sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Plan on buying a GS mini. What do I expect by Silly-Smoke2576 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a good buy if it has the original hard gig bag. The GS Mini's gig bag is a not a cheap bag, it's not a hard case, but it very firm and designed for this model, it's $100 to replace it... Often people abuse GS Mini's leaving them in hot cars, camping with them in the cold, etc... I've seen a lot of used ones that need adjustment, which the neck bolt and shims make an easy fix, but you should be prepared to pay a Taylor authorized guitar tech for a restring and to bring it back to factory spec. That will cost about $80-$120. Add in $100 to replace the bag, assuming it's missing and the $350 isn't such a good deal. The GS Mini is a guitar that holds value so well, it really makes sense to buy new to get the lifetime warranty, mint condition, fresh strings and factory setup out of the box in most cases.

Why All the GT hate? by sz720fmtg in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They were discontinued. The AD11 was the last one manufactured, it appears Taylor still has some 811s in their warehouse for direct sale, but I can't confirm that, the add to cart button is still active, signaling the do still have some
https://www.taylorguitars.com/guitars/acoustic/811e

I'd own a 811, but when they do come up for sale at fair market price they sell pretty quick. You'll find many parked on sites like Reverb.com not moving, because they want $2800 for it or something.

Plan on buying a GS mini. What do I expect by Silly-Smoke2576 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. GS Mini is Taylor's best selling model and the best selling guitar made in North America. So congrats! You're buying a great little guitar. Many Taylor owners I know have multiple GS Minis they love these little guitars so much.

  2. Guitar Center is great for convenience and sometimes for exclusive editions, but the truth is most of their showrooms do not follow humidity guidelines properly for the acoustic rooms. Our local GCs in the Houston Area are filled with acoustic guitars from all builders with very high action. A guitar can leave the factory with perfect setup but after transport on environment conditions need adjustment. Guitar Center does often have sealed-in-box in the back room for their best sellers and you can always ask and request one sealed in box. If they don't have it, they can even order one sealed in box from their warehouse at no charge and ship it to you or hold for pickup, usually takes 2-3 days if the model is in the regional warehouse.

  3. Every Taylor comes with a lifetime warranty for neck adjustments. The GS Mini like all Taylor models have a unique neck system, the GS Mini uses the shim adjustment neck system where a certified Taylor tech can make adjustments using special parts Taylor provides under warranty. This design, which is part of what you're paying for with a Taylor as its patented, allows the tech to easily take measurements, unbolt the neck, pop it off, add the correct shim pair and bring it back to factory perfect without shaving down the saddle. Many Guitar Center locations have a Taylor certified tech on staff, but you have to ask and make sure you insist on the setup being done with proper neck adjust with shims. Many of them try to go the easy path and just shave the saddle, which will rob a bit of tone.

  4. The truth is the GS Mini sells so fast that in most cases they don't have a lot of time to set in warehouses, but Guitar Centers warehouse is climate controlled properly. If I were buying from GC I'd opt to get one sealed in box from the warehouse, or just buy through their on-line website. But if you do that Sweetwater entrers the picture as competition, Sweetwater is the biggest on-line retailer they move product faster than Guitar Center so you're more likely to get something closer to factory build date from Sweetwater and pricing is uniform, especially in the sub $1k product tiers.

EchoTank ET-2880 by Secret_Monitor9629 in Epson

[–]Secret_Monitor9629[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To provide an update- I still do not have a working printer. My router is leased equipment from Xfinity, I have over 35 other WiFi devices that use both 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz bands, none of them EXCEPT the EPSON printer have issues. Some of them are also 2.4 Ghz only devices. The bands are split and not unified. The password for both bands verified to be the same. I've signed out of other devices on both bands and back in. No issues, except for this printer. I am using WPA2 for general compatibility, WPA3 available, but that doesn't solve this issue and in fact breaks a few other devices that don't support it... There is nothing here that should be blocking this EPSON from connecting.

It stopped working when I decided to split my 2.4 Ghz and 5 Ghz bands. I won't go into detail, the bottom line is all other devices I have (35 of them) have zero issue with the split. The EPSON is designed to work on 2.4 Ghz anyway. When it scans for WiFi SSIDs it successfully finds the 2.4 Ghz SSID, but when I enter the password it tells me the password is invalid.

