some help would be really appreciated guys

[hithere]

Hey guys I am in the market for a new acoustic guitar. I am very interested in the whole mic inside the guitar blended with the pickup deal. My humble opinion over my many years of playing, is you can pick up decent sounding acoustics at decent prices.

I soon will have around 1000 dollars, but am hardly interested on the name on the headstock. From what I have read a quality guitar is made out of all solid wood. I have seen the taylor 214s, the martin d16s and the lairvee do3.

My question is there any other great values from reputable companies with good customer support. To me anything over 1000 seems kind of too much, especially on my budget. At the same time I don't want to sacrifice having a great guitar. I am left handed, and have been curious about the seagull s6, it's made of solid cedar. Any help would really be great.

[Chazmo]

From what I've heard, the Fishman Aura system was/is a nice blended system. You might want to look for that in a used lefty axe. Your lefty choices definitely restrict the universe of choices.

I've heard great things about Seagulls, though there isn't that much discussion of them here. Enjoy the hunt!

[Tahitijack]

aside from taylor's in your price range, i would look at used breedlove acoustics. you might even find a usa made breedlove at or just over the one thousand price point.

[hithere]

I am very curious to know when the sound stops improving, besides being subjective. Like as far as build quality and such the seagulls have cedar all wood tops. I mean how would this compare to breedlove's taylors, etc, I am curious to know once you get a "all solid wood" guitar if that is really all you can ask for. I am not looking for any frills either, and the seagull s6 seems to be highly regarded for being a simple effective acoustic that rivals some martins. Could anyone explain why or why not it would rival a martin/higher end acoustic. I can't image a 400 dollar guitar doing so.

[sangemon]

Originally Posted by hithere

I am not looking for any frills either, and the seagull s6 seems to be highly regarded for being a simple effective acoustic that rivals some martins. Could anyone explain why or why not it would rival a martin/higher end acoustic. I can't image a 400 dollar guitar doing so.

I own a Martin HD-28 and a Seagull S6. I am a noob and bought the Seagull as my starter guitar. I adore it.

About three weeks after I got the Seagull I was browsing eBay one night and saw an auction for a mint 1994 HD-28. It was no reserve and the description and pictures were attractive so I put in a lowball bid on an impulse. Well wouldn't you know it, the next thing I knew the Martin was at my doorstep. So here I am a beginner guitar player and I have two great guitars. How lucky am I?

Anyway, to get back to the topic, these are two totally different guitars. They are made of different woods, they have very different necks and they have very different tone. It's tone is probably closer to the tone of a D-15 or one of the other Martin hogs.

Although I adore my Seagull and play it all the time, in no way does it rival the Martin. For a $400 guitar, the Seagull S6 is an absolutely spectacular buy. It sounds wonderful and is very comfortable to play. But it is not even close to a Martin.

[UGB]

hi there hithere!

Your choices are going to be severely restricted by needing a lefthanded instrument. Seagull is a good choice as they do offer more models in a lefty version than most brands in cedar and spruce. I'm not sure what you're currently playing or the style of music you play, but I would check out the full line they offer including the mini-jumbo and the folk models. You have to get to the top of the line Artist series before you get an all solid wood guitar and those are easily $1000 or more.

As to a $400 guitar rivaling a more expensive guitar, there's some variables here. The biggest one I'd start with is the player. The more novice the player the less noticable the subtleties are. There comes a point when learning to play is somewhat replaced by getting the most out of what you can play. This means your ear isn't as focused on making sure the notes and timing are right; it's more about your ear focusing on tone, sustain, character, etc. You're quite comfortable with how the chord should sound musically; now you're focusing on the materials, size, scale, and construction that best enhance that chord the way you play it.

