Great presentation. I love the depth of tones-deep bass, bright but not chimney highs, and the balanced mids. Lots of “presence”. I bet you could feel the air coming out of the sound hole. The D50 and this D40 are certainly on my “to look at” list. Great job, boys.
Oh Chris, you are such an AMAZING guitar player!,he stays gushingly. (Sony, I had to). Nice guitar. Honestly great to hear Chris again. You too work so well together and know your products!
That Guild ‘burst sure sounds great. Will have to check it out. I still have my Guild D-40 Natural, purchased new in 1978. Good box, no issues minor or major. Thanks for doing the video!
Hi Guys! Thanks for all the great videos and helpful information you share with us. Guild acoustic guitars have always been my favorite. I would go with the D50! Although I had a Martin D41 more recently, years ago I had an incredible Guild HD50 Dreadnought with what I believe may have been a Cedar top. I'm not sure if it was a HD50, but I think it was one of a kind and not common. I bought it used. I am SO sorry I ever let it go. I have never found anything comparable since. I'm wondering though, if you ever have Eastman guitars in your store. Would it be possible for you to demo and review an Eastman E20D-SB Traditional Rosewood Sunburst Dreadnaught Acoustic Guitar? I would love to hear your honest opinion! Thanks again!
I would like to see a comparison between D-40 Standard and D-40 Trad, with particular attention to differences in tonality. I can’t decide which to buy.
I love Guilds! I owned a D4 HG( high gloss). Solid top and arched back. With case it was $650! Fender realized they made no money on it they pulled it! Sounded way better than the satin they offered at the time! Long for a D55!!
could you answer the questions .....Is the martin D-18 satin amber burst all satin OR a semi-gloss like the D-40 pacific sunset burst AND both being dreadnoughts are they the same width and depth at the lower bout?
If both the new Standard D-40 and the D-40 Traditional necks are now installed with a dovetail joint, the same internal bracing, same basic specs, it would seem that the only significant difference between them now is that the Standard has a lighter finish and a little less bling. That sounds like an advantage for the Standard over the Traditional to me. It should open up faster than the Traditional, sounding better sooner. And it is significantly cheaper.
And From a physics standpoint, at the size level of braces, the strength to weight ratio is going to be the same between Sitka and Adirondack. It makes a difference top vs top of course… but when it comes to bracing, luthiers seem skeptical whether it does. Just what I’ve read on guitar forums anyway 😂
Do a d-40 vs d-40 traditional! That dovetail neck makes more difference than the finish. 😉 that gets it a little closer to a d-18- super unique sound. Would love to see a d-18 vs d-40T vs d-40! In many ways these are better than the original guilds, which lacked scalloping in many cases, as characteristic of that era for Martin too.
I would question the idea that scalloping is automatically 'better'. Wood varies in density and stiffness, and these are factory production guitars. They'll vary. In some cases scalloping may well weaken the top particularly if medium or heavy gauge strings are used. In support of this comment - I've owned eleven Martin dreadnoughts, one of which had scalloped bracing and needed a top replacement because of excessive bellying due to string tension.
@@gam1471 Not automatically better, just different. Alamo Music Center has actually argued that, very generally speaking, scalloped bracing is better. Usually it's a cost-saving measure to not scallop braces, which is why we saw braces no longer getting scalloped once WWII started.
Thanks for your interesting comment, and I can see your point that non-scalloped tops would be cheaper to produce. The story I've heard down the years is that the early scalloped tops weren't strong enough, and Martin had to repair or replace a lot of these. This would fit with the 'X' junction being moved closer to the bridge in I think 1939. I suppose that a dealer who's seen a lot of old Martins would know if this is true. As an aside, the early dreadnoughts didn't have a 'popsicle' or tongue brace, which in some resulted in cracking on either side of the top next to the fingerboard - I've seen this for myself. An official Martin repairman once told me that dreadnoughts are more susceptible to problems like these than OOO or smaller guitars. @@JesseDylanMusic
@@gam1471 Interesting! Yeah, it's hard to sort fact from hypotheses. Greig Hutton's book (Martin Guitars 1833-1969, or something like that) basically casts doubt on the whole "heavy strings were ruining tops" theory, or even disproves it outright by showing people weren't actually using heavy strings. But then, like you said... why move the x brace backwards? In the end, it may have been both; they stopped scalloping to save labor costs, and they perhaps also moved the x-brace to reduce warranty costs. Although they've put the X back where it was and resumed scalloping, they still build heavier guitars than in the pre-war days (of course). On the other hand, the surviving pre-war guitars are pretty darn sturdy.
