Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Willie-O
Date: 04 Feb 02 - 02:42 PM

Well, anybody with a little old single-O like my 18 knows they're the opposite of "too boomy". A brash midrange though.

I played a nice 74 D-18 at the Twelfth Fret during my quick trip to Toronto last week. Priced reasonably too. (As these things go) Twould make a nice pair with the O-18 which is a 73.

Not gonna happen though.

W-O

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Willie-O
Date: 04 Feb 02 - 02:58 PM

Well, anybody with a little old single-O like my 18 knows they're the opposite of "too boomy". A brash midrange though.

I played a nice 74 D-18 at the Twelfth Fret during my quick trip to Toronto last week. Priced reasonably too. (As these things go) Twould make a nice pair with the O-18 which is a 73.

Not gonna happen though.

W-O

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Midchuck
Date: 04 Feb 02 - 03:31 PM

Peter, are you sure the 12 Fret "S" Dreadnoughts have a greater body volume than the 14 fret "D"'s" ?

I used to own a D28S many years ago, and I seem to remember the length/width/depth dimensions of the body were pretty much the same as a regular 14 fret Dread. But, I could be wrong ...

I threw out my collection of Martin flyers, which were out of date, but Elderly prints Martin size stats in its catalog.

They give the 14-fret dread as being 40 1/2" long overall, and the body length as 20." The 12-fretter is given out to be 39 9/16" long overall, but the body length is 21."

So the 14-fret is almost an inch longer overall, but an inch shorter in the body, because of the more rounded shoulders. Since the width is the same, the 12-fret should have somewhat more total volume.

P.

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Murray MacLeod
Date: 04 Feb 02 - 03:46 PM

Yes you are right Peter, I have just been on the phone to the current owner of my D28S who confirms the body length as 21".

Murray

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: jup
Date: 04 Feb 02 - 04:06 PM

MURRAY, what is the cat.no of the maton you mentioned. See my thread new guitar. I want a new maton for finger picking to replace my old overlander.It's pickup is the old type. Thanks, Jup.

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Feb 02 - 01:36 AM

Tonight on Antiques Roadshow, they showed a 00042 Martin. The guy didn't play it at all but he said it was built in 1938. (he said Martin made them from 1913 until the 1940s, I think.) He said the top was Adirondack Spruce, which he said was no longer available. The guitar appeared in good shape and was supposedly a one-owner, belonging to the widow of the man who had bought it new in 1940. She said her husband had been a cowboy and a musician, who had strapped the guitar to the back of the saddle.

The appraiser estimated its value from $20,000- 25,000. I would have loved to hear its tone.

Ebbie

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From:
Date: 05 Feb 02 - 02:48 AM

Jup,

It is called the "BG808" (don't ask me why!). This one is solid wood and has a high quality spruce soundboard. The rest is of Australian woods.

There is a cheaper one of the same dimensions called the "BG808L", which has laminated sides and back and one grade lower spruce soundboard.

Maton has a website www.maton.com.au>

I didn't think of bridge placement, Murray, but it does make sense.

Murray

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 10 Feb 02 - 05:14 PM

Bald headed stepchild on JIK's cookie

Justa Picker

I have found the HD-28's to be great all around instruments, as well as the D-40s series, and older, straight braced D-28s. But for fingerpicking and balance, I'd recommend the M-38, the OO and OOO 18s and 28s - especially the BRW ones.

In response to the question of bass being too boomy, I thought for a long time the problem with the Martins was the ringy-ness of the guitar, mostly due to the rosewood construction. As a fingerpicker I found that the over-ring caused the sound to be less clear.

I first found the solution in the all mahogany D15 I purchased about a year and a half ago. I really like the tone , Especially on older style blues and solo country playing, and I still enjoy using it for these purposes.

I did find that the D15 was not the most versatile guitar for all around playing so I went in search of something else and found the answer in another Martin, the JC16GTE, which it disappointed me to not see in this thread.

The JC16GTE has spruce top with mahogany back and sides and sounds just amazing. It is a very well balanced guitar and responds much better to touch than most of the other Martins I have had the opportunity to play, and I only paid $1200.00 for it brand new.

If you have not had the opportunity to play the JC16GTE, I would recommend seeking one out as I believe you probably would be impressed. I never have been one to jump on a particular company's bandwagon, as I am more inclined to look at the individual guitar rather than the brand, but this guitar is well worth looking into.

The preceding is an unpaid commercial announcement and does not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of the management - JohnIn Kansas

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 09:30 PM

Subject: RE: Martin Guitars - Too 'Boomy' ??
From: catspaw49
Date: 12 Feb 02 - 10:18 PM

Many moons ago on the Brazilizn Rosewood thread we discussed mahoghany and what you have found John is quite true. I know several members here now who are looking at expensive or vintage (both in the case of vintage) mahoghany guitars. It do make a difference......It may not have the class, but for many applications, it has the sound!

Spaw