Which of these guitars is easier to record well

[doc7string]

Hey guys, I decided I need to buy a good Acoustic guitar for recording. I went to my local store here in Pittsburgh and played more than 70 guitars and came down to two. I am having a very difficult time choosing between the two and hoped you might be able to give some insight as to which I will be able to get better recordings from more easily. I am doing mostly country work,strumming, flat pick soloing and some finger picking. The two guitars are:

Taylor 814 ce
Martin HD 28

I have reasons to like each better than the other, but given that the recorded result is most important to me I thought I would ask those of you with much more experience than I with recording acoustics to chime in (and that means just about everyone here)

I look forward to your thoughts.

[Dan Walsh]

I've always found the Martin to be a little "woofy" in the studio. I have an older Taylor 710 that records awesomely with a very rich bottom end to it. I'm not familiar with the HD 28 so I have no valid opinion but I have never "loved" any Martin for recording. Thats just my humble opinion. Having said that, I know guys who have recorded Martins and made them sound amazing.

My choice would be the Taylor for recording. My fave recording guitar is a J-45. Did you get a chance to try one?

Lots will chime in here, but ultimatley you have to go with what works for you. And remember, mic placement is everything. Even on the cheapest guitars......

[fullertime]

Taylor 814 for me:)

[Phil O]

I don't know the model, but I recorded a Taylor with phosphor-bronze strings on it a couple of years back and it was without a doubt the finest sounding guitar I've recorded. I could have put a tin can and a string on it and it would have sounded terrific. (actually used a stereo pair of AKG 451bs by the way)

I have heard some amazing sounding Martins as well, but they are a little more difficult to "tame" IMO.

Phil

[Dwetmaster]

FWIW:
My main session guitarist is a Taylor endorsee and all his guitar tracks are ALWAYS plugNplay in my mixes. Turn the volume up, a notch of reverb et voila!!!

[mhschmieder]

I've owned both over the years -- they are almost at polar opposite extremes in terms of how they sound.

I would say, from experience, that the Taylor records the best, being that it has a more present sound that more easily slots into a mix.

In a solo situation, the delicacy of a Martin guitar might best fit the material, or other instruments and voices if present.

For the Martin, I'd recommend an omni or even a stereo pair. Maybe not as necessary for the Taylor, but it's always good to have mix options.

For years, I have placed one mic angled more or less towards the soundhole, and another aimed at the neck, adjusted by ear.

I've always used stereo miking for Martins, but haven't recorded a Taylor acoustic recently and have a lot of new miking options such as ribbons and omnis that I haven't tried yet.

From recordings that I have heard, I have found some of the best to be with Neumann TLZ(TLM?) series mics. Like voices, acoustic guitars are quite picky about mic matching -- there's no general solution.

But certainly the generality that the Taylor will probably take less work to record well and slot into the mix, can be made. It just may not end up being your primary criterium in the context of things.

Strings make a big difference as well, of course. I use Elixir on my Taylor, which people either love or hate. All I can say is that they record well, and I personally find them well-balanced tonally and in terms of attack etc.

[mhschmieder]

You might also want to listen to recordings that use these guitars.

This can probably easily be checked via endorsers lists or the vendors' websites, but my recollection is that Crosby, Stills, and Nash mostly use Martins (at least in the old days).

If you go for material that is exposed, and also material that isn't, and stick to acoustic and semi-acoustic genres that don't do much studio production, you may start to become familiar with how these very different guitars sound once recorded (vs. live or in home practice).

That, of course, is a slightly different face to the original question of which guitar is less trouble to record well. But it will help you to know what these guitars sound like when they ARE recorded well.

[markwayne]

Well, I'm going to be in minority here, but I would go with the Martin. My advice would be to try and find a D-18GE or just about any mahogany, Martin M (0000 size) series to compare first. The problem a lot of people have with Martin dreadnaughts is really a problem with rosewood. Although Mark Knopfler has gotten great results with an HD28. I've discovered that I can make a Martin sound like a Taylor, but I have a much harder time making a Taylor sound like a Martin.

Now part of the problem is that the accepted, modern, acoustic tone is pretty much a product of Taylor's popularity. However, take a Martin, throw on some Elixer, nano-webs, put up a pair of SDCs and roll off the low end and you are in Taylor city. That tone sits in a mix with little to no work. However, now try tracking a solo guitar part or an exposed section, and you may find you miss all that complexity in the lower mids. No problem, if you have the Martin, throw on some John Pearse strings and put up one or two LDCs and there you are.

If you go the Taylor route, however, for my money the best sounding of all the Taylors is easily the 314. Out of about seven 814's that I've played, all but one was over-built (way too heavy for an acoustic guitar) and tight sounding.

of course this is all just my opinion,
Wayne

[mhschmieder]

Wow, a string change mid-song.

Gread advice, though -- I hadn't heard anyone explain before that it's about the wood more than anything else (and the strings).

[Rainman]

Can't add much to what's already been said other than I find finger picking articulation to be better on a Taylor than a Martin. I personally own a J-45 inherited somewhat from my father, circa 1962, it's a great guitar, but not in every situation. I'd be getting a Taylor if I were purchasing another acoustic.

Rainman

[markwayne]

Wow, a string change mid-song.

Well, I've certainly changed strings just before a session to achieve a particular tone: Elixers for dense pop mixes and John Pearse PBs for quiet or traditional acoustic styles. Mid-song . . . yeah, you're right . . . . not so much . . . although, if it's on their dime . . .

One thing I feel gets missed in threads like these (in addition to the huge difference wood plays) is that when most people hear Martin they think of a banjo-killing, dreadnaught monster and when most hear Taylor they think of small-bodied, crystaline guitars like the x12 and x14 series. It would be much better to discuss Martin 00-18s and 000-28s if you are thinking about the typical, Taylor sound. I honestly think that if you heard a Martin 000-28 and a Taylor 814 both strung with elixers, you would be very happy either way.

However, I'll stick with my original posit and say that the Martin is more likely to have that "voices-of-the-angels" thing going for it if you were recording a solo guitar passage. What can I say? There is just something in that 180-year-old pixie dust they sprinkle on certain guitars at the Martin factory.

Wayne

[mhschmieder]

I am embarassed to acknowledge that I have never heard of Pearse strings.

Aren't forums wonderful?

In the old days, ignorance could continue into old age...