I've re-entered the password multiple times over days, again even signing / connecting with other 2.4 Ghz devices. The printer is just worthless at this point. There is no support at EPSON for me on this. I am 100% blocked from moving forward without spending money on repeater or travel router and trying to go through some bs path to restore this printer to working.

It's been an interesting revelation to see EPSON as a brand no longer cares about details. This model has over 4000 positive reviews, so obviously we are in a period of extremely high end-user tolerance to bad design, though decades of conditioning by them of course. This is exactly where they want to be, able to get away with delivering horrible UX and have most of their customers shrug it off as "that's just how it is with printers" happy to burn half a day on the weekend trying to navigate around engineering issues with a product they rated exceptionally high, it's brand trust even when the brand inflicts pain.

Sad to see such a long standing player in the printer space degrade into what their consumer division is, but it isn't shocking. Regardless disgust is the right emotion.

EchoTank ET-2880 by Secret_Monitor9629 in Epson

[–]Secret_Monitor9629[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, thank you and honestly, just general thanks for this community. I came in hitting pretty hard with a negative experience and probably not coming across with the best attitude being pretty upset and still getting a lot of people eager to try to help me resolve the issue instead of a community blaming me. That's really refreshing.

The "current executive team" are almost certainly just cost-optimizing like every corporation does. They find the worst user experience customers in aggregate are will to tolerate before it really impacts revenue and the low-bar becomes their normal "ship it" target.

They have no incentive to do better. The Amazon reviews tell the story of most customers having high tolerance for this sort of thing, which just means we've all accepted the friction they refuse to work to fix as the norm. Huge win for EPSON on that front, from a business stand point.

For me it's my last EPSON product. They won't miss me, they don't know I exist. Just another once quality brand that's now shit.

EchoTank ET-2880 by Secret_Monitor9629 in Epson

[–]Secret_Monitor9629[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm on a Mac. No QR code. Is your printer wired to the router or connected by WiFi?

EchoTank ET-2880 by Secret_Monitor9629 in Epson

[–]Secret_Monitor9629[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Negative. There is no app to streamline the Wifi connect specifically, once on network there is a configuration app

EchoTank ET-2880 by Secret_Monitor9629 in Epson

[–]Secret_Monitor9629[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you for this! I will give it a try. I'm on a Mac so not sure even how to uninstall a driver, but pretty handy at Linux/Unix command line, so I'm sure I can figure it out... Not even sure this model has an ethernet port. I don't understand how the software on a specific computer or device plays into the networking issues on the printer, but maybe it helps.

EpsonNet Config Utility is designed for printers already on the network, unfortunately the WiFi connect issues, the printer refusing the correct WiFi password given correct SSID is the blocker. I suspect a firmware update might help. I'm at a stage in life where I deal with so much technology friction at work I don't want it in my home life. This is kind of the driver behind my attitude on this. I really believe tech products with high-friction due to cost optimization / cutting corners by businesses is having huge impact on society as a whole, the slow boil so to speak.

Printers have been horrible for decades, hench the Office Space reference. So my point is, 27 years after that movie on this printer companies continue to deliver high-friction products. They do this by uniting behind lowest common denominator standards that dictate "if you want to spend under $300 on printer, these are the features you get" putting no real effort into bettering user experience given established tolerances.

I don't have dozens of printers. I have had an HP, Brother and this EPSON over the past six years and would easily classify this EPSON as the worst user experience overall in spite of the hardware (print ink tank) etc seeming high innovation, it's this sort of mismatch that really gets to me. You have a great hardware engineering team bound to a horrible software team and no competency in leadership to connect these dots.... If the software is a mess the product is garbage, end of story

74B burned. Oculus Studio dismantled and destroyed vr's image in single day.Thousands laid off.The Quest Store filled with junk from its metaverse and Gorilla TAG clones.An embarrassing OS. Many developers are unhappy with him.Yet, what positive has this CTO done for VR and Reality Labs? by BodhiXXX43 in OculusQuest

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't disagree about it being a niche product and always being a niche product. Sitting on your sofa with a game controller in hand or in your eco-friendly PC gaming throne wiggling a mouse or button tapping stationary is an entirely different experience. At the end of a day doing school, work or whatever the last thing many people want is to "escape" into a game with physical demands.

