wicked picking man.. is that pmpi on thr right hand ?? or pipm ,,I play a bit diffrently and I would give a left nut to play that smoothly like at 0:52 ,, thanks ,,,i have a Martin d16 ,peace
For the record, the Martin guitar factory in Nazareth, PA is pretty small. Take a tour of it if you ever get a chance and you'll understand why they are so expensive. A lot oh hands on manufacturing goes into making a Martin Guitar. I wound recommend the tour to anyone with slightest of interest.
both iconic guitars, and both sound great! i have a fender and gibson and i can't compare the two other then their both great guitars and i love them both!
Actually, that would be a reflection on how little you know. Then again, I could see how someone who's spent that much money between two factory guitars would think those tones are exclusive to those two brands.
@themaninme No actually he's right. Half of what you're paying for those instruments is the right to own a guitar that says "Gibson" or "Martin". I like those brands a lot, and I'm not talking electric at all here, but maybe you should go around a little and play on cheaper instruments made by infamous luthiers and then you'll understand that it doesn't take a big factory to make a guitar sound good.
@ShivaOpensHerArmsNow I would have to disagree with you here. While you are right, that you do pay for the name, there is a reason that that name has value. And saying that it doesn't take a big factory to make a great sounding guitar, well that is true. But to get a guitar of similar quality from a small manufacturer is far more expensive, not cheaper. See larger manufacturers have what's called economies of scale, so it is cheaper for them to operated on a per-unit basis
I don't know the Martin sounds pretty decent to me. Recording guitars and getting them to sound nice on youtube is not easy. A quality microphone helps, but youtube compresses the recordings and you lose audio quality. Live the Gibson has a lot bass oomph but you don't hear that here. Try recording some cheaper guitars and post as a response.
@Broyale26 Gibson and Martin hold their own against all makes of guitars... I've played them all... Been playing for over 45 years... Own a 67 Country and Western Gibson... Will put it up against any make out there today... It will absolutely destroy anything that I've heard that's new... 45 year old lacquer is hard to beat... People that down Gibson and Martin really show their ignorance... People that play know the difference... I play... I know the difference...
I don't think you can go wrong with either of the guitars. It all depends on what you want to hear out of your guitar. I had the Gibson & actually sold it eventually. Beautiful sounding guitar, but I preferred the Martin sound as well as the neck. Now I have two Martins (got the D-18 as well), & also now have a Guild which is a whole nuther beast that I love!
For people who prefer manufactured guitars, Martins are good - AT BEST. Unless you can get an old 40s or 50s Martin, they don't stand a chance against boutique or small custom shops guitars like Collings, Santa Cruz, Goodall, McPherson and MANY more.
Owning a BIG NAME BRAND doesn't mean you have a great guitar.
@sc12100 I disagree..martin still produces a fantastic guitar.I have seen a j45 That the fret ends were bumpy and action high.I think Martin is up there or pretty damn close to the collins.I am just saying..And I only own one Martin.Its a D18..I have two Collings a d28 and an om1.Martins are great.
@runninonempiy I think Martin produces certain models that are good, but a lot of their guitars don't cut it. I do like their D-28, D-18, and Eric clapton model; but other than those few, I really can't find any others that have great tone. Thats just MY opinion though. I have a Santa Cruz D/PW and it would drowned out a D-28 if played together. The D/PW has got great tone and is extremely loud compared to the D-28 - and thats with light strings. I do love Martin SP though. Only string I'll use
@sc12100 Very good.I too am a fan of the sp strings..i had Marin refret my guitar and it came back with the sp stings and like them a lot,I really am happy that you responded,I am anxious to go play a santa cruz..I am far from a great player but do enjoy playing these guitars and researching them is a lot of fun.Thanks
@sc12100 ....And owning a boutique guitar is no guarantee that you'll be playing a great guitar either. Besides, your definition of tone is awfully esoteric. 99% of those listening would never be able to tell a great acoustic from a mediocre one, the rest are guitar players with too much time on their hands. If you must have the most expensive guitar in town, then you're welcome to buy it, but if someone is happy with a Martin or a Gibson, then, for the love of god, leave them be!
@trniquet So what is my "definition of tone"? And guitar enthusiast have "too much time on there hand"? What are you babbling about?
I responded to a quote that claimed "Martins are the best". And they are NOT. Neither is a boutique. Guitars produce sounds that are better and worse for some ears.
@themaninme They're to busy making a new flavor Les Paul every week to bother with their Acoustic Department. They had a great master luthier in Montana in the mid 90's that turned out some awesome J-35 guitars, but he went on to start his own shop. Walker Guitars.
@hanghang71--Fair question, but I really think it shouldn't influence your decision if you are comparing the two for tonal quality, and your tonal preference should be the deciding factor. =)
The Martin has rosewood backs and sides the Gibson mahogany. I doubt most would be choosing between them in a purchase. If you want pungent and tangy go Martin if you want mellow and rich go Gibson. The J-45 competes with the D-18. The Gibson Advanced Jumbo with the D-28. Both these guitars sounded exactly like I would have expected! (<:
Both great guitars. I listened through headphones. The Martin is clearly brighter, but I prefer the J45 especially in your fingerstyle comparison. Better emphasis on the mids and better note definition.
Martin HD-28 to my ears. That's why I ordered mine from MFG about 3 Mo. ago and have never had one regret. Sounds fantastic. All the guys in the praise band at church play Taylors and while they don't sound bad they don't compare to the full bass and sound projection that the Martin HD-28 gives.
@hawg427 thats what i've always thought. i feel like martins are much bassier and full than taylors. thats why i traded in my taylor for a martin. but some people like the "brightness" of taylors.
I went back and fourth between the finger picking passages and to my ears the Martin sounded fuller and more balanced...but the Gibson has a more earthy-woody tone...both are world-class professional instuments...but if I had to pick...the tone cannon wins hands down...Martin: there is no subsitute!
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare a J-45 to a Martin D-18? The D-18 and J-45 are both Mahogany back and sides with spruce top. The HD-28 is Rosewood back and sides with spruce top. Also, the J-45 and D-18 are almost identically priced. I don't see what could be gained from comparing the J-45 and HD-28 because they will, by design, have different acoustic properties so it comes down to which sound you prefer hearing....
