Martin vs Tacoma ABGs

mikeoso

mikeoso

Acoustic Curmudgeon
Feb 14, 2014
4,296
33,795
5,631
eastern Iowa
www.iowaparrotrescue.org
#1
Ok, so...been hearing forever about how massive the sound from a Tacoma Thunderchief is, and how sad they're out of production, and how nothing currently made except some boutiques can stack up. I've been playing a Martin B1e and a custom Mota (much like an Earthwood). The B1e is out of production but very similar in size and build to what Martin is currently building. Saw a Tacoma going for reasonable (under a thou) money on Reverb, decided to try it.

The Tacoma arrived today, and I A-Bed it against my others. All three are strung with tapewounds...the Martin and the Tacoma both with Roto Tru-Bass 88s. The Tacoma is 1.5 inches wider than the Martin, other dimensions about the same. Both are 34"scale. Result? Kinda meh. I didn't expect the Tacoma to be abld to run with my big dog, and it didn't. The Mota is 19 wide 6 deep, and 25 long in the body...uses a 4/4 cello gigbag. I did think the Tacoma ought to be significantly louder than the Martin, given the hype...but nope. Really about the same levels. Actually had less oomph on the E string than the Martin.

I thought the Tacoma had maybe a little deeper tone than the Martin through my Rumble...but we all know that you can make ANY abg sound good with electronics. I have no idea what pup is in this Tac...it's an aftermarket UST with no trapdoor.

So, my conclusion...if you want decent unplugged volume and quality amped sound, don't worry about chasing a used Thunderchief that may or may not be structurally sound. Find yourself a recent Martin. It might not look as impressive, but it can play in any league. Anyone need a Tacoma?
 
#2
mikeoso said:
Ok, so...been hearing forever about how massive the sound from a Tacoma Thunderchief is, and how sad they're out of production, and how nothing currently made except some boutiques can stack up. I've been playing a Martin B1e and a custom Mota (much like an Earthwood). The B1e is out of production but very similar in size and build to what Martin is currently building. Saw a Tacoma going for reasonable (under a thou) money on Reverb, decided to try it.

The Tacoma arrived today, and I A-Bed it against my others. All three are strung with tapewounds...the Martin and the Tacoma both with Roto Tru-Bass 88s. The Tacoma is 1.5 inches wider than the Martin, other dimensions about the same. Both are 34"scale. Result? Kinda meh. I didn't expect the Tacoma to be abld to run with my big dog, and it didn't. The Mota is 19 wide 6 deep, and 25 long in the body...uses a 4/4 cello gigbag. I did think the Tacoma ought to be significantly louder than the Martin, given the hype...but nope. Really about the same levels. Actually had less oomph on the E string than the Martin.

I thought the Tacoma had maybe a little deeper tone than the Martin through my Rumble...but we all know that you can make ANY abg sound good with electronics. I have no idea what pup is in this Tac...it's an aftermarket UST with no trapdoor.

So, my conclusion...if you want decent unplugged volume and quality amped sound, don't worry about chasing a used Thunderchief that may or may not be structurally sound. Find yourself a recent Martin. It might not look as impressive, but it can play in any league. Anyone need a Tacoma?
Click to expand...
The Martin B1 definitely "punches above its weight class" in terms of acoustic volume. I haven't directly A|B'ed mine with my Thunderchief, maybe this weekend.

I will say the Emerald Balor easily kicks both their butts and may even have the Earthwood in overall volume - definitely does on the low E, and the low B is of course just beyond what the Earthwood can reach. All in all, a winner!
 
#3
bholder said:
The Martin B1 definitely "punches above its weight class" in terms of acoustic volume. I haven't directly A|B'ed mine with my Thunderchief, maybe this weekend.

I will say the Emerald Balor easily kicks both their butts and may even have the Earthwood in overall volume - definitely does on the low E, and the low B is of course just beyond what the Earthwood can reach. All in all, a winner!
Click to expand...

I was guessing you'd say that. So, what do we do with these Tacomas?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bholder
#4
mikeoso said:
I was guessing you'd say that. So, what do we do with these Tacomas?
Click to expand...
Mine will stick around a while longer, at least until I can do a full reasonably fair comparison rundown like I keep threatening. :) I'm sure they'll sell on the classifieds here though.
 
#7
bholder said:
The Martin B1 definitely "punches above its weight class" in terms of acoustic volume. I haven't directly A|B'ed mine with my Thunderchief, maybe this weekend.

I will say the Emerald Balor easily kicks both their butts and may even have the Earthwood in overall volume - definitely does on the low E, and the low B is of course just beyond what the Earthwood can reach. All in all, a winner!
Click to expand...

Maybe things have changed since 2002 when many seemed to prefer the Thunderchief: Is the Martin B-1 Acoustic Bass worth it?

I own a Thunderchief and plan to keep it. I am sure the Martin B1 is quite nice as well. Is it relevant that the Martin was originally a bit more expensive than the Tacoma?

If I were looking for a new instrument I would want to check out the Breedlove Solo Jumbo for my price range.
 
#8
Wasnex said:
Maybe things have changed since 2002 when many seemed to prefer the Thunderchief: Is the Martin B-1 Acoustic Bass worth it?

I own a Thunderchief and plan to keep it. I am sure the Martin B1 is quite nice as well. Is it relevant that the Martin was originally a bit more expensive than the Tacoma?

If I were looking for a new instrument I would want to check out the Breedlove Solo Jumbo for my price range.
Click to expand...
Just reporting what I think I hear. My main point was that the Tacomas are hard to find, priced higher than when they wete new, and often flawed, while a recent Martin in good shape is easy to find and doesn't cost much more than an older Tac. If the sound is equivalent, the Martin becomes a good option. I've been around here long enough to know that Tacs are coveted, and Martins seldom mentioned...except by bholder and me.
 
#9
mikeoso said:
Just reporting what I think I hear. My main point was that the Tacomas are hard to find, priced higher than when they wete new, and often flawed, while a recent Martin in good shape is easy to find and doesn't cost much more than an older Tac. If the sound is equivalent, the Martin becomes a good option. I've been around here long enough to know that Tacs are coveted, and Martins seldom mentioned...except by bholder and me.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't mean to attack or criticize. Surely your opinion has merit and holds value.

I think some of the mystique with Tacoma is related to the cost value comparison made when the instrument was new. Perhaps it's wise to be aware of this so you understand why the instrument was originally coveted. My intent was to provide some historical perspective.

It's quite possible the Martin is a better value on today's market, but I suspect some players will still prefer the Tacoma, for whatever reason. I will reserve judgment as I haven't played both. I am sure the Martin is a wonderful instrument based upon your word.
 
#10
I've owned both the Thunderchief and the Martin (all mahogany w/cutaway). The Tacoma was def the loudest of any I tried at that time (2003?) and was suitable for unplugged jamming with others. The Martin was not as loud acoustically, but far more elegant; better ergonomics, richer sound, overall prettier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wasnex
#11
In my experience the Tacoma basses are louder and have significantly more low end due to the offset sound hole and ladder bracing. They're also harder to amplify as they feed back very easily.

Each bass is an individual, your Tacoma could just be a quiet one or your Martin could be loud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back