A Martin or a Gibson?

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 01:42 PM

I've got a little Yamaha Classical.

It sounds more Willie Nelson than Segovia in my hands, but I like it a lot.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Midchuck
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 01:50 PM

I have just acquired a Froggy Bottom.

Anyone know of a proctologist with experience in Amphibian Extraction?

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 02:28 PM

If Richard Nixon was still alive, I'd suggest you call him for advice on that.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 04:04 PM

Ohmigod, Jack the sailor and I have something in common!

I also have an older Yamaha classical that when strummed in the right tempo in E, sounds just like Willie's in Blue Eyes Crying in the Rain.

I really don't play it much, though.

Have a:

1971 Martin D-18
1969 Gibson J45
1964 Gibson LG-0
1963 Harmony Sovereign
1962 Gibson LG-3

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 04:25 PM

The Martin we have is Sigma Dreadnaught 12 string, which JtS tells me is made somewhere in Asia. He says it's not a great guitar, but it plays nicely.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 04:35 PM

Sigma is to Martin what Epiphone is to Gibson.

It's a Martin wannabee. Difference in wood quality and assembled somewhere in Asia for 50 cents and hour.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 05:03 PM

I'd log out and post a message as "Stella National," but it's too much trouble.

Never played, or much wanted, a Stella, but I know that the recording companies provided them for use by many of the great blues players, figuring they were better instruments than whatever the guys owned themselves.

I've never had enough disposable income to suffer from "G.A.S.," and my 1969 Martin D-18 (which I got new for about $450 upon college graduation) has always been enough for me. Well, almost always; the *one* f guitar I've truly coveted as a second instrument has always been a National steel.

Also -- it's been mentioned briefly already by "GUEST, Maton Guild" -- that big round-bodied Guild is a really nice guitar, with a bog bright tone. Don't know about any other Guild models, but they produced at least one real winner.

Never heard of a Maton, though -- care to elaborate?

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 05:38 PM

Nice guitars Martin G.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 05:42 PM

poppaGator

I follow the collectible guitar market. Your '69 D18 depending on condtion, is probably worth $1800-2400 today.

What other guitar brand but perhaps a Gibson, could you have a better investment in?

Could the reason for this be...............quality?

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 06:25 PM

Thanks, MG, for those numbers. I've known for quite a while that my guitar was valuable, and have sometimes thought of getting an appraisal, but no one is selling it anytime soon -- not while I'm alive -- so why bother?

It might bear mentioning that my D-18 was made early enough in '69 to feature the old Brazilian rosewood back and sides. Martin had to switch to some other slightly-less-desirable variety of rosewood later that year.

My pickguard started to curl up a year or so ago; I've hit it with a hair dryer and peeled it off, and am about to install a replacement. I'm thinking of ordering a tortoiseshell pickguard (from Martin) instead of the original black, just for the hell of it, along with a set of tortoise-and-white bridge pins. Would this reduce the value? (Such "changes" wouldn't hardly be permanent, of course.)

What about having an under-the-bridge pickup installed? On the one hand, it would be an "improivement"; on the other hand, it makes the instrument less "original" from a collectors-item point of view. Any opinions? (I'll do it anyway if and when I can afford it.)

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 07:42 PM

A friend of ours has a Maton. The're made in Australia. They're nice guitars, if the one our friend has is any indication.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: kendall
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 07:56 PM

I wouldn't throw a Larrivee out on a stormy night.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Bobert
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 08:20 PM

PappaGator,

Believe it or not, yer pick gurad my be covered under warrenty. Over the years I've had lots of stuff fixed on my old D-18 and didn't cost me a dime. I had the neck reset two years ago and Martin paid for it. They even paid to have a new bridge made and to repair a small crack in thre rosewood back...

...and, BTW, Martin is now selling a electric pickups that sound really hot. I had one installed in mine last year. The cord plugs into a hole in the strap button so it's out of the way... And, I'm here to say that it is one fine pickup...

As fir the National steel, hey, the Regal's can be had on ebay fir about $400 including shipping and they sound great. I play with the Archie Edwards Blues Foundation and there are no shortage of National owners and mine sounds as good as any of them and at over 5 feet, looks identical to the National.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Bernard
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 08:37 PM

I'm happy with my three Yamahas, all circa 1971 - FG160 and FG200 six-strings, and FG260 twelve-string. I've had the 160 and 260 from new, and never felt the need to buy anything more expensive, though a Martin would probably have the 'edge' for me - the Yamahas, technically, are copies!