@themaninme Sorry, but I must agree with s&s100 on this one. Your title, on the contrary of your reply to s&s100 IS misleading since, versus or "vs", automatically gives the impression of a contest. And, while these two guitars maybe the most popular of the two brands, that does not mean that most people who are looking for their first "pro" guitar look at these two first. Is your statement based on empirical or anecdotal evidence?
@themaninme Never mind the science behind the evidence, the playing was fantastic and the differences were well worth watching, BUT....IMO you were misleading to say that this was not a contest, maybe you should have said "comparison". For a this vs that, better to have had the D-18 vs the J-45 to compete same types of wood vs different builder....which I believe most viewers were expecting. LOVED it nonetheless! You are an amazing guitarist!! Cheers!
i have to agree each brand has their "popular instruments," but people also have certain tonal preferences, causing them to prefer certain wood. one type being more popular than another within the same brand is more relativive to its other namesake guitars, not as much as the competetitions guitars.
personal opinion of each brand is a better judge than popular opinion. otherwise you miss out on MANY good guitars! (Gibson advance jumbo, and D18GE for example )
Here's the thing. Relish the fact that the two guitars have a different and distict sound. Choose the one you like ... it doesn't make one better that the other. Someone else will choose the one that you didn't like as much. That's great! Viva le difference! I was told by a wise collector that Gibsons are better for accompaning voice but Martins are better for pickin and grinnin. There you go.
Martin, Martin, Martin, is all I ever heard. Buy a Martin said all my guitar buddies. But I would go into the store, play all the guitars, and I walked out with a nice Guild D-55 instead.
20 years later, I walk into a guitar store, play all the famous acoustic guitars. Martin, Taylor, and Gibson. Picked the Gibson J-45. Great tone, and easy action. A pleasure to play.
I think the Gibson has more of an "American" southern twang to it. Not as crisp on individual notes, but a fuller sound overall. And since that's the sound I wanted; I bought myself a Gibson. And I will never regret it ! :D
the martin sounds more woody and the gibson sounds a bit more dark and fat in tone....to my ears. tough choice. maybe the gibson sounds a bit more to my likeing?
A Martin sounds like a Martin and the Gibson like a Gibson ! Both have their own mojo and tone - so which do you prefer ? Personally I have both and each offer you a bit different platform and both are classics no question .
Which do I prefer ? Wait a second .... Ive got to flip a coin .
Yeah I do like the sound of the j-45 better. Like you said it has more soul to it at least to my ears. Both are really good guitars though. Nice playing btw.
I've been a Martin man for 40 years - even used to do clinics for Martin in Australia - But I lost faith once they started making those cheap laminate guitars. I wasn't a fan of the Gibsons from the 70s, but I'm really impressed with the sound of the more recent J45s. Just looking to buy one right now, in fact.
I recently had to choose between the same guitars as I acquired both but could only keep one. It was hard because the Gibson had the best neck but the Martin tone was the decider in the end.
Im with you I cant really tell a slight different in tone seems like the second one might be a bit deeper but not my much both sound excellent though thanks!)
They seem very close. The Martin has the slight edge though as far as "bite" or deep, clear balls. But like the one guy said, different tools, neither superior.
the gibson is thin and girly,, yes girly,, good for female singer songwriter types no viceral mmpphhh to it! just punch back and forth from 30 sec to 2 00 and a b the diff!!!!!
The J-45 sounds more percussive to my ears. very bright and smooth. the martin sounds warm, and soothing. both are incredible guitars. and ill admit, before watching this video i would have given it to Gibson hands down. but what we have here is two guitars that compliment eachother like a dream. are you using the same strings on both?
The martin buzzes too mutch. Have you ever adjusted that thing? It sounds better finger picked. The J-45 had the right tone but still you might check to see if it needs adjusted too.
i cant really differentiate at least..but when i closed my eyes i think that the gibson has more.....you know warmth or somekind of thing that makes me feel relaxed....seriously...
The way I've always seen it, you can take an extremely deep and rich sound from a Martin and back off, or choke down on the pick or bring the action down a tad to add some extra mid and brightness, while it retains that complex warmth. But you can't take a Gibson, or a Taylor for that matter, and make it more resonant and pure.
Gibson & Martin: different tools, neither superior to the other . . . just different, like brunettes & blondes. Best to acquire both if at all possible.
You're playing some intricate fingerstyle lines and I really enjoy your playing. However, I have to made on suggestion. When posting guitar comparisons like this, you should get the best microphone possible. There's a lot of white noise in the background and your mic isn't picking up all the acoustic brilliance that is individual to each guitar. Keep playing, but get a better mic so we can hear all your playing in high-fi goodness.
You're playing some intricate fingerstyle lines and I really enjoy your playing. However, I have to made on suggestion. When posting guitar comparisons like this, you should get the best microphone possible. There's a lot of white noise in the background and your mic isn't picking up all the acoustic brilliance that is individual to each guitar. Keep playing, but get a better mic so we can hear all your playing in high-fi goodness.
Please. Martin is so, so great. Gibson and Fender acoustics, by the late 1960s, became mostly of inferior quality, partially due to change in ownership; emphasis on their electrics; and other reasons. However, Gibson electrics still rule, there is no question about this. Occasionally, you may find a sweet Gibson acoustic, but with Martin, you can be assured of a 100% chance of a fine instrument and the immense honor to own and play one.
Unfair comparisement as its rosewood vs mahogany, completely different beasts. Should have tried a J-45 vs D-18 or HD-28 vs Advanced Jumbo for example ..
Both sound great, I was lucky to try theme both at our local guitar store; We put the same strings on both and guess what .... Martin came out on top. That HD-28 was a dream to play it has a LOUD & CLEAR tone to it ..So I bought it. No regrets.
Both sound great, but I personally like the balanced sound of the J-45. The HD-28 is a little to deep in the bottom end. I don't have either of these guitars, but I have a Larrivee D-03RE, a very nice guitar also.
im really trying desperatly hard to buy a premium acoustic guitar like both of these models. Maybe an HD 35 or a gibson songwriter too... so far i find that the Gibsons really seem to use the whole body of the guitar to throw its sound out. The martins really seem to just amplify the original sound of the strings. i guess thats the "woody" aspect of the gibsons he was talking about... Still, choosing just one is making me sick.
