Official Luthiers Forum!

[QUOTE=PaulB] A blind guitarist would say "Where did I leave that bloody guitar!"[/QUOTE]
Guys, can we please try to be a bit more sensitive. Some people find jokes like this offensive.
Thanks, Paul

Another Great Thread. Thanks for starting it Rick.

I am not going to repeat all that has been said other than I agree that the sound of the instrument is first and foremost. That being said, I do have some great looking wood, mostly highly figured examples of woods I know make great sounding guitars for me. One of the nicest sounding guitars I made was a twelve string made with a spectacular piece of spalted maple. I wish I had a few more sets from that board. Unfortunately there were only two and the sawyer took one for himself. I sold it this summer at a substantial premium.

I build to a high standard as do most of the folks on this forum. I mostly like classic lines with not a lot of embelishment. Plain and Simple.

As a wanna-be builder just starting, it is hard to jump in on alot of topics.  However, this one I am all too qualified to respond to . 

I have been playing for 30 years, and play fingerstyle guitar.  I consider myself a serious amateur - meaning i take my playing seriously, but do not make my living playing.  I own a number of acoustic guitars - some vinage, and some built for me.  To me, the 2 most important items for a guitar are tone, and volume, followed by playability - looks comes dead last.  Do I want a crappy looking guitar?  No, but then again, I am very happy with a non-flashy guitar.  I have an 80's Franklin built for me with BRW cut in 1964.  It is perfectly quartered.  This guitar has tone for miles, and is very loud - it is my "standard" to hold all other guitars to.  

Glenn 

I think Willie Nelson is a good example of someone who loves their guitar for how it sounds/plays and not how it looks.

_________________
Thanks,
Blain

http://www.ullrichguitar.com

"89.67% of all statistics are made up on the spot."

[QUOTE=blain1976] I think Willie Nelson is a good example of someone who loves their guitar for how it sounds/plays and not how it looks.
[/QUOTE]

Oh, I'm not so sure about that! Of course looks matter, and I think Willie's guitar is a great example; you don't think he knows what an impression he makes with that guitar? Just because you don't care about bling and shiny tops does not mean you don't care about looks. Personally I find some of the more elaborate, 'fancy' contemporary custom guitars incredibly tacky and lacking in elegance. They all send a message, but it means different things to different people.

_________________
Rian Gitar og Mandolin

Funny...I made the bridge in that picture of Willie's guitar...

[QUOTE=Rick Turner] Funny...I made the bridge in that picture of Willie's guitar...[/QUOTE]

OK Rick...now you must tell us more about Trigger!

_________________
JJ
Napa, CA
http://www.DonohueGuitars.com

I'm having a bit of trouble reading and typing...just had the first of my eye lenses replaced today...cataracts. I'll write more in a few days. I was nearly the blind guitarist of this thread...

Good luck on the process, Rick. I have a friend who just had both replaced, and it is a quick healing process.  It is hard to think of anything bad happening, but there is always some risk.  Don't know how bad the cataracts were, but it has to be an improvement.  My friend says things really look different.

Losing ones sight, is a frightening process.  My father lost his in his last 20 years of his life due to Glaucoma.  First one eye then the other.  It was really hard for a guy who was an avid reader, an engineer who loved working in his little machine shop in the basement making stuff, and a hobby photographer.  It all happened after he retired, but it sure took the fun out of his life.  Somehow, he managed to handle it well, and kept a positive attitude, but you could tell how he missed seeing things.

_________________
Waddy

Photobucket Build Album Library

Sound Clips of most of my guitars

What? No more pretty, meticulously joined and finished guitars? HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA! You're THROUGH Lance! THROUGH I tell ya! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Seriously though Rick...your point is well-taken!

_________________
http://www.presnallguitars.com

It takes bling to get someone to look but once they have looked then it takes substance to keep their attention... and I am not just talking about getting a date...