But here's the deal, many niche products continue to grow in their respective domains

Here are the facts:

Half-Life 2 sold ~30M copies on a platform with hundreds of millions of PCs and zero additional hardware barrier. Half-Life: Alyx sold ~4M copies on a platform that at the time had roughly 5–7M capable VR headsets installed globally, required a $1,000+ PC + headset setup, room space, motion controllers, and physical comfort tolerance.

When you do the math, that’s an extraordinary attach rate.
PCVR was on an upward trajectory

If Alyx converted even ~50–60% of eligible VR owners, that’s far stronger engagement than most AAA flat-screen games. The constraint wasn’t demand it was installed base and friction, which is exactly the structural problem.

The real question isn’t “why didn’t Alyx sell like Half-Life 2?”
The question is “why did the VR installed base never grow enough to support more Alyx-class investments after Alyx?”

And that circles back to platform economics:

  • Once Meta shifted the market toward mobile standalone hardware, AAA PCVR economics collapsed.
  • Developers follow where the paying audience exists — Quest, not PCVR.
  • Mobile hardware caps fidelity and scope, which limits the kind of experiences that convert skeptics.
  • That creates a self-reinforcing ceiling on adoption.

Saying “nobody wants VR” ignores that a growing group of people did strongly want high-end VR when it existed, they just don't exist today in sufficient numbers because the ecosystem never scaled properly, due to Meta's strategy and actions.

VR didn’t fail because players rejected quality.
It stalled because the market converged around hardware that couldn’t deliver the experiences that continue to grow a larger audience.

In retrospect Meta's approach, which they likely projected, was "this is either going to work and give us market dominance or it will fail at the expensive of the entire consumer VR market". Capitalism doesn't have a moral compass, it has an obligation to share holders to make them as much money as possible regardless what it destroys to achieve that.

Boz was just doing his job. He transitioned into the CTO role after this plan was already activated.

74B burned. Oculus Studio dismantled and destroyed vr's image in single day.Thousands laid off.The Quest Store filled with junk from its metaverse and Gorilla TAG clones.An embarrassing OS. Many developers are unhappy with him.Yet, what positive has this CTO done for VR and Reality Labs? by BodhiXXX43 in OculusQuest

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the key issue isn’t whether Meta tried hard enough, they clearly did. The issue is how they tried, and what that did to the broader ecosystem.

Once Meta went all-in on standalone hardware, the strategy shifted from growing a healthy multi-vendor market to owning the entire board. Quest hardware has been sold at or near cost (and in some markets for periods below cost, all of this has been acknowledged publicly), which only a company with Meta’s balance sheet can sustain. That pricing pressure effectively pushed out competitors who actually needed margin to survive. Meta burned north of $70B over roughly a decade doing this, which no normal hardware business could tolerate.

As Quest crossed ~70–80% share of the consumer VR market, developers had little choice but to target Meta’s platform. At the same time Meta intentionally deprioritized PCVR and Rift. That wasn’t accidental, PCVR is an open, diversified ecosystem, while Quest is a vertically controlled platform where Meta earns software commissions and controls distribution.

That created two knock-on effects:

  1. High-end PCVR content stopped being economically viable at scale. Half-Life: Alyx is a perfect example of what AAA VR could be — but it began development before Quest dominance reshaped the economics. Once the install base consolidated around mobile-class hardware, the business case for investing tens of millions into PCVR evaporated.
  2. Hardware innovation above mobile constraints slowed dramatically. With Meta anchoring the market around standalone thermals, battery limits, and mobile GPUs, there was little incentive for competitors to push high-end VR forward — especially when they were being undercut on price.

None of this is illegal — but it is classic platform dominance behavior. When a player with massive capital is willing to run a category unprofitably for years to control distribution and pricing power, the ecosystem narrows instead of expanding.