You're a great player! I've got both. The Martin is louder & brighter. It's presence cuts through live, sounds like no other. Sweet ring, bass phenomenal! But, if you are a bluesy bender with a weaker hand, it is harder, especially on upper frets. Light strings affect tone but it helps. This is why I go to the J more often. It's a dream blues guitar, plays like butter, warm and woody tone, bending is much easier. It is also less boomy for recording. Each has it's place, buy both. LOL
The tonal differences in the description would have a lot to done with the tonewoods. The Martin has a rosewood body and the Gibson has mahogany. A better comparison would be Gibson J-45 vs. Martin D-18. The D-18 has a mahogany body. I own a Martin D-28 and a Martin D-18. Mahogany is much lighter weight wood and has a more midrange-woody tone.
problem with internet video comparrisons is the poorer video camera's sound quallity doesnt really let you "hear" the tone, i know im personally very picky, and id half to hear it in person to deside
I couldn't agree with your assessment more. Fantastic demo. The Martin HD28 is just a great all-round meat and potatoes guitar, but the J45 has that special something especially when played fingerstyle, IMO. Every time I hear a beautiful recording of some fingerstyle playing, it ends up being a J45. No, it doesn't have the same clarity and top end brightness of the Martin, but damn if it doesn't have that soul and certain sadness to it. Love it!
@MrBuc128 Um actually sir I beg to differ. I own a few Gibsons and my J45 is a late 50's model and I had it appraised at around $2500. I havent seen a new Gibson sell for $7000 so idk what you're talking about.
@rhetoric09 Apparently I looked up the price of the wrong Martin guitar. The HD 28 and the Gibson j45 are around 2500 each. I apoligize for the confusion. I myself have a Gibson hummingbird artist for which I paid around $2200.I am partial to Gibsons myself.
Gibsons are good acoustics, but they need to get off their high horse because they're lower ends are not worth $2000. I can get a Martin, Taylor, and others that play and sounds better than Gibsons for also a better price.
I used to own an HD-28LSV. It was great for bluegrass but wasn't the most versatile. I've lusted after a Bourgeois Slope D since trying one back in 2001 but they've always been out of my price range. That (and the fact that the J-45 has been used by so many of my favorite artists), has kept the J-45 on my radar as my next steel string. I have a chance to trade one of my classicals for an '05 J-45 Historic and unless it's a real dog, I'm gonna take it. Your great comparison has helped me decide.
i must have watched this video a million times. i own an HD28, but my mate has a J45. I've played both and can honestly say I couldn't choose. They complement each other beautifully when played together. i think i may get a J45 in time.
bought a d28 was nice until the neck separated at the heel. lifetime guarantee? good luck with that .bought a j45 still working no probs. and gibson has customer service that will help you if a prob arises.they are both great sounding guitars but when martin gave me the run around for two months and told me to take it back to where i bought it who then told me to call martin who then told me to take it back to where i got it. you get the picture i did have a pickup prob gibson replaced
bought a d28 was nice until the neck separated at the heel. lifetime guarantee? good luck with that .bought a j45 still working no probs. and gibson has customer service that will help you if a prob arises.they are both great sounding guitars but when martin gave me the run around for two months and told me to take it back to where i bought it who then told me to call martin who then told me to take it back to where i got it. you get the picture i did have a pickup prob gibson replaced it.
I am not sure which is which. The first one sounds somewhat better (richer in sound) with the pick on the first song. They sound about the same when fingerpicking. So…I think I would choose the first guitar.
I own two martins d18ge and a hd35 I also own a gibson advanced jumbo and a j45 except for a little higher flatpick noise the j45 mids can not be beat try Doc Watsons Deep river blues on a j45 and you'll never want to hear it on a martin
gibson specailizes in electirc guitars, not acoustic.. but their acoustic are great but its more a of a "side-product" for gibson, thats why they're only around 1,000$ to 2,000$, when martin specailizes in acoustic (and if you can find a electric buy them, thats really rare) so there around 2,000$ to 10,000$...
The martin sounded thin but the Gibson's flattop always cracks on me when I pay so much money for a decent acoustic and Martin's are way overpriced// Buy a epiphone lol
Can anyone recommend which Martin acoustic guitar I should consider, since I mainly like classic rock? I thought about the HD 35, but I know there are many to choose from. And, is it very important to choose an old one, instead of new? Thank you.
in my oppinion the martin guitars have a warm kind of typical campfirey or blue grass or country tone to it, while the gibsons have the sound you would want for a live performance or for recording
Thanks for putting this up. Going back and forth between them, I can see that the mids are better for the gibson, but to me there's not as much clarity with the gibson as the martin. are you using the same strings on both guitars? also, what is the song you're finger-picking? I really like it--reminds me of "crayon angels," but I don't think that's what it is. please get back to me. thanks.
I do understand the 'they are expensive' arguement but these instruments are really the 'money no object' end of the market.
That being said...there are other makes/models that are great but..
Both guitars are built better and made to last, with finer materials than pretty much anything out there. (generally speaking..no horror story replies please;)
if you want to explore your humanity then these two are the main event....there are NO $800 guitars that are in the same league as a 'goo
To my ears, definately Martin on the fingerpicking! Crisp, clear notes! Flat picking is CLOSE, but deeper resonance to Martin! I might be partial to the sound of the D-28 because I've owned one since 1975. I tried not to let that have any bearing on what my ears were hearing, though. Not sure if I was successful. hahaha!
Martin seems to have more clarity to me.. or richness. They both have their cons and pros though. I tend to like Martin's a tad more.. but I like Gibson's as well. Taylor's are too thin sounding for me though.
I might have purchased a gibson, but most of their acoustic and electric guitars are overpriced. I was able to get an sg standard a while back, and it is a great, obviously legendary guitar, but not worth the price tag to me. I now own a d-28 (not vintage), and it is pretty much everything I expected, and I am more than happy. Still pricey, though.
@themaninme people don't seem to understand that gibson acoustics sound crappy when first bought, this is a good thing because over time it will develop and change and sound awesome as the years go on. Good quality instruments all sound crappy at first, you have to break them in so to speak, its like a 50's stratocaster, in the 50's people thought they were terrible, and now they are just insane
wicked picking man.. is that pmpi on thr right hand ?? or pipm ,,I play a bit diffrently and I would give a left nut to play that smoothly like at 0:52 ,, thanks ,,,i have a Martin d16 ,peace
rrrrockin 11 hours ago
Nice playing man.