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Bernard
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 08:47 PM

Sorry... I can't count! I've also got a cheap F340 Yamaha, which I've had for around two years... I got it because I was fed up with people wanting to borrow at singarounds, but it's no big deal with the cheapo!

I bought an under-bridge pickup, and the sound dramatically improved after I fitted it - which was the opposite of what I had expected.

When fitting the transducer I discovered that it would fit perfectly if I carefully gouged the wood out of the bridge until I reached the 'top' of the body... it seems that the bridge insert then made better contact with the body, making the sound 'meatier'...!

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Once Famous
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 10:00 PM

PoppaGator

Your guitar might be covered under warranty if you are the original owner and of course can prove it with a bill of sale with the serial number.

But, I am a bit perplexed.

The D18 was only built with mahogany back and sides, never to my knowledge with rosewood, brazilian or otherwise. One of the definitve books on the subject, The Vintage Guitar price guide, published yearly by Vintage Guitar magazine substantiates this. Now, if you are talking rosewood, you might really have a D-28, which DOES list the 1969 model as being the last year for Brazilian rosewood, with 1970 switching to Indian Rosewood. The guide lists THIS guitar in exc condition rangin from $3500 to $4500!

Look in that baby with a flashlight toward the lower bout. It will say D-18 or D-28, one or the other. Replace the pickguard with an original and keep everything about it as original as possible. Do not drill any holes. This is a vintage instrument, and yes, it's integrity is in your hands.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,sorefingers
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 11:30 PM

Since this is not a prank thread, I owned and played on a late 40's Harmony, a 53 Gibson, a 70's Fender - yup and it was a superb jumbo - later hands on several guitars. Liked one Aria, wouldv'e bought and cherished a repro classic Washburn, but ended up with a Martin DM.

So for me there is no such thing as eiter or, more like they are all great.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 21 Aug 04 - 12:48 AM

MG:

My mistake about the rosewood; it's definitely an 18, not a 28, and it's from early '69.

I read about Martin's rosewood switch in mid '69 and made an invalid assumption that it applied to my guitar. Also, obviously, I am no expert on recognizing the difference between mahogany and rosewood.

I've been without a pickguard for a while. As some of you undoubtedly already know, Martin used to affix their pickguards before applying the lacquer finish. Since sometime in the 80s, they've changed to the practice most other makers have always used, which is to finish the top wood first and then glue on the pickguard. So, when the pickguard comes off an older Martin like mine, it leaves a patch of slightly recessed raw unfinished wood. (On other guitars, peeling off a pickguard will expose a lighter-colored patch of wood, outlined by a "tan line," under a smooth overall finish.)

When the pickguard started to curl, peeling away from the surface around the edges, I learned about www.frets.com here at Mudcat, and exchanged a few messages with the guy Frank at that site, who is a prominent California luthier/repairman.

At first, he contended that the only thing to do would be to apply lacquer to the "bald spot" in several layers, building up the newly fininshed area to the exact height of the surrounding original finish, and only then to apply the self-adhesive replacement pickguard. A qualified repair guy could do this, of course, or I could try it myself.

After a frustrating unsuccessful search for the proper lacquer, I wrote back and he said, well -- "for now" -- I could stick the pickguard right where the old one came off, adhering it to the raw wood. That's what I plan to do, soon.

A replacement pickguard from Martin only costs $3.50, but their minimum internet order amount is $25. There are other replacement parts available, but I am by no means a do-it-yourselfer; I wouldn't trust myself to fool with the nut, bridge, saddle, etc. (No one has to warn me not to drill any holes in my Martin -- there's NO danger of anything like that happening!)

My original bridge pins are pretty chewed up after 35 years, so I could add a set of them to my order, bumping my total up another five and a half bucks, but I'd still have to buy something else to reach the $25 minimum -- probably a copy of "Rising Up Singing" for $17+. I don't want to buy a CFMartin shirt or baseball cap, or any of the other books they have for sale (mostly pictures of fancy guitars made for celebrities). They don't compete with their retailers by selling strings via mail order -- if they did, I'd make up my $25 minimum order by buying strings.

