New Martins vs Old Martins

[Paul December]

You got a good price for your Martin S1. I believe it's closer to $400 when you visit your big retail store. I've never heard of $75 for QC so that's not the norm for a Mainland uke. It really doesn't matter as long as you like your Martin S1 and I don't think the general public will change their mind.

But going back to the question, I've only played a HS0, which is made in Mexico but set up in PA and it didn't sound like anything special so I didn't buy it. It was a great price at $320 from a private party.

QC = very high action, sharp frets, couple bad strings, and intonation

`general public` perception is actually good

I didn't say it was a private party purchase

 

[garyg]

The trouble with vintage Martins is that the sample size we base our opinions on is usually fairly small. I've owned an SO and have six vintage Martins of varying models, five from the teens to late 20's/pre-32 and one from the 40's. My S0 was a decent uke but like most other folks have said, not anything special so I sold it. My early Martins include three 1M's , one 1K, one 2M, and one 0M. They were bought from both private parties and ebay. They all have great sound, even the beater that had 8 cracks, although it is a little soft on projection and sustain. Paul I'm surprised that you've had such bad luck with early Martins, I have heard they're variable, although I haven't gotten a bad one yet, but I think it's pretty unusual to get four bad ones in a row unless you're just looking at damaged instruments. Among the Martin models there is variation too in that my 20's 0 seems heavier and with a slightly different sound than my 1's and 2's. It's rounder and slightly less bell like. Seems like the weight is from slightly thicker wood. My 2M is probably my best sounding instrument although my 1M's and 1K have beautiful sound too. Love that bell-like ring that old Martins have. Haven't really heard it duplicated on any modern uke. I did watch a youtube video by a French-Canadian in which he compared all the modern Martins including the new koa models and I was surprised at how good the koa ukes sounded. Unfortunately he didn't have any vintage ukes to play them against. You can probably find the video by searching "Martin ukulele comparison". cheers, g2

 

[RyanMFT]

As for the new ones sounding like a low-end Kala or "clunky", you guys must have played bad examples because of the 4 I've played, they were anything but.

Just to clarify my comment, the new Martin ukuleles I have tried didn't sound clunky, they just felt heavier, thicker, and were not built with the fine attention to detail and finish I have experienced on several vintage Martin's. The new Martin's I played sound fine, but not as full and rich as the vintage Martin ukuleles.

 

[SailingUke]

Very interesting discussion.
I have a few vintage instruments with awesome voices.
One might also need to consider the number of instruments that have been destroyed since the 1920's.
Many of the survivors could have just been some of the best.
I truly believe technology today gives builders the ability to build as good or better instruments than in the old days.
I would love to hear my DaSilva 50 years from now, but most likely I won't last that long.

 

[Paul December]

The trouble with vintage Martins is that the sample size we base our opinions on is usually fairly small. I've owned an SO and have six vintage Martins of varying models, five from the teens to late 20's/pre-32 and one from the 40's. My S0 was a decent uke but like most other folks have said, not anything special so I sold it. My early Martins include three 1M's , one 1K, one 2M, and one 0M. They were bought from both private parties and ebay. They all have great sound, even the beater that had 8 cracks, although it is a little soft on projection and sustain. Paul I'm surprised that you've had such bad luck with early Martins, I have heard they're variable, although I haven't gotten a bad one yet, but I think it's pretty unusual to get four bad ones in a row unless you're just looking at damaged instruments. Among the Martin models there is variation too in that my 20's 0 seems heavier and with a slightly different sound than my 1's and 2's. It's rounder and slightly less bell like. Seems like the weight is from slightly thicker wood. My 2M is probably my best sounding instrument although my 1M's and 1K have beautiful sound too. Love that bell-like ring that old Martins have. Haven't really heard it duplicated on any modern uke. I did watch a youtube video by a French-Canadian in which he compared all the modern Martins including the new koa models and I was surprised at how good the koa ukes sounded. Unfortunately he didn't have any vintage ukes to play them against. You can probably find the video by searching "Martin ukulele comparison". cheers, g2

Sadly I've never had the chance to play a good, vintage Martin. All were in "Antique Shops" and were in shabby condition.

 

[Jnobianchi]

I have two vintage Martin sopranos, a Style 0 from the 60s and a Style 2 from the 20s. I've had a fortune to be able to play a Style 3 from the 30s pretty extensively and a Style 0 from the 20s for awhile.

Over the last few weeks, I've played all the recent and new Martins, from the S1 to the new Nazereth-made style 2 and 2K sopranos, concerts and tenors. I've also played the Mexican-made Style T1K Tenor.