@sc12100
For the record, the Martin guitar factory in Nazareth, PA is pretty small. Take a tour of it if you ever get a chance and you'll understand why they are so expensive. A lot oh hands on manufacturing goes into making a Martin Guitar. I wound recommend the tour to anyone with slightest of interest.
Forcedunder 1 day ago
lovely playing
Nick80R 2 days ago
First song sounded good on the martin Second song sounded better on the Gibson
EBB47 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Gibson Guitar Corp. Responds to Federal Raid its just to stop jobs here in the us
buy gibson i will never buy better then a gibson :D
galegregory97comcast 2 weeks ago
both iconic guitars, and both sound great! i have a fender and gibson and i can't compare the two other then their both great guitars and i love them both!
MegaRockgod123 4 weeks ago
Overrated factory guitars.
You could get those same tones for cheaper.
Broyale26 1 month ago
@Broyale26
shows how little you know.....
themaninme 1 month ago 11
@themaninme
Actually, that would be a reflection on how little you know. Then again, I could see how someone who's spent that much money between two factory guitars would think those tones are exclusive to those two brands.
Broyale26 1 month ago
@themaninme No actually he's right. Half of what you're paying for those instruments is the right to own a guitar that says "Gibson" or "Martin". I like those brands a lot, and I'm not talking electric at all here, but maybe you should go around a little and play on cheaper instruments made by infamous luthiers and then you'll understand that it doesn't take a big factory to make a guitar sound good.
ShivaOpensHerArmsNow 3 weeks ago
@ShivaOpensHerArmsNow I would have to disagree with you here. While you are right, that you do pay for the name, there is a reason that that name has value. And saying that it doesn't take a big factory to make a great sounding guitar, well that is true. But to get a guitar of similar quality from a small manufacturer is far more expensive, not cheaper. See larger manufacturers have what's called economies of scale, so it is cheaper for them to operated on a per-unit basis
gtrplr42 3 weeks ago
@Broyale26 you don't seem to understand guitars very much to say that.
andrepappas 4 weeks ago
I don't know the Martin sounds pretty decent to me. Recording guitars and getting them to sound nice on youtube is not easy. A quality microphone helps, but youtube compresses the recordings and you lose audio quality. Live the Gibson has a lot bass oomph but you don't hear that here. Try recording some cheaper guitars and post as a response.
SeadartVSG 1 week ago
DLTJR1959 1 week ago
@DLTJR1959
Pretty good commercial. Still doesn't disprove my point at all, but if you like your guitar, more power to you.
Broyale26 1 week ago
The Gibs is poor here. Martin is the best in this demo. It's clear.
lafoudrenoire 1 month ago
GIBSON... THE BEST !!!!!!!!!!
sceicspiar 1 month ago
I don't think you can go wrong with either of the guitars. It all depends on what you want to hear out of your guitar. I had the Gibson & actually sold it eventually. Beautiful sounding guitar, but I preferred the Martin sound as well as the neck. Now I have two Martins (got the D-18 as well), & also now have a Guild which is a whole nuther beast that I love!
Gingerjake2 1 month ago
Obviously Martin guitars are superior than any other acoustic guitars you can even imagine
GreyBandanna 1 month ago
@GreyBandanna
For people who prefer manufactured guitars, Martins are good - AT BEST. Unless you can get an old 40s or 50s Martin, they don't stand a chance against boutique or small custom shops guitars like Collings, Santa Cruz, Goodall, McPherson and MANY more.
Owning a BIG NAME BRAND doesn't mean you have a great guitar.
sc12100 1 month ago
@sc12100 I disagree..martin still produces a fantastic guitar.I have seen a j45 That the fret ends were bumpy and action high.I think Martin is up there or pretty damn close to the collins.I am just saying..And I only own one Martin.Its a D18..I have two Collings a d28 and an om1.Martins are great.
runninonempiy 1 month ago
@runninonempiy I think Martin produces certain models that are good, but a lot of their guitars don't cut it. I do like their D-28, D-18, and Eric clapton model; but other than those few, I really can't find any others that have great tone. Thats just MY opinion though. I have a Santa Cruz D/PW and it would drowned out a D-28 if played together. The D/PW has got great tone and is extremely loud compared to the D-28 - and thats with light strings. I do love Martin SP though. Only string I'll use
sc12100 1 month ago
@sc12100 Very good.I too am a fan of the sp strings..i had Marin refret my guitar and it came back with the sp stings and like them a lot,I really am happy that you responded,I am anxious to go play a santa cruz..I am far from a great player but do enjoy playing these guitars and researching them is a lot of fun.Thanks
runninonempiy 1 month ago
@runninonempiy I do agree with you on Gibson. I think they're beautiful instruments, but whenever I plucked one, I felt jaded.
sc12100 1 month ago
@sc12100 ....And owning a boutique guitar is no guarantee that you'll be playing a great guitar either. Besides, your definition of tone is awfully esoteric. 99% of those listening would never be able to tell a great acoustic from a mediocre one, the rest are guitar players with too much time on their hands. If you must have the most expensive guitar in town, then you're welcome to buy it, but if someone is happy with a Martin or a Gibson, then, for the love of god, leave them be!
trniquet 1 week ago
@trniquet So what is my "definition of tone"? And guitar enthusiast have "too much time on there hand"? What are you babbling about?
I responded to a quote that claimed "Martins are the best". And they are NOT. Neither is a boutique. Guitars produce sounds that are better and worse for some ears.
You need to stop READING into my posts.
sc12100 4 days ago
Two of the nicest guitars in the world and you can't spare $80 for a half-decent microphone?
username91ification 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Both guitars are out of tune. The high E string is flat on both of them.
LarryLane07 1 month ago
Comment removed
LarryLane07 1 month ago
no one wants to see that like that...
prescomp 1 month ago
it would be better if you`d do it in sinc...vid and audio..
prescomp 1 month ago
Gibson forever!
sceicspiar 2 months ago
GIBSON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
sceicspiar 2 months ago
@themaninme They're to busy making a new flavor Les Paul every week to bother with their Acoustic Department. They had a great master luthier in Montana in the mid 90's that turned out some awesome J-35 guitars, but he went on to start his own shop. Walker Guitars.
popoaggie 2 months ago
Martin all the way
rdickinsondickinson 3 months ago
What kinds of strings were you using? Same on both?
