Why buy other than Martin?

[necessaryrooster]

There seem to be a lot of Martin copies, both in the guitar and ukulele world. I understand buying, say, a Timms; he makes that vintage Martin sound at a fraction of the cost of a vintage Martin uke. But in the guitar world, Martin copies cost more than the Martins themselves. Why go for a Martin copy over an actual Martin when you're paying more? And if they can make a better guitar, why are they still copying Martin?

 

[Patty]

There’s a certain cachet about the name, which is deserved. And some of the companies (and many luthiers) out there today do a better job of reproducing the classic “Martin“ than Martin itself currently does. That’s just an uninformed observation, gleaned second- and third-hand.

 

[EDW]

There seem to be a lot of Martin copies, both in the guitar and ukulele world. I understand buying, say, a Timms; he makes that vintage Martin sound at a fraction of the cost of a vintage Martin uke. But in the guitar world, Martin copies cost more than the Martins themselves. Why go for a Martin copy over an actual Martin when you're paying more? And if they can make a better guitar, why are they still copying Martin?

Depending on the instrument and condition, there are plenty of vintage Martins which come in at less than the current cost of a Timms. I can see people going for a copy to avoid having to deal with any potential condition issues or repairs. In many ways, if you are talking about classic sopranos, Martin is certainly the standard. I suppose that for many it is a good starting point. I can think of a few makers who take that as an inspiration and have made adjustments to reflect their own taste. Some may consider it an improvement, some may not.

 

[necessaryrooster]

Sorry, I probably should have clarified better. I'm talking specifically about guitars here; I understand why people buy Martin-alike ukes.

 

[dancephoto]

Sometimes the bracing (and therefore sound) is different of vintage Martin guitars.
Martin had a fire that destroyed much of their wood stocks. Some people think the pre-fire wood was "better."

 

[rlgph]

There’s a certain cachet about the name, which is deserved. And some of the companies (and many luthiers) out there today do a better job of reproducing the classic “Martin“ than Martin itself currently does. That’s just an uninformed observation, gleaned second- and third-hand.

Quite a few knowledgeable people think that Martin is producing the best quality guitars that it has ever produced. One of mine (000-18GE) is the best-sounding guitar i've ever played (and i've played some highly reputable guitars, both factory and individual luthier made), and my other (0-18) is pretty close tonally.

 

[Oldscruggsfan]

Specifically as to acoustic guitars, I would certainly never pay (or advise anyone else to pay) more for a Martin than for a look-alike copy. The company is an unquestioned icon of craftsmanship.

 

[hendulele]

Disclaimer: Not a guitar player. If I were, I might consider offerings by Gallagher or Wayne Henderson simply because they were preferred by players I particularly like hearing: Doc Watson and Presley Barker, respectively. Then again, Tony Rice, Vince Gill and countless others who could own anything they wanted preferred Martins, so there.

 

[Patty]

Quite a few knowledgeable people think that Martin is producing the best quality guitars that it has ever produced. One of mine (000-18GE) is the best-sounding guitar i've ever played (and i've played some highly reputable guitars, both factory and individual luthier made), and my other (0-18) is pretty close tonally.

Sorry—I misunderstood the OP. I was referring to Martin ukes, not guitars.

PS: And I see this was posted in the Guitar Discussion Forum. Duh!

 

[Oldscruggsfan]

Disclaimer: Not a guitar player. If I were, I might consider offerings by Gallagher or Wayne Henderson simply because they were preferred by players I particularly like hearing: Doc Watson and Presley Barker, respectively. Then again, Tony Rice, Vince Gill and countless others who could own anything they wanted preferred Martins, so there.

OK- here’s my own disclaimer. If I had the tools and had developed the necessary skill level, I’d only play instruments I had personally built. My best example:
Balsam Range guitarist & baritone vocalist Caleb Smith plays a flat top guitar he designed and built. Within the hard-driving bluegrass genre, Caleb’s six-stringer far outpaces even the priciest Martin. YMMV

 

[hendulele]

OK- here’s my own disclaimer. If I had the tools and had developed the necessary skill level, I’d only play instruments I had personally built. My best example:
Balsam Range guitarist & baritone vocalist Caleb Smith plays a flat top guitar he designed and built. Within the hard-driving bluegrass genre, Caleb’s six-stringer far outpaces even the priciest Martin. YMMV

Reasonable point. I guess it’s a question of opportunity cost. Would you rather invest the hours building or doing other things, especially if you’re a professional musician? There’s no wrong answer. Just depends on your preferences and priorities.

 

[Oldscruggsfan]

Visual (and current market) example of a Caleb Smith guitar currently listed on Reverb:

Caleb Smith Cruiser 2016* Maggie Valley* spruce top*/Black Locust | Reverb

Caleb Smith toured and recorded with this guitar, a guy talked him out of it at a concert. This guitar has black locust back and sides with a Maggie Valley old growth red spruce top. This guitar is the size of most D-18s and is awesome!Specifications: MINTY! * This guitar has black locust back a...

reverb.com

Also, admittedly veering off thread, here's a link to my absolute favorite of Caleb's songs, "The Girl From the Highlands":

 

[merlin666]

There are some great Martins out there and I have many guitar friends who won't play anything else. Still I find that they are way over priced just because of the name on the headstock. And quality is variable meaning that if you buy a Martin just because it's a Martin it's no guarantee that you get a great guitar. Nowadays they also also have serious model bloat, like how many flavours of D18 do you need? Just give me the one real thing please.