Here's my critique.

The Mexican made S1 was poor; not up to Martin standards. It was thick and overbuilt, and though it was cheap compared to the new Martins, it just wasn't as good as an Ohana-made uke that cost half the price. Get an SK-35 or even a CK-70 to get a better sounding uke at 2/3rds to half the price.

The new Nazereth-made S2 ukes are very, very good. I think they are comparable to Kamakas in sound and feel. They're also comparably priced. In short - they're great ukes, especially the koa ukes. They're lightly built, resonate well, have great intonation all the way up the neck and they feel great. I recommend them, if you have that kind of $.

The Mexican-made style T1K is less than $500. It's worth every penny. It's the best uke in the $400-$600 range I've played. If I ever feel the need for a tenor, I wouldn't hesitate to pick one up.

Do they compare with vintage Martins? No. Vintage Martins have a construction style and lightness that even the best of the new ones don't have. No one makes them like Martin used to make them. Also, no wood is going to 'open up' enough to approach the same sound. They're different animals and if you want the sound of an old one, go buy an old one. You can get a style 0 or a style 1 for $600-800.

But, that said, new Martins are really something great now. They got the formula right and are producing excellent instruments, and despite all the chatter about how "they're failures they're too expensive, they aren't worth it," I will wager a lot of that talk is from people who "heard" they weren't as good as the old ones and who probably haven't actually played one yet, or only played an S1 from Mexico. You really have to try a new one and judge for yourself. A friend tried out a couple - he had a different opinion than I did. He felt they were great, but too costly. He isn't wrong, but I felt if you had the money for a Kamaka, these were a viable option.

I especially recommend the Mexican-made T1. It's a really really good uke and excellent value for the $.

 

[Dan Uke]

Jnobianchi,

Checked out your youtube page, nice playing on your Martins

 

[Pippin]

New Martin ukes sound nice. Old Martin ukes, however, sound magical.

Yes, In a nutshell, the man has it.

 

[delray48209]

The Mexican made S1 was poor; not up to Martin standards. It was thick and overbuilt, and though it was cheap compared to the new Martins, it just wasn't as good as an Ohana-made uke that cost half the price. Get an SK-35 or even a CK-70 to get a better sounding uke at 2/3rds to half the price.

I guess I must of picked up a diamond in the rough. My Mexican made S1 that I just purchased a week ago, blows the doors off my Ohana SK35 and CK - 70. As a matter of fact, yesterday I had a chance to play a vintage Martin Stle 1 and I'd say my S1 plays and sounds better than the vintage Martin soprano. I have however, played other Mexican made S1's that totally sucked in sound.

It would be interesting to weigh a vintage Martin and new Mexican made martin to see what the difference in weight would be. I would guess it's not very much. The build quality on my Martin S1 is outstanding. In my opinion, the additional money for the Martin S1 was worth it when compared to my less costly Ohanas.

 

[hmgberg]

I've only played one S1, and like some others who have posted, was underwhelmed. I've played and own a number of vintage Martins, and I've never been disappointed in them. I have played 8 or 9 Ohana sk35s. Some were just okay, one was outstanding. Sometimes, you just get a great piece of wood.

 

[Paul December]

I guess I must of picked up a diamond in the rough. My Mexican made S1 that I just purchased a week ago, blows the doors off my Ohana SK35 and CK - 70. As a matter of fact, yesterday I had a chance to play a vintage Martin Stle 1 and I'd say my S1 plays and sounds better than the vintage Martin soprano. I have however, played other Mexican made S1's that totally sucked in sound.

It would be interesting to weigh a vintage Martin and new Mexican made martin to see what the difference in weight would be. I would guess it's not very much. The build quality on my Martin S1 is outstanding. In my opinion, the additional money for the Martin S1 was worth it when compared to my less costly Ohanas.

+1
The fit-&-finish of the S1s I've seen are a big step above the Ohanas & Mainlands.

 

[Pippin]

Depending on the vintage instrument and the conditions in which it was stored, it is possible to have one that is a genuine dog rather than a gem. That is why, I'd prefer to never buy one sight unseen, if possible. Pictures can lie and I have never bought anything on Ebay because of that. I have bought vintage guitars that I played before buying and one Martin I had even had a bad neck that I could fix, so, I did. I am still looking for another vintage Martin to add to my collection-- one of these days.

 

[delray48209]

Although many buy sight unseen, other than pictures, which don't necessarily portray the actual instrument, I can't see myself buying something that I can't touch, see and hear. Buying blindly is like a crap shoot. Sometimes your a winner, but most of the time, probably a loser.

