Taylor Acoustic Guitar vs Epiphone Acoustic Guitar

[rexde]

Brandon,

Thanks so much for listening. Some of the difference is no doubt just my playing inconsistencies. However, clearly, the tonal differences are all in the guitars.

When I get home I'll look up the model of the epi. Here's pix of each:
http://home.comcast.net/~candmeat/epi.jpg
http://home.comcast.net/~candmeat/taylor.jpg

Also, I had some people outside this forum compare the tracks. There was no discernible pattern of preferences. Although some people expressed preferences, nobody felt strongly one way or the other. Nobody guessed that the difference was the guitars. One person did say that he heard some measurable difference and he did think the Taylor was better. However, that person happens to have a bachelor’s degree and TWO master’s degrees in music, and he was listening in my studio to the high quality recordings being played on my high quality audio equipment. He also thought the $50 Epiphone sounded good, just different.


Regarding the title, I was trying to get more open-minded honest comments. I'm sure a LOT of people will bring a LOT of bias (both ways) with them once they know their listening to an Epi and a Taylor. I strongly believe there is a lot of "mythology" in the audio/music world. However, since my idea failed so badly, we'll try it this way.

[rexde]

The epi is a PR 200E VS. According to some on the epiphone forum, an "S" suffix signifies a solid spruce top. Evidently, I did pretty good at $50: Epiphone PR 200E VS acoustic guitar built in pickup - Guitar museum
Now, I'm curious about this thing.

I have two other guitars that are far more, um, 'exotic'(?). They're both mid-1960's off-brand electrics. One is kind of a 335 copy, the other is strat-like, but with some bizarre looking pickups. Google says neither one exists. The 335 I paid about $100 for, and it has some damage and is missing the trem spring (kind of interesting, I know). The other I inherited and it is missing the trem rod. Maybe I'll start a punk band, or do some more crazy shootouts with you guys to see if I can get some benjamins out of these. They would at least make good wall-hangings in your basement.

I have a wicked GAS problem.

[johnn]

New strings and retest.

[Slide Guitar]

Hi, Slide, here. This is my first post (and hopefully that extra text reminder at the top of my page will go away now. I'll give you my honest opinion of these sound tests, as I don't have a dog in this hunt (I'm a custom guitar builder by trade - no spam, I want to stay anon).

I have a similar Epi and they aren't very deep-bodied. This results in a less boomy sound. The Taylor was surprising boomy as I tend to think of them as tinny. Maybe you had old strings on the Taylor?

Anyway, I loved the recordings (glad you confirmed the good mics)! They Taylor probably needed a bit more distance from the mic as there was considerable proximity effect on that one. The Epiphone was a nice tight recording! I may have to record my Epi sometime (mine's a pretty shallow body though).

Originally I thought that the "difference" was a reversal of LR to RL. I was hearing more articulation/harmonics in the R channel of the Epi so concluded you are right-handed. Then the Taylor came in and it sounded reversed: The right channel seemed boomier and therefore probably miked-up close to the bridge (in a left-handed configuration ... or reversed, if you get what I'm saying). Must have just been that the R channel of the Taylor track was louder...

Like I said, I don't have a dog in this hunt as I make my own (and am not a big fan of Taylor as I tend to think of them as too glassy and feminine). But yes my ears were totally fooled in regard to the disparity between $50 and $3000! In that respect, the Epiphone was surprisingly pleasant. I think you got a deal though because I've looked for that model recently and couldn't find one for less that a few hundred, IIRC.

Not commenting on the emotional factor. But on my cheap computer speakers, the Taylor distorted. So I'd suggest backing off the proximity of that louder guitar. Regarding further suggestions, I'd experiment with the over the shoulder position ... it gives a nice dimension. Alternatively, use an ambient mic in front of the guitar but about the same distance of the over the shoulder method. I haven't done this in a while but I used to get a great sound that way and I'm about to get more into recording my guitars with a new microphone so I'll be trying it too. Point is, don't be afraid to back off the mics a bit ... you get more room sound but it shouldn't be too much until you get like 6 feet away or more. Also experiment vertically with mic placement, you'll be surprised what you hear!

[rexde]

Originally Posted by Slide Guitar

I have a similar Epi and they aren't very deep-bodied.

Well, maybe some aren't, but mine is pretty full-bodied. I just measured the body depth at the butt, and at the neck joint on my guitars (including a Takamine) and it looks like this:

               neck       butt
Epi            10.3cm     12.4cm
Taylor         9.3cm      11.2cm
Takamine       10cm       12.4cm

So, at least in my collection, the Epi is the biggest. Also, both the Takamine and Taylor are cutaways, but Epi is not. I know there are bigger flattops, but not many.

Originally Posted by Slide Guitar

Maybe you had old strings on the Taylor?

The guitar was less than three months old when I made the recording, and I hadn't been playing it much, so I would say not really. However, I am going to put new strings on both and redo this whole thing. Hopefully should be in the next week or two.

Originally Posted by Slide Guitar

so concluded you are right-handed

You go Sherlock!


I did my best to use the exact same mic placement for both recordings. "Exact" as I could possibly be.

I definitely have to do some more mic placement experimentation. As it is, I did try a few experiments. I got radically different results by just moving the mics an inch one way or the other.

Thanks for listening.

[Slide Guitar]

Yeah I totally tanked guessing the guitars in question. I didn't even know that the Epi PR came in a Dreadnought until I looked it up. And I thought the Taylor was the size of a Martin Grand Auditorium: one size smaller! So I got BOTH guitars mixed up somehow.

The nice clarity of the Epi is explained by the mahogany body, though, while the bassiness of the Taylor is explained by its rosewood body. From Taylor: "combines the width and depth of a Dreadnought with a narrower waist". Two nice sounding guitars though.

And the mics knock me out they sound so good! :envious:

[P.P.T.]

I don't know about condensers, but my experience fooling with an acoustic and a dynamic mic was that mic placement is very critical.

I doubt that I could get 2 recordings to sound the same it is so touchy.

[dbrhodes2]

Hey, first time doing this. I'm gonna have to go with the Epiphone. I heard more body and less, treble if you will. I am going to take a listen to the tracks later on with better speakers. I'm on my laptop right now.

[brandondrury]

and am not a big fan of Taylor as I tend to think of them as too glassy and feminine

HA!!!! I've never heard "feminine". I've heard "too bright" but never "feminine". That is funny.

The guitar was less than three months old when I made the recording, and I hadn't been playing it much, so I would say not really.

Oh boy. I thought that Taylor was pretty damn dark, but I said "maybe this one is different". If strings are more than 4 days old, it's rare that I record them.

Redo the test. Make sure you follow the standards and enter in the Gear Shootout Contest.

[Slide Guitar]

I guess what I mean by fem is "think Jewel". James Taylor's Olson could be the same ... I don't see why he doesn't just play Taylors they sound the same right? Sorry, don't mean to put anybody down, just that Taylors or shinny and gossamer taylor-made for Sweet Baby James patented riff or to accompany Jewel. This Taylor is pretty dark or deep. Martins are smoky and hale: think fat trebles not bright trebles. Epiphones run the gamut from a Gibson sound to a National sound. Can't pigeon-hole. Again, no offense with the fem comment. Definitely redo with new strings.