I recently bought the Eastman E 10 D. It has a pretty broad tone spectrum and a huge voice. I can't believe how loud this guitar is. I play 4 sets a day, 5 days a week. We are totally acoustic meaning no mics, no electricity, no sound reinforcement at all. We typically play in front of about 30-60 people in an intimate outdoor setting with quite a few regulars, many who are musicians. When rain or cold comes we move in to a drafty 171 yr old cabin with a fireplace for heat. Not necessarily ideal conditions. I play with a 4 piece bluegrass, folk, mountain group. Aggressive salty players w/ good chops and pro instruments. The Eastman cuts through loud and proud with great tone. The commentary from the regs and fellow players are all positive. All amazed at tone and volume. I use med strings and could easily use lights and still have plenty of volume but love the tone of 13s. The feel in my hands is beautiful. Plays great. VERY happy so far. Remaining question: Will it hold up for years to come in this Ozarks environment at this rate of use? Martin does. That's proven. Time will tell with Eastman. My money's on them... literally.
The ebony fretboard and adirondack give my E10D a snap and percussiveness that is really something. Plus it has tons of power. Not the same tone as a Martin and I totally understand that quest for the real Americana tone. But the Eastmans are something. Mine is coming up to 10 years old, one of the first ones they made and it is always an adventure picking it up and playing it.
Differences r ivory nut n saddle on Martin n forward shifted bracing. Bone nut n saddle n standard bracing on the Eastman. That must be where the difference in tone comes from.
I actually own the "Eastman" I was going out to play some J-45's and after a couple this 20-something sales kid asked me to do a true blindfold test, I said go for it... as I held the first it was obviously a slope shoulder like a wanted, and sounded great thru Chords, scales, etc. the 2nd guitar, also a slope, played really well, but it wasn't as chimey, the neck was not as fast, and just sounded I speck "muddy" in tone... I went home with the "Eastman SS10" and $1400. in change ... give them a fair shake, they're badass.. ♪
I've got an Eastman AC420 ($750) and also a Huss and Dalton TDR ($4K guitar). The H&D is clearly a superior instrument, but what you get for your money from Eastman can't be beat.
Both sound very full and both are good sounding instruments. The difference I hear is in the Martin having a delay or hall like quality to the sound. For the price of the Eastman I’m amazed at how close it is to many high end guitars.
While I own two Eastmans (and a bunch of Taylors) I give the nod to the Martin on this one. But, as was intimated by an earlier poster, Eastmans are NOT cheap Chinese "knockoffs" they are extremely well built, handcrafted instruments and perform waaay beyond their price point. They are favored by many top jazz players.
The Eastman sounds a bit muddier than the Martin, also the Martin has a brighter, fatter, clearer sound. Perhaps the Eastman is tight and will loosen up with age and playing but right now the Martin is the clear winner.
To my ears, the two sound very close. The difference could be in the "vintage toner" of the top and/or the "fossilized ivory" of the Martin GE. This isn't really an "apples-to apples" comparison.
I took the sound test without looking and after I made my sound decision I found I had picked the Martin. The Martin has a more mature, complexity, and depth. The Eastman tone is less complex, not as rich. Finishes second........ I do like Eastman and for the price it beats the Martin, however, if money isn't a limitation then get the Martin.
Martin clearly sounded better to me. I like the looks of the d18 sound board better too. I don't like pale looking top plates. I would rather get a used d18 in relatively descent condition than a new pale tinny sounding Eastman.
I'm European and I'm unbiased. I love my Blueridge guitar made in China and I also love my Seagull made in La Patrie, Canada. I sold my Yamaha (JP/CH) and my Taylor (US) because I didn't like them. In this video, the Martin is much much better than the Eastman. It's not even close. This is one of the more convincing comparisons I've heard. I don't know what it says about Eastman and Martin in general, but for these two specific guitars there's no doubt.
Hahah there’s absolutely no way you could have picked which was which out in a blindfold test of this video, much less decided one is wildly better. Maybe, just maybe, in the strummed chords portion for a second you noticed a clear range difference.
I love the sound of both guitars, they are both wonderful. I own two Martins but for the difference in price the Eastman is an unbelievable value for money.
I like the Martin slightly better tone-wise. But at two times plus on the cost? And an E10 D thermo cured would bring the tone difference closer, if not matched, @ roughly $1600 for thermo cured Eastman.
Today's Eastmans are better than yesterday's. They bought Dana Bourgeois company and Dana has influenced their recent bracing/ and top grain selection. I would give this comparison a go again today. Eastman has been constantly working to improve their product. I just bought 2 that side by side were indistinguishable with Thompsons, Santa Cruz, and Collings.. The Varnish slopes are also crazy nice. Adirondack tops are more bright and piercing and don't work as well for heavy handed strummers with clearer note separation, however give someone with a lot of feel better single note clarity and volume control. I would definitely reccomend trying some Eastmans if they are in the mix. One negative on the eastman is that their Dovetail neck joints/ necks seem heavy in comparison to Martin/ Guild/ Gibson Dovetails. And the finish/ glue is definitely thicker. But they do sound amazing regardless.
From 2:01 the Eastman sounds better (better songs for an OOO than a dread, get muffled on the Martin?). From 3:00 on, the Martin is the winner without question. It really depends on what you are playing.
D18 by quite a distance for me. Trouble with modern guitars is that they are too balanced and sound quite hi-fi. Fantastic for a more modern sound if that's what you're looking for but Martins have that vintage, worked-in sound and all the strings seem to blend into each other when strumming that not many other guitars seem to have.
amazing! one of the few videos where I could hear a big difference between comparisons. Not saying I cant hear it in others but this one is BIG. Martin for crispness across all frequencies and that beautiful airy sound of notes blending when strummed. Eastman sounds muted compared to the Martin.
Despite the popular perception, there is plenty of quality which is made in China. This is not the era where an Asian "made in Japan" item was manufactured in a partially rebuilt industrial park with scrap components. China today is FULL of skilled woodworkers. Wood is a cheap resource, as is labor. That being said, Eastman is clearly a quality guitar, but Martin is a PREMIUM guitar. The designs are advanced, tonewood selection is second-to-none, and production is highly quality controlled. Even Martin's entry level instruments are top-rate. The Eastman, when compared to economical guitars of not too many years ago is AMAZING. Clearly a quality product, and worth a try. After all, instrument selection should be a PERSONAL CHOICE and a player should try as many guitars as possible before buying.
both guitars sound pretty good, but Martin sounds fuller and projects more from what i can tell, if i had a good set of headphones, i probably could hear the differences more distinctly to make specific comments
I scrolled the screen so I couldn't see which one was being played the first time, so I wouldn't be biased. My preference changed depending on what was being played. They sound much closer to each other than either does to say a Gibson or a Martin. I would be hard pressed to choose a favorite based upon what I heard here. Maybe if I played them in person I would be able to make up my mind.
Towards the end when he when just doing single strums, the Eastman atlas on my speakers sounded fuller. There was a metallic overtone to the D-18 I didn't like. Slightly brittle.
