#1
|
|||
|
|||
Eastman PCH cutaway vs Taylor 114ce
I’ve been toying with the idea of getting my first cutaway guitar. I don’t need or want electronics but I could live with the Taylor’s because they aren’t very noticeable, aside from the little wheels. I think the Eastman has some in most models but I’m not entirely educated on them yet. I used to have an Eastman mandolin and liked it a lot.
I’ve been looking at the Eastman PCH and the 114ce. Both have lam b/s and solid tops. The Taylor is a lot more expensive because it’s a Taylor, but is it that much better? Or any better at all? I’d be curious to hear from owners of these models. Thanks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
My introduction to Eastman guitars was an AC120ce, a cutaway dread - solid top / lam b&s .. very similar to the current PCH series..
For the money it was an excellent guitar.. I would recommend it. You may also find the PCH series offers more choices in body styles and finishes - all for significantly less money. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The main differences is going to be the C shaped neck on the Eastman. Its pretty beefy. You should try it out before you buy. The taylor will have a bolt on neck. The Eastman is a glued neck. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I’m pretty new to acoustic playing so don’t view this as sage advice from someone who knows what they’re talking about…
First acoustic I got was a PCH GACE. I liked the sound but never felt “comfortable” playing it compared to, say, my G&L. Then tried a Taylor 110ce and it just clicked with me. I assume it’s a preference for the Taylor neck shape. Will probably move the PCH along at some point as the 110 gets all my acoustic attention currently The other difference is nut width. Taylor 100 series is 1 11/16 vs 1 3/4 for the PCHs My 110 wasn’t much more than my PCH but the comfort level when playing is well worth the price difference to me. If you can try both you may find a strong preference for one neck over the other one way or the other also |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Well… I had a Taylor 110e. The dread version. In my opinion, you can’t compare the much higher quality Taylor with the lower price Eastman. It’s more expensive because it is much better.
I am not an Eastman hater, I have owned several. But the new Taylor is unlikely to have any QC problems, and will sound great. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
I'm not out to Taylor bash, (I currently have three, and am happy with THOSE) but would take my Eastman PCH any day over an entry level Taylor. They are laminated, and Chinese made (if that bothers you) but are top quality in build and materials. Honestly, it plays and sounds as good as almost anything in my stable. And at the price, I'm not afraid to tote it around, or play it by the fire. They are an incredible value in their price range, and a few others. I had AcousticMusicWorks (fellow AGFer and friend) put a K&K in a PCH dred, and still got it shipped for about a third of a Taylor entry model.
__________________
Dave F ************* Martins Guilds Gibsons A few others 2020 macbook pro i5 8GB Scarlett 18i20 Reaper 7 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
There is also an AC122 with a cedar top as well.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
i would not bother with Taylor laminate/layered B&S guitars (or Martin for that matter) - get the Eastman PCH and when you're ready to upgrade get an all-solid Taylor 300-series or higher.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I like the 300 series but I really like the matte finish on the 100 and 200 line. I think the 300 has matte b/s, or at least they used to back in the day.
|