Small Body Acoustic Guitar Battle | Martin 00-18 versus Gibson L-00
Martin and Gibson are the two originators in steel string flat top guitar design and their guitar designs have continued to stand the test of time. If you are wanting a vintage style, small body acoustic guitar look no further. These 00 sized bodies with spruce and mahogany construction have a fantastic warmth and snap to them that is a joy to play. Each has its own unique feel and sound that reveals the nuanced design architecture of each builder.
Shop the Martin 00-18: https://bit.ly/44F7EUZ
Shop the Gibson L-00: https://bit.ly/3sUC8os
0:00 Intro
1:16 Specs
5:22 Demo
13:37 Final Thoughts
SHOP GUITARS: bit.ly/3jKZjx1
CHECK OUT OUR PODCAST, the Fretboard Confessional!
Listen on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4UIwHpSgyer6fWjLCGZYXk?si=11842dccc52e4c2d
Listen on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-fretboard-confessional/id1610237545
Listen on Audible: https://www.audible.com/pd/The-Fretboard-Confessional-Podcast/B09XH1C27X
Shop Guitars – https://www.alamomusic.com/guitars/
Guitar Buyers Guide → http://bit.ly/2kssXsR
Interested in a different guitar? Talk to an expert here → http://bit.ly/findmyguitar
__________________________________________________________________
YouTube: Pianos and Keyboards – http://bit.ly/YTpianos
♪ Contact us: https://www.alamomusic.com/contact
♩ Call toll-free: (844)251-1922
♬ Connect:
Instagram → https://www.instagram.com/alamomusic
#Small #Body #Acoustic #Guitar #Battle #Martin #Gibson #L00
Originally posted by UCIB3DqQuXKmM7DzEMppafDA at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aHS0DN-yG4
Martin is typically warm and gibson has more clarity and brightness similar to taylor profile
Gibson L-00 has the best sound and balance here. The Martin has a nice sound but it’s a little too bubbly for my ear.
I wanted to prefer the Gibson bc I love the look of the smaller waist, but I think I prefer the sound of the Martin. Still love my Himmingbird and prefer it over my partner’s D18 though!❤
Since this video, acquired both. Love them both. Thanks for this video.????????????
Your ears are defective. What I heard was the Martin more pleasing with far superior musicality.
The Martin sounded like a dreadnought baby. The Gibson sounded more mature and had its own voice.
This demo tells me the L00 has those awful high-tension Gibson strings, no flexibility, rough on the fingers, and just nasty. The Martin has better Martin strings, makes it easier to play. In watching the demo one can see that our host was a lot more comfy with the Martin than the Gibson. BTW, the Gibson's tuners are Golden Age brand, available at StewMac, The stiffer strings make tuning more difficult. I have a lot of guitars, and my 1957 J-200 that I bought a couple of years ago was shipped with those nasty, stiff, high tenson Gibson strings. The tuners were a pain until I changed the strings and then suddenly, they began working perfectly fine.
The gibson seems to be more focused, but the martin seems to be more mellow and fuller, however the gibson is way better in the looks category. Like the sound of both, but for different jobs.
MArtin sounds like a toy guitar compared to the Gibson
Martins always sound just a bit muffled to me.
It seems the Mike being used and the speakers I’m listening with give a false representation of the guitars true sonic characteristics. Acoustic guitars are just that and as soon as they are miked with a pickup and or a Mike then reproduced through speakers are they not just electric guitars at that point? A video tells me nothing about the ways the guitars actually sound. Sorry, there is only one way to experience an acoustic guitars, and that is live in a room without any sound reinforcement, Mike or the sound emitting from a speaker. Just my 2 cents….
Great review, thank you. I'm looking for a new smaller body aqustic and the Gibson wins for me.
Personally, I am a Gibson fan on this one.
My 1959 Gibson lg-00 has a bias towards the granddaughter Gibby. I recently got the '59 setup and the age difference is not apparent. Martin- meh.
Martin all day and I’m a Gibson guy ????
I'm a Gibson guy, but I'd like two of each. They sound absolutely beautiful. Nice playing!
Gibson is bassier but not as articulated as the Martin. To my ears, Martin
Agreed. The Gibson was more articulate. I own both Martin and Gibsons and I am leaning more toward Gibson ……
Nothing else sounds like a Martin and this Martin has it. The Gibson shines with this style of fingerpicking with its clarity and dynamics. Current L-00 have wonderful mini-Grover Rotomatics instead of those awful tuners you had here.
I’d go Martin here, all day. That Gibson is a dream guitar as well, and is def the sexier-looking of the two, but I found the 00-18 to have a much richer sound, while also showing that trademark piano-bell ring. I agree the L-00 was a bit brighter, but also sounded almost brittle next to that Martin.
I dare you to send me that L-00 to change my mind, though. ????
Martin sounds better out of these 2 ????????????????????????
Great demo! They both sound beautiful! I have a 00-18 and love it, it’s a good all around guitar, meaning it can handle most of what you throw at it very well. I love that L-00 sound too and would love to own one. To my ears, the L-00 doesn’t do as well with a pick, but really excels at fingerstyle, it sounds woody and very well balanced. If I was only playing fingerstyle, I would take the L-00 hands down, but I play with a pick and fingerstyle both so I need something that can handle both styles, which the 00-18 does a little better job at imo.
