Taylor T5

[Flaco]

Anyone here with experience with one of these? It seems the reviews are very mixed. I have read a thread posted here earlier this year where Reverbbb indicated he wasn't particularly impressed.

I am seriously considering this guitar because of 2 situations I currently face:

1. My praise band at church. Our music director currently plays acoustic and I play mostly my Tele. However, our director is leaving and our pastor will be filling in on acoustic. Although he's good at the more folk sounding stuff, he's can't really do the driving rhythms in the contemporary Christian stuff. Ideally, the T5 would let me cover both bases at once.

2. I sometimes play in an acoustic duo backing up a singer/rhythm guitarist. We're usually doing covers of the popular "Texas music", Americana, roots rock, and classic country type stuff. The situation dictates an acoustic, but I end up playing a lot of electric style leads in the songs. I'm thinking the playability of the T5 would enhance this, as well as allowing me to do some acoustic fingerpicking on the slower stuff.

I put one through it's paces at the local GC. I played it through 2 different acoustic amps and through a Twin Reverb RI. I noticed that it really took on the character of the amp it was played through. The acoustic amps were pretty cheap, and they didn't do much for me. It sounded great through the Twin, but a little plain for the electric sounds. Of course, that Twin was so clean. I'm thinking with a little overdrive it would really sound great.

It seems like it would make a really cool jazz guitar, too. Of course, the construction and set up were absolutely flawless, and Taylor's customer service is the best in the business.

Any thoughts?

[Joe-Bob]

I played one unplugged about 2 hours ago, and I heard the Taylor rep play one 2 months ago. They sure seem cool to me. I played a redburst one with flame maple...it wuz purty.

It seems like the perfect guitar for someone who needs an acoustic/electric, but needs even more versatility from it.

[chago04]

Originally Posted by Joe-Bob

I played one unplugged about 2 hours ago, and I heard the Taylor rep play one 2 months ago. They sure seem cool to me. I played a redburst one with flame maple...it wuz purty.

It seems like the perfect guitar for someone who needs an acoustic/electric, but needs even more versatility from it.

I played one 3 or 4 months ago, beautiful acoustic sound, then you plug it in and it actually sounds quite like our tele. A buncha twang, but the adjustable eq works extremely well. if it werent for the lofty price tag, id have it in my living room right now.

[FUMoney]

I played one recently. It was an extremely nice playing and sounding guitar. It's my problem I know but, I don't like to mix my acoustics with my electrics. I guess it stems from not mixing my food on my plate as a kid.

Ed

[Chris S.]

I play at least one session a week of (relatively) low-volume jazz stuff, and I admit, I've been pretty intrigued as to what one of those might sound like in that context.



And I actually could have <u>used</u> one of the things while I was playing Tommy. The score called for both the 1st and 2nd guitars to keep switching back and forth between acoustic and electric throughout the show. (Of course, I would've had to play about oh, I dunno... 120 performances or so to make that much $$)

Man... random, free-floating, unfocused G.A.S.! It really is a heartbreaking chronic affliction. (Especially when it carries a price tag like that of the T-5...)

Hee. ;-) CS

[Flaco]

The funny thing is, on the Taylor forum they feel it's a very cheap price tag! I guess when you compare it to most of Taylor's acoustics, it is pretty reasonable. Compared to the bang for the buck quality of some of Fender's MIM stuff, which is mostly what I own, the price is definitely a shocker!

[reverbbb]

I REALLY wanted to like these guitars. My beef was the sound was not like a $2300 Martin Accustic. For $1900, I would be reaching for a D-35 instead.

Plugged in, the acoustic sound was more like all peizo equipped accoustic guitars that I have heard. But the driving electric sound was a really nice surprise. However, it was not the quickest change over to flip from acoustic to electric sounds. Once you switched over, then you needed to re-EQ the settings. This might be OK for between songs, but not ideal for in the middle of a song - it would be too slow and distracting.

I cannot see obtaining all of the best sounds in this guitar using a single amp (other than a modeling amp). I would consider two amps and a A/B/Y switch to get the most out of this guitar.

I would still like to own one, but they are priced beyond what I would want to pay for that type of utility in a guitar. The Variax 700 provides more utility for $1000 less. But then again, I have yet to fully appreciate the Variax as well. As I have stated before, that if these guitars were priced at $800~900 street, then I would already own one (a blue one of coarse).

According to the Taylor PR machine, their production is having a lot of difficulty keeping up with the demand of these guitars. There are definately a lot of folks that have a higher opinion of these guitars than I do.

Flaco, it seems that this guitar was envisioned to fulfill your type of requirements. It would probably work well for you.

[d. meyers]

My curmudgeonly opinion is that, since one "amplified acoustic" pickup (be it piezo-elecric, field coil, mini mic, electromagnetic, etc...) sounds more or less like the other (seroiusly- the differences are splitting hairs, and none of them sound remotley like a good acoustic guitar through a good mic), why not just get a powerbridge for your tele and be done with it? This plan saves you a few grand. It cracks me up that the Taylor PR guys where right in assuming everyone had forgotten about the initial marketing campaign for the Parker Fly. It's basically the same idea, you know- next they'll put out a mass produced lute, and claim that Bob Taylor invented it.

[Flaco]

If they made a powerbridge in the 3 saddle vintage ashtray style, I would seriously consider it. However, in my particular situation the image of the acoustic guitar is just as important as the sound. When I play my acoustic in church people say "wow you sounded great today." When I play my electric people tend to say "you sure sounded loud today," even though I wasn't any louder. Some people just don't like the idea of an electric guitar in church. They do tend to be less offended by my Grestch hollow body than by my Tele. Anyways, if I could get the electric sounds from an acoustic guitar, I would be set.

