Official Luthiers Forum!

Paul, you obviously didn't hit him with a pet peeve like I did.   He detested the very concept of an electric guitar or electric bass.   I was "instant enemy to all things aesthetically sacred" when I told him what I did for a living. I wasn't a furniture building devotee.   He had no tolerance for a viewpoint much different from his own.

It's OK. There are instrument builders right here on this forum who hate amplified music, pickups, and all that. For me it's just another range of colors from the musical rainbow, but it's amazing to me how tightly wound some supposedly mellow craftspeople can be, and Krenov was pretty damned tightly wound once you bounced him out of his nice little comfort zone. What I didn't appreciate was having my work criticized without his having even seen it, much less heard it. In fact, my work of that time was very informed by the natural curves and touchy-feely wood aesthetic of the Northern Californian furniture movement as exemplified by guys like Krenov, Art "Espenet" Carpenter (a pal), Sam Maloof, etc.   I was, in fact, the instrument maker who was the most like them in a parallel field with the early Alembic designs.

I'll really enjoy a critique section. We may not be able to talk about much
more than aesthetics, but that will be enjoyable and helpful. You never
know what we may be able to help each other refine, and if nothing else,
we'll get to know each other better by hearing what each other likes.

I doubt that you can evaluate anything on-line except perhaps the large design features such as shape of bridge choice of purfling or rosette. Sounds clips are practically useless. I was listening to one the other day and decided to play around with the equalizer on my audio player. I could make the instrument sound pretty good or terrible without setting the equalizer to anything unreasonable. I have no idea what the recording settings might have been.

In person, a critique is a different animal. I've attended several guitar evaluations at ASIA conferences and I have found them to be enlightening. The focus seems to be on the fit and finish of the instrument. Very little is said about tone. I guess tone is so subjective that it is hard to say anything about it. The fit and finish aspect is concrete and the builder can so something about it on the next build. It also lets the builder know how close they are to building an instrument that is sellable.
I looked at the reaction of the builder to the comments and they always nod their head to each point as if to say "Yea, I knew about that and now I know that it's important enough that I'll have to fix it or make sure it doesn't happen again."

A friend of mine who has been a builder for over 30 years showed a few instruments to Frank Ford and asked the simple question. "What do I have to do to make an instrument that he could sell in his shop?" Frank pointed out several aspects of his instruments at would make it hard for him to sell. Some of his comments could be summarized as "This doesn't look like a Martin clone so the customers will be taken aback by it". But other comments were very helpful and directed his future builds.

As for the credentials of the critic, you don't have to be a gourmet chef to know that you don't like the food. The top food critics are probably lousy cooks and they know it. Just because I can't dress frets to save my life doesn't mean that I don't know what a well dressed fret board is supposed to look like. Although I do sympathize with Howard's point about the "superstar" luthier who gleefully points out all the flaws in other builders instrument when his are no better or even worse. That is annoying.

Is giving a reply yea or ney included in this ettiquette?
Please see THINK BIGGER-recent post

     This forum isn't appropriate for full evaluation of anybodys instrument. The priority is of course sound, as others have eluded to, comparison has so many variables that have nothing to do with the guitar itself, as to make them really useless to determination... it is extremely interesting to hear them though.

     A good guitar comes through but there are a lot of good guitars shown here.

     As for appearance, a good camera, good lighting, skilled hands, hides many evils!

      I mostly consider what is posted here for ideas and greatly appreciate those that offer their time to inform others of what they're doing or think.

     Really, the OLF is like a great big christmas present everytime it's loaded up. People are giving a big leg up for others to see and the gratitude for a job shown well done, either from a hobbiest or professional, is shown. In light of that spirit, careful consideration of the overall is very important.

_________________
Billy Dean Thomas
Covina, CA

"Multi famam, conscientiam, pauci verentur."
(Many fear their reputation, few their conscience)

Rick,
Every person I've ever heard speak of their personal contact and
interaction with Krenov has had similar things to say. Over and over it
was, "What a rude, arrogant person." I have two friends from New Jersey
who were huge fans of his work....until they had an opportunity to meet
and speak with him. He was never mentioned in their shop in Paterson
again.

