Hand built or factory?

[Truckjohn]

As you can see from the variety of answers...
It depends.

Some hand builders make exact reproductions of older instruments.. Some of which were factory made things. Others simply use the plantillas as an outline and go from there.

The best answer you will get is to talk with a luthier to find out what he does.

[mjudd]

For me, the difference is that if one guy builds the guitar from start to finish and that guy makes the profit from its sale, it’s hand built. If it goes from one guy who does the neck and another who attaches the bridge, and so on, and the company makes the profit, it’s factory built.

This loose definition obviously leave a lot of grey area. For example, when Burner guitars were being built (father and son operation), they were buying custom made necks from someone else. To me, that’s still a hand built guitar, because they, the owners, were still personally constructing the instrument and were responsible for its quality.

On the othe4 end of the spectrum, I think I read that in the New Hartford Guild factory, it wasn’t unusual for one guy to build a guitar from start to finish (except for the actual finish). But that’s still a factory guitar because it was owned by Fender, and the customer had no knowledge or control of who was involved in the build process.

In many cases, a hand built guitar may be created with the use of CNC machines, jigs, and other techniques common in factory guitars. So, I don’t think one can make a blanket statement that hand built guitars are better or worse than a factory built guitar. Some hand built guitars are built by people with little experience,, or people who may overlook some quality issues. Others are very experienced and approach the craft as a perfectionist.

Jim Olsen is a very high quality, experienced builder, but uses almost an assembly line approach to contructing a batch of guitars. Yet I doubt anyone would have any reservations about considering his guitars among some of the best hand built guitars available.

As I said, lots of grey area.

[murrmac123]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

For a guitar maker, it might include making a guitar top thickness just on the edge of failure - one more stroke or two of the hand plane, sanding block, electric orbital sander, etc. and the top is too weak or not the right response. .

This is the thing that always intrigues me, Charles ... like ... how does the builder actually know that one more stroke with the sanding block will ruin the top ?

I totally get the top stiffness measurement thing (not part of this thread discussion so far, admittedly) ... but it seems to me that many builders like to propose an almost mystical , tai-chi kind of approach to their voicings, and I am not sure that I can altogether gel with that .

AFAIAC if it can't be measured, then it doesn't exist.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Fresh1985

I have been pondering on this for a while, what is the real definitive difference between a handbuilt guitar and a factory built one? What makes a guitar truly handbuilt?

Surely both use similair processes, some requiring machinery and others luthier bench like work.

Is it simply a case that a factory built guitar is piece work, e.g one person is in charge of making the necks etc. And a handbuilt guitar is a single luthier taking the guitar from start to finish?

Just wondering....

I think all guitars built now are mechanically assisted builds. Whether its by one person or many.

As far as the "assembly line" idea of a factory, I don't think that it takes away the notion of "hand built in that its probably more feasible for one person to become an expert in the manufacturing of a few parts than every part in a guitar.

So for example only, one guy does necks and bridges, another does tops and backs, another bends sides and closes the boxes, another does the trim, etc. All these people develop specialized skills that are above average. For one person to become highly skilled in all the areas is tougher I would think.

This results in many guitars getting built over a short time with lower costs as opposed to the one or two guitars being built by one person.

The very small shop charges a lot more money per unit due to the economies of scale among other things, Also the small shop builder will do extra bling features which are labor intensive that you don't see in a "mass produced" guitar. To be fair to the small builder, custom work takes time and time is money. Go into the custom build section of the forum and take a look. The work these builders do is exceptional. They take the craft to another level.

[Rmz76]

Originally Posted by Fresh1985

I have been pondering on this for a while, what is the real definitive difference between a handbuilt guitar and a factory built one? What makes a guitar truly handbuilt?

Surely both use similair processes, some requiring machinery and others luthier bench like work.

Is it simply a case that a factory built guitar is piece work, e.g one person is in charge of making the necks etc. And a handbuilt guitar is a single luthier taking the guitar from start to finish?

Just wondering....

When I think of "hand built" I think of zero use of CNC machines. Every piece of wood cut by hand and chiseled by hand. I think of names like Wayne Henderson, James Olson and other highly respected luthier's to the stars. Years of wait time and price points well beyond my reach.

When I think of "hand built" I also think of hobbyist and aspiring lutheirs building substandard product on experimentation or from guitar kits and calling it "hand built".

To put the process of guitar building on an assembly line means working with machines and this was the case even in the 1930s and 40s when the most sought after acoustics today were built. There seems to be this romanticized idea that during that time a Martin or Gibson was entirely hand built and that's just not the case at all. The industrial revolution happened over a hundred years before those pre-war Martin's were being constructed. So it's always been a dance between craftsman working the assembly lines and machine assisting in the process. Martin and Gibson have optimized their workflow to use the latest technology where they can without compromising quality. Since the majority of the process is still done by hand, they can all be called hand built.

But don't put too much weight into the term as even Yamaha calls their $200 FG800S a hand built instrument.

[Fresh1985]

Interesting answers, thanks.