Sixdouble5321 3 months ago
@Sixdouble5321
Dadario PB 12' both
themaninme 3 months ago
ya Martin fo sure man ,,,J45 is nice though ,,,may I ask what right hand arpeggio are ya usin when your travis style pickin there ??? great vid
rrrrockin 3 months ago
Both sound great. I have always preferred the J45 sound.
leonanim 3 months ago
both of these are great guitars, but i would rather have a takamine sw341c than any other acoustic on earth.
anewdayproductions 4 months ago
which is the most expensive?
hanghang71 4 months ago
@hanghang71--Fair question, but I really think it shouldn't influence your decision if you are comparing the two for tonal quality, and your tonal preference should be the deciding factor. =)
gadammit69 4 months ago
@hanghang71 Martin
SenfMann132 3 months ago
The Martin has rosewood backs and sides the Gibson mahogany. I doubt most would be choosing between them in a purchase. If you want pungent and tangy go Martin if you want mellow and rich go Gibson. The J-45 competes with the D-18. The Gibson Advanced Jumbo with the D-28. Both these guitars sounded exactly like I would have expected! (<:
Mandolin1944 4 months ago
Both great guitars. I listened through headphones. The Martin is clearly brighter, but I prefer the J45 especially in your fingerstyle comparison. Better emphasis on the mids and better note definition.
pjmuck 4 months ago
thanks for sharing :D
naivhoerenundsehen 5 months ago
Martin HD-28 to my ears. That's why I ordered mine from MFG about 3 Mo. ago and have never had one regret. Sounds fantastic. All the guys in the praise band at church play Taylors and while they don't sound bad they don't compare to the full bass and sound projection that the Martin HD-28 gives.
hawg427 5 months ago
@hawg427 thats what i've always thought. i feel like martins are much bassier and full than taylors. thats why i traded in my taylor for a martin. but some people like the "brightness" of taylors.
bluesensationist 5 months ago
uh, just wanted to say that that picking....is fucking insane.
van1980 5 months ago
Nice playing...Gibson J-45. I pick.
stratdelux09 5 months ago
I went back and fourth between the finger picking passages and to my ears the Martin sounded fuller and more balanced...but the Gibson has a more earthy-woody tone...both are world-class professional instuments...but if I had to pick...the tone cannon wins hands down...Martin: there is no subsitute!
AtheistSongs 5 months ago
Two nice guitars, but definitely would pick the Martin D-28, beautiful!!!
Lafiddler1 5 months ago
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare a J-45 to a Martin D-18? The D-18 and J-45 are both Mahogany back and sides with spruce top. The HD-28 is Rosewood back and sides with spruce top. Also, the J-45 and D-18 are almost identically priced. I don't see what could be gained from comparing the J-45 and HD-28 because they will, by design, have different acoustic properties so it comes down to which sound you prefer hearing....
safeandsound100 5 months ago 9
@safeandsound100
No it wouldnt, the Martin D28 is the most popular martin and the same goes for the J45
when people buy their first pro guitar they check these 2 first.
themaninme 5 months ago 4
@themaninme I cant understand that how can the D28 be the most popular the D42 in my opinion is much nicer if you heard it you will agree
wipers86 5 months ago
@themaninme I'll just say nicer I don't know how much I'd have to play both to really know wouldn't I
wipers86 5 months ago
@themaninme Plus it looks like he owns the guitars in the video. You can't pull guitars out of your ass and review them.
evilvon 5 months ago
@themaninme Sorry, but I must agree with s&s100 on this one. Your title, on the contrary of your reply to s&s100 IS misleading since, versus or "vs", automatically gives the impression of a contest. And, while these two guitars maybe the most popular of the two brands, that does not mean that most people who are looking for their first "pro" guitar look at these two first. Is your statement based on empirical or anecdotal evidence?
yumpladukfoo 1 month ago
@themaninme Never mind the science behind the evidence, the playing was fantastic and the differences were well worth watching, BUT....IMO you were misleading to say that this was not a contest, maybe you should have said "comparison". For a this vs that, better to have had the D-18 vs the J-45 to compete same types of wood vs different builder....which I believe most viewers were expecting. LOVED it nonetheless! You are an amazing guitarist!! Cheers!
yumpladukfoo 1 month ago
@themaninme
...if they're ignorant and have money to blow on for name on the headstock.
Broyale26 1 month ago
@safeandsound100 I agree to what you say - but I also see the comparison based on popularity as valid too.
wesmantodd1974 5 months ago
@safeandsound100
i have to agree each brand has their "popular instruments," but people also have certain tonal preferences, causing them to prefer certain wood. one type being more popular than another within the same brand is more relativive to its other namesake guitars, not as much as the competetitions guitars.
personal opinion of each brand is a better judge than popular opinion. otherwise you miss out on MANY good guitars! (Gibson advance jumbo, and D18GE for example )
cninja87 4 months ago
Good
sugimoto1478 5 months ago
Here's the thing. Relish the fact that the two guitars have a different and distict sound. Choose the one you like ... it doesn't make one better that the other. Someone else will choose the one that you didn't like as much. That's great! Viva le difference! I was told by a wise collector that Gibsons are better for accompaning voice but Martins are better for pickin and grinnin. There you go.
safeandsound100 6 months ago
Good! HD28的延音似乎比J45要好，但是J45的整体平衡好像好过HD28，都是好琴，这两者里面，我可能更愿意选择指板手感更胜一筹的那把！
ldengfeng 6 months ago
Mighty Martin pisses on weedy little slope-shouldered Gibbo. (IMHO)
longjonwhite 6 months ago
yeah, the J-45 takes it. the hd is no slouch, very nice, that 45 has the vibe. extra acoustic.
thagedorn 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
0:53 vs 2:44
mrgetrealpeople 6 months ago
:53 vs 2:44
mrgetrealpeople 6 months ago
The natural top instrument sounded better to me, brighter treb and deeper bass :D Thx for post.
badback22 6 months ago
Im not a big fan of Gibson acoustics myself only love their electrics and loved martins but today i would say j45 wins thought never said that
Danny980223 6 months ago
I like the J-45 more. but how does it compare to the Gibson Hummingbird pro? I'm kinda deciding between those 2
NoFILanthropy98 6 months ago
Martin, Martin, Martin, is all I ever heard. Buy a Martin said all my guitar buddies. But I would go into the store, play all the guitars, and I walked out with a nice Guild D-55 instead.