Ease of play is an issue that we all deal with from the very first moment we pick up a guitar, and I have played inexpensive guitars that were set up to play far easier than some very expensive guitars. Then again, set ups and playing ease vary for different styles of playing and music. If you're a hard strummer then you're going to need a bit more relief between the strings and the frets so the strings don't buzz as much when you're bashing away. If you're a fingerstyle player you might want the strings as low as they can possibly go over the frets w/o fretting out or buzzing. In extremes, that can be a difference of 1/8" or more at the 12th fret.

One of the quickest ways to discover subtleties in instruments is to have a more experienced player point them out. A luthier is excellent at doing this as well.

[hithere]

thanks for the advice, I have been playing for about 13 of my 17 years and believe it or not my acoustic was always a beat up fender. The reason I am looking for another guitar is my Ibanez Artcore failed me and I want to get a forever guitar.

So would you guys venture to say, if you are getting an all solid wood guitar, which as I have researched are all around 1000, you are getting top quality stuff?

I was pretty much trying to talk myself out of paying that much, though I know my ears would realize the difference, and the price you have to pay.

For instance Taylor Sells the 214 lefty straight up acoustic for a little under a grand. As martin sells the d-16 for around the same, as larrivee sells their do3r for the same price. All these guitars are all solid wood, no frills guitars. As they have no fancy asthetics. Once you reach this point, does the sound become less of a " I know there is better out there" and more of a subjective thing.

Since all of those guitars are their "low end".

Secondly I do want electronics, which would obviously take me over 1000. But I was figuring I could get them installed later, because I want a mic installed in my acoustic also. Would it be better to just get the electronics then or install them later, and have a luthier drill them in? More is that a risk I should just pay for upfront.

[Tahitijack]

ugb has covered it....i just checked my local craigslist and fount a breedlove atlas for $xxx. well worth the money.

[UGB]

alright, I think I have a better understanding of what you're asking. Yes, virtually each brand of guitar has models that cost more simply due to increased inlay, polished finish vs. matte, upgraded tuners, etc. They will also classify models by the grade of wood used to make them. If you looked at a Seagull Entourage Rustic it would be obvious the top on that guitar would never make it on an Artist model. So in very general terms, fru-fru aside, the more expensive the model, the more choice the wood. Those variables can be cosmetic and/or tonal.

Taylors, Martins, and Larrivees are all very different from each other. My personal preferance would opt for the Larrivee for the wider nut and volume.

[cotten]

Originally Posted by hithere

...For instance Taylor Sells the 214 lefty straight up acoustic for a little under a grand. As martin sells the d-16 for around the same, as larrivee sells their do3r for the same price...

Of the ones you've mentioned, I think the best bang for the buck, in a guitar that you'll be proud to be playing years from now, is the Larrivee d03r. Skip the electronics for now, unless you have to have something immediately. If that's the case, opt for an inexpensive sound hole pickup. You can then save up for a more expensive pickup to be added later. Probably, you'll want someone familiar with them to install it for you.

There are LOTS of decent guitars that sell for under $1,000 new. I just think that the Larrivee is one of the best guitars in that bracket.

Want an even better guitar for the same money? Think "used!" In buying a gently used guitar, that $1,000 maximum might just get you one that originally sold for, say $1,500-1,800, perhaps even more if it's got a few minor dings. Or, you may be able to find a nice Seagull S6 or Larrivee d03 or a Taylor 214 for a lot less than you'd pay at a dealer. A lot less!

Unless you have to be in a big hurry, I'd suggest watching our AGF Classifieds and eBay for a while, to get a good handle on what these guitars are going for used. You can even post an "In Search Of" ad in our Classifieds, but you might want to wait until you have a better idea of exactly what you're looking for.

Good luck. Glad to have you with us!

cotten

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by hithere

Hey guys I am in the market for a new acoustic guitar. I am very interested in the whole mic inside the guitar blended with the pickup deal. My humble opinion over my many years of playing, is you can pick up decent sounding acoustics at decent prices.

I soon will have around 1000 dollars, but am hardly interested on the name on the headstock. From what I have read a quality guitar is made out of all solid wood. I have seen the taylor 214s, the martin d16s and the lairvee do3.