I thought they were both great. But I felt like the Martin was a notch better for my ears. I think I like the warmer tone of the Martin rather than the brighter tone of the Gibson. I really think it just depends on a persons ear and what they gravitate towards in sound.
martin is more clear and crispy but the gibson is more open&woody sounding. probably better for blues but both are great! hard to choose ????♂️
Martin has a bone nut and saddle
Gibson has a pick up.
I own both and they’re both awesome and easy to play
Martin is more versatile. Strumed Gibson sounds WAY too compressed like some cheap guitar to my ears…????. But one thing i learned, you can't get a good idea of the sound produced by an acoustic guitar until you feel it resonate in your hands!
The Gibson is rich and smooth & very powerful
Combine both specs and you have a perfect 00
Less articulate was a great way to describe it. both sound great though.
My 2 year old 00 18 has binding issues, great guitar but come on Martin figure out how to resolve this issue.
I’ve got an original 1939 L-00 and a 1969 00-18. Similar differences in sound …but….the Gibson is so vastly superior to play as I have big hands and those skinny Martin necks and bad shape profile make it a chore to play, even with a similar action. And the Gibson will cut through anything, at the slight expense of bass. If I had to choose to keep only one it’d take me a nanosecond to ditch the Martin
Gibson all the way!
I’m more curious what guitar felt easier to play… didn’t fight chords or finger positions? They both sound nice ! I have had a few martins – but that Gibson has my attention
To my ears, great guitars. A little bit more L 00 for blues. And a little bit more Martin for anything else
In general, you did not play the guitars the same way, consequently it’s hard to speak of nuance. However, as I heard it, I partially agree with you. You attacked the Gibson and your gusto made it very bright and brassy (I don’t like that in an acoustic) where you softened your style considerably on the Martin which brought out a very warm and smooth tone. Which was all well and good until you got to the blues progression. I listened through that three times and usually I like that to be a slow and warm sound, but the Martin sounded muddy and despite my listening three times I could not pick up if was your playing or the guitar. From what I heard, I’d pick the Martin over the Gibson, and that’s saying something because I’m a Gibson guy, but, if I was a blues player, I’d probably pick the Gibson as that "articulation" really brought homes the blues sound. Again, not certain if it was you or the guitar bringing that out. I have almost no experience with Martin since it’s frequently one or two thousand more than a Gibson. On this case money wasn’t a factor and I’d be buying a Martin based on your demo. As a minimum I’m going to surf around and see if I can pick up the same distinctions from other players. Thanks for the demo.
I love both guitars, but every time I listen to a Gibson vs Martin comparison, I always walk away liking both, but to me the Martins have a nice bass sound, but sound a bit "muddy" to me, whereas the Gibson's always seem to articulate better, meaning I can hear all 6 strings more clearly. As I said, I always like the sound of both brands, but I always like the Gibson sound just a bit better.
The L-00 sounded better with a pick, but the 00-18 was hands-down better at fingerstyle…
I have an 0-18 and 000-15m Martins, I think the 0-18 is a better comparison to the L-00 tonaly.
Coming in late to the party… My 2 cents: Initially the L-00 was shockingly bright and articulate, but with further listening and comparing I realized I was missing the low/mid range balance. I prefer to Martin even though it was a bit weaker in the upper register. The balance and overall warmth is what moves me more.
It sounds like you’re strumming with a penny.
The Martin is more open and more overtone. It may be more versatile for fingerstyle, and the wider nut width helps The Gibson has a little more focused power, tight bass and less overtone. It has punch, even with a shorter scale. It has a flatter frequency response, more like an archtop. It is more specifically a blues guitar. I really like them both.
I just traded a Martin 00015M for a Gibby L00. To my ears, based on my side by side comparison of my two coupled with the comparison here is that Martin and Gibson have completely different tone profiles — neither one superior. The Martin(s) seem to have a smoother balance across the tonal spectrum — more of a “flat” response, while I’m hearing a hump in the midrange of the Gibson. The Gibson “seems” louder, but it also has more mid-presence, which may help to explain the crispness. It really seems to carry at about 1-3k. I prefer the shorter scale length and appreciate the string spacing on the Gibson. Mine has the closed Grovers, rather than the open vintage (which I also appreciate). Feels
Like the Martin might accompany a
Voice better, but the Gibson should cut through with other instruments. Nice comparison, sweet playing, and two really great little guitars! Thanks!
i think gibson wins on this one this time, d-18,28,35 are leagues above gibson dread this days but on this one, gibson wins by far.
Hello everybody the song he play on 9:04 on the Gibson is fantastic can somebody tell me who is the songwriter,thanks
What is the demo song from 6:23? Love it but can’t seem to find out what it is – want to learn it.
both sound great. I think I'd have to play them for month to decide
" Each has its own unique feel and sound that reveals the "nuanced design" architecture of each builder. "
Nuanced.. miles apart and it's obvious.
I own a Martin 00-18V with flamed mahogany backs and sides.
I really like the Gibson L-00 of 1930.. The new ones, no one home and grossly overpriced.
Nut width matters, even down to the 16th inch difference between 1 11/16ths and 1 3/4.
I prefer 1 13/16s and 1 7/8ths.
String spacing at the bridge matters. I prefer 2 1/4 at minimum up to 2 5/16ths and 2 3/8 ths.