Definitely more volume and note separation from the Martin. The E10D can now be had with a thermo-cured top, E10D-TC. I have one and love the tone but that Martin D18 is calling to me. Now that Dana Bourgeois is collaborating with Eastman, it will be interesting to hear a comparison between one of those guitars and a Martin D18 to see if they get any closer to the Martin tone.
I know the Martin wins, but I still love my Eastman. It's an awesome guitar, but so is a Martin D-18!! You really won't mind playing either guitar, trust me.
I propose a blind test, like the Pepsi challenge. All the Martin love may not hold up. I hear a much brighter sound from the martin, and a deeper bass from the Eastman. Take the brand out of the equation, and I'll bet the results will be different. Martin makes great guitars, but there is little doubt once someone knows which label is on which sound....the label sways the opinion. I preferred the deeper sound of the Eastman through headphones, but no doubt they both sound good.
I dare say with the same bracing pattern, the Eastman would sound very close to the Martin. I think Eastman's approach is for a "throatier" voiced instrument. I have played a D 18 and it didn't really do much for me personally, but it certainly is a sweet sounding guitar. It's obvious the Martin is a more refined sounding instrument, it should be.
The Eastman sure moves a lot of air for the price. The craftsmen and women in that factory have plenty to be proud about. I still think that the Martin in this example has a far more balanced, refined tone... but compared to some of the $900-$1000 Martins, the Eastman is pretty respectable.
I find the Martin's sound smooth and even (so maybe good for recording) but I prefer a very actively loud and lively sounding guitar nice clear powerful low end and sparkling cut through highs. The Eastman is where I am heading. I have already decided on an Adirandack spruce top for the extra volume and thought I liked rosewood back and sides but now I am leaning hard towards mahoghany for the clarity. time to go shopping to feel and hear them!
just recently bought the E10D. it is awesome. Big sound, easy to play. Hard to describe the sound - rich, chunky, very full. Thought I wanted rosewood as well but the addy/mahogany mix is hard to beat. I'd highly recommend it for you!
I really like Eastman guitars, they are very good value for money. Of course this Martin sounds better, but its also more than twice as expensive as the Eastman.
This is tough for me. I wanted a D-18, never having played one, but felt that I couldn't justify the cost so I bought an E10D. Fantastic guitar. I went to GC a week ago and saw that they had two D-18's so I spent some time with them and didn't like them. But did I really not like them, or was I just not prepared for them. Considering that the E10D is modeled after the D-18, I expected them to feel nearly identical, but they aren't even close. The Martin is much lighter, the sound is more woody/boxy, I thought. The E10D is more what I expect an acoustic to sound like. But maybe that's because I've only ever played cheap guitars. Maybe the Martin feels and sounds closer to what higher-end guitars more traditionally feel and sound like. I recorded a 12-minute video of myself playing the Martin's. When I got home and watched it on a good sound system, I thought it sounded great. Powerful, articulate, balanced. The woodiness wasn't there. And I think maybe that woody tone may just be common with light-weight guitars. I have a classical guitar and those things are feather light and it has that woody quality too. Maybe "woody" just means "open/unrestrained". Maybe heavy woods and/or finishes stifle the tone. Maybe the woodiness I heard was the guitar singing freely. Maybe, if I had more experience with more guitars in more price ranges and familiarized myself with everything, that woody sound would reveal itself to be superior. When I told the guy working at GC that I preferred my Eastman, he said "You're used to it". And there is nothing wrong with preferring the Eastman - it IS a great guitar. And there'd be nothing wrong with loving a $100 guitar if that's what makes you happy. But I keep wondering if I prefer my Eastman because it's honestly better to my ears, or because I'm ignorant. I'm kind of thinking the latter. And maybe it's the snob in me that wants so much to believe I'm ignorant and that the Martin is better because it's a big brand name and their instruments are expensive and are the stuff of dreams. Maybe my feelings were also affected by the room those guitars are kept in. It would certainly sound different in my house. I did like how light the Martin felt, the satin finish on the neck is amazing, and the volume and balance is truly impressive. I wasn't impressed by the sustain, but I did notice that the strings were a bit old and due for replacement. I'm going to listen to my video some more and keep thinking about it. I try to keep an open mind about things. I don't like to decide that something is better only because it's what I'm familiar with. Maybe I'll try the D-18 at a different shop so I can hear how it sounds in a different room. And I'll try not to let the unfamiliar feel keep me from really listening. The Martin feeling so light gave me the feeling that it was cheap. But why? I guess, with my Eastman feeling so heavy and solid, I imagined that's a sign of superior build quality and durability. I don't know why I am ranting here. Thinking out loud. If anyone read all of this, I hope it didn't bore you too much.
By the way, I have no idea how the Martin I played feels compared to the one featured in this video. Modern D-18s are made with Sitka spruce, not Adirondack, and bone is used for the but and saddle, not ivory. And I believe the position of the bracing is different, too. So that Golden Era D-18 likely feels and sounds noticeably different from a modern D-18. SO, if anyone watches this video and thinks they want to go buy or order a D-18, I highly recommend that you go play one because, unless you specially seek out this Golden Era model, the D-18 you buy may be quite a bit different.
Final note (hopefully): I agree with anyone who said that this E10D sounds tight. It does to my ears, too. I've had mine for a couple years. Mine would presumably be a better candidate for this heavyweight shoot-out, as that Martin has already been well-played and is expressing its full capabilities. Or is that brand new? I did a brief search and can't even find a D-18 GE for sale. I found one custom shop Adirondack guitar, but with a bone nut and saddle. So anyway, while this comparison is neat, it certainly isn't a representation of the D-18 one is likely to find in their local music shop. Buy a D-18 if you want. They're awesome. Just don't buy one based on this video. I'm talking so much I've ended up in a loop, repeating myself.
I listened to this blind while reading the comment section. I listen on Hs8 Studio Monitors with the HS8S Subwoofer system. I am pretty experienced on guitars: Martin is a more open upon strum. Less percussive but more open. Has frequencies across the board from bass to mids to treble. Eastman is tighter upon strum. Has tighter frequency bands focused more on bass and treble....with the mids lacking in comparison to Martin. (Likely due to having normal bracing which makes guitar more rigid instrument....as opposed to Forward Shifted X which makes bindings less rigid but more resonant. The difference means basically an Eastman will be more likely to survive a drop on floor....although....you don't want to drop either guitar.)
Eastman is about having great material selection and great craftsmanship on traditional concepts. Thats the "chinese way" of luxury guitars. Martin is about how the guitar sounds...with innovative building techniques such as forward shifting braces etc- while still maintaining the best materials that humans can use. You have to pay for the research and development process in Martin guitars. Thats why I think Martin's sounds better- but will always be more expensive than other brands.
instruments are very particular. I went out shopping for an EM a few years ago. I had about 3k to spend. I played vintages and new and ended up saving over 2k because the best guitar I found was an Eastman. I played many but this one was great and the ones I played from Martin, Taylor et al were not ...