[iim7V7IM7]

FYI, Jim Olson is an early pioneer of a solo luthier employing a CNC (a Fadal) into is highly fixtured building process. Jim typically builds in batches of 20 guitars at a time (mostly one model, an SJ). He used to build 3 batches of 20-guitars a year, but has eased back his practice to a batch or two in recent years. His use of CNC, level of fixturing, use of a catalyzed finish and focus on a single model enables an output of about 4x over most one at a time solo luthiers.

Originally Posted by Rmz76

When I think of "hand built" I think of zero use of CNC machines. Every piece of wood cut by hand and chiseled by hand. I think of names like Wayne Henderson, James Olson and other highly respected luthier's to the stars. Years of wait time and price points well beyond my reach.

When I think of "hand built" I also think of hobbyist and aspiring lutheirs building substandard product on experimentation or from guitar kits and calling it "hand built".

To put the process of guitar building on an assembly line means working with machines and this was the case even in the 1930s and 40s when the most sought after acoustics today were built. There seems to be this romanticized idea that during that time a Martin or Gibson was entirely hand built and that's just not the case at all. The industrial revolution happened over a hundred years before those pre-war Martin's were being constructed. So it's always been a dance between craftsman working the assembly lines and machine assisting in the process. Martin and Gibson have optimized their workflow to use the latest technology where they can without compromising quality. Since the majority of the process is still done by hand, they can all be called hand built.

But don't put too much weight into the term as even Yamaha calls their $200 FG800S a hand built instrument.

[RP]

I think that the difference between hand and factory-built is easier to differentiate at the extremes than in the middle. A small group of people build Huss & Dalton guitars but they use a CNC machine for the repetitive parts such as the neck and bridge. After visiting the Huss & Dalton shop, one would never confuse it with a factory but there's Mark Dalton running that danged CNC spitting out various pieces to very exacting standards....

[printer2]

Originally Posted by charles Tauber

For a guitar maker, it might include making a guitar top thickness just on the edge of failure - one more stroke or two of the hand plane, sanding block, electric orbital sander, etc. and the top is too weak or not the right response.

I wish this example would go away. If two strokes of the sandpaper is left on it may last 10 hrs. If another stroke, then ten days. There is no way a builder will take an instrument just before the point of immediate failure if he wants it to last for years.


As far as hand built, I am getting close to finishing an instrument. I was given free reign to build as I pleased, I was told what they could afford (oh they have no idea what it really should cost) and I decided on the wood and what it will look like. It will be comparable to a store bought instrument but it will come with the knowledge that one person built it.

And that makes it more special than a store bought product. It is what makes antiques valuable, they might have been mass produced a hundred, two hundred years ago but how many are out there? There will not be another instrument built like this one, the cost will not be an issue as it is a gift and the person to receive it will not know the cost. Hopefully it will sound fine, so far I do not see any reason it will not.

I worked in a factory for 18 years. I was good at whatever piece of machinery I was working on. Even with the machine made to spit out carbon copy items many times (well it used to be) how the operator ran the machine affected the quality or amount of production. One week they let my partner and myself go for holidays the same week, that was the only time and we were not allowed to be gone at the same time. Production of the plant fell from the mid 90's (percent of product to 100% production) to the 50's. But today's factories are more tightly controlled.

I have no bias against factory made things, use them every day. A factory built instrument can sound better than a hand built one, and the reverse can be true. If they were on par in quality and cost which would you choose? And if there was one that was better than the other but it cost more which would you choose? Not saying if it was the factory one or hand built. And if you were willing to pay more and get the higher quality one, at some point the added cost will not be worth the added quality and most would buy the other as long as it was acceptable.

So it is wants and ability to pay the price that determines the sale of the item. If you made 10 million a year and you wanted a Somogyi and it was $75k would you care? What if you liked the sound of a Martin better? Oh yea, you would get both but use the Martin as a beater.

In the end it is a question is if you like how the guitar sounds (built or to be built) and the physical aspect of it. Does it look cool, does how it was made enter into the cool factor? Will always knowing that a person picked the woods he thought would go well together and managed to make it all work together mean anything more than if it was a factory built guitar after you owned either for 30 years? (assuming you are young enough to still be around).

Lot of things go into whether one is better for you, there are no wrong answers to this one.

[hifivic]

Easy answer. Consistency of sound. Factory's can produce 60-70 THOUSAND guitars a year versus 50 -1100 from smaller builders/luthiers. When a boardroom of executives governs your total output only a certain amount of time can be allotted to each instrument. This is what I call the cookie cutter approach. Smaller builders don't have those folks to answer to and in most cases voice each and every top as just one example of the building process. This guarantees consistency. There is absolutely nothing wrong with factory made and they can be excellent. "Phenomenal, take your breath away every time you open the case" is a totally different league though! I am in the high end bicycle business and it's really very similar. While Trek, Giant, Specialized and Cannondale build excellent cookie cutter bikes none can compare to a handmade bicycle made by an individual builder from a point of ride quality and fit and finish.

