Sigma v Taylor

which is that peiozo crap



horrible sound

omg its both of them

please no more plugged in sounds comparisons
OK?

I think that the Taylor has more of the "typical" Taylor "brightness," and sounds a bit better than the Sigma.

I think you missed the point of my objection. This objection has been raised by others in referene to reviews and comparisions as well.


In such  video comparisons we have only 3 points we can consider:
- the recorded look
- the recoded sound
- the recorded opinion(s)

Since the comparison is obviously focused on the sound. (blind hearing test)
I for one would like to hear that sound, preferable with over left shoulder mics. . Instead  what we hear is the pickup system and amplifiers…


I hope you understand now. I have no idea of the quality of these guitars. They are not in my hands. They do look nice and I accept guitars as gifts


May I remind you of the actual testing with my dealer that I wrote about between the Sigma 000M-15 and the Martin.  We could both not only hear both's sound, over the shoulder and audience but also touch and look them over carefully.
That was a true comparison.. IMHO A guitar sound comparison should not use pickups.

Now i'm gooan Play my Siggy... we been a workin' on a guitar arrangement of the piano tune After the Gold Rush...

I know that my RK RO-10 sounds a lot different when I plug the Fishman soundhole pickup into the Laney LA 30 amp...

For me, a true comparison of guitars would require that each be played as what they are - acoustic guitars...and recorded to capture the natural sound of the instrument.

Yeh, it's a bit of a weird comparison I must admit. Horses for courses I guess.

I play plugged in just about every week, and I still maintain that a bad pickup ruins a good guitar sound. But it really depends on the application.

If I were selecting a stage guitar for a band or ensemble, I may not be too fussy because no ones listening to the quality of the acoustic sound much anyway. They are engrossed in the song, listening to the whole package, getting lost in the music etc. Its only us guitar geeks who worry about it. And so for me, this is where a Taylor works so well because it's designed as a cutting acoustic stage guitar. I think they have done a good job in that department.

But if I were a singer songwriter on stage and the acoustic guitar was the only instrument or main instrument, I'd be a lot more fussy about the pickup. In that situation you want the amplified sound you like, no matter how close or far that sound is from the original.

Personally, I'd never buy a guitar for the stage without firstly liking the feel, and then secondly plugging in and liking the amplified sound. The unplugged tone would be a secondary factor. But if I were buying for recording, unplugged tone would be the number one thing I would look at.

TonyKgull,

 Yes, I would do the same thing if I had the money.
Then I asked myself this question, "why", and couldn't think of a good answer.
 Have you or for that matter has anyone else got a good answer ? 😀 ( Other than personal choice).

If you were rich enough to where money was no object, then sound would be the only thing that mattered. But since none of us (at least I get the impression) is independently wealthy, then money is definitely a part of the equation of what we purchase.