Case in point, Antonio De Torres is thought by many to be the Stradivarius of classical guitars yet the way he first become sought after was when he won the bronze medal in the Sevilla Guitar competition of 1858 with his FE08 guitar which is totally bling.  Ifthe only guitar we had of his was the over the top FE08, nobody would remember Torres.  Because he got attention and then proved through a number of well executed guitars that he could build great sounding guitars, his place in history was preserved.

To be able to build a well built guitar with bling shows technical craftsmanship.  To build a number of well built guitars that sound great makes you a luthier.

Don Ross is another another example of a player who loves his beat up guitars for the tone and you won't see any bling either.

The more I build the more I am attracted to a minimalist approach, fewer woods, lighter guitars, guitars that let you feel the vibrations on your body.

Tone comes first along with playability but if bling is your thing that's cool too.  Of all the old Martins that I have played at say Elderly they all have one thing in common, they are very light weight.

In my own building every guitar that I build gets lighter and lighter over the early guitars and they sound better too IMHO.

Don't get me wrong I greatly appreciate the craftsmanship that can go into an elaborate, ornamental guitar.  But I am learning still, always will be too, and my focus is on a signature sound and playability.  Once I find that to be where I want it perhaps bling will be next, perhaps not.  It's also always on my mind to create something that can be reproduced if it is successful and reproduced where the numbers/costs/time spent make sense for what the market will bear.

[QUOTE=Dave White]I don't know but "Blind Curly Redwood" might be a hell of a stage name



[/QUOTE]

For a while, I was performing as Coco Bolo. Then, when I switched to bluegrass, my name became Bubba Inga.

Jim

Lest you all think I'm totally anti-bling...I'm not. I'm the guy who taught Larry Robinson "the Art of Inlay." But there was a time when I put the visuals first and then tried to work out the structural and tonal details.   Now I attempt to design from the core of the instrument outward in the sense that tone and playability make up the core values. Frankly, bling is the easy stuff, once you get your basic chops down. Yes, it attracts the unsophisticated gawkers; you'll certainly get the crowd around your table at a guitar show.   But I'd rather know that one of my guitars was the one chosen to record or was that beat-up guitar in the number one slot of the guitar rack on stage.

I want to make musical instruments; that's hard. Making art pieces is like shooting fish in a barrel...great for an ego rush and leaves you unsatisfied tomorrow.

[QUOTE=Arnt]Oh, I'm not so sure about that! Of course looks matter,
and I think Willie's guitar is a great example; you don't think he knows
what an impression he makes with that guitar? Just because you don't
care about bling and shiny tops does not mean you don't care about
looks.[/QUOTE]

Thank you, Arnt.

[QUOTE=Rick Turner]Does the function of the guitar really matter much
or is is just a canvas for art, craft, and the beauty of the wood?[/QUOTE]

I believe each are the function of a guitar. People don't polarize things;
it's just not the way we work. We come to love sounds because of the
way something looks. We love the way something looks because of the
way it sounds. We're constantly transmediating. Attraction is in the
beholder, but I would say just as strongly that if the attraction isn't there,
something is nothing but a guitar-like object.

One of the first persons I saw play a guitar was Jeff Healey (A Canadian to boot). That guy sure can play. I was totally amazed at his ability to play, his style was unconventional (still is) and what else can be said, he's a great guitarist and he plays trumpet and clarinet too.

Honestly, I can't afford to build guitars with bling.

The sound should be paramount in a guitar, but that doesn't always happen. Like I mentioned in the Martin Authentic thread, that's the reason I bought the last guitar I did. It sounded better than all the others I played and it cost less to boot.

Rick, have you been able to hear or see the 1,000,000th Martin. That has to be the most blinged out guitar I've ever seen a picture of.

What's it sound like? I wonder if all that pearl, gold, abalone and what ever else is on there effects the sound. Sure looks amazing though.

That's the way to celebrate a milestone.