20 years later, I walk into a guitar store, play all the famous acoustic guitars. Martin, Taylor, and Gibson. Picked the Gibson J-45. Great tone, and easy action. A pleasure to play.
01Stratplayer 6 months ago
Nothing can hang with that Gibson--except of course a Larrivee, take your pick which one...
;-)
DirtySouthTV 6 months ago
I think the Gibson has more of an "American" southern twang to it. Not as crisp on individual notes, but a fuller sound overall. And since that's the sound I wanted; I bought myself a Gibson. And I will never regret it ! :D
steelpowerhouse 6 months ago
the martin sounds more woody and the gibson sounds a bit more dark and fat in tone....to my ears. tough choice. maybe the gibson sounds a bit more to my likeing?
CJsoccer4 7 months ago
Gibson has more even balance between bass and trebles.
janklosowski 7 months ago
A Martin sounds like a Martin and the Gibson like a Gibson ! Both have their own mojo and tone - so which do you prefer ? Personally I have both and each offer you a bit different platform and both are classics no question .
Which do I prefer ? Wait a second .... Ive got to flip a coin .
fendertweed 7 months ago
this is why I hate Gibson acoustics I've got a Martin DM that sounds much better than that Gibson and it only cost 700 pound
wipers86 7 months ago
Yeah I do like the sound of the j-45 better. Like you said it has more soul to it at least to my ears. Both are really good guitars though. Nice playing btw.
2cool4u24 7 months ago
I've been a Martin man for 40 years - even used to do clinics for Martin in Australia - But I lost faith once they started making those cheap laminate guitars. I wasn't a fan of the Gibsons from the 70s, but I'm really impressed with the sound of the more recent J45s. Just looking to buy one right now, in fact.
Also - you are one hell of a flatpicker, sir.
number1guitarplayer 7 months ago
Both great, but my ear likes the Martin more.
diptwares 7 months ago
I honestly can't find differences :D I guess I havent played enough. I swiched back and forward all the time. Just sound so much the same to me.
However, I have a passion for Martin guitars. I would most likely pick the HD28. Buuuuut will be a while before I have the money for that ^^
Nice comparison :-) ty
Amotaraso 7 months ago
I'm extremely lucky I own and play both because I just could not decide which sounded best either one is a dream to play
spankystrat49 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i have a left handed j45 check us out me playing it live in a band .DARREN HARRIS BAND mary lou
1darrenknight 7 months ago
I recently had to choose between the same guitars as I acquired both but could only keep one. It was hard because the Gibson had the best neck but the Martin tone was the decider in the end.
jimmypinch 7 months ago
Im with you I cant really tell a slight different in tone seems like the second one might be a bit deeper but not my much both sound excellent though thanks!)
marcangel79 8 months ago
They seem very close. The Martin has the slight edge though as far as "bite" or deep, clear balls. But like the one guy said, different tools, neither superior.
tmertube 8 months ago 2
the gibson is thin and girly,, yes girly,, good for female singer songwriter types no viceral mmpphhh to it! just punch back and forth from 30 sec to 2 00 and a b the diff!!!!!
steeltone 8 months ago
the gibson is thin and girly,, yes girly,, good for female singer songwriter types no viceral mmpphhh to it!
steeltone 8 months ago
@steeltone lol wow must have never played one in person then....
tannermiddleton 8 months ago
The J-45 sounds more percussive to my ears. very bright and smooth. the martin sounds warm, and soothing. both are incredible guitars. and ill admit, before watching this video i would have given it to Gibson hands down. but what we have here is two guitars that compliment eachother like a dream. are you using the same strings on both?
Floridaboy7777 9 months ago
The martin buzzes too mutch. Have you ever adjusted that thing? It sounds better finger picked. The J-45 had the right tone but still you might check to see if it needs adjusted too.
a1b2c3d4e5f6h8i9j10k 9 months ago
@a1b2c3d4e5f6h8i9j10k That Martin is not BUZZING. He's using a sissy thin pick. Which cause a thin click, and fussy sound.
bluegrasssingingman 8 months ago
The Martin has more cut, the Gibson, a more rounded tone. Love BOTH!
Mandotwang 9 months ago
i cant really differentiate at least..but when i closed my eyes i think that the gibson has more.....you know warmth or somekind of thing that makes me feel relaxed....seriously...
Surreallism007 9 months ago
The way I've always seen it, you can take an extremely deep and rich sound from a Martin and back off, or choke down on the pick or bring the action down a tad to add some extra mid and brightness, while it retains that complex warmth. But you can't take a Gibson, or a Taylor for that matter, and make it more resonant and pure.
lamontofnazareth 9 months ago
Gibson & Martin: different tools, neither superior to the other . . . just different, like brunettes & blondes. Best to acquire both if at all possible.
plasticsouldotnet 9 months ago 2
i must say.. martin is really suitable for country song. so as the gibson. but i much prefer the martin.. eventhough gibson is my favorite.
TheSynyster1996 9 months ago
PSSSHH
thems grandpas geetars
WoWintosh 9 months ago
both sound great but santa cruz sound awesome!!
MICKEYISLOWD 10 months ago
Martin for Bluegrass, Gibson for Folk
magliulo 10 months ago
I played the video without looking at it to see what had the better tone to my ears and I determined the first so I liked the D28 in this instance.
CharlieBennett13 10 months ago
Vey good playing mate, wish i had both :-)
declan215 10 months ago
The Martin wins hands down. It's so warm sounding.
Truemyshkin 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You're playing some intricate fingerstyle lines and I really enjoy your playing. However, I have to made on suggestion. When posting guitar comparisons like this, you should get the best microphone possible. There's a lot of white noise in the background and your mic isn't picking up all the acoustic brilliance that is individual to each guitar. Keep playing, but get a better mic so we can hear all your playing in high-fi goodness.
pickinstone 10 months ago
You're playing some intricate fingerstyle lines and I really enjoy your playing. However, I have to made on suggestion. When posting guitar comparisons like this, you should get the best microphone possible. There's a lot of white noise in the background and your mic isn't picking up all the acoustic brilliance that is individual to each guitar. Keep playing, but get a better mic so we can hear all your playing in high-fi goodness.
pickinstone 10 months ago
Both great guitars but the microphone really falls short here I think. I got a 1960 Gibson J 45
jamesbondaygee 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Please. Martin is so, so great. Gibson and Fender acoustics, by the late 1960s, became mostly of inferior quality, partially due to change in ownership; emphasis on their electrics; and other reasons. However, Gibson electrics still rule, there is no question about this. Occasionally, you may find a sweet Gibson acoustic, but with Martin, you can be assured of a 100% chance of a fine instrument and the immense honor to own and play one.
