Yamaha FS5 (2021) vs Taylor 512 (1995)?

[josephdviviano]

I've been playing for 20 years and I'm upgrading my starter acoustic for a proper spruce mahogany small-body player's grade guitar. I am quite new to the world of good acoustic guitars as I've pretty much exclusively played electric guitars for many years.

For reference, my dream guitar is a Martin 000-18 Modern Deluxe, but I simply can't afford one right now, so I'm looking for something in the ballpark that I'll also be less worried about / happy to bring to the campfire.

Locally I've found two options.

• Yamaha FS5 - pretty much like new, made recently, a little more expensive.
• A Taylor 512 from 1995 - a 2 cracks in the top I would need to fix (due to lack of humidity, apparently), no electronics. A little less expensive, but after I stabilize the crack with my tech they will be about the same price.

I like the idea of the Taylor because the wood will have had lots of time to open up and I don't mind a few cracks so long as the guitar is in a durable state.

Experienced acoustic players, what are your thoughts on these decisions? Both guitars are private sales over an hour's drive from me, so I won't be able to simply play them side by side.

[davidd]

Easy... FS5 all day long.

[Puddleglum]

I love Japanese-made guitars. That Yamaha would make a great player. But that Taylor sits smack in the middle of their golden age and once you get those issues worked out, it would be a great guitar to own. I'd probably go for the Taylor.

[movehome]

Have you played both of them?

There are a lot of other options. You could get a brand new LS6 (inexpensive) or LS16 (still less expensive than an FS5).. both are really great. I'd take one of those over the FS5.

I have an LL16 and wouldn't trade it for anything. I recently got a Martin D-18 and I greatly prefer the LL16 in playability, looks and sound (which is totally different.. kind of apples to oranges).

You could also look into Eastman OM size guitars. Eastman E1-OM might be a great option for you.

[Cool555]

First post. Welcome to AGF!

Go for the FS5. I feel that the neck is more comfortable than the MLO of the 000-18 and it is comparable or on par with the 000-18. Never owned a Taylor 512.

I own the early batch of these Red Labels and think that the FS5 is a great guitar. Of course, I’m bias.

Happy hunting!

[josephdviviano]

Thanks for the replies folks. To respond generally --

I've played many guitars but neither of these specific models (I've gotten close with Taylor 517, but not these specific guitars). I will of course test drive whichever I choose to potentially buy before buying it.

I was actually surprised by how little I cared for the Eastman OM / OOO offerings. I found them overbuilt.

I actually quite liked the Taylor 517 I played. From my experience I definitely want a spruce / mahogany build and I would much prefer a light resonant guitar in the OOO / OO size range. It has the playability and response I want.

I'm leaning toward the Taylor because the wood will have 30 years of aging as well. I don't mind fixing some cracks.

For everyone suggesting I go for the Yamaha -- any particular reason you think this is the better choice over the Taylor 512?

[Rpt50]

Originally Posted by josephdviviano

For everyone suggesting I go for the Yamaha -- any particular reason you think this is the better choice over the Taylor 512?

Play a mid or upper level Yamaha back-to-back with any Taylor and you'll see.

I would also agree with the suggestions on other instruments in the Yamaha line. But first, a clarification--the FS and LS models have a smaller body (concert size) and are very comfortable playing in a variety of positions including sitting on a couch. The FG and LL models are basically "full size" acoustics, and can get a little uncomfortable when sitting (kinda forces the shoulder up).

I would agree with the suggestions about the L series guitars (LL and LS). They are all solid wood (at the 16 level) and offer their own stellar sound, and are available with a choice of mahogany or rosewood back and sides. I've never been able to compare the LS16 and the FS5, but the LL16s I've played always seemed a little brighter, whereas the FG5 a little darker, but both models just seem so much more "alive" to me than other big-name guitars. The "16" guitars are several hundred less than the FS/FG guitars. The 26, 36, and 56 levels get you to the "made in Japan at the special shop" level and would rival pretty much anything made anywhere by anyone.

I certainly wouldn't put much weight on the ageing process and sound. Better to buy something that sounds good now.

[josephdviviano]

Well a few things - first I’ve played some Taylor’s that sounded pretty good to me, second there’s no all solid LS configuration with mahogany back, third I prefer smaller bodies *for the sound*, fourth only the two options I listed above are able to be found locally at a price I am comfortable with (this is meant to be a bridge guitar towards the eventual Martin 000-18 modern deluxe I will buy, which is way out of my price range).

Can you be more specific about why you think I shouldn’t even consider the 30 year old Taylor? I’ve played many guitars side by side including Taylor’s and I enjoyed playing some of them, particularly the ones with mahogany back and sides.

[Puddleglum]

For whatever reason, many here are not fans of Taylor. Fair enough. Buy in the opinion of many, those 90s-era Taylors are the best guitars they ever made. I would snatch that one up.

[Rpt50]

Originally Posted by josephdviviano

there’s no all solid LS configuration with mahogany back, third I prefer smaller bodies *for the sound*, .

An all solid Yamaha LS16M (mahogany back and sides) can be had at any number of places (reverb, music zoo, gear tree, amazon) for the regular "street" price of $799 with a really nice hard bag. You may try searching LS16MHB (presumably the "MHB" is mahogany and hard bag). The rosewood back and sides model usually goes for about $899. I ordered my LS16 from a local shop that is a yamaha dealer for a good discount off the street price and included a free set-up, and another set up within one year of purchase (we all agreed that no initial set up was needed--it came out of box just about perfect).