It's very interesting that within theses comparisons different ways of picking and strumming effect the output, the Martin definitely has more full balanced tone, but the Eastman seems to excel when strummed harder
I mean, it was pretty obvious the Martin was the better guitar, and the Eastman the best value. If money matters, the Eastman wins, if you're talking about nothing but tone, the Martin wins handily.
Eastmans come with Strings: D’Addario EXP16 .While the D18 auth probably had Martin SP Lifespan PB Medium Gauge . I believe the the lighter gauge give the eastman a a much different tone . Having forward bracing in the Martin also changes the tone . Just not an apples to apples comparison in my opinion. and yes i'm biased i have an e10d and i can buy at least 2 or more with the coin i saved . :) Im pretty psyched that its in the head to head as that says a lot . Martin is a great guitar company with a rich history. Eastman is also a great guitar company and as you can hear makes a stellar guitar.
Both sound great in their own way. I would pick them both up at the store and choose the one the fits me...Since both guitars are well built quality shouldn't be an issue.
I've been playing and buying fine guitars for many years. I listened to this comparison closely though a good amp and excellent speakers. I could clearly hear the difference. The Eastman has a more treble focus and the Martin more of that Martin rumble, but I heard more differences between two Martins. I have loved Martins for many years although I now play Collings but Eastman have truly done their homework. It sounds like a perfe4ctly good instrument that would be good enough to take to a bluegrass jam or a concert performance. The sad fact is that Martin (and other US made items) have become overly expensive. Eastman (above all other Far eastern makers) have found a market that US brands can't really compete in even though they have tried. Do I own an Eastman? No - but I sorely miss the Eastman Archtop I let go - still looking for another AR805. Do I own a Martin ? Yes - a rebuilt '64 12 string.
Perhaps Martin place more emphasis on conditioning the woods, and that is one reason they cost more. I wonder if the Eastman wood provides less clarity due to the wood being new and not aged, or perhaps they age the wood, I'm not sure. But it sounds like there is extra moisture in the wood creating a slight muddy sound due to dampening, a slightly less clear tone and over emphasis on the bass end. The Martin does indeed have a more balanced tone.
I've played both and, as always, there are differences between any two guitars of the same make, the Eastman I played sounded better to me than the D18, and had a much kinder neck making for far less fatigue after a four hour gig. It was also much kinder on my wallet. Having said that they're both wonderful guitars, and whatever you chose you're going to own a great instrument.
I played a couple of the Sapele OMs and the Eastman J-45 copies & standard Martin Style dreadnoughts the other day and they felt to me, WAY better than the 1800$ Taylors in the shop and even better than the 3000$ HUmmingbird. The Eastmans sounded brillient, but moreover, just felt 'right'. I am looking for the Correct one to buy ... oddly enough, Never been an OM fan, but the All SOLID SAPELE OM is fantastic and only about $600! Felt better to me than most of the highend guitars in the shop.
To me the the Martin has a bit more volume and a "tighter"sound. I couldn't pick this so much when the pieces where being played but when the chords where strummed individually and allowed to swell and die, the difference becomes apparent. The Martin's sound here was brighter while the Eastman seemed just a little"muffled". Maybe a better match up would have been with a standard D18 ? I've played some of the Eastman guitars and the construction has a real attention to detail. They feel very nice on the knee and the neck has a good profile. I've always wondered what they'd be like strung with quality strings. If I couldn't afford a Martin an Eastman would be the guitar to get. Just keep fresh strings on them ;-)
Nice video. The truth is Eastman's are great guitars as are Martins. In this video the Martin is louder, clearer and has more piano type overtones. It is not BETTER just very different. I just compared on my RUclips page my Martin D18 with my Eastman E200m...take a look!
gib wise I think the Martin is the better dreadnought. It shines through on the blue-grassy sounding last song and for chords. But, those first few songs sound better on the Eastman and I think it's because they are just better songs for a smaller guitar; since the Eastman has more tremble, it works better for that selection. Or do you think that the Eastman sounds better for all of the songs?
D Ray Gamez why would he lie to himself? If anything, he could have looked for any reason (to lie to himself) and choose Martin. He couldn’t. So he chose Eastman.
Martin sounds a bit more "Open". Are they strung with the same strings? Even a subtle difference in tone can be attributed to different brands and types of strings. I'm looking at buying the Eastman in the near future.
There should be a difference. The Martin is more than twice the price. for those who like the D18 and don't want to spend that much, you will get a fine guitar that gets you very close. I also agree with another post that said there is a setup issue with the Eastman. You can hear it.
I feel like comparing an E6D to the D18 would be more appropriate. The E10D has a solid Adirondack Spruce top, whereas the D18 has Sitka. The Eastman E6D has the sitka top. And if this was a new E10D in the demo, then new Adirondack can sound tight and green before opening up. Adi tops usually take awhile to open up, so a brand new E10D or any Adi top guitar for that matter will always sound better as it gets older.
Every Eastman I have ever played or listened to has a very pronounced thud in the bass notes. Like putting foam under the bridge on a P bass. That said I own an Eastman travel guitar as it was the best bang for the buck to go camping with and not worry about. I love the way it plays.
Interesting that this E10D doesn't sound like mine at all... Mine has a much deeper, fuller sound. I tried them side-by-side with full intent on buying the Martin D-18 but went home with the Eastman. It is truly a great sounding instrument. That being said, the Martin is easier to play. It's a specific combination found on most Martin's I've tried of neck, fretboard, frets etc. that makes fretting chords a pleasure... I put active Martin Thin-Line pickups on both my D-35 and the E10D, so over the PA you really can't tell much, if any difference. :)
Have to remember the difference can be the room especially on the mids and lows, very tough to know without changing the room conditions a few times, etc, try playing from a fabric couch and see the difference, may make more of a difference than you think...
I thought the Martin was louder however on the Individual plucked notes I think the Eastman was much clearer than the Martin When it was strummed hard I thought the Martin had some breakup in the mid range I love Martin like every other guy & gal, but dollar for dollar and this is how I base my way of life rather than on a who's who of the world, for the money Eastman all the way to the bank with the extra money I saved by not buying a Brand name And I understand the pride of owning a Martin as I have 2 but I also have became more economical with age and retirement Thank you for the review and if you can afford a Martin get one but for those like me living on a retirement budget Eastman's the way to go and I also own there 805 Mandolin it's as killer as there guitars
Of course it did. The martin has the forward shifted bracing and all the golden era appointments. I think you'd see the same difference with a standard martin D-18 vs the martin D-18 golden era.
I have to admit that the Martin's bass response sounds better. However, I think that the Eastman sounds better in the mid and the treble ranges. As others have noted, the guitars' set-up and the type, brand, and age of the strings on each guitar can make a HUGE difference. There is also the Martin's ivory nut and saddle vs the Eastman's bone nut and saddle. Ivory is more dense and harder than plain bone and transmits sound better. (It would be easy to replace the Eastman's nut and saddle with ivory.) Then there's the forward-shifted and scalloped X-bracing on the Martin vs the standard scalloped bracing on the Eastman. For me the bottom line is that the differences between these two guitars simply don't justify the price hike. Martins are WONDERFUL guitars but GROSSLY overpriced and the less expensive guitars are getting better with every passing year. In response, Martin is also expanding and improving their mid-priced guitar line. We'll see what happens over the coming years. For us guitar players, it's a win-win!