There's a place for "bling" but who's place that is I don't know. Some people love it, some people don't.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

Not for nothing but in my opinion tone must come second to playability.
You could build the best sounding guitar on the planet but if it doesn't play
well how often are you going to pick it up? Just a thought.

Good point Kahle, but you can always make it play better. Not to many people get there hands inside a guitar body to make it sound better.

_________________
My Facebook Guitar Page

"There's really no wrong way, as long as the results are what's desired." Charles Fox

"We have to constantly remind ourselves what we're doing....No Luthier is putting a man on the moon!" Harry Fleishman

"Generosity is always different in the eye of the person who didn't receive anything, but who wanted some." Waddy Thomson

[QUOTE=Kahle]Not for nothing but in my opinion tone must come second to playability.
You could build the best sounding guitar on the planet but if it doesn't play
well how often are you going to pick it up? Just a thought.[/QUOTE]

Good for you, Kahle, for a thoughtful response.

As for the rest of those jumping on the "tone comes first" bandwagon, I wonder how many are just talking the talk?

For example, how many responders use ebony for their bridges? Indian is less dense, and, they say, has less internal dampening. If tone is everything, then why would anyone use ebony for a bridge? Brazilian bridges would probably be the best. Ask Hesh.

As a matter of fact, I attended the Guitar Foundation of America (GFA) Convention a couple of weeks ago, and saw/talked with a couple of classic guitar builders who used padauk for their bridges, because, in their estimation, it was stiffer than Indian, as well as many other species (an important consideration where the bridge is the most important brace on the instrument).

So, picture this - a padauk bridge on a guitar with Indian B&S at one of the premier high-end classic guitar conventions in the US. It was stained, to tone its appearance down a bit, but you could still tell it was padauk, if you know what I mean, and I think you do. The other was on cocobolo; a little better.

Some guitar makers talk the talk, others walk the walk.

Just an observation.

Larry

This topic sounded good to start out with, but seems to get old quickly. I could say that grip and comfort should be the first priority in all shoes, and keeping warm, dry, and having a windbreaker are all that should matter to anyone wearing a coat. Fashion and prestige be damned. That pretty much sums up my priorities, but try telling that to everyone who wears or designs shoes or jackets. Our trade is not that different from apparel and fashion. Carhartt, Versace, North Face, Levis. Yeah, I think someone's a fool for spending $2000 for a pair of heels that take professional training to balance in, but they probably think I'm ugly.

There are different buyers and different builders. Do what you like, buy what you like. Other folks will do and buy what they like. Being aware of different priorities and criteria is great and essential for people in this trade. Trying to debate which priority holds some right to precedence over another is pretty much fourth beer philosphy to me.

_________________
Eschew obfuscation, espouse elucidation.

I like the way you framed the last few lines, David. People just aren't
linear enough for priorities to truly exist.

[QUOTE=David Collins] This topic sounded good to start out with, but seems to get old quickly. I could say that grip and comfort should be the first priority in all shoes, and keeping warm, dry, and having a windbreaker are all that should matter to anyone wearing a coat. Fashion and prestige be damned. That pretty much sums up my priorities, but try telling that to everyone who wears or designs shoes or jackets. Our trade is not that different from apparel and fashion. Carhartt, Versace, North Face, Levis. Yeah, I think someone's a fool for spending $2000 for a pair of heels that take professional training to balance in, but they probably think I'm ugly.

There are different buyers and different builders. Do what you like, buy what you like. Other folks will do and buy what they like. Being aware of different priorities and criteria is great and essential for people in this trade. Trying to debate which priority holds some right to precedence over another is pretty much fourth beer philosphy to me.[/QUOTE]

What David said, to the letter.

Well done David

[QUOTE=LPMc]

[QUOTE=Kahle]Not for nothing but in my opinion tone must come second to playability. You could build the best sounding guitar on the planet but if it doesn't play well how often are you going to pick it up? Just a thought.[/QUOTE]

Good for you, Kahle, for a thoughtful response.

