More comfortable Rainsong idea

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by ac

I recall the first X7s were arched, but the second version with the offset soundport were not arched.

I don't know anything further as to other models whether any were or are arched. Maybe those that own them can let us know.

Wood arch tops were developed long ago to increase sound output to compete with other instruments in bands before amplification became the norm. The concept came from violins, cellos, etc. which are very loud for their size. (Some archtop lovers here at AGF once linked to some articles regarding archtop history.)

Not sure what Emerald's reasons were for the slight arch of the original X7.

Let me be clear that I'm suggesting RainSong and CA alter their construction process to impart a bit of a convex radius to the top and not an arch as in that of an arch-top guitar design. This radius would be slight, similar to that of typical flat-top wooden guitars, e.g., Huss & Dalton's DS model has a 25-foot convex radius top. Ashvin sent me a note thanking me for my suggestion and that it was something RainSong would look into. My suggestion to RainSong was based on seeing every RainSong I've owned (more that 8) and played having a slight concaveness to their tops (variable somewhat guitar-to-guitar). I don't think this looks good and may turn-off a hardcore, wooden-guitar aficionado who is considering buying a carbon guitar. CA guitars are similar but, overall, may achieve a bit more flatness than RainSongs. I hope the above better explains the point of my original post on this matter.

[AndyFrank]

Originally Posted by Steve Christens

. . .

Steve, Ted posted that his customers "look for tone first, playability second, aesthetics third, and so on" how the heck is that dismissive? FYI, Ted is anything but dismissive when it comes to his customers needs. I once watched Ted work with a disabled woman with some serious physical limitations. Ted pulled out guitar after guitar and watched her play, paying close attention to her body position. She wanted a Martin OM, but it was clear the guitar was too unwieldy for her, so Ted brought her some smaller guitars to try. She tried everything from a Cargo to an SCGC Firefly. The Cargo was Ted's personal guitar by the way, he doesn't sell them any more but wanted her to try it anyway figuring she can order one from a CA dealer if that's the one that worked best foe her. I didn't stick around, but although the lady was ready to pop for the Firefly, I was told that in the end Ted felt that the Larrivee Parlor was the best fit for her.

I live very close to Ted's shop so over the years I've been able to try pretty much every carbon guitar made. I purchased several CA's and Rainsongs from Ted, and a friend just picked up a carbon Journey travel guitar from him. If you evr find yourself near LA Guitar Sales you should make it a point to stop in, it is the ultimate acoustic shop, especially if you are a carbom guitar fan.

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

Dismissive attitude? Ted? I find Ted's contributions here to be quite supportive and encouraging. If he gives information based on years of customer comments, I don't see how that is dismissive. Guitar shapes haven't changed a whole lot over the years, so I understand the comment about it being a "non-issue." If it were an issue (my emphasis), every guitar manufacturer would be putting bevels on every model... obviously, not the case.

Certainly, some of us might find more comfort with certain features (including arm bevels, rib bevels, belly bevels), but at this point, I don't see great demand for that based on what guitar manufacturers (wood and CF) are selling.

My personal preference in a neck shape leans towards Taylor, but I don't see other manufacturers changing their neck shapes to suit me. That isn't dismissive, that is a factual observation. Ted has stated that RainSong has settled on the thicker neck, with a truss rod (N2, NS)... they, too, are not being dismissive. It is what it is.

Well put Jim, this is indeed a non-issue, and we are fortunate to have someone with Ted's expertise chime in. And by the way, I just looked, and the top edge of my CA GX is actually sharper than my Rainsong.

[frances50]

Originally Posted by ChunkyB

I wish they'd come up with a different shape for the offset sound hole. It looks so weird to me. Like someone messed up at the factory, or a bad photoshop or something.

I'm not a fan of the off-set sound hole. That's one of the reasons I picked the Rainsong model that I did. I just like the traditional look.

[ChunkyB]

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

Dismissive attitude? Ted? I find Ted's contributions here to be quite supportive and encouraging. If he gives information based on years of customer comments, I don't see how that is dismissive. Guitar shapes haven't changed a whole lot over the years, so I understand the comment about it being a "non-issue." If it were an issue (my emphasis), every guitar manufacturer would be putting bevels on every model... obviously, not the case.

I guess all of us guitar owners on this forum who are requesting a bevel don't count, huh?

There were multiple people raising concerns about their personal experience with guitars that they actually own. Ted was saying it's a non issue. Right or wrong, that's the definition of dismissive.

Also, just because Rainsong isn't doing something, doesn't mean nobody wants it. You could have said a couple years ago "obviously nobody wants an offset soundhole because Rainsong isn't making them. Obviously if there was demand, they would make them". Or "obviously nobody wants a CF guitar that isn't black, because if they did, Rainsong would make them".

They've obviously tried to innovate where possible. A forearm bevel just happens to be something that would be very difficult to add given Rainsong's current manufacturing process. That doesn't mean nobody wants it, or it's a non-issue, it just means Rainsong isn't in a position to do anything about it.

[Acousticado]

Originally Posted by ChunkyB

I wish they'd come up with a different shape for the offset sound hole. It looks so weird to me. Like someone messed up at the factory, or a bad photoshop or something.

I like the offset soundhole designs on pretty-much every CF brand I've seen, which tend to reflect the lines of the space they occupy. Not so with Rainsong. I agree with you on this, Chunky. To incorporate a circular soundhole to the lines of the upper bout just looks weird and is a real turn-off for me personally.

[steelvibe]

Originally Posted by ChunkyB

I guess all of us guitar owners on this forum who are requesting a bevel don't count, huh?

...just because Rainsong isn't doing something, doesn't mean nobody wants it. You could have said a couple years ago "obviously nobody wants an offset soundhole because Rainsong isn't making them. Obviously if there was demand, they would make them". Or "obviously nobody wants a CF guitar that isn't black, because if they did, Rainsong would make them".

This thread kinda went off the rails of the crazy train. I agree with Ted on many levels and it wouldn't matter if I didn't. His experience in the business is simply undeniable.

Having said that, you really drive home a valid point here and I find myself agreeing whole-heartedly with this portion of your statement. The real rub here is the divide of best interests- those of a business and it's devotion to the profit margin, and those of the customer and their search for a supreme product.

Ted's use of "non-issue" is coming from his keen business sensibilities, and is speaking of how these interests are satisfied for both parties. Some companies can afford to take customer concerns or ideas and work them through R&D, while others don't have that luxury. In fact, my guitar (the Shorty) is the result of such ideas, and came from both Ted seeing the market for such a guitar, and Ashvin's keen sensibility to spot a great idea and test it. In this case, the idea apparently paid off for RainSong.

I'm speaking completely out of ignorance here, but in my opinion, there is only some demand for offset soundholes in the market but also one that would be a relatively inexpensive modification to RainSong's current designs (WS top with a hole cut in a different spot). If they don't sell enough to justify production, those guitars will disappear. The Shorty was even more of a risk- relocation of the bridge and the design of a shorter neck, all still relatively inexpensive when looking at the RainSong OM.

[Doubleneck]

I understand where the "non issue" is coming from but nothing is a non issue on a guitar discussion forum?

[ChunkyB]

Originally Posted by Doubleneck

I understand where the "non issue" is coming from but nothing is a non issue on a guitar discussion forum?

I agree. I think it's partially just a difference of tone/meaning in the term "non issue". It's hard to perceive tone in text.

Bickering closes threads.