I came here thinking maybe I could do an E10 just as a travel substitute for my D18GE. I think I might just have to buy another D18GE and the less good sounding one will be my travel. Martin is still my favorite!!!
I'd have to see what the action was set at on both guitars to really tell the difference.Eastman is well known for setting the action quite low,which means it won't be nearly as loud as Martin which tends to set action higher.
In person the Martin is going to sound and feel better by quite a bit. I just played a used Eastman like this one yesterday at Guitar Center. For $315, that Eastman was a great deal. Had I been looking for an acoustic, I would have bought it.
Just curious...have you ever done a comparison of two of the exact same model guitars from the same company with the same brand of fresh strings on both, using the same mics, same audio interface, same room, etc...just to see how consistant guitars are from one to the next in a given company? I've heard the whole, "oh, you must have got a bad one...happens sometimes...", stuff, and have even experienced that on guitars in price ranges where there absolutely should not be a bad one for that kind of money...like a "which of these exact same guitar models from the same year sounds better/ plays better?" review...I think that would be interesting to watch...or "here is the one they sent me, so I went to the store or online and bought the exact same guitar, and am now going to compare them with each other...anyway, thanks for the review even though this is an older post...I'm recently interested in Eastman guitars...
Many knowledgeable folks say they Eastman guitars sound more like Collings than Martin. IMHO, Eastman flattops have THEIR OWN sound that may be a shade or two different than Martin but NOT lesser quality. Also we don’t know the age of each guitar; the brand, type, and gauge strings used on each guitar, or other variables that can affect the sound. Martin also puts out a few different D-18 guitars and this also variates the sound.
Would like to see a blind sound only test...the fan boy bias/loyalty in guitar brands affects any comparison. IMO both are great guitars...the question is...is the Martin worth 2-3x the Eastman?
I play an Eastman 805C archtop with a floating pickup. It is THE BEST archtop guitar that I've ever had, and I've owned at least a dozen American made ones.
Even if the Martin sounds better, there's no way it's worth double the price. Eastman is just awesome value. My SB55/V is one of the best guitars I've ever had in my hands.
The Martin is an upscaled version of a standard D18. Not an apples to apples compaison. I did have an Eastman e10ss that I traded in for a Martin DSS-17. The Eastman is fun for picked notes but the Martin was superb for everything. The Martin sounds more like an older, loosened up acoustic immediately. So the Martin is my bright mahogany guitar with a spruce top, while my full mahogany Guild D20 is now known as the Dark Lord.
A Sigma would be a better choice then Eastman I think for sound quality at an affordable price. Don't give me wrong about Eastman though still a very good brand. Love their mandolins.
I have an Eastman I use primarily for playing live...if that ever happens again ;-). At home, I use my D18. I think the Eastman line of instruments are excellent, and their higher-end electrics are better than the Standard line G's they are modeled after (not hating, I love G, but it is what it is). Their acoustics are excellent, but they don't compete with the 18 and up Martins. I wouldn't even consider a 16 or lower over a comparable Eastman though - you get so much more tone and quality for your $$$.
I have to admit the Martin sounds richer in this comparison, especially on the D chord, but I do wonder about the difference in strings. I just came from my favorite music store and I was convinced that I was going there to buy a Taylor that was on sale and they had this model Eastman used. I played the Taylor, the Eastman and a Martin. In the store the EASTMAN WON HANDS DOWN. Now, it was used and the wood has mellowed. The others were new. The Eastman setup was better and the action was buttery smooth. Match the sound to your playing style and you can't go wrong either way.
This video put me off Eastman and especially the E10D for a while. I have the D18 standard which I love but now also have the e10D and it sounds nothing like this. Neither are recorded well to be honest. You really do have to play them in person. I preferred the E10 to the D18MD. Still would love to try a GE but haven't come across any. Love the E10D. It's powerful and takes getting used to. And this is with light strings. My D18 needs the mediums to drive the top.
Although the Eastman sounds very good and close to the Martin, good enough for it to be my only Acoustic in fact, but I prefer keeping Americans working and choose Martin. I wish I could do that with everything I own! Thank you for the good review!
Excellent review .. Both guitars sound beautiful..one got a little more bass ..one abit less ., just listening with out looking at the guitars ..both would be perfect .. Both are equal .. personal choice .. Eastman have a long history of making classical instruments to ..Not only the USA that make stringed instruments ..
![Yeat & Quavo - 5BRAZY [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4XxnTAwyxus/mqdefault.jpg)
I recently bought the Eastman E 10 D. It has a pretty broad tone spectrum and a huge voice. I can't believe how loud this guitar is. I play 4 sets a day, 5 days a week. We are totally acoustic meaning no mics, no electricity, no sound reinforcement at all. We typically play in front of about 30-60 people in an intimate outdoor setting with quite a few regulars, many who are musicians. When rain or cold comes we move in to a drafty 171 yr old cabin with a fireplace for heat. Not necessarily ideal conditions. I play with a 4 piece bluegrass, folk, mountain group. Aggressive salty players w/ good chops and pro instruments. The Eastman cuts through loud and proud with great tone. The commentary from the regs and fellow players are all positive. All amazed at tone and volume. I use med strings and could easily use lights and still have plenty of volume but love the tone of 13s. The feel in my hands is beautiful. Plays great. VERY happy so far. Remaining question: Will it hold up for years to come in this Ozarks environment at this rate of use? Martin does. That's proven. Time will tell with Eastman. My money's on them... literally.
It seems to have held up well! Love the Homestead Pickers!
The ebony fretboard and adirondack give my E10D a snap and percussiveness that is really something. Plus it has tons of power. Not the same tone as a Martin and I totally understand that quest for the real Americana tone. But the Eastmans are something. Mine is coming up to 10 years old, one of the first ones they made and it is always an adventure picking it up and playing it.
Differences r ivory nut n saddle on Martin n forward shifted bracing. Bone nut n saddle n standard bracing on the Eastman. That must be where the difference in tone comes from.
I actually own the "Eastman" I was going out to play some J-45's and after a couple this 20-something sales kid asked me to do a true blindfold test, I said go for it... as I held the first it was obviously a slope shoulder like a wanted, and sounded great thru Chords, scales, etc. the 2nd guitar, also a slope, played really well, but it wasn't as chimey, the neck was not as fast, and just sounded I speck "muddy" in tone... I went home with the "Eastman SS10" and $1400. in change ... give them a fair shake, they're badass.. ♪
I've got an Eastman AC420 ($750) and also a Huss and Dalton TDR ($4K guitar). The H&D is clearly a superior instrument, but what you get for your money from Eastman can't be beat.
Should have just bought a Mickey mouse or barbie guitar at toy store or garage sale and pocketed even more money.
Both sound very full and both are good sounding instruments. The difference I hear is in the Martin having a delay or hall like quality to the sound.
