|
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Couldn't find anything via search, so thought I'd ask since I respect the learned opinions here. ;)
I'm looking at another guitar purchase, a *gasp* non-Ovation this time. I have the option of a spruce or maple top and am interested in general opinions of the differences. To me they just sound "different", not one really better than the other (and not really that much different to my ear).
Since the spruce is a little less expensive I've been leaning that way, but if the more golden ears have a strong preference that'd be an influence as well. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2003
Posts: 11039
Location: Earth·SolarSystem·LocalInterstellarCloud·Local Bub | Maple top Acoustic??
Most likely a lam top.
You'll need to offer-up a little more info. If you are looking at acoustic play, there is a reason spruce is so widely used... if you are looking at electrics/semis/arch tops that's another story... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2006
Posts: 972
Location: PDX | What kind of guitar is it? And what kind of tone are you looking for? That should help you decide.
The maple is going to be "darker" toned, and the spruce will be "brighter"
But the BEST judge is your own ears -- play them both and then decide.
Here |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2003
Posts: 4389
Location: Capital District, NY, USA Minor Outlying Islands | I've never played a maple topped acoutic guitar. I have played a spruce topped semi-solid body, and a maple topped semi-solid bodies. I can't say there was enough of a difference caused by the tops to make a difference. As such, if it were me, I'd go with the cheaper of the two. Besides spruce is the traditional top. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
April 2005
Posts: 27
Location: Williston Park, NY | Maple or Spruce ae the choices in a Taylor T-5. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2003
Posts: 13984
Location: Upper Left USA | If it's the T5 go with the Koa.
Koa looks 3 times better and the output is so processed it almost doesn't matter about the tonewood. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 5575
Location: big island | i second MWoody's motion. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2004
Posts: 580
Location: NW NJ | Third. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 14842
Location: NJ | With the exception of the all-maple Collings that Bill has, I've never really heard a maple guitar that I liked . . . |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Originally posted by gh1:
The maple is going to be "darker" toned, and the spruce will be "brighter"
But the BEST judge is your own ears -- play them both and then decide.
Here
Yes, I'm ordering a T5 this week. I'm actually not a big fan of Koa and can't really justify the cost increase just for the looks (which isn't that important to me). So I'd narrowed it down to the Spruce or Maple tops. Sounds like there's not really much reason to go to the Maple for a top (other than, potentially, looks), so I'm leaning even more toward the Spruce.
I've got a couple locals to consult with tonight and then I'll likely order it tomorrow.
Thanks for the opinions and I'm open to more dialogue! Lots to learn from youse guys... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2003
Posts: 11039
Location: Earth·SolarSystem·LocalInterstellarCloud·Local Bub | There are some sweet maple back/side guitars out in the world. I owned a beautiful AAA Spruce topped, Maple Jumbo Guild c/a (actually have NEVER seen another like it and believe me I've LOOKED.) ... shoulda held on to it... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | Actually those Collings are Maple B&S, spruce tops. Solid maple tops tend not to sound good, just too damn stiff. If it's a maple top it's a panelmaster or it sucks. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Lebanon, TN | I bought the 1990 Collector for sentimental reasons, but I have to say I actually enjoy picking it up and playing. In fact the sound is great for some power strumming.
Difficult to describe the difference but it is a bit of a shock compared to all my others that are spruce tops. Any other comments on the 1990 Birds Eye Maple?
Bill was that one on your watch? Any reason for picking maple for that top other than it looks damned pretty? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 5575
Location: big island | all this talk about sitka tops paired with maple back and sides has me missing my gibson j-200. man, what a sound! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2003
Posts: 11039
Location: Earth·SolarSystem·LocalInterstellarCloud·Local Bub | you woulda saved us some charity time if you had been more specific in the first place... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2006
Posts: 5881
Location: Colorado Rocky Mountains | Seems like the more expensive (and, consequently, the better sounding) the wood guitar (ornamentation notwithstanding), the more likely the top is made of spruce. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | The 90 was because it looked nice. It was also a 16 fret deep bowl if I recall correctly. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Lebanon, TN | Sadly mine is a 14/Shallow :-) There appear to be 4 or so variations of the 1990 from what I can see.
But still sounds sweet for a SSB. Was playing it for 30 minute rotation this evening. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2004
Posts: 627
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ | Maple as the top does not vibrate effectively enough to use on acoustic guitars. Maple is used on the backs and sides of acoustic guitars. The Taylor T series are essentially electric guitars. The electronics and pickups will have more of an effect than a spruce or maple top. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
January 2002
Posts: 14127
Location: 6 String Ranch | I guess I missed that one. I could go look it up on the main site. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
December 2005
Posts: 149
Location: New York, NY | I always thought that Taylor's theory on the whole thing is that if you plan on using it more for acoustic playing (read: through an acoustic amp) then you should get the spruce, but if you're going to use it primarily as an electric, the maple is for you...;
Either way, that's a beautiful guitar. I was drooling on one at GC just the other day :) .
Cheers, enjoy,
JT |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2005
Posts: 12750
Location: Boise, Idaho | Stuart, I had a 90 just long enough to pack it up and send it to Paul Blanchard. Pretty guitar and interesting with the 16 fret neck. I didn't have it long enough to get used to it. Erniewan also had a deep bowl 90 and would like another one. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 51
Location: Arizona | Originally posted by vcnyls:
I always thought that Taylor's theory on the whole thing is that if you plan on using it more for acoustic playing (read: through an acoustic amp) then you should get the spruce, but if you're going to use it primarily as an electric, the maple is for you...;
Either way, that's a beautiful guitar. I was drooling on one at GC just the other day :) .
It's still a hollow body, so I suspect that the top material will have an effect. The output of any electronics will be better with a better input, so in this case with the body p/u (and perhaps even the neck p/u) the top material could be expected to make a difference; hence my question.
I ordered a spruce top today. :D |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2006
Posts: 2804
Location: ranson,wva | i thought the t5 is a chambered body like the ea vipers?? maybe im wrong...jason |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Lebanon, TN | Bill, I apologize. It is a 16 but Super Shallow. Picture doesn't do justice to the beauty of the wood.
 |
|
| |
Spruce or Maple top?