[BluesKing777]

Originally Posted by hifivic

Easy answer. Consistency of sound. Factory's can produce 60-70 THOUSAND guitars a year versus 50 -1100 from smaller builders/luthiers. When a boardroom of executives governs your total output only a certain amount of time can be allotted to each instrument. This is what I call the cookie cutter approach. Smaller builders don't have those folks to answer to and in most cases voice each and every top as just one example of the building process. This guarantees consistency. There is absolutely nothing wrong with factory made and they can be excellent. "Phenomenal, take your breath away every time you open the case" is a totally different league though! I am in the high end bicycle business and it's really very similar. While Trek, Giant, Specialized and Cannondale build excellent cookie cutter bikes none can compare to a handmade bicycle made by an individual builder from a point of ride quality and fit and finish.

See, you learn something every day on the forums! As the owner of 2 ‘jalopy’ bikes, I have seen the very expensive road bikes at the shop, high on the wall....but I would never have dreamed that you could get a hand made custom bike!
A Lowden bike? I see....
As far as the hand made vs factory made guitars, I think we need a few cameras on the wall! Is it ...full factory, (D18) hand made in the factory (Authentics), hand made in a room next to a factory ( Custom shop) , hand made at home with cnc parts, hand made at home with hand made parts...? Etc.
Now Lowden are not a factory, they are a ‘workshop’. Is that a workshop of hand tools or cnc? (whatever they are doing at Lowden, keep it up - perfection!)


BluesKing777.

[merlin666]

There are two different distinctions here. The first one that involves use of advanced machinery and tools that replaces labourers which takes place in a factory setting. The second distinguishes between individual production and mass production where division of labour takes place. For me the factory denotes this mass production where many labourers perform routine tasks such as polishing bodies only or bending sides only etc. The result is a relatively high output of standardized products. Individual building will have much smaller production numbers and higher variability from one guitar to the next.

[hifivic]

Originally Posted by merlin666

Individual building will have much smaller production numbers and higher variability from one guitar to the next.

Not sure I agree with higher variability. We've all read on these forums about factory guitars every now and then just seem to hit a home run while the rest are mediocre to average so in my experience higher variability seems to be more prevalent with factory. It's pretty rare to read about a mediocre boutique such as Goodall, Smogyi, Borgeous, Huss & Dalton, Lowden, Froggy Bottom, Collings....(yes they are tight sounding but they are consistent) Santa Cruz.........they all seem to be exceptional.

[BluesKing777]

I went back and looked at the Maton Guitar site - they say their guitars are handmade....though I think they mean 'handmade in a factory'

I recently bought a Maton SRS808 and it is a flawless build! And it wasn't that much money to buy.... a low range model.

Here is the Maton Guitars promo video:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO2v8Ggxbyo




BluesKing777.

[Alan Carruth]

Merlin666 was right to mention division of labor. When you're making guitars that way, you're necessarily doing what iim7V7IM7 talked about; making standardized instruments with interchangeable parts. The whole point of division of labor is to save time: each worker becomes very skilled at a particular task, but they can't take the time to adapt to variations. When I took the Martin tour the woman who was trimming top braces was incredibly fast, but she wasn't 'voicing' the top in the sense of trying to optimize the brace heights for that particular top. She just matched the brace profiles to the standard model in front of her, and went on to the next one. This is, of course, 'hand work', but it's not done to improve the quality of the final guitar; it's simply a sales gimmick that allows Martin to say that they 'hand shape' their bracing, rather than using 'evil' CNC machines to cut them. Me, I'd like to know who sharpened that chisel.

Factories live by fit and finish; it's the only way they can make money. To the extent that F&F determine what a 'good' guitar is, they have the edge over anybody who feels the need or desire to make changes from one instrument to the next. Any maker who does make changes 'on the fly' is depending on skill to preserve the quality of F&F. This introduces an element of risk on that front, since even very skilled workers sometimes make mistakes.

The trade-off there is supposed to be in the interest of more control over tone quality. This is not guaranteed, as it depends in part on how well the maker understands what produces tone. It has been shown that, due to the amount of variation in wood properties, highly consistent dimensional tolerances yield variable tone quality. This is not an issue for production shops which build mostly 'on spec', since it's likely that somebody will like every guitar they make. Many small shops and individual makers build to order, and that often includes specifications on tone that need to be matched reasonably closely. It's probably not possible to make guitars that sound 'identical', but a skilled maker who understands tone can consistently come quite close to a target.

In all of this it's well to keep in mind that we're working with designs that have been highly optimized over many years of refinement. Simply building a guitar carefully to a proven design using good quality wood will get you most of the way there. In any such system the difference between 'average' and 'very good' is small, but it's also important, and difficult to achieve, and that adds value.

So I guess I'd summarize it by saying it comes down to who calls the shots. A 'hand maker' is going for a particular result, which is defined either by him/her self, or by a customer. The builder can chose any means they like to realize that result, from all hand tools, to CNC, to farming out steps such as inlay and finish, to produce the product. In a 'factory' the designs have been pre-defined, and the worker reproduces them by whatever means seems appropriate to the managers. This can include a fair amount of hand work, or almost none. Design goals are, for the most part, in terms of physical dimensions that can be objectively specified, rather than subjective things like 'tone'. I'm aware that this is all debatable, and far from satisfactory. There's a lot of wiggle room in there, and very few examples at either extreme.