For the price of the Eastman I’m amazed at how close it is to many high end guitars.
While I own two Eastmans (and a bunch of Taylors) I give the nod to the Martin on this one. But, as was intimated by an earlier poster, Eastmans are NOT cheap Chinese "knockoffs" they are extremely well built, handcrafted instruments and perform waaay beyond their price point. They are favored by many top jazz players.
The Eastman sounds a bit muddier than the Martin, also the Martin has a brighter, fatter, clearer sound. Perhaps the Eastman is tight and will loosen up with age and playing but right now the Martin is the clear winner.
That's what I'm thinking...Eastman needs some time
If you put a set of Martin SP on them, the Eastman guitars sound even closer to the real thing.
Should be set up with the exact same strings.
To my ears, the two sound very close. The difference could be in the "vintage toner" of the top and/or the "fossilized ivory" of the Martin GE. This isn't really an "apples-to apples" comparison.
Is that a standard D-18?...I noticed it has a through the bridge saddle.....I have an Eastman E10D that is 10 years old and sounds incredible.
Yes mine is only two years old and it's incredible to !
The Martin sounds better to me but I could make the Eastman work. It's definitely not a bad sounding guitar.
7 years later, you still think so?
Yes except for hard strumming like at the end..The eastman is smoother for that.
I took the sound test without looking and after I made my sound decision I found I had picked the Martin. The Martin has a more mature, complexity, and depth. The Eastman tone is less complex, not as rich. Finishes second........
I do like Eastman and for the price it beats the Martin, however, if money isn't a limitation then get the Martin.
Martin clearly sounded better to me. I like the looks of the d18 sound board better too. I don't like pale looking top plates. I would rather get a used d18 in relatively descent condition than a new pale tinny sounding Eastman.
Its kinda fun to watch Tony transition from dude with a little beard and a hat to full on Chewbacca.
I'm European and I'm unbiased. I love my Blueridge guitar made in China and I also love my Seagull made in La Patrie, Canada. I sold my Yamaha (JP/CH) and my Taylor (US) because I didn't like them. In this video, the Martin is much much better than the Eastman. It's not even close. This is one of the more convincing comparisons I've heard. I don't know what it says about Eastman and Martin in general, but for these two specific guitars there's no doubt.
Hahah there’s absolutely no way you could have picked which was which out in a blindfold test of this video, much less decided one is wildly better. Maybe, just maybe, in the strummed chords portion for a second you noticed a clear range difference.
I agree Martin is easily the better guitar. I also own a blueridge. A BR-60. I own a Yamaha FG830 as another guitar. I really can’t a D-18
I thought the Martin had better tone. Eastman is good but my Yamaha LS 26 beats them both.
I love the sound of both guitars, they are both wonderful. I own two Martins but for the difference in price the Eastman is an unbelievable value for money.
I like the Martin slightly better tone-wise. But at two times plus on the cost? And an E10 D thermo cured would bring the tone difference closer, if not matched, @ roughly $1600 for thermo cured Eastman.
Today's Eastmans are better than yesterday's. They bought Dana Bourgeois company and Dana has influenced their recent bracing/ and top grain selection. I would give this comparison a go again today. Eastman has been constantly working to improve their product. I just bought 2 that side by side were indistinguishable with Thompsons, Santa Cruz, and Collings.. The Varnish slopes are also crazy nice. Adirondack tops are more bright and piercing and don't work as well for heavy handed strummers with clearer note separation, however give someone with a lot of feel better single note clarity and volume control. I would definitely reccomend trying some Eastmans if they are in the mix. One negative on the eastman is that their Dovetail neck joints/ necks seem heavy in comparison to Martin/ Guild/ Gibson Dovetails. And the finish/ glue is definitely thicker. But they do sound amazing regardless.
BTW, thanks for doing all these comparison videos, they're excellent!
From 2:01 the Eastman sounds better (better songs for an OOO than a dread, get muffled on the Martin?). From 3:00 on, the Martin is the winner without question. It really depends on what you are playing.
D18 by quite a distance for me. Trouble with modern guitars is that they are too balanced and sound quite hi-fi. Fantastic for a more modern sound if that's what you're looking for but Martins have that vintage, worked-in sound and all the strings seem to blend into each other when strumming that not many other guitars seem to have.
They sound similar. However, the Martin has something going on that makes it sound the best.
amazing! one of the few videos where I could hear a big difference between comparisons. Not saying I cant hear it in others but this one is BIG. Martin for crispness across all frequencies and that beautiful airy sound of notes blending when strummed. Eastman sounds muted compared to the Martin.
I'm sure that you could swap out strings and warm up the Eastman tone a little more.
Despite the popular perception, there is plenty of quality which is made in China. This is not the era where an Asian "made in Japan" item was manufactured in a partially rebuilt industrial park with scrap components. China today is FULL of skilled woodworkers. Wood is a cheap resource, as is labor.
That being said, Eastman is clearly a quality guitar, but Martin is a PREMIUM guitar. The designs are advanced, tonewood selection is second-to-none, and production is highly quality controlled. Even Martin's entry level instruments are top-rate.
The Eastman, when compared to economical guitars of not too many years ago is AMAZING. Clearly a quality product, and worth a try. After all, instrument selection should be a PERSONAL CHOICE and a player should try as many guitars as possible before buying.
You have a good handle on this topic. Thanks.
both guitars sound pretty good, but Martin sounds fuller and projects more
from what i can tell, if i had a good set of headphones, i probably could hear
the differences more distinctly to make specific comments
I scrolled the screen so I couldn't see which one was being played the first time, so I wouldn't be biased. My preference changed depending on what was being played. They sound much closer to each other than either does to say a Gibson or a Martin. I would be hard pressed to choose a favorite based upon what I heard here. Maybe if I played them in person I would be able to make up my mind.
Towards the end when he when just doing single strums, the Eastman atlas on my speakers sounded fuller. There was a metallic overtone to the D-18 I didn't like. Slightly brittle.
There is an obvious setup problem with the Eastman, but sounds really good. Nonetheless, in this test, the nod goes to Martin.
I played a few Eastmans the other day ... and was blown away more by how damn good they felt to play
Definitely more volume and note separation from the Martin. The E10D can now be had with a thermo-cured top, E10D-TC. I have one and love the tone but that Martin D18 is calling to me. Now that Dana Bourgeois is collaborating with Eastman, it will be interesting to hear a comparison between one of those guitars and a Martin D18 to see if they get any closer to the Martin tone.
I know the Martin wins, but I still love my Eastman. It's an awesome guitar, but so is a Martin D-18!!
You really won't mind playing either guitar, trust me.
more room and complexity on the Martin
The Martin is deeper but I own a Eastman 816 jumbo and love it, I also have my American Taylor but will say for the $$ Eastman wins....
I have 2 Eastmans, but that Martin sounds GOOD!
I'm a martin fan but with this match up, Eastman has more balanced tone and presence. Maybe just with the mic position. I guess
I propose a blind test, like the Pepsi challenge. All the Martin love may not hold up. I hear a much brighter sound from the martin, and a deeper bass from the Eastman. Take the brand out of the equation, and I'll bet the results will be different. Martin makes great guitars, but there is little doubt once someone knows which label is on which sound....the label sways the opinion.
