Why not a Ted, Emerald X20 acoustic challenge?

[TomB'sox]

Last warning folks...Lots of good discussion on CF guitars here, but if we can't keep it like that, the thread will be closed.

[jdinco]

Originally Posted by TomB'sox

Last warning folks...Lots of good discussion on CF guitars here, but if we can't keep it like that, the thread will be closed.

Am I missing something here? Seems friendly to me....

[Acousticado]

Originally Posted by jdinco

Am I missing something here? Seems friendly to me....

I agree. Since Tom's first warning, seems to me that posts have respected the request.

[TomB'sox]

Doing fine. I have done some editing....listen just keep going, for the most part we are doing just fine!!!!

[pandaroo]

After several months with my X20, I did find my optimum playing position of my right hand is around the 22-24, so my thumbpick is knocking a bit on the fretboard. I did contact Sean in the event that I order another custom whether he can reduce the number of frets by couple at minimal cost. So in summary, it is a little issue for me but not a deal breaker.

[Long Jon]

This guy could use those extra frets.

[ac]

Whoa! I "think" I counted 30 frets on that acoustic. It appears at times he plays right over part of the fretboard as well.

Wondering if maybe he could have special ordered that acoustic with only 20 frets?

However, listening to him play, 30 frets does not seem to be a big issue for him . . . .

There are design parameters based on 500 years of R&D with classical guitars; those parameters could be used to suggest design flaws in guitars that deviate from the classic ideal.

Most contemporary guitars deviate from the classical design; necks too thin, cut-a-ways, too many frets, electronics, new materials, and so forth. Those are all design flaws from a classical point of view. I would say that all composite instruments are design flawed in one way or another. And it doesn't bother me a bit.

[Acousticado]

Originally Posted by EvanB

There are design parameters based on 500 years of R&D with classical guitars; those parameters could be used to suggest design flaws in guitars that deviate from the classic ideal.

Most contemporary guitars deviate from the classical design; necks too thin, cut-a-ways, too many frets, electronics, new materials, and so forth. Those are all design flaws from a classical point of view. I would say that all composite instruments are design flawed in one way or another. And it doesn't bother me a bit.

It's called "innovation".

[Long Jon]

I wonder if, in 20 years time , the concept of wooden guitars will sound as primative as wooden cars or wooden false teeth ?

[ac]

You can buy wind up watches instead of digital, but costly, fragile, generally less accurate, . . . . so why?

[amyFB]

Originally Posted by ac

You can buy wind up watches instead of digital, but costly, fragile, generally less accurate, . . . . so why?

I think it's a control issue.

digital anything has an aura of mystery for the majority of folks who benefit from it.

conceivably, i could take apart ,, repair and reassemble a wind up watch more easily than a digital watch.

i think because for me a mechanical part i can eventually understand by looking at how it connects to other mechanical parts. whereas with digital stuff i'm just looking at lumpy bumpy components soldered in place with no way to know what's what about any of it.

[mot]

Originally Posted by EvanB

There are design parameters based on 500 years of R&D with classical guitars; those parameters could be used to suggest design flaws in guitars that deviate from the classic ideal.

Most contemporary guitars deviate from the classical design; necks too thin, cut-a-ways, too many frets, electronics, new materials, and so forth. Those are all design flaws from a classical point of view. I would say that all composite instruments are design flawed in one way or another. And it doesn't bother me a bit.

All living tools and languages evolve over time. Causes could be environmental changes, misunderstandings, abundant/scarce material or many other factors. Design flaws happen, but generally speaking we all strive for something that is functional and obtainable given our circumstances.

Should classical form be the benchmark? Many think so. This is why we have silly rules about split infinities and dangling prepositions in English grammar books. Get out into the street and listen to the language and you will find colorful violations in these 'rules' and many others.

In the meantime I am sticking with my 24 fret X20 because it's the best guitar for me at the moment.

[Ted @ LA Guitar Sales]

Originally Posted by Long Jon

I wonder if, in 20 years time , the concept of wooden guitars will sound as primative as wooden cars or wooden false teeth ?

We've been playing stringed instruments made with wood bodies for over 2500 years, twenty years ago John Decker decided to build the first Rainsong out of carbon fiber. As of this writing they still have no significant competition, in fact they have remained rather small, so don't expect all that to change in the next twenty.

Originally Posted by ac

You can buy wind up watches instead of digital, but costly, fragile, generally less accurate, . . . . so why?

Well, I sure don't know how to take apart, repair, or reassemble any watch, but I only wear fine automatic watches. Use my iPhone to set them.

[ac]

Originally Posted by amyFB

I think it's a control issue.

digital anything has an aura of mystery for the majority of folks who benefit from it.

conceivably, i could take apart ,, repair and reassemble a wind up watch more easily than a digital watch.

i think because for me a mechanical part i can eventually understand by looking at how it connects to other mechanical parts. whereas with digital stuff i'm just looking at lumpy bumpy components soldered in place with no way to know what's what about any of it.

I think you may have touched on a major sticking point for the stress some players feel when they see "anything" composite.

They see guitars that resemble and function like something they are very, very familiar with, yet, at the same time, the guitars are foreign in every other familiar respect. There is an element of fear of the unknown.

Wood can be cut and shaped so many ways. We all grow up with wood. Everyone has made something simple with wood sometime in their childhood or later. Even if you know nothing about building guitars, you feel that if you really, really had to--you just might be able to figure out how to make a working guitar yourself. And you can always find wood.

Making guitars out of synthetic resin soaked cloth, wet shaped into a familiar shape, is a foreign concept.

It is as foreign as it was some decades ago to embrace a watch made from a circuit board and a chip which had workings that 1) couldn't be seen and 2) couldn't be understood with the use of just hands or eyes. Mechanical watches with metal parts have been around before our grandfathers were born.

Once more and more people learn to bridge that gap from traditional to the innovative, as they did with digital watches, later digital phones, etc., the stress reaction to composite from some players will be much more manageable.