1932 Martin OM28 vs. 2015 Martin OM28 Authentic 1931 (torrefied top)

[@BigKidCertified]

Holy F@&$/&$ $hizz!!! That 1932 almost made me have an eargasm. The tonal quality and harmonics as you slid the chords up was insane. This is one of the first and only KZbin videos I've watched that knocked me off my chair. There is something incredibly special about that 1932 wow wow wow. My mind is blown!!

[@albertpsaros4988]

vintage hands down, amazing given the authentic is an incredible instrument

[@williammartin4369]

I would like to hear the comparison in a couple of years when the 31 opens up. I’d kill for that 32.....almost

[@jaredcaldera]

Man that 32 sounds like 6 angels singing.

[@josejcastaneda5826]

That vintage sound is very hearable!

[@kelley71]

'32 Was amazing. I second the eargasm comment below.

[@everettclunie3525]

That 32 was one incredible guitar. I can appreciate what Martin is doing with their authentic series but there really is no substitute for a real deal vintage Martin. The "authentic" was great but the 32 is a truly beautiful guitar

[@harlequin75]

Holy smokes...that 1932...wow. My ears are only good enough to keep myself in key but even to my ears I noticed a difference.

[@amazingme1408]

one spectacular guitar here... one very good one.

[@soofitnsexy]

absolutely

[@Colms2005]

Thanks so much for taking the time to show us this very interesting demo. My experience with Madagascar rosewood on larger bodied is that it doesn't really compare to brazilian too well. Braz is a lot brighter and packs greater harmonics than Madagascar rosewood. The original 32 OM sounded so much better in that it had a much rounder and richer sound. This demo shows that even with a torrefied top there seems like no compensating for the effects of real time on an instrument.

[@timlilly]

Great demo, many thanks. Oddly, I prefer the new one.

[@Jordan_Thomas]

The newer one has a more dreadnought like quality. The older one is more mid focused and maybe louder? Hard to know for sure with the way things get compressed. They really sound quite different but the mid honk of that 32 would be real fun to muck around on.

[@CC-xt1bw]

I've owned a Martin '29 OM-28 and a '31 OM-18 and compared them to the new Martin Authentic series equivalents. While I applaud Martin for their amazing efforts to recreate what time has in part created, the new guitars fall somewhat short of the mark, albeit much closer than their "standard" models. There is richness and sweetness in the originals that simply can't be replicated, in part due to years the vintage instruments have been PLAYED. To emphasize this point, we compared a "players" quality '31 OM-18 to an identical one that had sat in the closet for many years purchased by a very well known guitarist (the two guitars were within 50 serial numbers of one another mfg in 1931). The "players" guitar absolutely BLEW the other "31 OM-18 away in terms of openness, tonal sweetness and richness (overtones), as well as sustain. The one kept in the closet was muted sounding in comparison. Just goes to show you how important TIME and PLAYING are in ultimately determining the future quality of sound of a guitar.

[@brandall101]

As an owner of a 4 year old OM-28A owner I'd hope this is the case, but I somewhat suspect at least half of the difference is due to flat sawn madi vs. old growth qs braz. The torrefaction of both top and braces should cut down on some of the aging diff.

[@alexcorll90]

The vintage one has such a great sound. But honestly, the Authentic really does sound close, just a brighter/tighter sound like you might expect from a new guitar. Overtime they'll probably become even more similar.

[@theflipsidersmusic6611]

the vintage obviously wins but that authentic is great too, it just hasn't opened up fully yet but it will one day. Hard to beat real age and whatever happens to the wood when it starts to break down or dry out. Obviously the vintage has the brazilian too.... I'm lucky enough to have a few 40's martins, the sound is one thing but also the feel is very different on the old ones in a very good way.

[@davidheenan7432]

I dont hear much difference but as an Om28A owner Im biased. And, every guitar is different, Im positive there are OM28As out there that would knock the socks off original ones.

[@samuelwwr1]

OMG.... the vintage OM28 is the bomb. To my ears, you can't fake an authentic aged tone. But then again, Brazilian RW is the king of tones.

[@jaymorritt4160]

the authentics are amazing, but there is no competing with that 32, which sounds just massive and, well.....beyond description....

[@bluesysamurainao4557]

Nice!! It seems a vintage one is much easier to play. I wanna buy a vintage Martin but don' have enough money.

[@tonystark9118]

The original is more mid scooped with more pronounced highs and lows and the torrefied has midrange. Thats what I hear as a difference, also the original has lots of sustain. The original sings like an angel!

[@libertasdon]

Enjoyed the torrefied top more. The earlier guitar did not sound right to my ear at certain tmes. Most probably me.

[@jc_montero]

Give the Authentic some 83 more years, and then let's hear it again.

[@mikestrat56]

Wow. There is a huge difference. Played one of the Authentics at the factory and it was spectacular. But... the real deal '32 is on a completely different level altogether. But then again.. so is the price. The Authentic is a wonderful guitar for the money unless you have some seriously high five figures of cash layin' around for the real one and who does? Not me.

