Signature sound vs player's preferences

[ewh2]

Originally Posted by Tim McKnight

If I ever develop a signature sound is the day I hang up my chisels. In my mind, "signature sound" comes from an engineered standard where one or a factory builds to a criteria to satisfy a standard sound signature for them. To adhere to an engineered platform, SKU or within a set of designed control limits to target an average population of players which limits the potential of the builder / factory and more importantly the final instrument.

For example; Factory M, T or G may thickness each top to .120" regardless of its stiffness, variation, intended use thus limiting its maximum potential. Five instruments may be awesome, 90 will meet the design criteria and be "average, while 5 will be lemons.

I approach every build as unique, just as the customer and materials I am working with. My goal is to build each guitar for an individual player and to respond precisely for the string attack and their tonal goals all the while maximizing the the potential of the materials that we have collectively chosen to work with. It may be a road less traveled but it has worked very well for us.

Thanks Tim McK. A very interesting perspective.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by JoeCharter

I personally never discuss "sound" or "tone" with luthiers -- at least never in great detail. First because I wouldn't know how to explain what I have in mind, second because I wouldn't know how the information is decoded by the luthier anyway.

I usually base my decisions on a reference instrument I would've played or a reference artist I would've heard -- and from that point on I can choose rosewood or mahogany, spruce or cedar, etc.

It's important for me that a luthier has a signature sound -- and if I can only own one guitar I would want the "best" of that signature sound. I cannot imagine myself contacting a luthier and asking him/her to copy someone else's sound or going through a dissertation as to what tone I hear in my head.

I find it much easier to discuss my visual preferences. That part I'm usually quite vocal about.

I'm with Joe. We have another thread on how there's no common vocabulary for sound, so if I go to talk to a luthier and tell him or her I want a "rich, warm" tone, will we both agree on what that means? I like artists who have a signature sound, ( I'd never ask James Taylor to sound like the Stones, for example, or vice versa), and so I'd not go to luthier A and ask them to build something like luthier B, or ask them to change what they do. There are so many choices out there, I find a luthier who's signature style appeals to me, and just ask them to do what they do. Where it gets personalized is in the wood choices, neck width, scale, inlay, etc. But for tone, I choose based on previous examples of the luthier's work. If they don't have a consistent signature tone, I'm probably not going to get interested.

That said, there can be just nice surprises if you aren't worried about getting it right every time. For example, I have a maple Ed Claxton guitar that is nothing like Ed's normal signature tone, or look or feel for that matter. I didn't order it, I got it after he built it as an experiment, and it's very cool in a very different way than Ed's usual. I also have my 2nd totally custom guitar underway from Tony Yamamoto - where we're trying for something quite different that he's never built, that I've never played, and neither of us has any idea how well it will work. It's not something I can walk into a guitar store and buy, so truly a unique "custom" instrument completely designed for my imagined preference - it could easily end up being a case of "be careful what you ask for", but you don't know unless you try. But even in this case, the main thing I've focused on with Tony is a pretty high level vision of what I want. Then he just takes it from there and does his thing.

[Sain't]

I also agree it's difficult to discuss tone. My experience with John Slobod was interesting: I told him I used nails but with a bare thumb and provided him with a recording that is a good sample of my style. After hearing the recording he said he thought he knew what I wanted and proceeded to deliver it. How much of that is luck, I don't know. But I'm amazed how precisely the guitar fits.

And I also should add I ordered from John because I wanted a Martin OM 18 style instrument so it wasn't an anything goes situation.

Michael

[DesolationAngel]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I'm with Joe. We have another thread on how there's no common vocabulary for sound, so if I go to talk to a luthier and tell him or her I want a "rich, warm" tone, will we both agree on what that means?

I took some of my guitars to Dan... and Dan came to my place and played/listened to what I have so that we could talk about the tones and reach a consensus as to how different guitars sounded. He also watched and listened to me play and asked me a bunch of questions about comfort for nut widths/string spacing etc... it was a fun collaborative process. But, as I said, we don't know how it's going to sound yet...

