Flamenca and Classical guitar advice

[dcmey]

Could someone explain the diffeneces between the 2 I have heard that flamenca's are thinner and lighter built. I was looking to purchase a classical in the near future, and had been been considering La Petrie because they have a good rep and made in Canada as opposed to China. However there are no dealers near me that have one to try, I have played a Cordoba GK studio, and studio Negra and liked those but found out they were flamenca guitars. I am looking to play classical and wouldn't mind learning a little bit of flamenca but I was worried that they were lightly built, will they hold up for many years. This classical and flamenca would be side stuff that I am trying to learn while also playing my Martin steel strings. If you were me what would you look to buy. I am looking for used instraments. I did like the neck on the cordoba which was 50 MM I think, I am mentioning this in case someone looks to steer in me in another direction to keep in mind. Thanks

[Ned Milburn]

Originally Posted by dcmey

Could someone explain the diffeneces between the 2 I have heard that flamenca's are thinner and lighter built. I was looking to purchase a classical in the near future, and had been been considering La Petrie because they have a good rep and made in Canada as opposed to China. However there are no dealers near me that have one to try, I have played a Cordoba GK studio, and studio Negra and liked those but found out they were flamenca guitars. I am looking to play classical and wouldn't mind learning a little bit of flamenca but I was worried that they were lightly built, will they hold up for many years. This classical and flamenca would be side stuff that I am trying to learn while also playing my Martin steel strings. If you were me what would you look to buy. I am looking for used instraments. I did like the neck on the cordoba which was 50 MM I think, I am mentioning this in case someone looks to steer in me in another direction to keep in mind. Thanks

A few things...

1) Listen to the differences in the music - flamenco versus "classical" which tends to include from renaissance to baroque to classical to romantic to "modern".

The flamenco guitar will not tend to perform well when used for classical repertoire (including the above groups). The classical guitar will not perform well in a flamenco music setting.

Flamenco music is very rhythmic and often with fast precise flourishes. The guitar must respond super immediately, and yet sustain is not a great need.

On the other hand, the modern classical guitar, even when playing historical styles, needs a great deal of body and sustain to each note, and the sprightly and bright immediacy of response of the flamenco is not required in the classical. The difference is enough such that the instruments should be thought of as different manifestations of the Spanish instrument.

Combine this with different setups - a flamenco is usually set up so low as to drive classical guitarists crazy, while a classical is set up high enough to make a flamenco player work too hard on both right and left hands.

A LaPatrie is a fine starter "classical" or nylon string guitar. You'd certainly get away playing some basic flamenco on it. But if your love and talent for flamenco music grows, then you'll surely want to upgrade to a proper flamenco guitar.

Sadly, I don't know (or remember) seeing any Cordoba guitars (though I have been in Cordoba, and visited a small hand-builder there). That said, people speak highly of the Cordoba instruments. I wouldn't hesitate to point you to a flamenco negra guitar. It is about the best "cross over" flamenco/classical beast you can get. In fact, you may find some flamenco negra guitars that play and sound as nice for classical as the LaPatrie guitars.

Either way, you have to remember that the sound quality of either instrument - classical or flamenco - will be limited at prices under $1,000. (Canadian - for reference).

Hope this helps.

[Bax Burgess]

An honest Flamenco guitar is very dry - I don't play Flamenco, so my light touch makes no sense for me to own one. A Classical can be very rich, even ones with outstanding tenor string clarity. I do have a Cordoba F7, which is not a dry guitar, so, not a Flamenco guitar to my ear.

[oldtimeblues]

http://www.cordobaguitars.com/p/gk-pro-negra
check out this video of Geordie Little (last one) Bells of Bocham
Now there is some crossover that will get you thinking

[zhunter]

Originally Posted by Bax Burgess

An honest Flamenco guitar is very dry - I don't play Flamenco, so my light touch makes no sense for me to own one. A Classical can be very rich, even ones with outstanding tenor string clarity. I do have a Cordoba F7, which is not a dry guitar, so, not a Flamenco guitar to my ear.