[@Dildobagginses]

I can't help but feel the new one will sound better with a little playing. Still gotta settle in, it's not just the old wood.

[@NikulPrasad]

The vintage guitar has richer harmonics, britcher but sweeter tone and far superior sustain. Jesus Christ I want one!

[@aum3.146]

that 32 is a sweet cannon

[@MyChannel-om3gg]

The ‘32 for sure

[@NaijaBoiTellEm]

Yea, the 1932 just sounds richer. No surprise though.

[@렉돌-r2r]

Fuck u man

[@daciuk8]

The ‘32 all day long,what a beautiful sounding guitar, how much?

[@BP-or2iu]

I wanted to be able to say there’s not much difference and it doesn’t really matter. But the new one sounds so metallic compared to the original one. The old one is much bassier and deeper and just more lovely all around.

[@michaelhockin1984]

You can't beat old wood. Torrification may be great but the difference is obvious. I love the old guitars. I have a couple Yamaha FG 180's. One is a '69 while the other is a '71. Both now compare well to my '70 Martin d-18 which I bought new back then. At the time I bought the Martin I could get an FG 180 for $169. a friend had one and it sounded good but not compared the Martin. Now the difference is negligible. Old Wood.

[@williamhole1914]

The contemporary guitar is not very fair. Tune has become an option on most guitars over the past 10 years. Alas, even on $ 8,000 guitars. But the old guitar is absolutely correct. We hear it immediately.

[@lindarice9087]

The 32 by far

[@Kananond]

Whats Madi-Gas-Can? Is it used in an emergency when your car runs out of fuel?

[@adamstewart247]

"Hi I'd like to sell you an $100,000 guitar. It's Madagascan back and genuine Adirondogs wood on the top. Built by Mitten Guitars. Did I tell you yet I'm an expert by the way?

[@CNFir-fs6zs]

I'll take the original. The copy is pretty good too, and much cheaper. As for sound, you can't copy age .

[@stevec.1802]

Do both guitar have new PB strings on them?

[@TallToadMusic]

Truthfully can't say for sure that we remember. Definitely not both "new" for the video. :-)

[@poppacooter]

maybe if the back and sides were torrefied it would sound closer.

[@brunocoelhobass]

wow to the real 1932... I wasn't expecting such a big difference.

[@thecaveofthedead]

Yeah. That 32 is just night and day better. They're obviously still a long way from being able to make new guitars sound like that.

[@michaellam3684]

How much is that 32' om28?

[@soofitnsexy]

ABOUT 3000

[@malcolm77]

3000 ??

[@SonicAgamemnon]

'32 crushes the new model-- older is mucho better

[@liamsilver4843]

the 1932 sounds more vintage

[@stevealexander8226]

Why have you tuned them down a semitones,that's cheating.

[@TallToadMusic]

Ha... didn't even realize that until now. I dont know why they were tuned down. I have no idea how it would be "cheating" but the tuner was probably just on a flat and we didnt even realize.

[@Michael-ei5jd]

The old martin’s sound is good than authentic

[@adamstewart247]

The older one sounds like too much bass and shrill treble and no midrange...but in the hands of the right player each guitar's tendencies can be turned to advantages. Impossible to get much of a feel with such poor microphone quality and without having both guitars in hand, but I think some of the older guitars are a bit over hyped. Everyone who has played a lot of the older ones says there are good and bad older Martin's

[@waltdude]

I don't hear 80 grand worth a difference

[@NikulPrasad]

I do if I'm a rich bitch

[@tomgnau]

Yea, the new one just sounds better. No surprise though.

[@shawnchaudry2126]

Not even close

[@NikulPrasad]

You would think if someone were to compare two guitars with a combined value of $80,000 US, they would at least use some proper microphones and recording gear in doing so -.-

[@TallToadMusic]

Sorry to disappoint you. We are a small family owned music store and we just do not have the budget for a dedicated "media" department. We try to do all we can to share some of our guitars with people with what we have to work with.

[@NikulPrasad]

Nah it's all good I still have the vid a like anyway. Maybe just I invest in a portable tascam or zoom recorder. They're fairly cheap and offer high quality 24bit 48 kHz recording capabilities.

[@TallToadMusic]

this video is 24 bit high quality audio.. sorry if its not coming through... I personally have a Zoom and these mic's on this Canon are better IMO. We could mic it closer but then I'd be out of the frame and I want to talk to everyone! :-) We could add another mic but then again you are talking time, post mixing, etc... I like to think that we are helping some people out or at least entertaining them for a few minutes with our video.... but like I said above we just don't have the budget to pay me to take 5-8 hours to do a video. :-) We do what we can! With this camera I feel we get a quick and easy video with very passable video and audio.

[@steveb9325]

@@TallToadMusic the videos and sound are good! Thank you!

[@jasonhealan744]

Not even close.