My question is there any other great values from reputable companies with good customer support. To me anything over 1000 seems kind of too much, especially on my budget. At the same time I don't want to sacrifice having a great guitar. I am left handed, and have been curious about the seagull s6, it's made of solid cedar. Any help would really be great.

Hi there hithere...
Hello and welcome to the group! We are glad you joined.

Sure the S-6 is a great guitar, and I have one with a K&K Pure Western Mini in it for the pickup and then three other guitars with K&K mic and mini pickup. The dual source rigs are more authentic to me, and I doubt most of the audience cares.

That said, you should care about what's on the headstock. It means something in the areas of durability, quality and support.

The kind of pickups you install probably have as much to do with the type of band or setting you play in as the guitar they are in. I find the dual source the most authentic sounding to me, but could kill the mic and drop back to just the pickup in two seconds if the mic became a distraction or problem (which they never have in over 9 years of playing with dual source rigs). And I run 50/50 ratio of pickup to mic without a soundhole cover on stages where at times I'm wearing ear protection.

I'm as smart as any sound tech about my gear, and should be since I carefully put the rigs together with the purpose of sounding full, fat and real without feedback issues in all kinds of situations. Then I gently tweaked it into submission. I find that if I get the sound I want at the stage amp, they can take it from there and translate it into the house. We roll into the room, and are setup and running in under 5 minutes ready for soundcheck.

Just so you know, a good dual source system will cost you as much as the S-6 itself. My preamp/blender alone would cost in the vicinity of $350 new (I found it used for $160). The dual source rigs ran me $160 each installed by a competent luthier. The stage amps I use cost $350 and have as much to do with the live sound as the guitar and the pickups.

All these have performed flawlessly for 3 years now going out two times a week to gigs minimum (that is over 400 outings with them so far).

Despite the fact I hear of people having feedback problems with internal pickups (and I don't doubt some people do) it is about stage management, and amp and monitor setup - especially on tight stages with loud volumes and non-adjustable monitors.

You could just about land a great dual source with mic and pickup, a Seagull S-6 and a stage amp in your $1000 budget, and if that were my assigment, I'd feel comfortable that it would end up being a great rig and sound and play great.

[tagmike]

I'd venture to say that if you're anything like I was, your actual "forever" guitar will probably eventually be something like a higher-end Martin. That said, an S6 will be great workhorse that you will want to keep and play forever, even later after you spend the bigger bucks.

I think the Seagull S6 is possibly the best bang-for-the-buck guitar I've ever seen. I recently sold mine to my dobro player when I changed my Martin from a 000 to the D-35 (I didn't really need 2 dreadnoughts, and he seriously coveted the S6). And then I had to replace it with a Simon & Patrick (Godin's "signature" version of the Seagull) folk, an OM-style version of the S6.

I got better sound from the cedar top on that S6, with the laminated cherry sides and back, than any solid wood Larrivee or Seagull I've played. In my experience you have to get a pretty good way out of your $1,000 range to improve it.

I'd say get yourself a nice S6, spend some of the extra cash on a good professional setup and a Shure SM57 microphone (ideal for mic-ing a guitar), and put the rest of your money in the bank.

- mike

[sooperstu]

Originally Posted by hithere

For instance Taylor Sells the 214 lefty straight up acoustic for a little under a grand. As martin sells the d-16 for around the same, as larrivee sells their do3r for the same price. All these guitars are all solid wood, no frills guitars.

I believe that the current Taylor 214 has a solid top, but is laminate (rosewood) on the back and sides. Pre-2007 214s are all solid wood (sapele on the back and sides).

[wthurman]

I'm with cotten on the Larrivee D03. However, the r is for rosewood, and while it looks more like what you might be used to, it was the mahogany version that really caught my ear. It's simply a great guitar and not just a good deal - it is well beyond its price point.