Big 3

[Tannin]

The "big three" is only the big three in the United States. Other countries have their own "bigs". In Europe, Furch is certainly a biggie. In Japan (a huge market!) Yamaha and Ibanez and Takamine are big. Here in Oz the "big 3" is Maton, Taylor, and Cole Clark. Those are the makes you mostly see people playing, and the ones you see lots of in the shops. (I'm ignoring Asian cheapies, of course. There are always zillions of them, but they are sold on price and the brands change all the time.)

Other big names here (i.e., enduring quality makes that you see often) are Takamine, Martin, and Gibson. You see huge numbers of Yamahas, but mostly cheap ones, not so many top-drawer Yammies here. So you might say it's the "big 6" (Maton, Taylor, Cole Clark, Takamine, Martin, Gibson). And they way they are going, Guild might power their way back onto the top table pretty soon. Shops that never carried Guild, or only used to have the odd one, are stocking up on them in a major way lately. Maybe it's a matter of stocking whatever you can get in these Covid times but my guess is that Cordoba have been out there in the marketplace talking to retailers and doing deals to get Guild back in the spotlight.

Do I like the American "big 3"? Mixed feelings. I generally like Martins, quite like Taylors, and don't much care for Gibsons. Every time I buy a new guitar, I look at Standard Series Martins and I like them a lot, but they are overpriced for what they are. For the same money it's not hard to find something better. I look at 3-Series and higher Taylors too, and although they tend to be more sensibly priced I've always found something else I like just a little bit more. Never played an acoustic Gibson I particularly liked. As for the lower-end products of the American "big 3", I can't see the point of them at all. For the price of something like a 2 Series Taylor, there are lots of better instruments to be had, and that's without even considering anything from low-wage countries.

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by YamahaGuy

What's with all the threads about the big 3? When I was into ATVs some five to 25 years ago, there was the Big 7 (Arctic Cat, Polaris, Kawasaki, Suzuki, Yamaha, Honda, and Can Am) manufacturers. And anything made by any other company was a waste of money. [Except maybe a KTM]

With the big 3 guitar makers, I feel differently.

My wife says I make a conscious effort to be against "the norm." She's not wrong:
I refuse to own an SM58
I have yet to buy a Taylor, Martin or Gibson

Maybe I like finding alternatives that (to my ears) sound just as good. Maybe they cost more, maybe not. Regardless, I don't get the appeal of having what EVERYONE ELSE has.

I must admit to a certain sense of smug satisfaction when people owning multi-thousand pound guitars play my relatively inexpensive instruments and come away impressed. Caveat; I have owned multiples of the 'Big Three' over many years, plus custom builds from small-shop luthiers like Brook and the late David Oddy, both situated here in my home county of Devon.

[Guzzi Fan]

I think the Big 3 have reputations that make them a good basis for comparison with other guitars, even if the compared guitars are not made by the Big 3. I understand you are taking a stand against owning guitars from the Big 3, but why do you only have Yamaha guitars in your collection?

[YamahaGuy]

Originally Posted by Guzzi Fan

I think the Big 3 have reputations that make them a good basis for comparison with other guitars, even if the compared guitars are not made by the Big 3. I understand you are taking a stand against owning guitars from the Big 3, but why do you only have Yamaha guitars in your collection?

If you check my signature, I have guitars not made by Yamaha, i.e. Ibanez, Cole Clark, Takamine. I recently sold an Eastman OM to a good friend.

Admittedly, I have an obsession with Yamaha products. I own much PA equipment and most of it is Yamaha. My last three motorcycles have been Yamaha.

As far as their guitars go, I like the feel of them, their build quality is good, especially for their price, and (most of) the ones I have sound great plugged in. And that's what I'm after in an acoustic-electric guitar. A good plugged in tone.

[Mattface]

I'm not sure Martin, Gibson, and Taylor really even qualify as the "big three". Certainly there are many brands that are talked about less that sell more guitars every year. I strongly suspect there are probably more Yamaha guitars out there than all three of those brands combined. Do you really think you are "bucking the norm" by owning one of the most popular (if not THE most popular) brands of guitar on the planet?

[Charmed Life Picks]

Originally Posted by YamahaGuy

What's with all the threads about the big 3? When I was into ATVs some five to 25 years ago, there was the Big 7 (Arctic Cat, Polaris, Kawasaki, Suzuki, Yamaha, Honda, and Can Am) manufacturers. And anything made by any other company was a waste of money. [Except maybe a KTM]

With the big 3 guitar makers, I feel differently.

My wife says I make a conscious effort to be against "the norm." She's not wrong:
I refuse to own an SM58
I have yet to buy a Taylor, Martin or Gibson

Maybe I like finding alternatives that (to my ears) sound just as good. Maybe they cost more, maybe not. Regardless, I don't get the appeal of having what EVERYONE ELSE has.

No shame in that. There are a LOT of great choices out there other than "the Big Three" -- almost too numerous to mention. In fact, you and I have had some great Yamaha discussions through the years, and I would put them on par with any of the "Big Three," and I suspect I'm not alone in that.