Frank at frets.com did recommend having the job redone "right," with a new lacquer finish under the pickguard, at some later date -- presumably, when I have the money, time, and inclination to hand the guitar over to an expert for pickup installation and/or general set-up/tune-up.

As far as the possibility of warranty coverage is concerned, I have long since lost my original receipt. For years -- at least 15 or 20 -- I carried a card in my wallet that came with the guitar, showing the serial number and something else: I had that document much longer than any receipt or bill of sale, but it's gone by now, too (along with that wallet). So, I don't think I can pull off a warranty request.

I guess you answered my question that a non-original-color pickguard would devalue the instrument, but I know now how easily one can be removed (with a hair dryer and a plastic puttyknife). I may go with the tortoiseshell pickguard (a Martin part, of course, the exact size and shape of the original black piece) for now, just to be different; it would look nice, slightly unique, especially if I color-coordinate the bridge pins (which would be easily and cheaply done). Like I said, I'm not selling any time soon. I would be sure that my heirs knew to switch back to basic black before putting it up for bids.

My other question is how installation of a pickup would affect the value. If and when I do that, my decision will be based entirely upon my needs/desires *as a player*, but I'd still like to know the financial fallout.

Bobert, it's very interesting to learn of a reasonably priced alternative to the National Steel, but when I have $400 to spend on an instrument, I'm afraid I'll have to put it into maintaining and upgrading my one-and-only. Maybe the *next* available $400 after that...

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 21 Aug 04 - 02:38 AM

MG, one more thing:

I see that your very nice collection includes three Gibsons but only one Martin. Any particular reason?

For example, do you feel that Gibson produces a wider variety of different-sounding acoustic guitars while one Martin is pretty much like any other? Or is it a price-differential issue?

If you include electrics, of course, Gibson *does* offer a wide variety of distinctive axes, much unlike Martin.

Years ago, I had a friend who owned an electric Martin, the only one I ever saw. Very strange to see. It had the same headstock as a D-model acoustic, which made for a very weird appearance -- literally and figuratively "square" -- on an electric guitar. I don't remember the body of the guitar nearly as clearly: I think it was a hollowbody, somewhat similar to a Telecaster. The color was a fairly dismal shade of brown.

Can't comment on the sound -- the owner, like myself, was a strictly acoustic player with no real knowledge of how to coax appropriate sounds out of an electric. We may not even have had an amp to play it through, there in his college dorm room. I remember how it looked, but not how it sounded.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,Fred Miller
Date: 21 Aug 04 - 07:52 PM

I haven't owned a lot of Martins, but from shopping they seem to have some range of sound, to my ear, more so than Taylors. Some people call this uneven quality, but I take it more as different qualities. Sometimes I even like a dead-string tone. It depends.

I own a very very very rare Martin-Gibson that sounds nice enough, until I try to play political songs, then the tone gets sharp and twangy.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: van lingle
Date: 22 Aug 04 - 08:12 AM

Midchuck, I don't think you need a specialist. When I drop a pick in my Froggy B I just turn it upside down and shake it. vl

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Aug 04 - 08:46 AM

Little known fact about warrenties, Pappa-G, and Martin. Some of their sales are on record based on yer specific serial nummer. If not, they still have been known to issue a "Certicate of Ownership" if you write an affidit telling where you bought it and when. I keep my certificate in the safety deposit box... If you have a lutherer who is also an authorized Martin reapinperson, he should be able to assist you getting the certificate retroactively there fore saving you some bucks. You still have to pay for frets but and bridge pins but that's about it, other than obvious damage 'caused by you or yer cat...

That oughtta free up 'nuff dough to get the Regal I was tellin' you about...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Aug 04 - 09:42 AM

Fred Miller ...you're a true mudcat treasure. I take every opportunity I can to pay you a compliment when I run across a post by you. I am never disappointed. As this character whose name escapes me now used to say, "Don't let the bastards grind ya down!"

This could easily devolve into a slam-thread a la "Are Gibsons/Martins Shite" ...so at the risk of encouraging what I am trying to avoid:

Taylor guitars have a distinct sound which isn't pleasing to my ear. This is my personal preference. These guys (Tacoma guitars) make a good guitar IMO, for the money. Pretty sound to my ear and prices are competitive with Martin guitars ($1000-$3000 USD).

