Official Luthiers Forum!

I do know what you mean, and that's kind of the point of my post.

I've played guitar for 15 years (certainly not as long as some here, but long enough) and for 5 of them I was gigging 3-5 times a week, making enough money and being 'popular' enough to have some interest from various A/R people.

I know what 'I' like in terms of tone, but what I'm trying hamfistedly to get at is that if we are to aim for a guitar with 'good' tone, and reduce or diminutise the importance of the aestetic of the guitar to allow for this, are we setting ourselves an impossible task?

It's like (for want of a better example as I abhor sports) playing a game of soccer with the objective of scoring goals between two posts which differ in position depending on who's looking at them.

Unless there is a baseline of characteristics of the range of 'good tones' which is universally agreed upon as good, or perhaps more importantly in the case of the professionals, a baseline which is agreed by the majority of the buying public as 'good', then how could a complete amateur (or even a professional for that matter) decide that a change in, for example, the shape of the braces had improved or been the detriment of the 'tone' of the instrument.

I realise this is almost moving into a kind of quasi-phisosophical discussion here, but there is a fudamental contrast that seems to exist here between 'looks' and 'sound'. After all, no one could put their hand on their heart and accept a guitar like that battered guitar posted above from a luthier with the comment: 'looks good', but there will be people who could honestly say it 'sounds good'.

What I'm trying to gather, really, is if, like looks, there's a univerally agreed set of characteristics which define something which 'sounds good' or 'has good tone', a baseline set which may be added to for particular preferences of good sound, but without which will always be considered 'poorly toned'.

Maybe a silly question, as I said, but it doesn't appear to have been asked yet...

Dave B. as for what does good tone sound like - of course this is as subjective a question as one could ask.

But based on your location I would suspect that if you went and played a Lowden, any Lowden, you would have a pretty good idea of what good tone sounds like.

As for ebony bridges I agree with my Bob Marley fan friend Dave White.  Ebony bridges can be a plus or a minus depending on what your design goals are or where you may need to compensate for something else in the guitar.

This stuff can drive you nuts and if are wrapped to tight and the smallest details get you thinking - look out - you will go insane because there is ALWAYS something that may improve the tone of your guitars.  Perfection is not a destination, it's a carrot on a stick that some jerk keeps pulling farther and farther away from you every time you get close enough to see it........  Maybe that is why they invented guns so you can shoot the guy holding the stick and catch up.

No one guitar will ever be the best in everyone's eyes, ears, and hands.

Dave,

Sometimes the "anal" part of the word analysis can take over and we (me included) spend an awful lot of time with our heads inhabiting that particular place Personally I don't think that there is an "answer" to your question. Build . . . listen . . . learn . . . build . . . listen . . . learn. To badly paraphrase Elton John ". . . it's the circle of a luthiers life".

_________________
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

Well, the only thing that I'm finding difficult here is that let's say I finish my first guitar, and when I post soundclips there's either a negative reaction or no reaction at all.

Is that a sign that I built a 'bad' guitar? Or shuold I say to myself 'Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks, I think it sounds good.'

Yes I know it's getting a little into the 'anal' part of analysis, but if there's a consensus, surely it must be definable?

Look at someone like Rick - he's sold countless guitars, and by his own confession, he's worked hard to refine his sound over the aestetic. Clearly he has found a way of making a guitar produce a tone which is commerically popular. That's kind of what I'm getting at, not so much for myself, but for anyone who wants to sell guitars, surely having a baseline of this tone to aim for would mean that they would sell more guitars? That same could be said of people like Mr. Martin or Mr. Taylor?

So, I suppose, yes, it's a little anal in presentation, but the answer to the question could actually be worth something to budding (and established) luthiers, which was why I figured it was probably worth asking it

PS: Here's a confession (and I fully expect to be kicked hard by any OLFers I ever meet about this) - one of my favourite guitars for playing the blues is an all-plywood ?5-from-a-junk-shop dreadnaught special. I would not say by any stretch of the imagination it would be considered a 'good' guitar by most people here, but the sound really works as I've been playing it since I was a child and know every nuence, every ounce of it's tone, and how to work it to make the sound I like (and other like judging by comments I've had).

