rough stratabond neck on a Martin

[Arthur Sweeney]

Hello, I own a Martin Custom X Series acoustic guitar, model DXJ,
which is basically the same as a DXM.

It has a stratabond neck, and the back of it is a bit rough.

Can I simply sand it down with fine sandpaper, then finish

it off with the special lemon oil that I use for the fretboard?

 

Also, the sound of the guitar seems a bit muffled. Is that

because the whole body is made out of HPL (high-pressure laminate)?

 

Thank you for all your advice,

-Arthur

 

[Arthur Sweeney]

anybody want to buy a like-new Martin for 300 bucks?!
(cash, not including shipping)

[Kerry Krishna]

Arthur, please reconsider. None of us wanted to rain on your parade. I'm sure that this is a great guitar for a learner, and you already said that that is what you are.  That being said, maybe the guitar just needs a new set of strings. Please don't take what was said here against Martin brand as being against your guitar. I certainly wasnt meant that way. Most of us had super cheep guitars to start off with. I played a $125.00 Fender laminate plywood guitar for years and years before I stepped up to a 300 buck Ibanez. Cheep guitars get people playing! Go get some sandpaper, do what Frank said in his post, and forget everything else you read here.

[Ned Knepp]

I agree with Kerry. Play the guitar you have. If you really want to get another, take your time and shop around until you get a handle on what you want but play your Martin in the mean time. If you are new to playing, it's better to keep playing even if the guitar isn't completely to your liking. If you're like a lot of us, you will own several guitars in your lifetime.

 

The issues that have been addressed in this thread have more to do with the Martin company and Martin name as well as repair issues with the material involved than it actually has to do with the fitness of the instrument as a player. I agree with a lot of the ideas here that there are other brands that might offer different construction materials for the same price points but you already have the guitar now. It might be more in your interest to hold on for a while longer and then trade up to something a bit more up scale for your next guitar.  You never know you might want to keep the Martin for use in less than optimum environments and buy something a bit nicer for more protected playing.

 

Ned 

[charley erck]

This is a great forum! Poor Arthur has inadvertantly set aff a lot of airing of feelings, though the discussion veered from his immediate question. And then returned.  

I think it,s interesting how we get to feeling about guitar makers. Someitmes it sounds like we think they are not businesses, but public entities with some sort of social responsibilities.Martin is ,of course , unique in their history in the guitar and it's developement ,use by our deeply important music hreoes,icons, etc. They are ,too,a business.  I had a laugh once when a resophonic parts supplier I was talking to was decrying the buying of Dobro by Gibson. "Gibson's got no business owning Dobro!"  Hey they are businesses!

 

Fun, though! 

[Ian Barker]

Whilst totally agreeing the tonal superiority of solid-wood guitars, let's not overlook some of the advantages of laminate - especially when you live somewhere with less than ideal temp and RH.  Over here (Dubai) one of the biggest dealers simply refuses to sell solid wood acoustics because they know how much trouble they are, because they hate the heat, the low RH and the seasonal changes.  I have several, and trust me, I'll not buy another till I retire to somewhere in Europe with a sensible climate.  My go-to guitar is a $100 Japanese laminate-top which sounds consistently good, and for $10 I can put a new set of strings which make it sound great.  My $2000 hand-built doesn't get played that much.

My point?  Keep the guitar, even if you graduate to something better you'll always want something you can throw in the car and play round the campfire without having to be too precious about.  And spend the $10 on strings!

[Doug T]