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 02:44 AM

Thanks for the tip, Bobert. I would certainly be able to supply my serial number and the name of the (long-defunct) music store where it was purchased, so I might as well try for a Certificate of Ownership and the lifetime warranty that comes with it.

I dunno if I'd buy any guitar, even a "cheap" $400 Regal, via Ebay or from any mail-order source. I'd have to see it in person and put my hands on it first. Although, I suppose, you could just make sure you're able to return it and get your money back if you wish to do so for ANY reason.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Once Famous
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 11:38 PM

Poppagator

The 3-1 ratio of Gibsons vs. Martins has no real meaning. The LG-3 was my first decent guitar and for years the only one I used and is basically in semi-retirement. The LG-0 was found way too cheap in an antique mall some years ago and couldn't be passed up.

My main 2 instruments are the D-18 and J45. But sometimes, that Harmony Sovereign, which was masterfully worked on by a luthier I know, can sometimes sound better than anything.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 23 Aug 04 - 11:54 PM

well thank you so much, dear Guest. I really do appreciate it. If you knew HOW much you'd get a restraining order. Are you the same that once accused me of opaque logic? Or now, after several years, can I count 2 people who've liked my comments? You can lie if I can count more, probably only Max would know, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't care, he has a baby, and other interests.
    You could be, like, this whole big group of people somewhere, in some country, an island, with just one computer, who have to vote and ratify their remarks by commitee. My demographic. That would be really cool. Keep it in mind, if you like. At the very least, I'm pretty sure you aren't just me, re-reading my own lines the next morning, and slapping my knee, kind of LIKING myself, because I don't (like myself, that is, especially the next morning) and because I don't know how to make those links to things.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 12:30 AM

Yes, one and the same: opaque logic. Sort of like my friend who related an incident: she was on a date, having dinner. Her companion, hoping to pay her a compliment, offers, "You know, you don't look 47." She was offended. She said, "What is wrong with 47?"

I get the same sort of vibe from you. Not purposely "thinking out of the box," because you don't know what a box is.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 12:57 AM

Wow! I'm another one, Fred, so that makes three.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 10:18 AM

thanks. But that's 3, including me, I think.

Guest, Do you tune up a fifth with the small Tacoma? I got the impression you didn't like too high and bright a sound. Or is it rounder-toned than Taylors? I kind of like my daughter's big baby Taylor for some things. It's kind of thin, but I think a bright mandolinish tone works behing my voice often. And having had a Gibson casualty, it's nice to have a guitar around that you don't have to worry too much about.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 12:01 PM

Fred, sorry ...I don't understand your question about tuning up a fifth with a small Tacoma. I don't own one, just heard one once at a concert in the hands of an (unknown) fellow who knew how to play, and I was duly impressed. I also think they are pretty guitars, esthetically speaking. I really liked the tone, and that is all I'm basing my comments on, having not ever played one myself.

You are right, I don't like the "high and bright" sound very much. I like "warm and rich" better. That is, if any of these descriptive words have any meaning for anyone else but me.

Neil Young said he liked dead strings on his Martin because new strings sounded too bright. I suppose his acoustic recordings describes the sound I like also.   

My uncle has a baby Taylor that sounds pretty good. My cousin has a bigger Taylor (sorry, don't know the model) that he's had for years and just last month I picked it up and plucked around on it. No denying it has a good feel, good tone - just not the tone I would shell out thousands of dollars for. Diff'rent strokes.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 03:17 PM

But they're only a few hundred, and not trying too hard. I wouldn't put even med strings on one, the way their built. The Tacoma papoose is often tuned like a standard guitar capoed at the fifth fret.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,fred miller
Date: 24 Aug 04 - 04:23 PM

Um. Which is a fourth, not a fifth.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,Bigfitter
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 01:04 PM

I love them bouth. Rased on bouth, dad wouldn't aloud anything elc.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 01:38 PM

I prefer Martins.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,Georgiansilver
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 02:46 PM

My old thread again? How are you Martin Gibson anyway? How are you Martin? Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 04:06 PM

yes some of us have nothing but good wishes for you. all the best Martin

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:26 PM

"Dad wouldn't allow anything else" - including school, apparently. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:08 PM

What's going on here? Is GUEST Bigfitter the fartist formerly known as Martin Gibson, and should this fact somehow have been obvious? Am I missing something?

If so, yeah, I'll give a shout-out to MG myself...Hey there buddy!