PPS Yes, I LOVE Lowdens, and Brooks and in fact most guitars I've played, but for different reasons. I am therefore officially a rubbish judge of what makes a guitar sound good... ;)

PPPS If it's of any use - best sounding and feeling guitar I ever played was a 28 year old Bill Dinsdale OM in rio and adi with a huge fat V neck. Couldn't tell you the worst though...

The which blind guitarist is the only answer here IMO .. reminds me of a story told in a GP amp shootout. One guy says there is a Strat in a store, and two guys come in to check it out - the first plays it and says, this is way too muddy sounding, then picks up the next one and its thin and cutting - he says, this is the one for me, it has tone that BITES .. the other guy picks up the first one, and being somewhat of a jazzer, says, no this is it, listen to the warmth and fullness.

Different strokes ....

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

[QUOTE=Dave Bamber] Well, the only thing that I'm finding difficult here is that let's say I finish my first guitar, and when I post soundclips there's either a negative reaction or no reaction at all.

Is that a sign that I built a 'bad' guitar? Or shuold I say to myself 'Doesn't matter what anyone else thinks, I think it sounds good.'[/QUOTE]

Dave,

I include soundclips here with each guitar I post on now but there are lots of things going on here:

- some people are on dial-up not broadband so don't listen

- some people might not like the music of the sounclip

- a soundclip is not like playing the instrument live

- people are polite

etc. etc.

I think it helps being able to hear sounclips as well as see guitars here. But what I do with each build is play and listen myself but more importantly get people I respect to play them so I can hear and have them listen while I play. Then I listen carefully as they give me their views - listening hard to everything they say and not just the kind things. I also let them take some away and test drive them over a long period to hear what the think of them after this time.

If you can get them into the hands of professional people whose opinions yoy respect then even better. A couple of years ago Martin Simpson was very kind to me and played two or three of my instruments. His feedback was hugely helpful.


[QUOTE]Look at someone like Rick - he's sold countless guitars, and by his own confession, he's worked hard to refine his sound over the aestetic. Clearly he has found a way of making a guitar produce a tone which is commerically popular. That's kind of what I'm getting at, not so much for myself, but for anyone who wants to sell guitars, surely having a baseline of this tone to aim for would mean that they would sell more guitars?
That same could be said of people like Mr. Martin or Mr. Taylor?[/QUOTE]

Again it depends on the definition of "commercially popular". If you use number of sales then Estaban would be in that list too.

_________________
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

Dave B. my take on your questions "what if" would be to answer you with another question(s), what I think are more important questions - do you enjoy building guitars?  Does creating a guitar with your own two hands make you happy?

If you answered yes to the two above questions AND you are not constrained by commercial considerations (you plan on selling your guitars) who gives a rats arse what anyone else thinks.

That sounds like excellent practical advice, Dave (Great forename btw, where'd you get it? ) Many thanks! - as it happens my best friend from school just launched his debut single (band is called 'My Name Is Red' for reference). I've been helping them with their live mix for the last few gigs (Yeah he and I were in a band together way back in school, kicking myself now!) so I'll almost certainly get to meet a few more 'pro' guitarists who can help me with an objective evaluation.

So, to summurise, it would seem that the best plan of action is to decide which tone to 'aim' for then learn how to work with the wood to produce it.

Interestingly, from reading the other threads this is exactly what E.S. (everybody stay calm I'm not going to say any more) offers in his course.

Many thanks for the patience and the thoughtful responses everyone!

And hesh - yes, of course your right, and that's an attitude I can completely agree with, not just in making guitars, but in anything in life...

That said, perhaps I should make an effort to stop enjoying 'making simple matters complicated' quite so much...

[QUOTE=Dave Bamber]


That said, perhaps I should make an effort to stop enjoying 'making simple matters complicated' quite so much... [/QUOTE]

Me too bro and thanks for reminding me of this very important advice too!