I think you're right on all counts. I've not read the Hutton book; I'll try and find a copy - thanks for bringing it to my attention. 🙂 @@JesseDylanMusic
Even though they're both made from similar woods, the D-18 and D-40 are a bit different. The D-18 has a huge spike in low mids and a classic, more traditional sound. The D-40 is more balanced (and also has a deeper bass). Both guitars are probably the two best readily available mahogany guitars on the market for the past 50+ years.
If guild would come out with a Mississippi John Hurt model it would sell like hotcakes. Then again I’m a lefty, and guilds rarely carry lefty so I’m SOL regardless.
@@PGrizzy91 yeah, I didn’t mean Oates was a treasure! LOL! I meant the guitar is his treasure…. I have heard him play it, and he definitely channels some MJH… plays some pretty good blues. And he shows great respect for MJH.
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
I like your reviews because you play your guitars - you don't thrash them with hard strumming, and that's why we hear what they actually sound like!
Oh you’ve seen Quentin from acoustic letter?
How did you guess? 🙂@@524coconut
Love my vintage Guild D40 Florentine, great guitars! Very special sounding guitars
Great presentation. I love the depth of tones-deep bass, bright but not chimney highs, and the balanced mids. Lots of “presence”. I bet you could feel the air coming out of the sound hole. The D50 and this D40 are certainly on my “to look at” list. Great job, boys.
Oh Chris, you are such an AMAZING guitar player!,he stays gushingly. (Sony, I had to). Nice guitar. Honestly great to hear Chris again.
You too work so well together and know your products!
I could listen to Chris Play all day !
That Guild ‘burst sure sounds great. Will have to check it out. I still have my Guild D-40 Natural, purchased new in 1978. Good box, no issues minor or major. Thanks for doing the video!
Love the look and sound of that D-40 burst.
Hi Guys! Thanks for all the great videos and helpful information you share with us. Guild acoustic guitars have always been my favorite. I would go with the D50! Although I had a Martin D41 more recently, years ago I had an incredible Guild HD50 Dreadnought with what I believe may have been a Cedar top. I'm not sure if it was a HD50, but I think it was one of a kind and not common. I bought it used. I am SO sorry I ever let it go. I have never found anything comparable since. I'm wondering though, if you ever have Eastman guitars in your store. Would it be possible for you to demo and review an Eastman E20D-SB Traditional Rosewood Sunburst Dreadnaught Acoustic Guitar? I would love to hear your honest opinion! Thanks again!
Wow that is a large caliber projectile launcher! Got to play one somewhere!
I would like to see a comparison between D-40 Standard and D-40 Trad, with particular attention to differences in tonality. I can’t decide which to buy.
I love the sound of Mahogany in the morning!
Hi guys, always love your channel.
I don't remember if you did a review on the MIC Guild line.
It would be interesting price wise.
Thanks!🎶🎶🎶
I love Guilds! I owned a D4 HG( high gloss). Solid top and arched back. With case it was $650! Fender realized they made no money on it they pulled it! Sounded way better than the satin they offered at the time! Long for a D55!!
That is a GREAT sounding guitar ❤
These sound very nice. I would like to see a comparison between these and the Epiphone Excellente. Please.
How about substituting “howitzer”, for cannon?
You guys should review the Juanes Fender Strat
could you answer the questions .....Is the martin D-18 satin amber burst all satin OR a semi-gloss like the D-40 pacific sunset burst AND both being dreadnoughts are they the same width and depth at the lower bout?
From a $ standpoint, a satin d-18 has a dovetail neck and is also $2499… great value.
If both the new Standard D-40 and the D-40 Traditional necks are now installed with a dovetail joint, the same internal bracing, same basic specs, it would seem that the only significant difference between them now is that the Standard has a lighter finish and a little less bling.