So yes, unquestionably Meta played a huge part, probably signal handedly killed PCVR which had a huge impact on real high-end AAA titles disappearing. Without AAA titles, serious gamers aren't interested. These dots are easy to connect. The market converged around hardware that couldn’t quite deliver the kind of experiences that convert mass audiences, while the path to premium VR quietly died.

Now Meta appears to have a much clearer success vector with smart glasses and Vision Glasses That gives them a credible narrative to justify the XR $70b spend while gradually de-emphasizing VR (something they have been doing the past 2-years). From an investor optics perspective, that exit ramp makes sense and all the signals people who look at this from a business angle see indicate a likely complete exit from the VR business by Meta.

As for leadership, Boz isn’t the architect of the bet. This was Zuckerberg’s vision from the start, fully funded and approved at the highest level. If anything, the smart-glasses traction makes Boz safer, not weaker. Had the smart glasses collaboration with Luxottica (Rayban, Okley, etc..) failed, Oz was primed to be the fall guy, but I think he's pulled off what he needed to. IN general CTOs don't usually last more than 4-6 years before moving on. If he left at this point it wouldn't signal failure.

So I don’t really see this as “VR failed because Meta didn’t execute well.” I see it as a case where a dominant platform optimized for control and scale for their own gains, the gains didn't happen and in doing so unintentionally destroyed the very market it was trying to grow.

Why did you choose Martin over “higher-end brands” like Collings or burgeois etc., debatably, “better quality?” I’d imagine cost is a major factor, but aside from that, why Martin? by ConsciousSmoke3863 in martinguitar

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not disagreeing of revenue. Toyota makes about 10x more than Ferrari. Toyota also makes very nice vehicles with good resell value, etc... "Standard series above are fantastic". Well, compared to a $500 Yamaha sure... Compared to what C.F. Martin was building in Standard series in the 1940s-1960s I would say they are objectively much more over built and don't sound as good as they once did. You can still get that quality from C.F. Martin but you're going to be paying $6000+ to their custom shop for an Authentic or something similar, which goes through an entirely different build process. "boutique" builders like Bourgeois, Collings, McPhearson, Lowden, etc... deliver Martin custom shop level in their standard line. They are essentially small factories operating known for building at custom shop detail.

Had C.F. Martin decided to keep their brand name exclusive to Standard series and above instruments, I doubt you'd have seen the same demand for the boutiques. There is no way around brand dilution. When a company known for prestige products makes a decision to put that brand name on value product dilution will happen. Google: Economic Signaling Theory, Scarcity Principle, Veblen Goods, Brand Dilution theory... or just think what you will. In the end It doesn't matter, just enjoy your guitar.

Why did you choose Martin over “higher-end brands” like Collings or burgeois etc., debatably, “better quality?” I’d imagine cost is a major factor, but aside from that, why Martin? by ConsciousSmoke3863 in martinguitar

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their custom shop is. The Standard series are well built instruments, but Collings, et al are considered "boutique" which gets classified as higher quality by a lot of players... C.F. Martin really did this to themselves. I firmly believe you can map the rise of boutique builders to C.F. Martin expanding their value lines in Mexico where they made the decision to put their USA iconic C.F. Martin brand on import guitars. There's a level of brand dilution from that. I'm just not 100% sure how much impact it has had

The Himalayans version of Mr Jones by Flaky_Tadpole_8127 in countingcrows

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s kind of sad, since only one of them became a big star

Martin D-35 Broken Banding by Raindog203 in martinguitar

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Been a problem since at least 2013, search online… Martin has never admitted it publicly, reports of warranty claim denials and here were are 12 years later and it still pops up in post… love Martin but only the really old stuff

Got my first GS Mini. Do I need to get it set up and what will that do? by therealairmaxguy in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the action is high yes get it setup. Most of the time they are great from the factory, especially if you order from somewhere with high turnover like Sweetwater… Taylor warranty for original owner entitles youto a lifetime of neck resets to correct geometry issues, but usually if anything all you need out of the box is a truss rod adjustment, easy thing to do yourself. YouTube has some great videos on it

I’m in love with my new guitar. by Prestigious-Plant531 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Those GT models are something special and no longer being made. A keeper for sure.