[justonwo]

I think it's a risky proposition to pick a luthier and then try to have them achieve a sound you have in your head. I think most luthiers find a niche that works for them and stick to that relatively narrow set of characteristics. It is important, I think, to hear a few examples before commissioning something. Within the bounds of a builder's signature sound I think you can find small tweaks with tone woods and small differences in construction. Although I used to provide builders with detailed descriptions of what I'm looking for, these days I favor telling the luthier to make the best guitar they can, and I have to trust that I like their signature sound enough (and trust their consistency) that all will be well I the end.

I would not recommend that anyone commission a build from a "jack of all trades" builder as they are almost certainly master of none.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

I took some of my guitars to Dan... and Dan came to my place and played/listened to what I have so that we could talk about the tones and reach a consensus as to how different guitars sounded. He also watched and listened to me play and asked me a bunch of questions about comfort for nut widths/string spacing etc... it was a fun collaborative process. But, as I said, we don't know how it's going to sound yet...

That's a good way to do it. Even with this project with Tony, he came to my place and brought a couple of guitars, and I brought out a couple, and we sat for quite a while, playing, and talking about "a little like this, but also more like this, and definitely not like this..." On the other hand when I ordered my Ryan Nightingale, it was just "I want one of those". I did go down to the shop and pick out the back and sides, but that was it. With most of the luthier orders I've done, it's just been about neck width, scale, cutaway, etc, because I already knew I liked the tone the luthier got.

[dneal]

Originally Posted by DesolationAngel

I took some of my guitars to Dan... and Dan came to my place and played/listened to what I have so that we could talk about the tones and reach a consensus as to how different guitars sounded. He also watched and listened to me play and asked me a bunch of questions about comfort for nut widths/string spacing etc... it was a fun collaborative process. But, as I said, we don't know how it's going to sound yet...

This is the gist of what I was going to address with regard to Doug Young's post.

I would think playing/listening should be a key facilitator of the discussion, because it is simply so difficult to convey in words alone due to the lack of concrete definitions.

Since this forum is a virtual discussion, I'll have to use the dreaded YouTube clip; but I could explain the qualities I like about this guitar during certain passages. Sustain, depth of bass, punch, etc... As I think about it, I could use the YouTube clip anyway; since it doesn't matter what the guitar sounds like in person and the discussion would hinge on the reproduced sound.



To pose a hypothetical to Doug, suppose you identified guitars from 3 different makers that possessed distinct qualities you found appealing and wanted an amalgam of those qualities. How would you go about selecting the builder (whether one of the 3 or a different one you believed could integrate the qualities)?.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by dneal

T
To pose a hypothetical to Doug, suppose you identified guitars from 3 different makers that possessed distinct qualities you found appealing and wanted an amalgam of those qualities. How would you go about selecting the builder (whether one of the 3 or a different one you believed could integrate the qualities)?.

I don't think I have any idea of how to do that, or even how I'd identify or communicate those qualities. Certainly not in the abstract. I'm not even sure you can mix and match different qualities, since they all interact. I tend to take guitars as they come - they're all good for something, I just try to enjoy what each brings to the table, even if I can't find words for it.

This guitar I have in progress with Tony Yamamoto is probably the closest to that kind of approach I've done, and the discussion was "can you do something like this, but change X and Y and Z". As I said, we approached that by sitting and playing a bunch of guitars and talking about them. After a while, Tony said "I think I know what you want". Does he? Do I even know what I want? We'll see when it's done :-) We did nail down the features, we'll have to wait and see how the tone plays out.

I also had an fun experience recently where a brand new builder asked for some feedback on his guitar #2 and #3, and was specifically interested in tone. He left them with me for a while, and then stopped by to chat. I ended up pulling out various guitars, and compared them with his. I found it very hard to talk about, or even say X is better than Y. I just ended up playing something on his guitar, and then playing the same thing on some others and letting him listen. We could say, well, that guitar has more bass. Is that good or bad? Not sure, but it's interesting, and so on. It was a lot easier to talk about aesthetics, and features, fit, finish.

[dneal]

I don't think I have any idea of how to do that, or even how I'd identify or communicate those qualities.

I'm not even sure you can mix and match different qualities, since they all interact.

Me either.

I enjoyed the rest of your post, and I appreciate the perspective.

I think the sitting and discussing a reference is the key (to a nice discussion, if nothing else). "Good" is subjective, and I think as long as you have intonation and other basics then you've jumped the "bad" hurdle.