   It just goes to show you that the person behind great work is just as
important as the work to some folks. I never met him personally, but have
admired some of James Krenov's work up close. He has obvious skills with
wood and an equally obvious lack of them with people.

   Your early Alembic designs are still some of my favorite basses of all
time. There are some great bass makers today, but none doing anything
close to those beauties.

   The industry owes you a debt of gratitude for your designs and your
continued innovation.

    I build electrics occasionally, even now, but acoustic guitars hold my
interest for the time being. I love you current electric designs and have
been inspired many time by watching what is coming out of your shop.

   I, for one, am glad that Krenov's rediculous response to you and your
work didn't slow you down at all.

Regards and Thanks,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars

[QUOTE=Bruce Dickey]

I got a kick seeing that Kent Everett offers a guitar critique for just $85. I don't know if that comes with a box of Kleenex or not? But I be you could learn some things from one of his critiques.

[/QUOTE]

Kent's guitar critique is actually a really good service for those wanting to take their building to the next level, whatever level that is for you.
You have the opportunity to get an honest critique from someone who has been doing this for over 3 decades. I highly recommend it!

Krenov is not my problem, I am!   And conversely, he is his own problem as well.

[QUOTE=Rick Turner] Krenov is not my problem, I am!   And conversely, he is his own problem as well.[/QUOTE]

I can relate to that!
We are all our own worst enemies.
We hold ourselves back much more than we are held back by others.

My favorite artist, Bob Bennett has a line in a song something like this -
"You have lived your life as a slave it it seems,
Believing you nightmares instead of your dreams."

_________________
"An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is an adventure wrongly considered." G. K. Chesterton.

ahh .. another Bob Bennett fan .. 'We Were the Kings' is my favorite tune of his - I dont know how he performs it without breaking into tears. Next time you see him, say Hi for me - he doesnt make it up to Canada much.

_________________
Tony Karol
www.karol-guitars.com
"let my passion .. fulfill yours"

Mike Mahar wrote:
"A friend of mine who has been a builder for over 30 years showed a few instruments to Frank Ford and asked the simple question. "What do I have to do to make an instrument that he could sell in his shop?" Frank pointed out several aspects of his instruments at would make it hard for him to sell. Some of his comments could be summarized as "This doesn't look like a Martin clone so the customers will be taken aback by it". But other comments were very helpful and directed his future builds. "

That was me! The actual question was: "What would make this instrument hard for you to sell?" The gist of what he said was that a Martin clone is the easiest. The other interesting thing was that, if you can't make an _exact_ (or improved, like Collings) copy of a Martin (or Taylor, I suppose), the worst thing you can do is come close. People will assume you tried for a copy but don't have the chops. Basically, any time you depart in any way from that standard, you have to justify it, and most people won't wait for the explaination, whether you're right or wrong.

It always seems to me that fit and finish get far too much attention, simply because it's possible to be objective about them. I recall the long thread on another forum started by a player who bought a guitar, found that the bridge was 1/32" off center, and wondered if this was 'acceptible'. 'Precision' only counts in a context. In a production setting that might be a killer, but on a handmade it's trivial so long as the thing plays and sounds well. The variety of responses in that thread showed that a lot of folks simply had not thought about it much.

This is not to say that sloppy work is OK. Personally I realize how far I have to go in the F&F department. Some times these 'issues' can be self-inflicted: using varnish or FP instead of a more 'modern' finish will limit the degree to which you can emulate that 'new car' shine, for example. So, again, those sorts of things have to be judged in context; you can't (or shouldn't) expect a classical guitar to have the same sort of finish a solid body does. As Rick (?) said, a big part of the critique has to be based on how well the person accomplished what they set out to do.

