The taylors have better unplugged sounds than the martins. After about the 2000 dollar mark, the martins start to win out in sound.

However, I have issues with the ES system. When I've used it (again never owned, but borrowed recently) it sounded great, but fuzzed out when you bring the volume control up. This isn't that big of a problem, just control the sound at the board, however, it would be nice to know you didn't have to.


---Edit--- But yeah, look into Seagulls...good, professional sound. Half the cost...spend the rest of your money on candy and pepsi.

[presbystrat]

Seems like comparing Mercedes to BMW. They are both quality brands. I would want to compare different models not just brand names.Usually people seem to have a clear preference of one over the other. Usually people who like the Taylors (that would be me) like their brighter sound. Those who like the Martins like a bassier sound. Only you can decide what you like. Of course, if you like both, why not buy one of each?

[RainCaster]

Originally Posted by presbystrat

Seems like comparing Mercedes to BMW. They are both quality brands. ... Those who like the Martins like a bassier sound. ...

Mercedes used to be a great name in autos, but no longer. Cab drivers across Europe have moved to other marques in the last 5 years for reliability reasons. But i digress.
As others have mentioned, the trend in A/Es seems to be to build brighter guitars. Taylor fits that bill off the shelf, while the Martin is more "old school" design and has that more solid bottom end. As each guitar ages, the Martin will sound better (IMO) since the highs will soften slightly leaving the Taylor less potent. Of course string choice plays a huge difference here. A great set of medium gauge PBs can go a long way to livening up any wooden A/E. Taylors come with light gauge strings that leave them sounding a little thin, IMO. If you decide on the Taylor, have the store put on a set of meduim gauge strings when they prep the instrument for you.

[sabertooth181]

Originally Posted by gtrdave

I'd avoid them both and buy a Seagull.

Heck yes. And you could easily get two good Seagulls for the same price.

[gtrdave]

Originally Posted by S.B.Nichols

Amen to that.

However, given only these two options, at this price range, I'd say get the Taylor (actually, I would spend the extra 100 bucks to get the 314, but thats just me...I think it looks nicer).

In this price range, at least from what I've played(never owned), The taylors have better unplugged sounds than the martins. After about the 2000 dollar mark, the martins start to win out in sound.

However, I have issues with the ES system. When I've used it (again never owned, but borrowed recently) it sounded great, but fuzzed out when you bring the volume control up. This isn't that big of a problem, just control the sound at the board, however, it would be nice to know you didn't have to.


---Edit--- But yeah, look into Seagulls...good, professional sound. Half the cost...spend the rest of your money on candy and pepsi.

I've used an ES-equipped Taylor for two different sessions, by request of the studio engineer.
Both times I was totally unimpressed with the sound quality of them.
By comparison, the L.R. Baggs Duet II system in my S6+CW blew the ES/Taylor away in clarity and replication of the sound of the acoustic via it's soundhole. This opinion was also shared by the engineer and also by the Taylor's owner.
Other Fishman-equipped Taylor's have earned similarly unimpressive results for me.

I really don't want to have anything against Taylor and I'm sure they make a fine guitar or two but I honestly have not played it yet.

If my choice was strictly between Martin and Taylor, of course I'd want to play them both to give them each a chance but the Taylor would have to overcome a mountain of negative experience with me.
I might rather play a Breedlove or (gulp) Tacoma...or even a RainSong...if Seagull were removed from the process.

[jamforchrist123]

I'm a taylor man, so thats my choice. Of course, the last time I was playing a Taylor I got kicked off it because I am a "immature teenager"... stupid WWBW salesmen...