In terms of size, Yamaha is actually the "Big ONE," as they dwarf the other three in size, just in their various musical instrument offerings and not even looking at motorcyles, waverunners, etc. With Gibson and Martin, it has to do with longevity and their being around forever, esp in the glory days beginning roughly around 1900. And Taylor is simply an outstanding company when it comes to marketing. I'm not a fan of their products overall, but you have to give them their due. And then one must factor in all three of these companies being U.S.-based and making most of their products stateside (I suppose the Epiphone division of Gibson would diverge in this regard).

SO many great choices. Most folks around here know what an Eastman fanatic, but they are not the only company bringing in terrific instruments from across the pond.

Ironically, if you had asked this question in the sixties or seventies, we'd say "Martin, Gibson and GUILD."

scott

[LakewoodM32Fan]

I think another reason for The Big Three always being discussed (and again, referring to the current USA big 3 of Martin, Taylor and Gibson) is how ubiquitous they are. You can live almost anywhere in the country and have local access to at least one or more of them.

Contrast that with Bourgeois. I live in Los Angeles. You'd think I have easy access to just about anything. But there's only one local Bourgeois dealer to me that isn't 120 miles away, and they hardly stock any. Same with Santa Cruz. Collings is a little more prevalent, but they're also bigger than either of the other two. Huss and Dalton I have to drive to San Diego to try out 2-3 guitars at any one time.

Given how this forum has members all across the country (and world!) it makes sense that the biggest discussions revolve around the makers where most of our members have the easiest access.

[zombywoof]

Originally Posted by Mattface

I'm not sure Martin, Gibson, and Taylor really even qualify as the "big three". Certainly there are many brands that are talked about less that sell more guitars every year. I strongly suspect there are probably more Yamaha guitars out there than all three of those brands combined. Do you really think you are "bucking the norm" by owning one of the most popular (if not THE most popular) brands of guitar on the planet?

While Taylor fits the bill I would think Yamaha and Hofner would be among the top producers of acoustic instruments.

[Tannin]

Originally Posted by Mattface

I'm not sure Martin, Gibson, and Taylor really even qualify as the "big three". Certainly there are many brands that are talked about less that sell more guitars every year. I strongly suspect there are probably more Yamaha guitars out there than all three of those brands combined.

Originally Posted by zombywoof

While Taylor fits the bill I would think Yamaha and Hofner would be among the top producers of acoustic instruments.

Oh, if we are talking about volume of production volume now, then the "big 3" would be Samick, Cort, and probably Yamaha or perhaps some anonyous Chinese company.

Samick and Cort, both originally South Korean firms, have grown bigger and bigger and bigger over the years as they have taken on production for more and more brands. They still do some manufacturing in Korea but their main factories are spread across China and Indonesia. All the guitars sold as "Epiphones", just for one small example, are actually Samicks, but there are many, many other brands coming out of those same factories.

[Dru Edwards]

Originally Posted by Tannin

Oh, if we are talking about volume of production volume now, then the "big 3" would be Samick, Cort, and probably Yamaha or perhaps some anonyous Chinese company.

Samick and Cort, both originally South Korean firms, have grown bigger and bigger and bigger over the years as they have taken on production for more and more brands. They still do some manufacturing in Korea but their main factories are spread across China and Indonesia. All the guitars sold as "Epiphones", just for one small example, are actually Samicks, but there are many, many other brands coming out of those same factories.

Godin (Seagull, Simon & Patrick, etc) makes about 200,000 guitars a year in Canada. Just looked it up, Yamaha makes about 500,000 a year, and that may only be in it's China plant. I think you're right with Samick, Cort and Yamaha although Samick and Cort using their own names on the headstock wouldn't be that high.

[asilker]

Originally Posted by YamahaGuy

I refuse to own an SM58

What? You won't use Shure SM58s? Why?

[Mark Stone]

Originally Posted by LakewoodM32Fan

I think another reason for The Big Three always being discussed (and again, referring to the current USA big 3 of Martin, Taylor and Gibson) is how ubiquitous they are. You can live almost anywhere in the country and have local access to at least one or more of them.

Contrast that with Bourgeois. I live in Los Angeles. You'd think I have easy access to just about anything. But there's only one local Bourgeois dealer to me that isn't 120 miles away, and they hardly stock any. Same with Santa Cruz. Collings is a little more prevalent, but they're also bigger than either of the other two. Huss and Dalton I have to drive to San Diego to try out 2-3 guitars at any one time.

Given how this forum has members all across the country (and world!) it makes sense that the biggest discussions revolve around the makers where most of our members have the easiest access.

This is exactly what I was going to express, but it is well said by this post - thanks LakewoodM32Fan . Many of us don't buy guitars online, so therefore are limited to GibsonTaylorMartin in cities that don't have a lot of guitar shops. I lucked out when I ran into my K. Yairi in the late 1970s, but other than that in my area of the world if you want to bond with a high-end guitar, the Taylor/Gibson/Martin triune is all there is. I think this is why large forums like this tend to focus on few brands.