So when it came down to buying my first "good" guitar about 40 years ago I passed on the three D18 in the store and instead took the Suzuki copy home that was a bit cheaper but way better. In more recent years I bought high end Ovation and Guild guitars because they offered a much better bang for the buck.

 

[Oldscruggsfan]

There are some great Martins out there and I have many guitar friends who won't play anything else. Still I find that they are way over priced just because of the name on the headstock. And quality is variable meaning that if you buy a Martin just because it's a Martin it's no guarantee that you get a great guitar. Nowadays they also also have serious model bloat, like how many flavours of D18 do you need? Just give me the one real thing please.

So when it came down to buying my first "good" guitar about 40 years ago I passed on the three D18 in the store and instead took the Suzuki copy home that was a bit cheaper but way better. In more recent years I bought high end Ovation and Guild guitars because they offered a much better bang for the buck.

My son came to the same conclusion when buying a Seagull.

 

[ProfChris]

... in the guitar world, Martin copies cost more than the Martins themselves. Why go for a Martin copy over an actual Martin when you're paying more? And if they can make a better guitar, why are they still copying Martin?

I'm guessing you're thinking of guitars by individual luthiers or boutique builders. There are two reasons why you might not choose a Martin:

1. Martin builds to dimensional specifications, but wood is variable. This means that Martins are not all the same - the best can be truly excellent, most are very good, but a few are poor. An individual luthier builds to that particular piece of wood, so you would expect all their guitars to cluster at the top end and be excellent.

2. Many Martin copies are based on the 1930s Martins, which are very different from their modern equivalents. A 1930s Martin costs several multiples of its modern version, so luthier built copies are cheaper than the vintage Martins.

 

[Graham Greenbag]

Sorry—I misunderstood the OP. I was referring to Martin ukes, not guitars.

PS: And I see this was posted in the Guitar Discussion Forum. Duh!

Be easy on yourself. There‘s a school of thought - I might be the only member - that considers Ukes to be one of the many forms of Guitars. Once you start to check it out there’s both been and are loads of Guitar variants beside what’s now considered the classic acoustic version.

 

[merlin666]

I'm guessing you're thinking of guitars by individual luthiers or boutique builders. There are two reasons why you might not choose a Martin:

1. Martin builds to dimensional specifications, but wood is variable. This means that Martins are not all the same - the best can be truly excellent, most are very good, but a few are poor. An individual luthier builds to that particular piece of wood, so you would expect all their guitars to cluster at the top end and be excellent.

2. Many Martin copies are based on the 1930s Martins, which are very different from their modern equivalents. A 1930s Martin costs several multiples of its modern version, so luthier built copies are cheaper than the vintage Martins.

Well the sad part is that most Martin copies come from Martin itself. Like there are about nine D18 and D28 flavours out there, but only some of them are "authentic". That is just as bad as Fender and Gibson with their dozens of versions of Les Pauls and Stratocasters. This self copying bloat is probably one of the reasons people prefer the old to new ones.

 

[Troou2]

Whether it's a Martin, Seagull a uke or a guitar you should buy an instrument because it speaks to you.

 

[dancephoto]

In the 1960s, I was an entry-level folksinger in New York (supplemented by tending bar a few nights a week). At first, I played a Gibson, which was very nice. But many of the better, more popular, and more famous folksingers and singer songwriters played the Martin D-28. Eventually, I bought one, too. It wasn't a decision based on tonality or playability (although both were excellent), but rather an act of conformity. My goofy logic went something like this. "Those people are good, they play Martins, they must know what they are doing, I should get one." Once I saved up the money, I traded in the Gibson and walked out with the Martin. I never even compared the two.

Conformity is a very powerful factor in human decision-making. We all like to think that we are independent thinkers. But the Solomon Asch conformity studies in the 1950s tell a different story. Most people are very likely to conform in some ways to a group, even at times when they think the group is wrong.

Based in part on my extensive experience with loudmouths not being able to tell one brand of liquor from another while blindfolded, I suspect that most people can't tell the difference between Martins of different decades or other makes of different decades just by listening. One way to test your ability to do this is to put a blindfold on and have a friend play various YouTube videos by The Ukulele Site and see if you can identify the makers based on sound.

"Why buy anything but Martin?" At the time I was playing my Martin, Larry CoryeIl (who was about a thousand times better than me) was playing a LoPrinzi. Vintage LoPrinzi guitars are still available at very reasonable prices compared with vintage Martins. Larry CoryeIl fans might ask, "Why buy anything but LoPrinzi?"

Like @Troout2 says,

Whether it's a Martin, Seagull, a uke or a guitar you should buy an instrument because it speaks to you.

 

[Oldscruggsfan]

Whether it's a Martin, Seagull a uke or a guitar you should buy an instrument because it speaks to you.

You're exactly right. Having - at the tender age of 22 - had my heart set on, and been saving up for, a Gibson Mastertone banjo, I ended up buying a lightly- used Fender Leo Deluxe precisely because it spoke to me. Actually, within the obviously- soundproofed room in which the little shop displayed its stock of a dozen or so high-end banjoes offered on consignment, it rang to the heavens, with far better sustain than the Gibson and than each of the nearby Stellings and Deerings with far larger price tags.
Call me cynical (guilty as charged) but in recent years I've often wondered whether (out of my sight) the shop manager had some sort of "white noise" switch he was able to flip to make other instruments sound worse than the one he most needed to sell.