SeattleLA 11 months ago
Comment removed
SeattleLA 11 months ago
Unfair comparisement as its rosewood vs mahogany, completely different beasts. Should have tried a J-45 vs D-18 or HD-28 vs Advanced Jumbo for example ..
AussieEuro 11 months ago
Both sound great, I was lucky to try theme both at our local guitar store; We put the same strings on both and guess what .... Martin came out on top. That HD-28 was a dream to play it has a LOUD & CLEAR tone to it ..So I bought it. No regrets.
AmosM64 11 months ago 9
MARTIN hands down!
Myer58 1 year ago
Both sound great, but I personally like the balanced sound of the J-45. The HD-28 is a little to deep in the bottom end. I don't have either of these guitars, but I have a Larrivee D-03RE, a very nice guitar also.
Goldminer63 1 year ago
What's the fingerstyle song he's playing?
lptomtom 1 year ago
im really trying desperatly hard to buy a premium acoustic guitar like both of these models. Maybe an HD 35 or a gibson songwriter too... so far i find that the Gibsons really seem to use the whole body of the guitar to throw its sound out. The martins really seem to just amplify the original sound of the strings. i guess thats the "woody" aspect of the gibsons he was talking about... Still, choosing just one is making me sick.
ShimmyDigg 1 year ago
is like day and night or let me put it this way a mismatch martin is so much better .im buying martin one good guitar is all i need.
ol220938 1 year ago
That J45 has some great woody tone....wow you are right on there...
I'm buying a 68 reissue wine red with white pickguard real soon off a family member in the next few weeks....TIME TO GO HONKY TONKIN!
theflyingalamo 1 year ago
You're a great player! I've got both. The Martin is louder & brighter. It's presence cuts through live, sounds like no other. Sweet ring, bass phenomenal! But, if you are a bluesy bender with a weaker hand, it is harder, especially on upper frets. Light strings affect tone but it helps. This is why I go to the J more often. It's a dream blues guitar, plays like butter, warm and woody tone, bending is much easier. It is also less boomy for recording. Each has it's place, buy both. LOL
Talarico00 1 year ago
martin...but just by a hair. nice playing though!
utubuser10 1 year ago
both guitars are fantastic. but personally i love the sound of a martin. but i would still love to have a j-45.
crazycaleb92 1 year ago 2
What would be the main difference between a new
Gibson J-45 Standard compared to a Gibson J-45 1959 model?
CharlieMcCotton 1 year ago
The J45 , cause it sounds more Dylanesque to me ..
naxi55500555 1 year ago
very tough choice. but the J-45 just seems to have a little more to say.
BluegrassCamaroAdam 1 year ago
The tonal differences in the description would have a lot to done with the tonewoods. The Martin has a rosewood body and the Gibson has mahogany. A better comparison would be Gibson J-45 vs. Martin D-18. The D-18 has a mahogany body. I own a Martin D-28 and a Martin D-18. Mahogany is much lighter weight wood and has a more midrange-woody tone.
ShammyMcPumpkinhead 1 year ago
my epiphone also make the sring dead...
can you prefer good acoustic strings
TheLespaul9211 1 year ago
Martin never sounds as good as when they do Bluegrass. Gibson is sweet, for slower melodies. imho Thx for the notes.
badback22 1 year ago
problem with internet video comparrisons is the poorer video camera's sound quallity doesnt really let you "hear" the tone, i know im personally very picky, and id half to hear it in person to deside
NailsAndWood 1 year ago
I couldn't agree with your assessment more. Fantastic demo. The Martin HD28 is just a great all-round meat and potatoes guitar, but the J45 has that special something especially when played fingerstyle, IMO. Every time I hear a beautiful recording of some fingerstyle playing, it ends up being a J45. No, it doesn't have the same clarity and top end brightness of the Martin, but damn if it doesn't have that soul and certain sadness to it. Love it!
pjmuck 1 year ago
And the winner is.. Martin!!! Sparkling and clear and easy made sound where the Gibson makes You work to get the same results.
Pan3405 1 year ago
there's no competiton here....Martin kicked Gibson's ass...
LakicGuitar 1 year ago
i cant pick which is better lol
i want both and cant choose
fatezztruth 1 year ago
I just looked up the price of this guitar .it is over $7000. I wouldn't even pay that much for any Gibson model which are better guitars.
MrBuc128 1 year ago
@MrBuc128 Um actually sir I beg to differ. I own a few Gibsons and my J45 is a late 50's model and I had it appraised at around $2500. I havent seen a new Gibson sell for $7000 so idk what you're talking about.
rhetoric09 1 year ago
@rhetoric09 Apparently I looked up the price of the wrong Martin guitar. The HD 28 and the Gibson j45 are around 2500 each. I apoligize for the confusion. I myself have a Gibson hummingbird artist for which I paid around $2200.I am partial to Gibsons myself.
MrBuc128 1 year ago
I just looked up the price of this guitar .it is over $7000. I wouldn't even pay that much for any Gibson model wich are better guitars.