[LakewoodM32Fan]

Originally Posted by YamahaGuy

My wife says I make a conscious effort to be against "the norm." She's not wrong:
I refuse to own an SM58
I have yet to buy a Taylor, Martin or Gibson

Maybe I like finding alternatives that (to my ears) sound just as good. Maybe they cost more, maybe not. Regardless, I don't get the appeal of having what EVERYONE ELSE has.

To bring it back to OP's points, which I quoted the second part above, there's a little bit of cognitive dissonance, in that it assumes someone buying or talking about the Big Three is actually "seeking the norm" (first part) or isn't interested in finding alternatives that sound just as good (second part).

As I mentioned above, in many places in the U.S., if you want to step up from the entry level guitars, chances are that you live within easy driving distance of at least one of the Big Three whereas the boutiques are much harder to find. So for many people it's a matter of convenience. Many a guitar player who is looking to improve and get serious about their craft may not share the same level of willingness that some of us on AGF have to drive multiple hours to try guitars. We all draw the line at different places.

With regards to the Big Three being "what everyone else has" - well there's a reason for that, and it has to do with quality. You can love or hate those brands, but there's no denying that all three have had a pretty good quality run for an extended period of time. If a company was routinely churning out poor products, they wouldn't last as long or stay as popular. The SM58 you reference is a great example. According to Shure's site:

The SM58 has been the microphone of choice for Roger Daltrey, Paul McCartney, Henry Rollins, Patti Smith, Alice Cooper, Buddy Guy, Cheap Trick, G. Love, Martina McBride, Megadeth and countless other musicians. In fact, it would be difficult to name a major entertainer who has not used the SM58 at some time in their career.

Being a Los Angeleno I am friends with a couple of people who work in sound studios and SM58s are an integral part of the stable for any serious studio. These artists can be a finicky bunch, and if the SM58 stunk, it would have gone by the wayside long ago.

[Tannin]

Originally Posted by LakewoodM32Fan

With regards to the Big Three being "what everyone else has" - well there's a reason for that, and it has to do with quality. You can love or hate those brands, but there's no denying that all three have had a pretty good quality run for an extended period of time.

Your other points are well made, but this one makes no sense at all. Most of the other brands mentioned by various people above are of outstanding quality: Avalon, Cole Clark, Collings, Furch, Ibanez, Maton, Takamine, Yamaha .... these are beautifully made guitars, and some of those companies have been doing it right for a very long time.

You point about people buying what's available locally is a good one. It takes a mighty leap of faith to order a guitar, especially an acoustic guitar, sight unseen.

I'll add to it by observing that people very often wind up playing and liking what they are most familiar with because they hear them and see people playing them when they are young. On stage, yes, but also because their uncle played one, or their older brother had one, or the friends they borrowed guitars from when they were learning, or their guitar teachers. Like many Australians, I grew up hearing and seeing Maton guitars, and some of the best guitarists I knew personally had them. That was the sound that defined what an acoustic guitar should be. Eventually a chap I knew at University wanted to sell his Maton to part-finance a custom-built single luthier guitar, and I was lucky enough to buy it. It was my first high-quality acoustic. I had it for 10 years before it was stolen. For the next 20 years I missed it. Now that I can, I have of course replaced it with a very similar one (the Maton dreadnopught in my sig). And because it is the Maton sound I'm dialed in to from an early age, I've added another one since (because I liked it better than any Martin or Taylor or etc.), and will doubtless add a few more in coming years. (But I also like variety, so there will be other brands as well.)

Now imagine that I'd grown up in the US instead. I'd have been exposed to Martins (or Gibsons) from an early age, my first real acoustic would very likely have been a Martin, I'd be dialled into that sound instead.

So to a very real extent, the "big 3" are the big 3 simply because they are the big 3. (Kudos here to Taylor: they have managed to break into the big time, starting from nothing, in only 40 years.)

[LakewoodM32Fan]

Originally Posted by Tannin

Your other points are well made, but this one makes no sense at all. Most of the other brands mentioned by various people above are of outstanding quality: Avalon, Cole Clark, Collings, Furch, Ibanez, Maton, Takamine, Yamaha .... these are beautifully made guitars, and some of those companies have been doing it right for a very long time.

I am not sure you understood my point. My comment about why the Big 3 is the Big 3 being largely because they've had a good, sustained run of making largely good products is something I'll stand behind. To disagree with that is to imply that they're the Big 3 for no good reason and have made sub-standard products more often than not.

With regards to other guitar makers, that statement I made of the Big 3 has nothing to do with my feelings towards any other makers. Just look at my signature, I own multiple non-Big 3 brands. The guitars I most want to audition and possibly purchase next are not Big 3 models.

I was simply replying to the OP's comment (hence why I specifically quoted them) about "not getting the appeal of having what everyone else has". My answer was: the Big 3 largely earned their spot by making good products more often than not, over a long period of time. My rationale for pointing that out wasn't to denigrate any other maker, it was to say that most people aren't buying a Big Three guitar just because it's what others have, but rather because they're generally good guitars.