I preferred the deeper sound of the Eastman through headphones, but no doubt they both sound good.
I dare say with the same bracing pattern, the Eastman would sound very close to the Martin.
I think Eastman's approach is for a "throatier" voiced instrument. I have played a D 18 and it didn't really do much for me personally, but it certainly is a sweet sounding guitar. It's obvious the Martin is a more refined sounding instrument, it should be.
This is one of the very few times a Martin guitar sounds brighter than the other guitar. Were the strings the same on each guitar?
How about comparing an Eastman AC630 (jumbo) vs Gibson SJ200 maple? that would be a great comparison.
The Eastman sure moves a lot of air for the price. The craftsmen and women in that factory have plenty to be proud about.
I still think that the Martin in this example has a far more balanced, refined tone... but compared to some of the $900-$1000 Martins, the Eastman is pretty respectable.
I would be interested to know the price difference. The Martin sounded much better to my ears but at what cost?
Not sure if they had the same exact strings on them for a fair comparison.
I find the Martin's sound smooth and even (so maybe good for recording) but I prefer a very actively loud and lively sounding guitar nice clear powerful low end and sparkling cut through highs. The Eastman is where I am heading. I have already decided on an Adirandack spruce top for the extra volume and thought I liked rosewood back and sides but now I am leaning hard towards mahoghany for the clarity. time to go shopping to feel and hear them!
just recently bought the E10D. it is awesome. Big sound, easy to play. Hard to describe the sound - rich, chunky, very full. Thought I wanted rosewood as well but the addy/mahogany mix is hard to beat. I'd highly recommend it for you!
I really like Eastman guitars, they are very good value for money. Of course this Martin sounds better, but its also more than twice as expensive as the Eastman.
This is tough for me. I wanted a D-18, never having played one, but felt that I couldn't justify the cost so I bought an E10D. Fantastic guitar.
I went to GC a week ago and saw that they had two D-18's so I spent some time with them and didn't like them. But did I really not like them, or was I just not prepared for them. Considering that the E10D is modeled after the D-18, I expected them to feel nearly identical, but they aren't even close. The Martin is much lighter, the sound is more woody/boxy, I thought. The E10D is more what I expect an acoustic to sound like. But maybe that's because I've only ever played cheap guitars. Maybe the Martin feels and sounds closer to what higher-end guitars more traditionally feel and sound like.
I recorded a 12-minute video of myself playing the Martin's. When I got home and watched it on a good sound system, I thought it sounded great. Powerful, articulate, balanced. The woodiness wasn't there. And I think maybe that woody tone may just be common with light-weight guitars. I have a classical guitar and those things are feather light and it has that woody quality too. Maybe "woody" just means "open/unrestrained". Maybe heavy woods and/or finishes stifle the tone. Maybe the woodiness I heard was the guitar singing freely. Maybe, if I had more experience with more guitars in more price ranges and familiarized myself with everything, that woody sound would reveal itself to be superior. When I told the guy working at GC that I preferred my Eastman, he said "You're used to it".
And there is nothing wrong with preferring the Eastman - it IS a great guitar. And there'd be nothing wrong with loving a $100 guitar if that's what makes you happy. But I keep wondering if I prefer my Eastman because it's honestly better to my ears, or because I'm ignorant. I'm kind of thinking the latter. And maybe it's the snob in me that wants so much to believe I'm ignorant and that the Martin is better because it's a big brand name and their instruments are expensive and are the stuff of dreams.
Maybe my feelings were also affected by the room those guitars are kept in. It would certainly sound different in my house. I did like how light the Martin felt, the satin finish on the neck is amazing, and the volume and balance is truly impressive. I wasn't impressed by the sustain, but I did notice that the strings were a bit old and due for replacement.
I'm going to listen to my video some more and keep thinking about it. I try to keep an open mind about things. I don't like to decide that something is better only because it's what I'm familiar with. Maybe I'll try the D-18 at a different shop so I can hear how it sounds in a different room.
And I'll try not to let the unfamiliar feel keep me from really listening. The Martin feeling so light gave me the feeling that it was cheap. But why? I guess, with my Eastman feeling so heavy and solid, I imagined that's a sign of superior build quality and durability.
I don't know why I am ranting here. Thinking out loud.
If anyone read all of this, I hope it didn't bore you too much.
By the way, I have no idea how the Martin I played feels compared to the one featured in this video. Modern D-18s are made with Sitka spruce, not Adirondack, and bone is used for the but and saddle, not ivory. And I believe the position of the bracing is different, too.
So that Golden Era D-18 likely feels and sounds noticeably different from a modern D-18.
SO, if anyone watches this video and thinks they want to go buy or order a D-18, I highly recommend that you go play one because, unless you specially seek out this Golden Era model, the D-18 you buy may be quite a bit different.
Final note (hopefully): I agree with anyone who said that this E10D sounds tight. It does to my ears, too. I've had mine for a couple years. Mine would presumably be a better candidate for this heavyweight shoot-out, as that Martin has already been well-played and is expressing its full capabilities. Or is that brand new? I did a brief search and can't even find a D-18 GE for sale. I found one custom shop Adirondack guitar, but with a bone nut and saddle.
So anyway, while this comparison is neat, it certainly isn't a representation of the D-18 one is likely to find in their local music shop.
Buy a D-18 if you want. They're awesome. Just don't buy one based on this video.
I'm talking so much I've ended up in a loop, repeating myself.
Lighter is good with acoustic guitars.
I listened to this blind while reading the comment section. I listen on Hs8 Studio Monitors with the HS8S Subwoofer system. I am pretty experienced on guitars:
Martin is a more open upon strum. Less percussive but more open. Has frequencies across the board from bass to mids to treble.
Eastman is tighter upon strum. Has tighter frequency bands focused more on bass and treble....with the mids lacking in comparison to Martin. (Likely due to having normal bracing which makes guitar more rigid instrument....as opposed to Forward Shifted X which makes bindings less rigid but more resonant. The difference means basically an Eastman will be more likely to survive a drop on floor....although....you don't want to drop either guitar.)
Eastman is about having great material selection and great craftsmanship on traditional concepts. Thats the "chinese way" of luxury guitars.
Martin is about how the guitar sounds...with innovative building techniques such as forward shifting braces etc- while still maintaining the best materials that humans can use.
You have to pay for the research and development process in Martin guitars. Thats why I think Martin's sounds better- but will always be more expensive than other brands.
I wish you didn't put the name for these in this video, means we'd get unbiased responses to people's preference.
Jonathan - I think its unnecessary in this case - open chords on Martin D18 against Eastman E10D is very clear on the sound quality
instruments are very particular. I went out shopping for an EM a few years ago. I had about 3k to spend. I played vintages and new and ended up saving over 2k because the best guitar I found was an Eastman. I played many but this one was great and the ones I played from Martin, Taylor et al were not ...
I just want to add that I have a few Eastmans and that they do take a long time to open up, but it’s worth it!