[Flaco]

By the way, I would contend that not all amplified acoustic systems sound the same. For the most part, piezo's sound annoyingly bright unless heavily EQ'd. Magnetic soundhole pickups sound much more "electric." Some of the blend systems with a UST and internal mic are pretty convincing and yet usable in the real world.

The T5 has a much more authentic acoustic sound than the piezo system on my 12 year old Steve Wariner Takamine, and that system was cutting edge in its day.

[d. meyers]

Originally Posted by Flaco

in my particular situation the image of the acoustic guitar is just as important as the sound. When I play my acoustic in church people say "wow you sounded great today." When I play my electric people tend to say "you sure sounded loud today,"

I hear you on that- I played with a piano player for years who's perception of amplitude was heavily influenced by visual information... that said, I wonder what the T5's "look" sounds like?

I'm guessing a giant space-worm-tiger singing through a 5 billion watt nuclear hyper amp.

[reverbbb]

I think the T5 is an awesome looking guitar. The look is ideal for church settings and won't be considered "one of loud electric guitars".

I played one again yesterday unplugged (mainly because the store was hiding all the cords). The action and feel of the neck is incredible. It is between the feel of a ES-335 and an Ibanez AS-73. The finish is silky smooth with no stickiness. Very low action and fast small neck. I am thinking that they had .011 Elixers, maybe .012. It little challenging for lead licks but I have been using .012 on most of my electrics already.

The guitar sounds ~OK unplugged, but is not very loud at all. But it occurred to me that this is a very usable volume for practicing and not bothering folks in the next room.

I wish I had plugged in to give another (3rd) personal assessment, but the store was approaching closing time and I did not want to bother them with asking for a cord. I'm hoping the day will come when the new sensation has worn off, Taylor has flooded the market, and I can buy a used one for $1000~1200 in decent shape. Still, a bit more than I think would be a great price.

[Flaco]

Well, I picked up the black spruce top standard. I'll post a review in a few days when I have the chance to put it through it's paces.

Thanks for all the comments.

~Shawn

[Ben Jammin']

I recently went to purchase a T-5 and passed on it for a Breedlove. The Breedlove is an AWESOME axe for that warm accoustic sound. I played it alongside the Taylor, and a Martin. There was NO COMPARISON. The Breedlove came home with me. The Taylor is still there for someone who will have to settle for less.

[d. meyers]

What breedlove model is comparable to the T5? (I'm thinking feedback rejection here)?

[Flaco]

Well, I took the Taylor back to the store. After playing around with it I realized that my acoustic already does all the stuff I wanted the Taylor to do. At that point the Taylor pretty much became a $2000 novelty.

There are two areas where I really thought the Taylor would shine. I think it makes an interesting alternative to an ES-335 type guitar or other thin-bodied electric archtop. I never really get along with those guitars because of the way the neck angles back away from the body and the strings are way off the body of the guitar. This Taylor is constructed more like a flat top, with the strings close to the front of the body. It did do great jazz tones, but again, I don't need a guitar like that for that price.

The other area would be as a unique guitar with its own voice for somebody like a Dave Matthews type player.

I do have to say that the fit and finish were as good or better than any guitar I've ever seen at any price, which seems to be pretty standard for Taylor. And it came with the coolest case I've ever seen.

When I took the guitar back I spent some time playing all the acoustics at Guitar Center. I played all their Taylors. I really admire Taylor, their customer service, their image etc. They do put out a great product and I have wanted one of their guitars for the last 15 years. However, there wasn't a Taylor in their that could touch a sweet Martin HD-28 that I played.

[reverbbb]

The HD-28 surprised me. The sound is closer to a D-35 than a D-28.

I'm glad that you had a chance to really play the T-5. It is hard to know for sure until you get the instrument home and in your hands for a few days. It is a great instrument, but I totally agree with your sentiment of it being a $2000 novalty. That is sort of what I was saying in a long hand form.

[Bob Rogers]

It seems to me the right term would be "compromise" rather than "novelty" guitar. I agree that for that purpose there are lots of guitars that fit the bill at a lower price. When someone says they want to buy guitar X to substitute for guitars Y and Z, its not a good thing for X to be more expensive than Y and Z combined.

From what I've seen, the T5 is a beautiful instrument with a pretty distinctive sound. My guess is that either it catches on by its own merit with a particual genre or artist, or it will fall by the wayside. Some have suggested that it's real "niche" is as an inexpensive alternative to a fancy carved archtop. Maybe so, or maybe its different enough to find its own niche. We'll see.

[John E]

and was unimpressed. Played it thru a Bassman and a PA system. Didn't like the neck/playability, the sound was OK but it didn't WOW me. That being said I only played it once for 15-20 minutes, everything deserves a 2nd chance... but for that kind of cash I could buy a couple of electrics, some pedals, and keep my existing (and very good) acoustics.

[Flaco]

Originally Posted by Bob Rogers

It seems to me the right term would be "compromise" rather than "novelty" guitar.

I didn't mean to imply that the T5 was a novelty. I meant that for me the only justification for keeping the guitar would be as a novelty. For that matter, I don't believe the guitar is even a compromise. I think it is a cool concept, perfectly executed. It is a unique voice.

I think Taylor has a tough job marketing this guitar. To be fair, they never say this was meant to replace all your other electric and acoustic guitars. However, that is what I wanted this guitar to be. Judging by the reviews I've seen, I'm not alone in this view.