I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other about the tonal differences in regard to adding pretty stuff to the edge of 40 series Martins cuz I've only played one 40 series Martin.
What I do wonder about is: Wade says, "the way that Martin guitars are constructed those top outer edges are some of the most acoustically deadened spots on the guitars". Well that makes me think 40s are constructed differently on those top outer edges. Wouldn't we agree on that? They're routed out to accept the pretty stuff. Maybe not much but there are many discussions here about 1/4" vs 5/16" bracing, belly vs pyramid bridges, tongue braces, bridge pins, etc. Even satin vs gloss finishes. And five year old guitars vs fifteen year old guitars. Why wouldn't a routing of the entire body circumference on the top and then applying a different material in the routed channel make a difference?
That single 40 series that I've played is the OM-42 that I own. It's the guitar visiting players make an ugly face at when they see the bling and give me a look like I was a dope to spend big bucks on it. Then they play it. Then they want it. They say, "Oh!". They don't think I'm a dope cuz they get it when they play it. Maybe I was a dope for buying it because honestly I bought it w/o playing it off eBay for the bling and the headstock! Hah! I'm LOL because everybody likes it better than my OM-28A, SCGC Custom OM, and the others hanging around here and it plays and sounds more beautiful than it looks. (If you like that look)
|