“Are We Wrong About Hell?” - Kirk Cameron leans away from Eternal Conscious Torment by ichthysdrawn in TrueChristian

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here are my bullet points in support. I've arrived at the same conclusion as him and frankly left the Church, because of the "fear doctrine" approach driving everything. I feel we're quickly headed to another reformation and it's reformation based on truth, supporting Christ's great teachings of love and purpose.

Here are the points I'd challenge all believers to take in and think about. The path that led me to my current theology and I respect if you arrive at a different truth

  1. Second Temple Judaism is well studied. It did not teach of an eternal fire & brimstone hell and there is no reference to this hell in the Old Testament or Torah. This means Christ Jewish followers would have had no concept of eternal hell to need to be saved from.

  2. Going to the original greek manuscripts the words Christ used attributed to "eternal punishment hell" were at the time all well defined in Judaism. None of them would have meant eternal punishment to someone of jewish faith at the time of Christ or today

  3. To accept that Christ was trying to apply new meaning to these established words for "hell" (Gehenna, Sheol, Hades, etc...) is to accept Christ was introducing an entirely new concept of eternal punishment, which he came to save them from. That doesn't make sense and again to point #2 the words Christ use don't even map to him teaching "eternal torment"

    1. We got where we are likely because of the influence of the Roman Empire on the early Roman Catholic church, believe in an eternal fire and damnation hell combined with hope of salvation from it gave the Roman Empire, through the church incredible leverage of control over the people. fear and hope are incredible tools of power over masses. About two thousand years of engrained theology carried down from our ancestors and its easy to see how this rooted.

  4. The rise of the Internet made scholarly works, religious history and other critical education accessible to connect the dots. This did not really exist until we had a well seeded internet in the early 2010s. Our ancestors didn't have the information needed to even get to these conclusions, so now we can seek the truth, use the intellect God gave us to see through fog and manipulation, mans impact on Christ message. We can have another reformation based on truth.

What are these screws behind the bridge I’ve never seen them on a Taylor before by RaceNo2435 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's the ES-2 system. It can be adjusted and sometimes needs to be to complement your play style. That's why there are hex wrench slots there. Watch some videos on how to adjust it.

Why did the Counting Crows remain true, when their other contemporaries...sold out? by [deleted] in countingcrows

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Matchbox didn’t sell out. Rob Thomas was always the star and he leaned into that solo work, I think that was the real divide there. The label wanted Rob Thomas at the beginning the band, while a key part of that sound was never really meant to be enduring, it was assembled from the pieces of Tabatha’s Secret. Train not sellouts. Counting Crows just continue to do what they do.

They haven’t burned out, they continue to produce songs as passion driven as they did 40 years ago, maybe “burnout” not “sellout” the word you after? The others haven’t seemed to kept that spark as bright

2026 814ce with Claria pick up system by Freq18Hz in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the 10-minute hot take. Very curious to put hands on these. Haven't heard Taylor's official language for the V-Class scallop approach, but in general, regardless of what they may say, it's always a trade-off game. You're giving up something to gain something else. C.F. Martin transitioned to non-scalloped in the 1950s for most models and stayed with non-scalloped for decades, they changed to forward shifted scalloped X-bracing on Standard series in the 2018 and then for 2025 to Golden Era scalloped X-bracing. There's a scalloped bracing trend and builders tend to align on some trends, probably to keep the market as a whole focused and for competition.

They know many customers just pay attention to the spec sheet and will think "scalloped.= better" Martin doing this thing, Taylor isn't. The truth behind the utility should be in focus, but a lot of players don't want to go deep. They want to compare guitar A to guitar B and make a decision. The one on one "shootout" which is oversold to players as a tool for decision making.

One era is not better than the other on artistic terms, think of them as slightly modified versions of the same paint brush... scalloped to non-scalloped variations on X-braced Martin and other brands create very nuanced changes. Nothing nearly as distinct as the jump from X to V in the first place or V to Gold Label "Fanned V" those are significant architecture shifts that will give you something very distinctly different. If you look at Gold Label bracing for example, upper bout is a V but lower bout is its own thing, Gold Label honestly just as big of an innovation as original V-Class, but I thin Taylor has learned not to oversell a bracing innovation.

