Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

Martin vs Gibson


mooboo

Recommended Posts

I have both Gibson and Martin - M-36, 000-28(EC but without the EC connection) and 2 J-45s. That is 2 rosewood and two mahogany.

The differences are chalk and cheese! I realy wanted to love Martin above all else, but found that my Gibsons are more pleasing. This is not down to brand but down to body material.

I dont like modern Martins ie post 1995. Reasons are new raised gold logo, winged headstock( I can take that on a Gibson!) 'select hardwood' neck, striped ebony bridge and fingerboard, all things I have never assosiated with Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Well' date=' there's snobbery. And there's anti-snobbery. Neither are very helpful, other than for shoring up ego. Real musicians can appreciate both Martins and Gibsons for what they are. [/quote']

 

I think you missed my point. I'm not anti-snobbery, and don't care a fig if someone is convinced they have the only really good guitar in the world, whether it's Martin or anything else. More power to em if that's the case. But look, here's a situation where the Martin owning friend comes over, looks at the OP's Gibson, and feels the need to say how much better he thinks his Martin is. Nothing wrong if he feels that way, but don't you think saying that is a bit rude? I do. Why not just say, nice guitar, and keep his feelings about the superiority of his Martin to himself while his friend enjoy's his Gibson?. That's what I find annoying.

 

Real musicians can appreciate both Martins and Gibsons for what they are.

 

Yes, that's the point I was trying to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only got one Martin, an '81 M-38. It probably has the widest frequency response of any guitar I've ever had the fortune of touching, let alone owning. Bass from under the floorboards and clear as glass highs with nothing in the middle, just like I'd set the EQ on a guitar amp or stereo. Despite it being a rudely expensive Martin with whizbangs and whistles, it doesn't feel like a Gibson. I wouldn't trade it for a farm down south because it was my father's, bt it seldom comes out of the case.

 

I would like to own a D-28 though, just as a rite of passage. Everyone needs to own at least one D-28 in their life.

 

I think the only other Martin I've owned is a '46 00-18. Nice guitar, it just had a rough life and seemed like every time I took it out of the case another brace or seam would pop loose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only Martin I've owned that I just flat didn't like was an HD-35. It was way too bassy. I bought it from Buffalo Bros, & I traded it back right away for something I can't even remember now!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand the sometimes insufferable "Martin Hallelujah Chorous" being a bit put off at times....every other flavor of the month guitar is almost invariably compared to a Martin. They probably get sick of hearing how much better such and such a maker's guitars are than their Martins. Personally, I'm in a Martin phase now, and my Gibsons are in hibernation. No doubt the pendulum will swing back. Both companies have been making some absolutely killer guitars for a while now. No reason we can't learn to appreciate and work with the differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously Ted McCarty was a Martin fan - the result being the Hummingbird.

 

Don't know but among the musicians who use our local Mom & Pop music store as a pickin' parlor on Saturdays (the owner has affectionately dubbed us the Dead Beat Club) my old SJ has acquired the reputation as the guitar to beat (strumming being the standard of measurement). It may have finally met its match. He just got in a pretty beat up but fully repaired 1950 Martin D-18. Lordy have mercy but that is one killer guitar. For whatever reason, it is a bit less boomy sounding than you would expect and to my ears is incredibly well balanced. The store has some newer scallop braced Martin dreads in and whille they are very nice sounding and playing guitars, this one sends 'em all scurrying for cover.

 

While it may be sacriledge, if I did not think my wife would kill me, I would trade my J-200 for it (my wife loves that guitar). Now my SJ - I may just be stubborn but the only way you are going to get that one is to pry it from my cold dead hands. I have played Gibsons for over 40 years but if I had the cash - that Martin would be sitting here right now.

 

Point is, I don't care what moniker is on the headstock, that Martin was a joy to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own two Martin and two Gibson Acoustics. I pretty much like them all, although I hardly ever play my Martin OMC Aura because I find it to be very hard work for whatever reason! My Martin M38 and my Gibson J185 Custom are my favorites. The necks on these guitars are really excellent and the sound suits my needs but both are quite different.

 

Martins, Gibsons - both are beautiful!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never played a martin in my life...just never felt like picking one up.

Very nice contribution trotsky

 

 

My opinion:

 

I like the feel and sound of gibsons more.

 

I've played some 3000 dollar martins and they didn't match up to a lot of Gibsons that cost half as much (IMO).

 

I like the Gibson sound a lot more. Martins have their merits but I'm a Gibsonite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooops. Didnt mean the anti-snobbery line to be directed at you' date=' Dennis. Just meant to say it occurs at both ends, Martin-philes and Martin-phobes. All about building up ego. Cheers, J [/quote']

 

Ah, got it, guess I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying. Cheers back atcha, J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone has such good responses! My friend who swears by Martins did not come right out and say it one day. We were discussing.. So don't think that the Martin player in this instance was being a jerk! Honestly this is how I see it:

I like Martins. But they all seem stripped down. Call me a push over for good looks (inlays, headstock logo, delicious wood patterns, etc).

My CL-30 just sings to me. I have picked up other guitars that sound exotic and different and I think, man, that is cool! But it just doesn't suit me. Sort of like my Les Paul.. Slash cranks up his distortion and just lets it wail. But I love to just take it slow and keep it clean.

In my case I just like belonging to a follower's group. Kind of makes you proud to be a part of a group of players of such exceptionally great instruments. Sort of like the Taylor roadshows.