In the end, I don't think a popular list that consisted of nothing but self-congratulation and back slapping would do any of us much good. On the other hand, there's no reason we can't have an equally popular list that includes some good critiques of other's work, so long as we remain civil and keep in mind that none of us is perfect and we're all trying to improve.

   I see this a lot and I always try to find the positives first , then after that I will point out the weaker parts of the build.
   Lets face it , we don't makem perfect and most of us know what we did wrong. fit and finish are hard to get right and that takes time and practice. Tonal quality should be the 1st priority.
When one does need to point out some problems . always be kind but honest but only of you know how to do it. Never tell one that something is wrong unless you can tell them how to do it right.
john hall

     I agree that sometimes the finish and overall appearance of a guitar
catches the eye of the beholder...and blurs their vision of more important
issues for the duration of their inspection of it.

    I love a great finish and have worked for a long time to achieve one.
Even though I haven't seen a perfect finish yet.....on any guitar.....from
any builders, there have been alot of gains made by the undustry in
general toward a better finish.

   Tone is always the top concern and the main focus of my pursuit of
buildng a better guitar than I did last time, but it's also important to
continue to educate ourselves and develop our finish chops. Fit and finish
are important issues since we are claiming to be skilled craftsmen and the
execution of all of the small operations that constitute the overall detail
package of our guitars are just things that we can get better at if we really
care to.

    I just took my seventh guitar (serial #004) back on trade toward a new
one from its original owner. It's an OM much in the Martin design
tradition complete with Ivoroid binding a Martin style rosette. It certainly
doesn't compare to what i'm doing now....nearly 18 years and 500 guitars
later, but it is still a guitar that I would sell. I was proud of its tone and
appearance back then and it sounds great and plays great today. Its
owner has six others from me since this one and just wants to get
another in the works as he retires this one to me.

    It will be heading off to a new home to be played by a new owner after
a little finish attention to bring it closer to like new condition.

    We shouldn't use the "tone is the only thing that matters to me" excuse
to avoid growing in the other aspects of the craft...like doing a clean
binding job with seemless joints and tight miters....and achieving a
smooth, glasslike finish that is thin and doesn't restrict vibration at the
same time. We need to pay attetion to all of the things that our potential
customers do and not be so quick to criticize those who do better work
tha we do ourselves.

    When a customer notices gaps in bnding and purflings and poor fitting
joints elsewhere on a guitar, you can't just blow smoke over the issue by
saying, "That stuff doesn't matter...listen to that tone." They simply reply
to those kind of rediculous things...possibly in though only, "Well it
appears to matter to these other builders who take the time to execute it
all with great skill...and still get great tone."

    That has been my chief problem with alot of the critique offered by
some who have claimed their stake in the loop of the "all knowing"
without ever achieving the same level of skill as many of the builders that
they readily criticize. When I hear some of the critical remarks offered at
shows by the self benched "judges" about what makes a great guitar, I'm
a little shocked...but then I usually end up laughing when I hear who
made those comments because I've often seen and played the work of
both the critic and the receiver of their critique.

    I've talked to as many as a dozen builders after a major who mention
and encounter with these guys or are affected by their observations and I
encourage them to ignore the comments and get a good look at the work
of the critics before the designate a level of validity to them.

    Those who criticize at the drop of a hat or look to create their
opportunities to do so...like some people have become known to do at all
of the shows, they usually do so more for their own service than for that
of the person whose work they are critiquing. "You don't look so bad if
you drag a few people down to where you are...", is what my Grandma
used to say.

    We need to be clear and honest about our intentions when we offer any
criticism.

Regards,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars

Unfortunately, fit and finish matter incredibly in making that invaluable first impression.   Kevin knows what he's talking about here...