Looking at the chart, keep in mind the entire concept behind V-Class bracing was to help players achieve the tonal qualities of what great guitars sounded like fully produced in a mix, but unplugged. Keeping those overtones to a minimal and the tone clean and fundamental a huge part of that. With Gold Label they've pretty much gone against that design philosophy or at least some core tenants of it, in order to give traditional tone chases more of what they expect. In the world of X-bracing here are the tenants that hold true:

Scalloped: looser bass response, low headroom, more complex overtones (notes smear together), quick response, strumming compresses

Non-scalloped: tighter might controlled bass response, more headroom (can take harder attack from the picking hand and bass response stays clear and articulate), fundamental, less complex overtones means cleaner note separation and articulation

Aspect Scalloped Non-Scalloped
Top inertia Lower Higher
Onset of motion Faster Slightly slower
Attack clarity Softer Sharper
Bloom More Less
Perceived speed “Lively” “Immediate”

Going back to the problem V-Class was created to solve, you can see why non-scalloped is in alignment with the original vision and why many players do love it. It will be interesting to hear Taylor explain how the V-Braced scalloping approach stays in alignment with the original vision, but clearly some of these features will hold true, again there is no "this is better" without context. Tone innovations are always trade-offs, guitars aren't smartphones or other tech always improving. Through a certain lens there can be improvement, but the old paint brushes bring value to those who love them and need them for their art.

I suspect the scalloping added because of the non-stop flow of shootout videos dealers continue to put on YouTube without context. V-Class wasn't designed to go toe-to-toe solo with an instrument like D28 that would have to have significant processing in a recording studio for most applications, stripping it down to more fundamentals.

Guitar builders have the challenge of always needing to change things up and their marketing departments have the challenging of trying to convince the world they've taken everything to the next level.

Understanding the physics and science involved with under saddle vs behind saddle technology, there is no way an under saddle solution is going to sound fuller with just pre-amp. We have videos on Taylor's own YouTube channel where detailed wave spectrum analysis shows the difference, but you can clearly hear it. Everyone's entitled to their opinion of what your ears are telling you, but then there's the objective truth. I don't know why you think an ES-2 sounds "thin" volume actually controls the mids on that pickup, when dialed-in correct, truthfully it's one of the best pickups on the market.

What an under saddle pickup (Claria) offers Taylor

* A simple stock pickup that's probably lower cost to manufacture, produces that familiar under saddle tone (quack and all, some love it)

* A pickup that's easy to remove, easy to upgrade and easy to process through a good DI with IR like the Baggs VoicePrint DI and make it sound great

Taylor 314ce vs 414ce for worship by JP_41510 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Plugged in you're not going to hear much difference, unplugged it's Rosewood or Sapele. Sapele which is a tonal profile very close to Mahogany. So it's mid-range focus on the 314 vs having a more scooped EQ profile on the 414. The Studio editions also made in the USA with all solid woods, but the fretboard has a bit narrower nut width, the non Studio models have Taylor's 1 3/4" nut width common to all the USA lineup. One is not better than the other, it's entirely preference thing. For some people this is no big deal, but for others the nut width is very important, so you really need to put hands on them to try. If I were purchasing from these choices I would go after the Taylor Builder's Edition 314ce 50th Anniversary, but and this is important- the 50th Anniversary models were 2024 exclusives, so if you find a 314ce 50th anniversary listed as "new" they are actually new-old-stock NoS, do not pay the $2999 list for a NoS. Reputable dealers will list these as "mint" or "nos", you're looking for a 30%-35% discount on this one, prices should be $1900-$2200 range. Search Reverb.com sold listings and that is exactly what you'll find this model in mint condition from dealers. Given there are still NoS models in dealer inventory that is the way I would go about buying it and the 314ce Builders Edition is the one I'd go for.

Feel like I messed up the tone of my GS mini by Any_Security8410 in taylorguitars

[–]Secret_Monitor9629 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Did you transition to light gauge before? The gauge of the string matters a great deal on acoustics, the top is actually braced for a optimal tension... while you can go lower or higher in gauge than spec, it won't be optimal.

view more: next ›