When I see someone playing a Martin I think, man that's a good ol guitar. When I see someone playing a Gibson I want to join in!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never really want to play my Martin 00-15, it just doesn't have that much appeal. But then when I do I love it again and wonder why I haven't played it for so long!

For me Martins are just intruments, whereas Gibsons seem to have a soul - but that's probably just some preconceived idea I have for no good reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not forget that a lot of the Martin-owning-Gibson-bashing fraternity has probably never played a great wartime or prewar Gibson, never mind a great Bozeman-made example. It's harder to understand the Gibson appeal if you haven't. For a lot of them, I'd venture a guess that their primary exposure to Gibson acoustics might have been in the late 60s and/or through the 70s, when Gibson was clearly in a state of serious decline. That would color their perceptions, in all likelihood.

 

I think maple guitars tend to get a bad rap for pretty much the same reason.....a lot of players' initial impressions of maple as a tonewood were formed when they played Norlin-era Doves and J-200s, which for the most part, were pretty underwhelming, to be kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have 2 of each and love them all. The Gibson SWD is the best sounding guitar I have ever played and it is the prettiest guitar I've seen, it is truly wonderful. The Martin D-35 is the loudest guitar I've played and has the best feeling neck I have encountered, plus it don't sound half bad. As others have said neither is really better or worse just different. I read a comparison somewhere that said "A Martin sounds like a grand piano where a Gibson sounds like a well used honky tonk piano" To me at least that comparison is the essence of the difference in Martin and Gibson.

BTW Guild aint half bad either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My tenpennyworth, as many have said - apples and oranges. I played a 00028 the other day, blooming marvellous it was too. I was gently reminded however by a very, very talented player that my J45 can do pretty much anything. They are gorgeous beasts though.

 

Oh, and hey folks. I'm back. Cheers Matt!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's not forget that a lot of the Martin-owning-Gibson-bashing fraternity has probably never played a great wartime or prewar Gibson' date=' never mind a great Bozeman-made example. It's harder to understand the Gibson appeal if you haven't. For a lot of them, I'd venture a guess that their primary exposure to Gibson acoustics might have been in the late 60s and/or through the 70s, when Gibson was clearly in a state of serious decline. That would color their perceptions, in all likelihood.

 

I think maple guitars tend to get a bad rap for pretty much the same reason.....a lot of players' initial impressions of maple as a tonewood were formed when they played Norlin-era Doves and J-200s, which for the most part, were pretty underwhelming, to be kind.

 

[/quote']

Why is it that there are so many "crap" periods in Gibson's history as opposed to Martin's? Just saying ....

 

And maybe it's just me but I dont detect nearly as much "bashing" of the other side at any of the Martin forums I frequent. Or from any of the Martin owners I know.

 

In fact, I own Martins and Gibsons and I love all my guitars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it that there are so many "crap" periods in Gibson's history as opposed to Martin's? Just saying ....

 

Fair enough observation and one I won't refute. I think a lot has to do with the fact that Gibson has changed hands many times and I suppose a logical extension of that would be the potential for many different management styles and methods, some better than others. Martin has been a family company forever. They still have the potential changes but probably less likely to be as radical.

 

The good news is that Henry has owned Gibson for what... 24 years now? And I think they've cranked out a consistently good product in that time. Compare the time period of 1985-2009 to, let's say, the changes that occurred in the previous 24 years, 1961-1985... or before that, 1937-1961! I know I'm being a little silly but the point is Henry has done some wonderful things with the company and I wouldn't hesitate to buy a new Gibson product off the rack in 2009. Maybe there was a time when we moaned, "they don't make them like they used to" but I haven't uttered those words in a loooong time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there are probably independant luthiers who are making better "gibsons" and better "martins" than the Gibson and Martin Factory themselves. For example, John Greven makes a better L-00 than Gibson, and Bill Collings makes better Dreadnaughts than Martin. Of course, this will start at about $5000 so not for the faint of heart. I think that Martin makes a fine guitar and I own three. They are superior to Gibson in fit and finish in my opinion, but especially in the young stages, are rather vanilla and plain in sound. However, over time.....wow. Gibson's are great guitars, often with visual flaws in fit and finish, but man, the sound. So woody and dry and sweet at the same time. Like with any guitar, you have to try MANY MANY MANY of the model you want before buying. No two guitars are alike and it is very hard to generalize. For example, I played as many as 20 Martin Eric Clapton guitars before buying. I went to every store in our area, I tried one at Guitar Center, that had an action at the 12th fret of about 5/32" and had a saddle of less than 1/16". This guitar was BRAND NEW, and needed a neck reset. Most of the guitars were Bass challenged, and I thought it was a factor of the body size. THEN I went to a Craig's listing, and found a 1999 EC, that probably had on the original strings!!!! Even with the dead strings, it was a fantastic sounding guitar with tons of bass.......so buyer beware. That EC in Guitar Center was still on the wall a month later even after I pointed out the problems to the store manager. Try a lot of the same guitars until one speaks to you. Martin or Gibson, don't matter, just get the one that sings to you.....good luck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, I've got a 00028EC that sounded great at the store and sounded great at home and with which I was well pleased, until I picked back up my D35 - had I played the D35 along side the 00028EC I never would have got the EC.

 

My J200 is totally unlike any other guitar I own and sounds (and smells) so sweet everytime I pick it up.

 

Then there is the 0-18 and the D-18 ... wish I had a Gibson mahogany to compare ... besides my LG0, that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...