I don't think it has been that simple for a while now. Flamencos are voiced a lot of different ways. For some time, maybe since Paco de Lucia started using a negra, many flamenco players have been looking for a warmer richer sound and builders have provided it. I have heard cypress examples by the same builder based on different bracing patterns/strategies with sounds that range from crisp and papery to fuller and warmer. And negras tend to be voiced fuller and richer. They are still true flamenco instruments but not very dry.

hunter

[Bikewer]

There's a lot of crossing-over now, as indicated. Much of contemporary Latin music is "Flamenco influenced"...

Traditionally, Flamenco was a dance and song accompaniment form. There were particular dances and rhythms that the guitarist was expected to know.

The instrument itself was lighter and more responsive than the traditional classical guitar, with a cedar top, and traditionally even friction tuning pegs.

That's from reading about traditional Flamenco in Guitar Player years ago. Nowadays... Seems that manufacturers use whatever they like.
My "Manuel Rodriguez" instrument is called by them "Flamenco Moderna".... But it's a very contemporary "crossover" guitar with a skinny neck, a radiused fretboard, and electronics.

[zhunter]

Originally Posted by Bikewer

My "Manuel Rodriguez" instrument is called by them "Flamenco Moderna".... But it's a very contemporary "crossover" guitar with a skinny neck, a radiused fretboard, and electronics.

That is probably flamenco abuse to someone that plays flamenco. But no doubt the terminology is getting softer around the edges. As a musical style, I think I like the terminology "flamenco influenced" better than new or "nouveau flamenco". While flamenco's core is evolving, front edge players like Tomatito and Vicente Amigo still fully grasp and can play the roots. As did and could Paco de Lucia. Most of the nouveau folks only can wish they could. At least I wish I could.

hunter

[Dave T]

Calling many of these guitars "Flamenco" is like calling all guitars with nylon strings "classical". We are loosing the language to over generalization. Most are fine with that but in cases like this it requires paragraphs of explanation to identify exactly what the intent might be.

Dave

[dcmey]

Thanks for the replies. I knew there was a lot more differences than I realized.

[Red_Label]

Originally Posted by zhunter

That is probably flamenco abuse to someone that plays flamenco. But no doubt the terminology is getting softer around the edges. As a musical style, I think I like the terminology "flamenco influenced" better than new or "nouveau flamenco". While flamenco's core is evolving, front edge players like Tomatito and Vicente Amigo still fully grasp and can play the roots. As did and could Paco de Lucia. Most of the nouveau folks only can wish they could. At least I wish I could.

hunter

I won't disagree with anything you posted here (cause I don't disagree with you). REAL flamenco music is something to be celebrated, preserved, and held up as a golden standard. But music is for everyone, and there are many who wish to play (or listen to) the "watered-down" nuevo-flamenco style, with its pop/rock sensibilities. I do like your "flamenco-influenced" description, and have used that term myself [as well as "flamenco-jazz" or "latin-jazz"] when describing my own compositions and playing style. I do understand why the purists get riled-up when the subject of "REAL flamenco" is discussed, and why they desire to keep the genre pure and not cloud it up. I've been trying to educate listeners for many years regarding the difference between flamenco puro and the style that I and others play. Often the first words out of my mouth when someone is trying to describe what I do are "what I do is not real/authentic flamenco". But I live in a sparsely-populated western state (Montana) and what I play is as close to flamenco as they'll ever experience (which is why I decided to start gigging it and stop playing the classic rock and country that I had been gigging). I do play the malaguena and a few other traditional flamenco forms here and there, but definitely don't specialize in traditional forms.

Anyways, in regards to the OP's question... I will add to the chorus of "good/real flamenco and classical guitars are very different in their construction and tone". It used to be all about the woods. Cypress back and sides, with spruce/cedar tops for flamencos... and rosewood back and sides, with spruce/cedar tops for classicals. But as has been noted, more and more instruments designed for both art forms are crossing-over those traditional boundaries. I like my classicals to sound deep and full, with sustain and note complexity. Whereas I like my flamencos to sound loud, snappy, and percussive... with a lively, immediate response. As I've been through more and more guitars... I'm finding that has more to do with guitar construction than it does wood choices.