That sounds like an advantage for the Standard over the Traditional to me. It should open up faster than the Traditional, sounding better sooner. And it is significantly cheaper.
And From a physics standpoint, at the size level of braces, the strength to weight ratio is going to be the same between Sitka and Adirondack. It makes a difference top vs top of course… but when it comes to bracing, luthiers seem skeptical whether it does. Just what I’ve read on guitar forums anyway 😂
Wow. I believe these give D-18’s a serious competition.
Guild is the only guitar I will buy without playing it first including the Westerly they are absolutely fantastic instruments .
Do a d-40 vs d-40 traditional! That dovetail neck makes more difference than the finish. 😉 that gets it a little closer to a d-18- super unique sound. Would love to see a d-18 vs d-40T vs d-40! In many ways these are better than the original guilds, which lacked scalloping in many cases, as characteristic of that era for Martin too.
I would question the idea that scalloping is automatically 'better'. Wood varies in density and stiffness, and these are factory production guitars. They'll vary. In some cases scalloping may well weaken the top particularly if medium or heavy gauge strings are used. In support of this comment - I've owned eleven Martin dreadnoughts, one of which had scalloped bracing and needed a top replacement because of excessive bellying due to string tension.
@@gam1471 Not automatically better, just different. Alamo Music Center has actually argued that, very generally speaking, scalloped bracing is better. Usually it's a cost-saving measure to not scallop braces, which is why we saw braces no longer getting scalloped once WWII started.
Thanks for your interesting comment, and I can see your point that non-scalloped tops would be cheaper to produce. The story I've heard down the years is that the early scalloped tops weren't strong enough, and Martin had to repair or replace a lot of these. This would fit with the 'X' junction being moved closer to the bridge in I think 1939. I suppose that a dealer who's seen a lot of old Martins would know if this is true.
As an aside, the early dreadnoughts didn't have a 'popsicle' or tongue brace, which in some resulted in cracking on either side of the top next to the fingerboard - I've seen this for myself. An official Martin repairman once told me that dreadnoughts are more susceptible to problems like these than OOO or smaller guitars. @@JesseDylanMusic
@@gam1471 Interesting! Yeah, it's hard to sort fact from hypotheses. Greig Hutton's book (Martin Guitars 1833-1969, or something like that) basically casts doubt on the whole "heavy strings were ruining tops" theory, or even disproves it outright by showing people weren't actually using heavy strings. But then, like you said... why move the x brace backwards? In the end, it may have been both; they stopped scalloping to save labor costs, and they perhaps also moved the x-brace to reduce warranty costs. Although they've put the X back where it was and resumed scalloping, they still build heavier guitars than in the pre-war days (of course). On the other hand, the surviving pre-war guitars are pretty darn sturdy.
I think you're right on all counts. I've not read the Hutton book; I'll try and find a copy - thanks for bringing it to my attention. 🙂 @@JesseDylanMusic
Even though they're both made from similar woods, the D-18 and D-40 are a bit different. The D-18 has a huge spike in low mids and a classic, more traditional sound. The D-40 is more balanced (and also has a deeper bass). Both guitars are probably the two best readily available mahogany guitars on the market for the past 50+ years.
Okay, I’m a country boy so “boys” is a compliment!
Beau Tee-shirt Steely Dan🎸👍
If guild would come out with a Mississippi John Hurt model it would sell like hotcakes. Then again I’m a lefty, and guilds rarely carry lefty so I’m SOL regardless.
Yep! BTW, John Oates now owns Mississippi John’s Guild! What a treasure that would be!
@@jed1166 I know…I don’t really know how I feel about that lol Kinda wish someone else had it 😂
@@PGrizzy91 yeah, I didn’t mean Oates was a treasure! LOL! I meant the guitar is his treasure…. I have heard him play it, and he definitely channels some MJH… plays some pretty good blues. And he shows great respect for MJH.
Guild isn't very lefty centric now like other manufacturers are, which is a shame.
Careful, my name is Fred!
No more canons...only BAZOOKAS!
peace.
Silktone
Is it nice? Yes
Would I trade my D18 for it? Nope