Some say the vintage Martin's weigh less. I'm not a scientist but I think it may be due to the wood drying out over a course of time. The difference in weight between a new S1 and a vintage Uke would probably be measured in grams. Some say the wood is thinner creating more sound and vibration. Perhaps that is why most vintage instruments have become victim to cracks. Again, I'm not a scientist, nor a luthier, I'm just speculating.

Based upon my purchases of the Martin S1, the Ohana S35 and Ohana CP-70, the Martin is virtually flawless, whereas the Ohana's do have some very small quality control issues.

 

[garyg]

Ebay is like driving a car, if you learn how to use it, it's a great utility but if you don't you can get hurt.

 

[Gmoney]

Ebay is like driving a car, if you learn how to use it, it's a great utility but if you don't you can get hurt.

Indeed - none of the Martin's I've bought off of eBay have been stinkers. In fact, the only ukes that I have bought w/defects were well described or pictured by the seller (like the bunch of Lanikai BLEMs I've recently bought to teach myself saddle, nut, & fret repair/setup)

 

[Pukulele Pete]

Ebay is like driving a car, if you learn how to use it, it's a great utility but if you don't you can get hurt.

Yes, I've been rear ended a couple times .

 

[hmgberg]

Although many buy sight unseen, other than pictures, which don't necessarily portray the actual instrument, I can't see myself buying something that I can't touch, see and hear. Buying blindly is like a crap shoot. Sometimes your a winner, but most of the time, probably a loser.

Some say the vintage Martin's weigh less. I'm not a scientist but I think it may be due to the wood drying out over a course of time. The difference in weight between a new S1 and a vintage Uke would probably be measured in grams. Some say the wood is thinner creating more sound and vibration. Perhaps that is why most vintage instruments have become victim to cracks. Again, I'm not a scientist, nor a luthier, I'm just speculating.

Based upon my purchases of the Martin S1, the Ohana S35 and Ohana CP-70, the Martin is virtually flawless, whereas the Ohana's do have some very small quality control issues.

I believe your speculations are correct on both counts regarding the wood on vintage Martins. You should be a scientist

 

[bazmaz]

Well I will shortly be the owner of a T1K Martin, so will be giving you my perspective on that one very soon!

 

[Baskervils]

One of the main differences between old and new Martins is the way the neck is attached to the fretboard. The older ones are wonderfully rounded and seem to flow from fretboard to neck. The newer fretboards seem less rounded, more machined and right angled. I love the feel of the old necks.

Speaking of eBay problems, buying a Martin baritone ukulele is so perilous from a seller who isn't an expert. The neck is long, thin and does not have a truss rod. Just a little warping makes a tremendous difference with intonation. I recently played a Favilla baritone uke. It sounded great, but the neck was like a trunk compared to the Martin.

 

[RyanMFT]

Some say the vintage Martin's weigh less. I'm not a scientist but I think it may be due to the wood drying out over a course of time. The difference in weight between a new S1 and a vintage Uke would probably be measured in grams. Some say the wood is thinner creating more sound and vibration. Perhaps that is why most vintage instruments have become victim to cracks. Again, I'm not a scientist, nor a luthier, I'm just speculating.

I'm no scientist either but does wood really dry out any more after many years as compared to when it was built into an instrument (given that the wood was properly cured)? As we all agree, humidity varies, which impacts the moisture content of the wood. I seem to remember reading that Rick Turner said the structure of the wood changes over many years, or that some believe that the wood structure changes over years along with the finish changing significantly over time.

This is a subjective thing, and influenced by much more than build, thickness, and age. I think it is deeply influenced by feelings and personal taste. I have a friend who LOVES the sound of fancy, glossy-finished new ukuleles, because he loves fancy, glossy ukuleles. A new AAAAAAAA curly, quilted, inlaid gloss monster doesn't appeal to me as I prefer simple, different, and understated. I think my Favilla Teardrop sounds better than any of my other vintage sopranos, including my Martin but I love things that are just a little different from what everyone else seems to like.

The old and new are different instruments to be sure, and will appeal to different people. Reminds me of MGM's blind sound test of laminate and solid ukuleles. Honestly, I was lost (and the results showed that most others were too) listening to the sound samples. Some sounded better to me than others, but I couldn't tell what I liked best just from the sound....but it is easy for me to decide what I like when I combine all of it....size, sound, look, shape, age, color, wood, and my personal preference for all of them.