[SRL]

Originally Posted by josephdviviano

I'm leaning toward the Taylor because the wood will have 30 years of aging as well. I don't mind fixing some cracks.

For everyone suggesting I go for the Yamaha -- any particular reason you think this is the better choice over the Taylor 512?

If you want a Taylor get one that doesn't have a cracked top. Cracked top guitars are very hard to sell even at deeply discounted prices. They can also have/develop other issues that might not be apparent at first blush. Frankly, if the cracked Taylor 512 is more than $500 you are overpaying.

Secondly, figure out what scale length you want. The Taylor is 25.5 and the Yamaha FS-5 is 25.0. Tthe Yamaha is the same as the Martin 000 and IMO sounds much closer to a Martin 000 than a Taylor 512 does.

Third, regarding wood aging. In approximate descending order, the primary determinants of sound are string type, top bracing, top material and thickness, back material/thickness/bracing, and maybe age of wood, depending. Most of the change in sound from wood aging happens in the first year, then it's a long slow process. Basically an exponential curve. Also, the Yamaha has a torrefied top ("ARE") which is designed to mimic the sound of a much older guitar. So, choosing the Taylor for its older wood isn't really a good reason to choose it.

[TomB'sox]

Originally Posted by josephdviviano

Thanks for the replies folks. To respond generally --

I've played many guitars but neither of these specific models (I've gotten close with Taylor 517, but not these specific guitars). I will of course test drive whichever I choose to potentially buy before buying it.

I was actually surprised by how little I cared for the Eastman OM / OOO offerings. I found them overbuilt.

I actually quite liked the Taylor 517 I played. From my experience I definitely want a spruce / mahogany build and I would much prefer a light resonant guitar in the OOO / OO size range. It has the playability and response I want.

I'm leaning toward the Taylor because the wood will have 30 years of aging as well. I don't mind fixing some cracks.

For everyone suggesting I go for the Yamaha -- any particular reason you think this is the better choice over the Taylor 512?

To answer the last part of your post after welcoming you to the forum btw, Yamaha just builds a great guitar from the entry level to the high end stuff which is just fantastic. They are well built, reliable and offer a lot of great stuff in any price range.

Taylors are also great, but they do tend to have less volume and are a little more sparkly then balanced and sometimes people complain of the bass response and over-all umph. Although the cracks do not bother you, they will bother many others if you try and sell it. If you don't think you would ever sell it and don't care about the cracks, fine, buy it, play it, and love it, but just assume that you will not get any value out of it later. I have guitars like that, I love them, but probably no one else will. Also, the fact that the top cracked not once, but twice tells you it was not well cared for so could there be future problems with loose bracing, a neck issue, etc.

You will get a lot of opinions including the one I just gave you, but most are trying to be helpful, you just need to sort through them and decide for yourself. Me personally, Yamaha all the way for your first real good guitar, well build, sound great, affordable, and well respected.

[singlechange]

I agree with SLR's comment. Recently on craigslist I saw a Yamaha FS5 for a fair price of an used Taylor 512 without cracks. I would have snagged it but I already have a guitar I really like. I have owned guitars like Martin Authentic and Golden Era, Bourgeois OM, Huss & Dalton OM, and Santa Cruz Guitar Company OM and several pre WWII arch tops. Let us know how it all works out in the end.

[Puddleglum]

Cracks in a guitar and resale is a real thing. But I don't generally buy things with the plan to resell them. My own guitar had a crack about twenty years ago and I've not thought of it in a long time till now, this thread reminding me. I would still buy the Taylor as I have a personal affinity for the guitars they made in that era. YMMV.

[Tleek]

Originally Posted by josephdviviano

I've been playing for 20 years and I'm upgrading my starter acoustic for a proper spruce mahogany small-body player's grade guitar. I am quite new to the world of good acoustic guitars as I've pretty much exclusively played electric guitars for many years.

For reference, my dream guitar is a Martin 000-18 Modern Deluxe, but I simply can't afford one right now, so I'm looking for something in the ballpark that I'll also be less worried about / happy to bring to the campfire.

Locally I've found two options.

• Yamaha FS5 - pretty much like new, made recently, a little more expensive.
• A Taylor 512 from 1995 - a 2 cracks in the top I would need to fix (due to lack of humidity, apparently), no electronics. A little less expensive, but after I stabilize the crack with my tech they will be about the same price.

I like the idea of the Taylor because the wood will have had lots of time to open up and I don't mind a few cracks so long as the guitar is in a durable state.

Experienced acoustic players, what are your thoughts on these decisions? Both guitars are private sales over an hour's drive from me, so I won't be able to simply play them side by side.

I love my FS5. I wasn’t planning on getting it. I was set on a 000 Martin, but I played it and was shocked. It is such a nice guitar. My particular FS5 is literally my favorite guitar I have ever played. It just clicks with me and I am beyond happy with it. Every now and then I’ll pick up a martin in a shop and enjoy them, but they don’t give me the same fiz the FS5 does. I don’t know why. Regardless of price I’d take the Yamaha.