If you can't come close to meeting the standards set by America's top guitar factories, you need to go back to the woodshed and practice. Build simpler instruments and get them right, really right. If you really believe that tone is paramount, then make some very simply ornamented instruments...single layer binding, unbound peghead and fingerboard, simple dot inlays.   Take the ego out of your building style, and build more instruments for tone...and charge less for them.   Think about how many more instruments you can build...and that means a lot of experience focusing on tone...if you lose the fancy inlays, the mitered purflings, the super fancy woods, etc.   Build instruments for players, not would be collectors for a while. Learn to build guitars in less than 40 hours, start to finish.   Build them exquisitely well, and make 'em sound stupendous.   

Then go back to the zoot suit...

[QUOTE=Rick Turner] Unfortunately, fit and finish matter incredibly in making that invaluable first impression.   Kevin knows what he's talking about here...

If you can't come close to meeting the standards set by America's top guitar factories, you need to go back to the woodshed and practice. Build simpler instruments and get them right, really right. If you really believe that tone is paramount, then make some very simply ornamented instruments...single layer binding, unbound peghead and fingerboard, simple dot inlays.   Take the ego out of your building style, and build more instruments for tone...and charge less for them.   Think about how many more instruments you can build...and that means a lot of experience focusing on tone...if you lose the fancy inlays, the mitered purflings, the super fancy woods, etc.   Build instruments for players, not would be collectors for a while. Learn to build guitars in less than 40 hours, start to finish.   Build them exquisitely well, and make 'em sound stupendous.   

Then go back to the zoot suit...[/QUOTE]

Wise words.

(Did I really say that )

Colin

_________________
I don't believe in anything, I simply make use of a set of reasonable working hypotheses.

Yes, you better believe that a guitar can be made in less that 40 hours. We do it here, and that's for fairly ornamented ones with a lot of engineering stuff going on inside. While I have a fairly well-tooled shop and employees, they work pretty much the same way most of you do. I have one employee who does most of the work on most of our acoustic guitars, plus he's doing most of our CNC programming and tooling for completely other projects, and he's building two acoustics a month...with no CNC'd parts yet. I do the finish spraying, but Matthew rubs them out and sets them up. The last acoustic I built fully was the one I took to H'burg, and I didn't have any more than about 35 hours into it.

James Olson does it in a one-man shop; I think his high was about 60 instruments one year, and those had laminated necks, nice purflings and bindings, etc.   And he had to tak the time in to sell them all, do his purchasing, etc.   So he probably had about 25 or 30 actual build hours into fairly complex instruments.

Mexican builders in Paracho whip them out working with not much more than a cuchillo...a knife. Get Benito Huipe's video if you want to see how to build quickly.

Most small shop luthiers work very inefficiently. Too much Zen, too much thinking about each step, too much pondering, too much time talking about guitar making, too much time on the Internet!

If you want to get good at this stuff, you have to learn to work quickly where appropriate, slow down where that's needed, and then speed back up whenever you can. There's nothing like cranking them out to get you good at it. One way to crank them out is to simplify so you can get that muscle memory of how to bend, carve, sand, level, crown, polish.   Note that I didn't say inlay or miter... If you build guitars that are simple, and elegant, AND sound great, and play easily, you'll find they sell and that you can make a living at this. An elegant shape or line beats the hell out of rococo detailing anytime.

Rick,
   I built as many as 52 in a year once and I believe that Jim and I put in
similar hours as we set our own personal production records. I spoke with
Jim concerning his approaching 60 guitars and he said that he was
putting in 16 hour days, 6 days a week for that year. That's about what I
did when hitting 52....and I was in 1200 suqre feet and working with no
CNC and my arsenal of old school tools. machines and methods.

   I couldn't agree more with you on your statement above about shooting
for a 40 hour mark on a guitar and simplifying the design and
appointment scheme as much as possible as you do. Good advice to any
builder who is cutting their design and execution chops is to keep their
goals in line with their current abilities and to continue practicing new
techniques and designs on prototype and experimental pieces to develop
their instruments on both fronts of tone and appearance.


