Skip to content
Head to head

ESP D-320E NATURAL SATIN vs Ibanez AW84CE

ESP D-320E NATURAL SATIN
Acoustic—
No ratings yet
82Overall / 100
Ibanez AW84CE
Ibanez
AW84CE
Acoustic—
No ratings yet
67Overall / 100

The verdict

The ESP D-320E NATURAL SATIN comes out ahead overall — 82 to 67 on our estimated score.

Estimated from specs & owner reviews — a starting point, not a substitute for playing both.

ESP D-320E NATURAL SATIN wins on
  • Better build (96 vs 70)
  • Better playability (78 vs 64)
  • Better value (81 vs 67)
Ibanez AW84CE wins on

No standout advantage.

Scorecard

Estimated scores
MetricD-320E NATURAL SATINAW84CE
Overall8267
Build9670
Playability7864
Sound6868
Value8167

Full specifications

Specification comparison
SpecD-320E NATURAL SATINAW84CE
BrandESPIbanez
TypeAcousticAcoustic
Years——
CountryJP—
Body woodOvangkolSolid Okoume
Neck woodMahogany—
FretboardRoasted JatobaLaurel
Strings66
Frets2020
Scale25.5"25.5"
PickupsFishman SonicoreIbanez T-bar Undersaddle
Rating——
Price——
BridgeRoasted Jatoba Bridge w/ Graphtech Nubone SaddleLaurel bridge
Bridge pickupFishman Sonicore—
Case-—
Case IncludedN—
ConstructionSet-Neck—
ControlsActive—
FinishNatural Satin—
Fretboard radius350mm—
HardwareBlack—
Neck profileThin U—
NutGraphtech NuboneBone
Nut width43mm—
Scale length25.5"647.7mm/25.5"
Strap ButtonStandard—
Top woodSolid Red CedarSolid Okoume top
TunersLTD—
A Length—20 1/8"
A Width—43mm at NUT
Back Sides—Okoume back & Okoume sides
Battery—9V x1
Body shape—Cutaway Dreadnought body
Bridge Pins—Ibanez Advantage™
B Width—15 3/4"
C Max Depth—5"
C Thickness—21mm at 1F
D Thickness—22mm at 7F
Factory Tuning—1E,2B,3G,4D,5A,6E
Inlay—White dot inlay
Output Jack—Balanced XLR & 1/4" outputs
Preamp—Ibanez AEQ-TP2 preamp w/Onboard tuner
Radius—400mmR
Recommended Bag—IAB540-BK
Recommended Case—FS40DA
Saddle Material—Compensated Bone
Soundhole Rosette—Black & White multi
String Gauge—.012/.016/.024/.032/.042/.053
String Space—11mm
Tuning Machine—Chrome Die-cast tuners w/Black knobs (18:1 gear ratio)

More D-320E NATURAL SATIN comparisons