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,Slim Eric
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:10 PM

Yep where are ya Martin? We kinda miss ya son.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Oct 05 - 06:22 PM

You're just looking on the wrong thread, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: DougR
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 06:13 PM

MG: things have been awfully quiet since you went away. I'm sure there will be lots of folks excited about the possibility of your returnint. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Lepus Rex
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 08:41 PM

Hmm? Oh, please. Martin Gibson is so fucking last year. You blew your one-and-only wad with your big bad goodbye thread, dude. We're over you, Marty.

Well, most of us are. Doug seems oddly excited...

---Lepus Rex

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 09:45 PM

Ahhhhh, as fir dead strings.... As far as I'm concerned, the deader the better...

Yeah, Iwas down in Mississippi last month workin' on a CD and I shipped tow reso's with "so-called" dead strings UPS and carried on my "so-called" dead stringed Martin with me on the plane.... Din'd even tune them down since I usually play it in a severely Bobertized tunin'.... (ahhhh, fir those with courage, it's EBEBBE... can wail on it...)

But, I'm proud to say that all the dead strings held up thru the 33 songs I recorded over 3 days... I was most proud of my 1934 Dobro tenor resonator... That little guitar not only held up but with 2 year old strings prolly provided me with the signiture cut of the session, "Preachin' Blues"...

But, no matter, Martins still rule (in most cases)...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: number 6
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 09:49 PM

What's best ... a Martin or a Gibson?

neither.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: GUEST,Martin Gibson
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 11:08 PM

Well, Martins and Gibson I still say are the choice for Nashville's finest overall.

Taylors are just plain bland, have no heritage or soul, are made by machine instead of by hand, are not a decent rhythm instrument, look stupid on the models without a pickguard and in general are mostly played by losers.

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: number 6
Date: 01 Nov 05 - 11:52 PM

Jeeeesh .. MG.

I guess I better pull my socks up and get on with it.

Anyone have a Martin around for sale ... cheap?

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Cluin
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:03 AM

"Taylors are... mostly played by losers."

Yeah, losers like Will Ackerman, Gregg Allman, Martin Barre, Beck, Adrian Belew, Stephen Bishop, Clint Black, Karla Bonoff, Michelle Branch, Garth Brooks, Jackson Browne, Jimmy Buffett, Glen Campbell, Mary Chapin Carpenter, Kenny Chesney, Bill Clinton, Marc Cohn, Judy Collins, Shawn Colvin, Dan Crary, David Crosby, Charlie Daniels, Iris DeMent, Neil Diamond, Ranger Doug, Duane Eddy, The Edge, Dave Edmunds, Don Edwards, Ferron, John Fogerty, Peter Frampton, Richie Furay, Beppe Gambetta, Vince Gill, David Gilmour, Pat Green, Nanci Griffith, Sammy Hagar, Merle Haggard, Daryl Hall, John Hiatt, Chris Hillman, Alan Jackson, Jewel, Rickie Lee Jones, Pat Kirtley, Mark Knopfler, Leo Kottke, Lenny Kravitz, Greg Lake, Alex Lifeson, Lisa Loeb, Kenny Loggins, Patty Loveless, Jeff Lynne, Dougie MacLean, Kathy Mattea, Dave Matthews, Tim McGraw, Sarah McLachlan, Zan McLeod, Tim Mensy, Jim Messina, Steve Miller, Liz Phair, Prince, Bonnie Raitt, Harvey Reid, Kate Rusby, Richie Sambora, Joe Satriani, Seal, Ron Sexsmith, Carly Simon, J.D. Souther, Tim Sparks, Rick Springfield, Billy Squier, Paul Stanley, Al Stewart, John Stewart, Stephen Stills, Doug Stone, Andy Summers, James Taylor, Pam Tillis, Artie Traum, Happy Traum, Travis Tritt, Shania Twain, Steve Vai, Suzanne Vega, Clay Walker, Joe Walsh, Roger Whittaker, David Wilcox, Lucinda Williams, Robin and Linda Williams, Robin Williamson, Nancy Wilson, Peter Yarrow, Neil Young, among others...

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Sorcha
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 01:10 AM

Stradaivarus anyone?

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 02:50 AM

100, thank you

Subject: RE: BS: A Martin or a Gibson?
From: kendall
Date: 02 Nov 05 - 08:08 AM

Touche' MG