I am going to revert back to Ricks original question and throw in a possible hitch in the get-a-long

Would Martin Simpson give up his Sobell?
Laurence Juber his Martin?
Muriel Anderson her Paul McGill?
James Taylor his Olsen?
Tony Rice his Santa Cruz?
John Williams his Smallman?

I have no doubt that the instruments each of the players chose are superior musical instruments in both tone and playability. But I have see photos a few of the guitars Olsen has built for JT, Phil Keaggy, Leo Kottke and others I think Zootfull wood and exquisite appointments would be appropreate descriptions. So even for these players, while the musical properties of thier instruments were not doubt paramount, artistic craftsmanship was also something they chose.

Any of those guitarists (and I do know half of them) would tell you that the sound and playability come first, and then they all love good looking guitars, too. My basic point is that I believe that aspiring luthiers should get a lot of relatively simple guitars under their belts first, and then develop your aesthetics.   There's nothing worse than a tarted up guitar that sounds like crap.

And there are benchmarks for tone...if you have the guts to take your guitars to gigs and present them to traveling musicians for criticism.   Ask them not to judge by looks at all, but to comment on playability and tone.

I'll say it again: Making fancy guitars is the easy part; making great guitars is the hard part.   If you have the chops to make great guitars, you'll find that you also have the chops to make fancy ones, but the reverse is not true at all.

Thanks for hanging around here Rick.

Hope your eye is feeling better.

_________________
Horton, MI

Thanks, Kirt. The eye is fantastic...less than 24 hours into a lens replacement, and I'm seeing colors in incredible contrast and the sharpness is already better than the other eye that will be done in about three weeks. I can't believe how bad my vision had become now that I have the contrast between one good one and one bad one.

For anyone approaching cataract surgery, don't worry; you'll be thrilled with the results.   And as creepy as it seems to have your eye operated upon while you are awake; it turns out not to be a big deal. The docs and nurses could not have been nicer unless they'd been serving me Champagne during the procedure...

Of course now all the sunbursts I've done in the past year are going to look hideously garish...

Rick I understood that from the get go. And I agree. I think this last post was better to the point you are trying to make

I guess the point I tried to make in my first and this last post was meant more informative to those that have not had to deal with the custom buying market yet.

Without a doubt musicality and playability are the most critical factors in professional quality instruments. but when you are trying to pedal your wears artistic craftsmanship is large selling point as well.

Like I said before I would love to set a standard model and say here world buy me based on the musical quality of my instruments. But in all honesty I know that my niche market is in my willingness to build to client specs as far as woods and appointments are concerned.

I do give my prospective clients my honest opinion about the best woods from my experience for the size and use of the instrument. And I most certainly concentrate my skills on the function and tone of the guitar. Yes I love beautiful and artistic joinery, and I love the processes of shell and wood inlay. However it is the sound and playability that consumes my skill. Making it pretty is the easy stuff.

Maybe I should clarify my response about Tone and Volume first, playability next, looks last.  My philosophy is I want to have a guitar that has the tone that I am looking for, and good volume.  I can always adjust the playability to meet my needs.  Also, I prefer a guitar with slightly higher action to get the tone and volume I prefer.  So, yes, Tone and volume are first for me.

Glenn

 

[QUOTE=Pwoolson] [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[/QUOTE]

Well, what can I do but to offer my most profound appologies to all the blind guitarists who read my post and took offense, or got their feelings hurt, or whatever.

Seriously, most people have thicker skins, or should have.

With a luthier I am collaborating on a project with.
I called it the "little mermaid" effect. The prince was drawn to her by her looks, but when he found out she had no voice he knew she "wasn't the one". Now, given he heard her voice first at one point, but when he thought she was the one he did go over to her without hearing the voice at all the second time.

So, given the average buyer isn't blind (no disrespect implied or intended) maybe the question is- what draws the person to want to hear your guitar in the first place? She better look good first, then have an amazing voice as well.. Thoughts from an inlayer.... Otherwise, is there a desire to pick it up?
Attraction normally comes first- human nature. I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, but it is what it is.

Craig L

_________________
www.handcraftinlay.com