Arthur, certainly keep the guitar, learn on it, but be aware that there is a level (and not that much further up in price point) that will improve your ability to improve, you will gain enjoyment from, and not charge you an extra 30 - 40% for a name.  A local dealer who was selling the low-end Martins and Gibsons stopped entirely and carries a few "no-name" beginning instruments, and Johnson, which for the money, I think sound a hell of a lot better (and that's to my ear, subjective...).  Take as many chances as you can to hear and play other instruments. Just understand that these instruments really are not offering or trying to offer what a well made Martin (or any other guitar for that matter) does.  That said, Charley, though they are trying to make money and produce an instrument that anyone can afford, I hear a lot of learners of many instruments have multiple complaints about their instruments, and these "beginner" instruments can hinder more than help.  These cheap instruments are often setup poorly, lose tune quickly, and generally don't do any favors for the beginner, while for another couple hundred bucks, one can at least get an instrument that will be easy for beginner players to progress on.  Among the instruments I play is French horn, which there are so many cheap instruments that are "shiny" and have detachable bells (which does not effect tone, but many pro's have so is perceived as better) that basically play like garden hose (and don't mention Dennis Brain, he was a freak of nature and a genius) and are ruining brass playing for kids, that instrument makers should actually be educating the public on what a good instrument is.  Parents are sucked in by names and pretty, rather than playable and tone-full.  Their responsibility is primarily to furthering music, the no favor is being done by creating an instrument which is essentially a way to pad your pocketbook at the expense of Music.  I don't care if you make money and offer an instrument that provides tone, feel, and ease-of-play, but there's so much junk out there that the public assumes is all they'll ever need, degrades the industry as a whole.  Ian, I'd actually rather see a Arabic or Middle-Eastern company come up with an answer appropriate to the weather conditions there and built in those conditions.  The guitar is of North African descent anyway, and there are tons of amazing instruments and makers out there.  Back to Arthur, when/if you decide to upgrade, please explore locally, work with the local music store, try multiple individual guitars of the same model of big makers, try your small builder if you can, and listen critically.  There is a great store I get to a few times a year to honk on the used horns and trumpets, which has been in business almost a century and requires its staff to be musically trained and encourages comment.  Last time I was there, there were no practice rooms available, so I was playing in the brass storage room.  Upon walking out, two sales associates who did not know what I was playing agreed I sounded best on the second and last horn I was playing.  It was the cheapest, most beat-up, piece of early 20th Century cr@) you have ever seen, a compensating horn, not full double, and was btw the way the one I had felt best about.  If I purchased it, they'd be making about 40 bucks, where as all the other instruments were well over $3000.  That honest, love of getting the best instrument for the player, not the store, or the company, or the audience, is what is most important.  Just my 2 cents.

[Arthur Sweeney]

Hi, just a note on this,
I recently played my Martin,
then played my friend's older Yamaha FG-435A,
which I believe has a solid top, and you know what?
my Martin sounded better! Both guitars had new
strings on them, same gauge too, so even playing field,
and my 'fake' 'plastic' Martin sounded much better.
So, I think I'll be keeping the Martin after all.

[Kerry Krishna]

I am so glad you reconsidered. Thanks for listening my friend.

[Eric Steven Johansen]

I must say this is a lively discussion. As well as repair and building, I've spent many years buying and selling used and vintage guitars and it is my honest opinion that there is someone for every instrument. We all see and hear things differently (thank god) and one mans trash is another mans treasure. I have owned guitars I considered complete dogs, no insult meant for the four legged variety, that shined only when they were introduced to the right person.

One other point I think may be pertinent. Trees are losing their battle for space on earth and if we hope to carry the guitar firmly into the future it will be essential we find sonically viable alternatives to our beloved wood. The path to that future will be blazed by attempts, both good and bad, by established luthiers, to build those guitars of plastic, carbon, processed plant fiber or ????????? Best wishes to them all.

 

[Pierre-Antoine Roiron]

Good news : you made up your mind using your ears, that's a good musician's way to proceed. Have fun!

[Mike Frantz]

My two cents: I understand every side of this question, I've had similar feelings about Ovations and Rainsongs - never played either one, but the plastic thing put me off.

 

But a few years ago I was given a DXM as a retirement present. As it happened, I had a Larrivee D-3 at the time which I liked...they are roughly the same price and I was worried about having two very similar guitars, and I couldn't see selling the gift. What to do? Well, I liked the Martin much better and that settled it.

 

The Martin sounds fine, is (of course) solid as a rock, does meet Martin standards of workmanship...and is a good deal. And I like the way it looks.

 

Something else...I've got two other acoustics, a beloved 00-21 I've had for 40 years and a recent splurge on a handmade OM. If you're going to have several guitars, it's nice that there are economical choices-

 

[Eric Steven Johansen]

Second this opinion. I've owned some great ones that were purchased cheap.