As for the rest of those jumping on the "tone comes first" bandwagon, I wonder how many are just talking the talk?

For example, how many responders use ebony for their bridges? Indian is less dense, and, they say, has less internal dampening. If tone is everything, then why would anyone use ebony for a bridge? Brazilian bridges would probably be the best. Ask Hesh.

[/QUOTE]

Khale,

I agree to a point. You can probably fairly easily make a poorly set up guitar with great tone play a lot better but it is a lot harder to make a great playable guitar with poor to average tone sound great. Having said that there is the story in Patrick Humphries biography of Richard Thompson of when RT was in a pub in Scotland and the Landlord handed him his battered old nylon string guitar. It had two strings missing and a cheese-grater action but RT proceeded to blow the place away for two hours solid. It’s mostly in the players fingers. For mere mortal players great playability and sound are a good solid basis to build on though.

Larry,

All of Martin Simpson’s Sobell guitars (that Rick included in his original post) have ebony bridges on them. Apparently Stefan has tried Brazilian Rosewood ones but they just don’t sound right on his guitars. I can also name a number of makers renowned for their tone that use ebony bridges on their instruments. There is no magic mantra or formula for producing great sounding instruments – like “Braz bridge good, ebony bridge bad” – it’s all part of the system/design/execution of the maker. Fortunately there are as many of these as there are makers.

_________________
Dave White
De Faoite Stringed Instruments
". . . the one thing a machine just can't do is give you character and personalities and sometimes that comes with flaws, but it always comes with humanity" Monty Don talking about hand weaving, "Mastercrafts", Weaving, BBC March 2010

Not to put the cat amongst the pigeons here (at least I hope not).

I've read a lot on here about making sure the tone is the foremost concern, and reading Dave White's post there I had a thought.

So if we're going to say that tone is paramount and that all other decisions regarding design and craft should at least consider the tonal implications. That's a message that as a complete amateur I can digest and accept. However it's not something I can yet understand...

Let me put it in the form of a question:

So given tone is paramount, what does a guitar with good tone sound like? How does it differ from one with bad tone?

Please help me understand what you all are referring to when you use the term 'good/great tone'.



PS - I realise this is a slightly silly question in one respect, we could probably all listen to one guitar and say it has good tone and another and say it was bad, but the point of the question is to establish if there is some 'concensus' here that I will come to learn which would lead to us all picking the same guitar as the one with superior tone... Or if it's 100% subjective, in which case I wonder if the blind guitarist question is a little misleading as the only answer would be 'Depends on which blind guitarist...'

[QUOTE=Dave Bamber]
So given tone is paramount, what does a guitar with good tone sound like? How does it differ from one with bad tone?

[/QUOTE]

Dave,

"Tone is as tone does as my Old Gaffer Gamgee used to say"

Every maker and player will have their own view of what is "good tone" and what is "bad tone" and in some cases it my vary depending on the style of music they are playing and who they are playing with. That's why I said there are as many as builders and players.

Best thing is probably to play a lot of guitars and see ones you like and ones you don't in terms of sound and then try and home in on and write down what exactly it is that defines the likes/dislikes. Then see if there are any common threads. Then just go and build lots of instruments

In my case the sound I am looking for derives from the music I like and the fact that I was a player for 30+ years before becoming a maker. I look for balance (well what's a balance mean? ) across strings and along the fretboard, a richness and complexity to the notes both in terms of string overtones and sympathetic resonance of non-plucked strings, long sustain, good projection both to the audience and the player. This "recipie" may alter subtly if I make a guitar or a guitar-bouzouki/cittern, or harp-guitar or an "acoustic lap-style thingy that looks a lot like those of a builder with a German name whose first part of his surname is the German for my surname".

_________________
Dave White
De Faoite Stringed Instruments
". . . the one thing a machine just can't do is give you character and personalities and sometimes that comes with flaws, but it always comes with humanity" Monty Don talking about hand weaving, "Mastercrafts", Weaving, BBC March 2010