Thanks for the great comparison review, Tony!
It's very interesting that within theses comparisons different ways of picking and strumming effect the output, the Martin definitely has more full balanced tone, but the Eastman seems to excel when strummed harder
The Martin sounds better for sure but does it sound so much better to justify the price difference?
I mean, it was pretty obvious the Martin was the better guitar, and the Eastman the best value. If money matters, the Eastman wins, if you're talking about nothing but tone, the Martin wins handily.
eastmen bright? martin warm?
Eastmans come with Strings: D’Addario EXP16 .While the D18 auth probably had Martin SP Lifespan PB Medium Gauge . I believe the the lighter gauge give the eastman a a much different tone . Having forward bracing in the Martin also changes the tone . Just not an apples to apples comparison in my opinion. and yes i'm biased i have an e10d and i can buy at least 2 or more with the coin i saved . :) Im pretty psyched that its in the head to head as that says a lot .
Martin is a great guitar company with a rich history. Eastman is also a great guitar company and as you can hear makes a stellar guitar.
Agree that light vs. medium strings make the comparison hard.
BTW, I own a standard D-28 and an E10D. They are both awesome.
Both sound great in their own way. I would pick them both up at the store and choose the one the fits me...Since both guitars are well built quality shouldn't be an issue.
martin sounds more open. both sound great, but i like the martin better. BUT, what if u installed a fossilized ivory nut & saddle on the eastman?
I've been playing and buying fine guitars for many years. I listened to this comparison closely though a good amp and excellent speakers. I could clearly hear the difference. The Eastman has a more treble focus and the Martin more of that Martin rumble, but I heard more differences between two Martins. I have loved Martins for many years although I now play Collings but Eastman have truly done their homework. It sounds like a perfe4ctly good instrument that would be good enough to take to a bluegrass jam or a concert performance.
The sad fact is that Martin (and other US made items) have become overly expensive. Eastman (above all other Far eastern makers) have found a market that US brands can't really compete in even though they have tried.
Do I own an Eastman? No - but I sorely miss the Eastman Archtop I let go - still looking for another AR805.
Do I own a Martin ? Yes - a rebuilt '64 12 string.
Perhaps Martin place more emphasis on conditioning the woods, and that is one reason they cost more. I wonder if the Eastman wood provides less clarity due to the wood being new and not aged, or perhaps they age the wood, I'm not sure. But it sounds like there is extra moisture in the wood creating a slight muddy sound due to dampening, a slightly less clear tone and over emphasis on the bass end. The Martin does indeed have a more balanced tone.
D-18's mids sound scooped. Not as open as the E-10.
I've played both and, as always, there are differences between any two guitars of the same make, the Eastman I played sounded better to me than the D18, and had a much kinder neck making for far less fatigue after a four hour gig.
It was also much kinder on my wallet.
Having said that they're both wonderful guitars, and whatever you chose you're going to own a great instrument.
I played a couple of the Sapele OMs and the Eastman J-45 copies & standard Martin Style dreadnoughts the other day and they felt to me, WAY better than the 1800$ Taylors in the shop and even better than the 3000$ HUmmingbird. The Eastmans sounded brillient, but moreover, just felt 'right'. I am looking for the Correct one to buy ... oddly enough, Never been an OM fan, but the All SOLID SAPELE OM is fantastic and only about $600! Felt better to me than most of the highend guitars in the shop.
feel means so much....
Yes! It is the most important, I think. A guitar can sound great, but if it doesn't feel right in your hands, you won't spend much time playing it.
but it'll look so good...in it's case....under the bed.
^^ Haha! Yep!
To me the the Martin has a bit more volume and a "tighter"sound. I couldn't pick this so much when the pieces where being played but when the chords where strummed individually and allowed to swell and die, the difference becomes apparent. The Martin's sound here was brighter while the Eastman seemed just a little"muffled". Maybe a better match up would have been with a standard D18 ? I've played some of the Eastman guitars and the construction has a real attention to detail. They feel very nice on the knee and the neck has a good profile. I've always wondered what they'd be like strung with quality strings. If I couldn't afford a Martin an Eastman would be the guitar to get. Just keep fresh strings on them ;-)
Nice video. The truth is Eastman's are great guitars as are Martins. In this video the Martin is louder, clearer and has more piano type overtones. It is not BETTER just very different. I just compared on my RUclips page my Martin D18 with my Eastman E200m...take a look!
I did the comparison blind, and I picked the Eastman 3 out of four times go figure
Bummer...now I've got to go figure. I'll be back in a little bit.
gib wise I think the Martin is the better dreadnought. It shines through on the blue-grassy sounding last song and for chords. But, those first few songs sound better on the Eastman and I think it's because they are just better songs for a smaller guitar; since the Eastman has more tremble, it works better for that selection. Or do you think that the Eastman sounds better for all of the songs?
I actually did the same, because I didn't want to be bias with the Martin names and it was Eastman more times than Martin
Yeah keep lying to yourself
D Ray Gamez why would he lie to himself? If anything, he could have looked for any reason (to lie to himself) and choose Martin. He couldn’t. So he chose Eastman.
Martin sounds a bit more "Open". Are they strung with the same strings? Even a subtle difference in tone can be attributed to different brands and types of strings. I'm looking at buying the Eastman in the near future.
Factory strings on both.... Eastman probably had D'Addario and the Martin, Lifespans. Both PB and Medium gauge.
There should be a difference. The Martin is more than twice the price.
for those who like the D18 and don't want to spend that much, you will get a fine guitar that gets you very close. I also agree with another post that said there is a setup issue with the Eastman. You can hear it.
I feel like comparing an E6D to the D18 would be more appropriate. The E10D has a solid Adirondack Spruce top, whereas the D18 has Sitka. The Eastman E6D has the sitka top. And if this was a new E10D in the demo, then new Adirondack can sound tight and green before opening up. Adi tops usually take awhile to open up, so a brand new E10D or any Adi top guitar for that matter will always sound better as it gets older.
No question, the D-18 is unbeatable and so well balanced. It has character and personality !!!
At MY local shop the e20d-tc sounded more like the d18 than it did in this video
Every Eastman I have ever played or listened to has a very pronounced thud in the bass notes. Like putting foam under the bridge on a P bass. That said I own an Eastman travel guitar as it was the best bang for the buck to go camping with and not worry about. I love the way it plays.
Interesting that this E10D doesn't sound like mine at all... Mine has a much deeper, fuller sound. I tried them side-by-side with full intent on buying the Martin D-18 but went home with the Eastman. It is truly a great sounding instrument. That being said, the Martin is easier to play. It's a specific combination found on most Martin's I've tried of neck, fretboard, frets etc. that makes fretting chords a pleasure... I put active Martin Thin-Line pickups on both my D-35 and the E10D, so over the PA you really can't tell much, if any difference. :)
I own an Eastman and love it. But IMHO the martin sounds better in this formatted comparison.
Have to remember the difference can be the room especially on the mids and lows, very tough to know without changing the room conditions a few times, etc, try playing from a fabric couch and see the difference, may make more of a difference than you think...
