[Jeff Alton]

Originally Posted by LEAKYSEALS951

Nice video.
I think the tonal differences described can really be attributed to the guitar shapes themselves as much as the makers.

The Martin is a dreadnaught- full bodied, and with scalloped bracing, very deep bass. The size and shape was designed before electronic pick ups, and as an acoustic hail mary to "bigger is better/louder." Prewar Martin dreadnaughts have aged well tonally, and most new dreadnaughts are modelled after them.

The Taylor is smaller, it's a grand auditorium, with a cutout. Both the smaller size (and to a lesser degree- even the cutout) is going to clip that large mellow bass tone for a more defined upper end. It's a better balanced fingerstyle guitar with a more immediate response.


Back in the day, guitars were named by the room they could fill with music. Parlor, Auditorium, etc. iirc- That Grand Auditorium is Taylors modern interpretation of a 'jumbo auditorium', which is bigger than a auditorium, but still smaller than a Dreadnaught (named after the battleship)

That doesn't mean either size is better-
With a pick though, the dreadnaught shape is going to be flat out awesome too. Deeper, louder. That is why it is and will remain a flatpicking favorite.

In my own personal experience, Taylors are a more consistent brand in tone and playability due to their construction methods. Martins, can be more hit or miss, BUT, when they get a particular guitar right, they hit it right out of the park in tone and playability.

This post is perfect. The only thing I would add (as an owner of 2 Taylors) is that perhaps the Martins can be more hit and less miss with a proper set up performed? Not sure, but suspect that may be the case.