[Oxwood_Handmade]

Originally Posted by justonwo

I think it's a risky proposition to pick a luthier and then try to have them achieve a sound you have in your head. I think most luthiers find a niche that works for them and stick to that relatively narrow set of characteristics. It is important, I think, to hear a few examples before commissioning something. Within the bounds of a builder's signature sound I think you can find small tweaks with tone woods and small differences in construction. Although I used to provide builders with detailed descriptions of what I'm looking for, these days I favor telling the luthier to make the best guitar they can, and I have to trust that I like their signature sound enough (and trust their consistency) that all will be well I the end.

I would not recommend that anyone commission a build from a "jack of all trades" builder as they are almost certainly master of none.

Well, I'm really enjoying this thread and that's my favorite response so far.

As for me, I continue to experiment with bracing layout and placement, top deflection readings (stiffness), back frequency, and voicing to have developed a signature sound yet. Will I ever...I think yes, but I'm only 8 years into a craft that will take a lifetime to master, so I don't feel bad about that. The thing is I take very detailed notes on each build and so if a customer liked the way guitar #30 sounded, I could probably get it on the green by using a top with similar deflection,density and weight numbers and shooting for the same top/back frequencies and other details for their build.

I really liked what David Berkowitz said, also. I sincerely believe that two guitars built identically as far as layout of braces, top deflection, etc. but by two different builders would sound different. Besides possible different methods for voicing altogether, my moment of "that's just right" may be in a totally different place than the other builder's. There is a real art to the carving of braces and it definitely manipulates the top's vibrational modes. Nothing but our own intuition and experience tells us when to stop carving.

Brad

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

That's a good way to do it. Even with this project with Tony, he came to my place and brought a couple of guitars, and I brought out a couple, and we sat for quite a while, playing, and talking about "a little like this, but also more like this, and definitely not like this..." On the other hand when I ordered my Ryan Nightingale, it was just "I want one of those". I did go down to the shop and pick out the back and sides, but that was it. With most of the luthier orders I've done, it's just been about neck width, scale, cutaway, etc, because I already knew I liked the tone the luthier got.

I think this is the gist of it. If a client is comfortable or familiar with a particular luthier, and likes his/her previous work, then it makes selecting that luthier easier. Then again, if there are certain traits or characteristics of the sound of a particular builder's guitars, then isn't that a "signature" of sorts?

Conversely, I think regardless of the client, the builder is tuning the guitar to his/her ears and preference, maybe subliminally.

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by Oxwood_Handmade

Well, I'm really enjoying this thread and that's my favorite response so far.

As for me, I continue to experiment with bracing layout and placement, top deflection readings (stiffness), back frequency, and voicing to have developed a signature sound yet. Will I ever...I think yes, but I'm only 8 years into a craft that will take a lifetime to master, so I don't feel bad about that. The thing is I take very detailed notes on each build and so if a customer liked the way guitar #30 sounded, I could probably get it on the green by using a top with similar deflection,density and weight numbers and shooting for the same top/back frequencies and other details for their build.

I really liked what David Berkowitz said, also. I sincerely believe that two guitars built identically as far as layout of braces, top deflection, etc. but by two different builders would sound different. Besides possible different methods for voicing altogether, my moment of "that's just right" may be in a totally different place than the other builder's. There is a real art to the carving of braces and it definitely manipulates the top's vibrational modes. Nothing but our own intuition and experience tells us when to stop carving.

Brad

Brad this is interesting and makes me wonder - If one luthier built a guitar with the braces left high, and gave the guitar to another luthier to shape and tune, whose guitar would it more sound like?

[Tim McKnight]

I wonder how many players could identify builder or brand X,Y & Z with a blind fold on? That might be an interesting experiment.

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by Tim McKnight

I wonder how many players could identify builder or brand X,Y & Z with a blind fold on? That might be an interesting experiment.

I would loosen the strings, reach into the soundhole, and determine by feeling the braces!

[Bruce Sexauer]

Originally Posted by LouieAtienza

Brad this is interesting and makes me wonder - If one luthier built a guitar with the braces left high, and gave the guitar to another luthier to shape and tune, whose guitar would it more sound like?

Years ago the forum called 13thfret.com built a guitar in which many of the resident luthiers contributed one aspect or another, myself among them. It was pretty embarrassing for many of us to have our name involved once we saw the final product. Certainly I moved on as quickly as possible.