   I can hardly imagine how you and your crew achieve the results that you
do in 40 hours on some of your guitars. Alot of us do work inefficiently,
but even those habits can be changed and refined into productive efforts
if we get past the goal of each step and actually understand what it's
taking for us to reach each one. Voicing can be a quick process if you
really understand how the top works and how it is affected by even the
most minute changes in specific areas of the bracing.

    I've talked to guys who spend hours voicing a top, but I assume that
it's more because they're just experiencing alot of it as a brand new
encounter each time rather than documenting and remembering what's
happened all of those previous times.

    You're one of the guys in the industry we all need to tip our ear to
when we see your name. I appreciate the input that you offer and the
candor that you offer it with...a rare combination in any forum.

Thanks,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars

For us, a lot of it is in hardly ever making one part at a time.   Make at least two, if not six...or twelve...or three dozen. Make your mistakes when you're making templets and correct them there...not on the final parts. Have your sequence of operations down pat.   Learn the shortcuts.

A "for example" here...I teach a class in building a mandolin in four days.   I make all the parts here in my shop. In about three hours over the past couple of days, I resawed, center seam jointed, and glued up 24 cedar tops out of some vertical grain WRC scrap that I had.   I used hot hide glue for the center seam, and I used brown flatback tape to "spring clamp" all the top seams.   Doing this I was able to glue up all the tops in one session, come back this morning and pull off the tape, and now I'll run them through the sander.   Well, it wouldn't take but about 25% more time to do guitar tops.   

The point?   How many tops and or backs do you all have in stock?   Why not center seam and glue them all up at once? Or at least do a year's worth...

It's a mind set based on my need to actually make a living doing this.   Yes, I love guitar making, but I also need to support a 12 year old kid with special needs; I like to live a fun life; and I have a wonderful relationship with a woman who lives 8,500 miles away, and that means expensive plane flights.   All that means I need to earn a decent middle class level income...as a luthier.   It's quite doable. Not easy, but doable.

Rick,
   I've taken exactly that approach for more tha a decade now. I always
have at least 250 sets of bracing materials rough shaped for both top and
back bracing and a shelf that usually has about 500 fingerboards with
radius, taper and fret slots cut in them. I leave all of the nut widths on
them at 1.875" unbound and simply have to run them across the jointer
to bring them into the width needed for a particular customer.

   East Indian Rosewood was always lying around to the tune of 500 sets
or so and there was always at least 100 ready to bend. The same has
always been true of Mahogany, but I was forced to sell a good portion of
my wood stash to help support us while I was unable to produce this past
year. I'll get back to that place one day.

   Tops are my least plentifully stocked or inventoried woods...and always
have been for whatever reason. I do keep a short stack of the more
popular tops here, but am working on building that pile soon.

    Just having alot of the parts fabricated and read to pull up for assembly
saves alot of time on each guitar. I've developed a quirky habit of keeping
all of my preshaped parts separated according to the resonant qualities of
the wood that they're made from to be able to still conside those traits as
I pick them up to match them with the other components of each guitar.

Regards,
Kevin Gallagher/Omega Guitars

I always joke that I tend to make the same number of mistakes per hour, so the fewer hours it takes me to make a guitar, the better it turns out. It'a joke with some truth in it. The 'flow' of working efficiently keeps you from making some of the more egregious mistakes.   

It's been a long time since I kept track of hours on a basic guitar: the last time did it was about 60, and I know I'm a lot faster now. It's still the same sort of hand tool work, though: some of you CNC types might be surprised at how fast you can get with hand tools.

It's always the decoration that slows you down. Any student of mine who makes a rosette more complicated that BWB-Ab-BWB seems to almost double the time it takes them to get through. My big bottleneck these days is the rosette, but it's worth the effort to me.

Aside from 'art', the biggest time waster is 'science'. If I really wanted to I could spend about as long charting stuff on each guitar as it takes to build it. I'm still learning.....

One thing Rick and Kevin aren't mentioning is that they need also need to
factor in that I'll bug them with either a visit or a question.      They're
very generous.