They both sound good, to my ears. I do prefer the martin
Both sound beautiful! However, the Martin sounds better integrated and less boxy/bloomy
what was the price difference back then?
I thought the Martin was louder however on the Individual plucked notes I think the Eastman was much clearer than the Martin
When it was strummed hard I thought the Martin had some breakup in the mid range
I love Martin like every other guy & gal, but dollar for dollar and this is how I base my way of life rather than on a who's who of the world, for the money Eastman all the way to the bank with the extra money I saved by not buying a Brand name
And I understand the pride of owning a Martin as I have 2 but I also have became more economical with age and retirement
Thank you for the review and if you can afford a Martin get one but for those like me living on a retirement budget Eastman's the way to go and I also own there 805 Mandolin it's as killer as there guitars
Of course it did. The martin has the forward shifted bracing and all the golden era appointments. I think you'd see the same difference with a standard martin D-18 vs the martin D-18 golden era.
I would love to see a comparaison of the D16R adirontack against the D18GE or a comparaison this very eastman against the D16-GT....
Martin sounds clearer and more open.
@Molly Davis that's subjective. To some it is, to others no :)
I have to admit that the Martin's bass response sounds better. However, I think that the Eastman sounds better in the mid and the treble ranges. As others have noted, the guitars' set-up and the type, brand, and age of the strings on each guitar can make a HUGE difference. There is also the Martin's ivory nut and saddle vs the Eastman's bone nut and saddle. Ivory is more dense and harder than plain bone and transmits sound better. (It would be easy to replace the Eastman's nut and saddle with ivory.) Then there's the forward-shifted and scalloped X-bracing on the Martin vs the standard scalloped bracing on the Eastman. For me the bottom line is that the differences between these two guitars simply don't justify the price hike. Martins are WONDERFUL guitars but GROSSLY overpriced and the less expensive guitars are getting better with every passing year. In response, Martin is also expanding and improving their mid-priced guitar line. We'll see what happens over the coming years. For us guitar players, it's a win-win!
I came here thinking maybe I could do an E10 just as a travel substitute for my D18GE. I think I might just have to buy another D18GE and the less good sounding one will be my travel. Martin is still my favorite!!!
Martin more brilliance and full body sound - this is obvious but what's the difference in price?
Look carefully and you can see the mic placement is different. Listen carefully and you can hear that the picker plays with more pop on the Martin...
I'd have to see what the action was set at on both guitars to really tell the difference.Eastman is well known for setting the action quite low,which means it won't be nearly as loud as Martin which tends to set action higher.
In person the Martin is going to sound and feel better by quite a bit. I just played a used Eastman like this one yesterday at Guitar Center. For $315, that Eastman was a great deal. Had I been looking for an acoustic, I would have bought it.
Yeah but there is no way you were playing one of the solid wood models for $315
I'd like to see the D-18 compared to the Blueridge BR-140A or BR-240A.
Just curious...have you ever done a comparison of two of the exact same model guitars from the same company with the same brand of fresh strings on both, using the same mics, same audio interface, same room, etc...just to see how consistant guitars are from one to the next in a given company? I've heard the whole, "oh, you must have got a bad one...happens sometimes...", stuff, and have even experienced that on guitars in price ranges where there absolutely should not be a bad one for that kind of money...like a "which of these exact same guitar models from the same year sounds better/ plays better?" review...I think that would be interesting to watch...or "here is the one they sent me, so I went to the store or online and bought the exact same guitar, and am now going to compare them with each other...anyway, thanks for the review even though this is an older post...I'm recently interested in Eastman guitars...
Many knowledgeable folks say they Eastman guitars sound more like Collings than Martin. IMHO, Eastman flattops have THEIR OWN sound that may be a shade or two different than Martin but NOT lesser quality.
Also we don’t know the age of each guitar; the brand, type, and gauge strings used on each guitar, or other variables that can affect the sound. Martin also puts out a few different D-18 guitars and this also variates the sound.
Martin is decidedly brighter and richer in tone.....the Eastman is warmer...
Were the strings the same on both guitars?
I have one Eastman E10D and one Martin D18
After few month, finally I prefer the E10D
My E10D sound better like yours....
Would like to see a blind sound only test...the fan boy bias/loyalty in guitar brands affects any comparison. IMO both are great guitars...the question is...is the Martin worth 2-3x the Eastman?
Can someone tell me the name of the tune he starts playing at 2:49?
I liked the way the Martin sounded but the Eastman was still good for the price.
I play an Eastman 805C archtop with a floating pickup. It is THE BEST archtop guitar that I've
ever had, and I've owned at least a dozen American made ones.
Martin by FAAAAAR
Even if the Martin sounds better, there's no way it's worth double the price. Eastman is just awesome value. My SB55/V is one of the best guitars I've ever had in my hands.
The Martin is an upscaled version of a standard D18. Not an apples to apples compaison.
I did have an Eastman e10ss that I traded in for a Martin DSS-17. The Eastman is fun for picked notes but the Martin was superb for everything. The Martin sounds more like an older, loosened up acoustic immediately.
So the Martin is my bright mahogany guitar with a spruce top, while my full mahogany Guild D20 is now known as the Dark Lord.
A Sigma would be a better choice then Eastman I think for sound quality at an affordable price. Don't give me wrong about Eastman though still a very good brand. Love their mandolins.
I have an Eastman I use primarily for playing live...if that ever happens again ;-). At home, I use my D18. I think the Eastman line of instruments are excellent, and their higher-end electrics are better than the Standard line G's they are modeled after (not hating, I love G, but it is what it is). Their acoustics are excellent, but they don't compete with the 18 and up Martins. I wouldn't even consider a 16 or lower over a comparable Eastman though - you get so much more tone and quality for your $$$.
I have to admit the Martin sounds richer in this comparison, especially on the D chord, but I do wonder about the difference in strings. I just came from my favorite music store and I was convinced that I was going there to buy a Taylor that was on sale and they had this model Eastman used. I played the Taylor, the Eastman and a Martin. In the store the EASTMAN WON HANDS DOWN. Now, it was used and the wood has mellowed. The others were new. The Eastman setup was better and the action was buttery smooth. Match the sound to your playing style and you can't go wrong either way.
This video put me off Eastman and especially the E10D for a while. I have the D18 standard which I love but now also have the e10D and it sounds nothing like this. Neither are recorded well to be honest. You really do have to play them in person. I preferred the E10 to the D18MD. Still would love to try a GE but haven't come across any. Love the E10D. It's powerful and takes getting used to. And this is with light strings. My D18 needs the mediums to drive the top.
Although the Eastman sounds very good and close to the Martin, good enough for it to be my only Acoustic in fact, but I prefer keeping Americans working and choose Martin. I wish I could do that with everything I own! Thank you for the good review!
Excellent review .. Both guitars sound beautiful..one got a little more bass ..one abit less ., just listening with out looking at the guitars ..both would be perfect .. Both are equal .. personal choice .. Eastman have a long history of making classical instruments to ..Not only the USA that make stringed instruments ..