MrBuc128 1 year ago
Gibsons are good acoustics, but they need to get off their high horse because they're lower ends are not worth $2000. I can get a Martin, Taylor, and others that play and sounds better than Gibsons for also a better price.
sc12100 1 year ago
great picking!
sammason89 1 year ago
you high E is out
ERStott 1 year ago
I used to own an HD-28LSV. It was great for bluegrass but wasn't the most versatile. I've lusted after a Bourgeois Slope D since trying one back in 2001 but they've always been out of my price range. That (and the fact that the J-45 has been used by so many of my favorite artists), has kept the J-45 on my radar as my next steel string. I have a chance to trade one of my classicals for an '05 J-45 Historic and unless it's a real dog, I'm gonna take it. Your great comparison has helped me decide.
fodera6 1 year ago
The best strumming tecnique I've ever heard...you are smashing!
sisiello 1 year ago
i must have watched this video a million times. i own an HD28, but my mate has a J45. I've played both and can honestly say I couldn't choose. They complement each other beautifully when played together. i think i may get a J45 in time.
barkatthemoon81 1 year ago 5
@barkatthemoon81
oh so its you :)
themaninme 1 year ago 8
@barkatthemoon81 if i had to choose one , i'd definatlly pick the J-45, no contest !
zoomer51 1 year ago
bought a d28 was nice until the neck separated at the heel. lifetime guarantee? good luck with that .bought a j45 still working no probs. and gibson has customer service that will help you if a prob arises.they are both great sounding guitars but when martin gave me the run around for two months and told me to take it back to where i bought it who then told me to call martin who then told me to take it back to where i got it. you get the picture i did have a pickup prob gibson replaced
onitram5 1 year ago
bought a d28 was nice until the neck separated at the heel. lifetime guarantee? good luck with that .bought a j45 still working no probs. and gibson has customer service that will help you if a prob arises.they are both great sounding guitars but when martin gave me the run around for two months and told me to take it back to where i bought it who then told me to call martin who then told me to take it back to where i got it. you get the picture i did have a pickup prob gibson replaced it.
onitram5 1 year ago
I am not sure which is which. The first one sounds somewhat better (richer in sound) with the pick on the first song. They sound about the same when fingerpicking. So…I think I would choose the first guitar.
pdxjo 10 months ago
Comment removed
pdxjo 10 months ago
Comment removed
pdxjo 10 months ago
your gibson is just beautiful...sound and looks!! by the way your a great picker!!
stewmacman 1 year ago
I own two martins d18ge and a hd35 I also own a gibson advanced jumbo and a j45 except for a little higher flatpick noise the j45 mids can not be beat try Doc Watsons Deep river blues on a j45 and you'll never want to hear it on a martin
georyans 1 year ago
gibson specailizes in electirc guitars, not acoustic.. but their acoustic are great but its more a of a "side-product" for gibson, thats why they're only around 1,000$ to 2,000$, when martin specailizes in acoustic (and if you can find a electric buy them, thats really rare) so there around 2,000$ to 10,000$...
godsmackguy100 1 year ago
The Martin is clear as a bell flatpicking -- the Gibson doesn't cut through in the same way, although it's a sweet sound. Best to have both!
kiaora12 1 year ago
The martin sounded thin but the Gibson's flattop always cracks on me when I pay so much money for a decent acoustic and Martin's are way overpriced// Buy a epiphone lol
wisesatyr72 1 year ago
Very nice comparison demo. What version and year is your J45? Standard, studio? Was it built in Bozeman factory? I love the way yours sounds.
probos1 1 year ago
suerrely there aren't story!!!!! martin martin and also martin =)
mustacchio92 1 year ago
Gibson J45 sounds warmer.
tomeklawreszuk 1 year ago
Awsome man! you have two sounding guitars
mrrouts 1 year ago
Awsome man! you have two sounding guitars
mrrouts 1 year ago
Both sound great, but I think the Martin sounds best over all.
Lafiddler1 1 year ago 15
Comment removed
OleBlues 1 year ago
Can anyone recommend which Martin acoustic guitar I should consider, since I mainly like classic rock? I thought about the HD 35, but I know there are many to choose from. And, is it very important to choose an old one, instead of new? Thank you.
SeattleLA 1 year ago
Can you teach me some of those sweet little diddies? I love your fingerpicking :)
tacosurprise 1 year ago
in my oppinion the martin guitars have a warm kind of typical campfirey or blue grass or country tone to it, while the gibsons have the sound you would want for a live performance or for recording
1pixle 1 year ago
Thanks for putting this up. Going back and forth between them, I can see that the mids are better for the gibson, but to me there's not as much clarity with the gibson as the martin. are you using the same strings on both guitars? also, what is the song you're finger-picking? I really like it--reminds me of "crayon angels," but I don't think that's what it is. please get back to me. thanks.
jtchand 1 year ago
@onetime
I do understand the 'they are expensive' arguement but these instruments are really the 'money no object' end of the market.
That being said...there are other makes/models that are great but..
Both guitars are built better and made to last, with finer materials than pretty much anything out there. (generally speaking..no horror story replies please;)
if you want to explore your humanity then these two are the main event....there are NO $800 guitars that are in the same league as a 'goo
MrPaolo101 1 year ago
I have to agree with you: I love them both, I own them both sometimes I play the Gibby sometimes the Martin either way I'm happy
spankystrat49 1 year ago
What about the hd-35???
actierney 1 year ago
To my ears, definately Martin on the fingerpicking! Crisp, clear notes! Flat picking is CLOSE, but deeper resonance to Martin! I might be partial to the sound of the D-28 because I've owned one since 1975. I tried not to let that have any bearing on what my ears were hearing, though. Not sure if I was successful. hahaha!
CKYZZIE 1 year ago
Martin seems to have more clarity to me.. or richness. They both have their cons and pros though. I tend to like Martin's a tad more.. but I like Gibson's as well. Taylor's are too thin sounding for me though.
sanders4617 1 year ago
what kind of wood does this j45 have? mahogony? (back/sides)
early70sRiff 1 year ago
what kind of wood does this j45 have? (back/sides)
early70sRiff 1 year ago
What kind of wood does this j45 have? (back/sides)
early70sRiff 1 year ago
What kind of wood does this J45 have? (back/sides)
early70sRiff 1 year ago
I might have purchased a gibson, but most of their acoustic and electric guitars are overpriced. I was able to get an sg standard a while back, and it is a great, obviously legendary guitar, but not worth the price tag to me. I now own a d-28 (not vintage), and it is pretty much everything I expected, and I am more than happy. Still pricey, though.
mcneely2818 1 year ago 3
@mcneely2818
strange... a Gibson guitar costs more ore less the same as a martin guitar of the same grade.
didnt understand you comment.
maybe you thought the are not good enough to be priced the way they do
in that case I disagree . they are just as good . they just sound very special very middy and not all people understand the benefits of that.
themaninme 1 year ago 3
@themaninme people don't seem to understand that gibson acoustics sound crappy when first bought, this is a good thing because over time it will develop and change and sound awesome as the years go on. Good quality instruments all sound crappy at first, you have to break them in so to speak, its like a 50's stratocaster, in the 50's people thought they were terrible, and now they are just insane
reviewteen 1 year ago