European Fan Fret Guitar

[ukejon]

Originally Posted by jdelin86

I have to comment on this, though it's at the risk of causing a bit of a stir...

Do none of you find these 'designs' rather, how shall I put it, familiar?

This might help: LHS = Goman guitars, RHS = Greenfield guitars



I know they say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but my goodness I think this may cross the line!

I'm all for innovations being made available to the masses -- Mr Watts will attest that Avian guitars are a good example of this, and indeed they do so with their own unique designs.

However, these guitars seem to 'borrow' a little too much no?

I say this because Greenfield Guitars is a one man shop that builds a handful of guitars a year to mind blowingly high standards. So it would be a shame if this factory-build manufacturer starts giving people the impression that they can have a Greenfield guitar (or possibly, 'an Andy McKee guitar!') at bargain-basement prices.

Just one guy's opinion. I figured Mr Greenfield probably doesn't have a Gibson-esque cash reserve for litigating against copy-cats of his protected designs, so someone should stand up for him!

Peace

Joel

Certainly are some striking similarities, although it is interesting to note that the Gomans folks did not emulate Michael's very distinctive bracing system inside the guitar. Also, the bridge on this Gomans (but not the one in the OP) is small compared to many other leading fan fret guitars. Wonder if that will lift over time?

[pappywatts]

Originally Posted by pappywatts

"Well Well Well"...sic. Muddy Waters

Seem to have stirred up some interest here, thanks for all the further research and comments plus and minus..

It's encouraging to hear others taking the plunge and have had a good result.

Certainly has racked up my anticipation to get this guitar up close and personal this week, hopefully it will match up with the description/hype and my expectations, I will report back positively or to the contrary as and when...

Oh deary me...seem to have stirred up more than a hornet's nest, i'l read them all later...even the flamey ones..don't make me come up there!
Anyway it arrived an hour ago...Everything the seller described about it is true and more so.

Now some personal history...In 2009 on my sixtieth birthday, I was in Hong Kong, 1st leg of a RTW trip, and with my daughter, prior to her going to UNI in september of that year. As is my wont, she went shopping for clothes, and I went in search of a guitar store in Kowloon, found Tom lee's store, the largest in the city, and spent a couple hours trying out all the major brands of acoustics which they did have...One of them was a Dave Crosby signature D18 Martin, which I personally found a bit heavy and bulky, I couldn't afford it anyway, but so what, I was trying out stuff.The next leg of our trip was Auckland NZ, and I purchased a K Yairi WY1K Koa cutaway from a shop there, got a good deal with case, and came away with a pretty , playable, well made instrument, still have it, and it does the job as and when required.

Although this goman model is a BJ, the quality and build and finish equals the DC-18 in spades, and not quite as heavy, the case it came with is very similiar to a roadrunner case I bought in Queens NYC at a Guitar center, heavily padded and well made...could be another 'copy' lawsuit there as well...eat your heart out.
Finally after many years, of playing, gigging, buying and swapping, tweaking, fixing up old battered abused instruments.( there are still some people who shouldn't own guitars) I have acquired a well made playable acoustic, which will probably see me out...I don't give a rats *** about the logo on the headstock, never have , never will, "this one speaks to me" to quote George Lowden...

[pappywatts]

Just by the by, re the RTW trip in 2009, the last leg of our journey was San Francisco, during the labor day weekend, they had closed the major bridge there for urgent repair work, so unable to travel in that direction for the weekend, i opted to walk around town, daughter shopping again, and stumbled across another guitar shop, and indulged myself for half an hour.
Hanging the wall amongst the gibsons and taylors, was a K Yairi WY1K koa, alvarez preamp, exactly like the one acquired in NZ...looked at the price, roughly about 600 bucks more than what I paid for the NZ version!!!.... go figure......So whilst we were in SF over the next few days I managed to snag an internal alvarez mic for the yairi preamp online, and had it delivered to the hotel, would have been more than expensive (about 100% more) trying to get one on my return to the UK. So that was a nice finish to our trip..

[ukejon]

Glad you love the guitar. That is what matters.

[dberkowitz]

Originally Posted by rogthefrog

Respectfully: calm down and learn to disagree politely.

There's a lot of derivative work in lutherie. Charis guitars look and sound a lot like Olsons. McIlroys look and sound a lot like Lowdens. Razo's early guitars borrowed liberally from Matsuda and Kraut. Taylor and Washburn are making Ryan-style bevels. Vellone is making a mod-D that looks just like the ones Somogyi and apprentices make. Your small jumbo looks like a bunch of other SJs, and the SJ isn't a Martin shape. Etc ad infinitum. (yes, I am aware of the lineage in some of these examples) Some extremely well respected luthiers and companies are producing Martin, Gibson and Dyer copies, and even exact, painstaking replicas, some even exclusively--by your standard, they bring zero original work to the table.

Gomans doesn't claim to have created original guitars. In fact they basically say they are copying other builders (my emphasis):



When does the canon start? 1833? Mid 1980s? Mid 1990s? Or does one only object to copying when the copyist makes lower priced instruments? Who decides what's ok to copy and what's not, and who's allowed to copy and who isn't?

Do you think someone in Greenfield's target customer base will go "hey I'm going to buy a mail-order copy that was made in China because it's 90% cheaper"?

I don't know Gomans guitars, nor do i care to. I think their site is kind of unprofessional, and the whole started-by-a-French-musician gambit and disingenuous vagueness about where the guitars are built is distasteful. And their designs are extremely derivative and/or IMO ugly. So I'm not advocating for them.

But what's good for the goose is good for the gander. And I'm not going to be lectured or yelled at because of someone else's design decisions.

Dear Roger,

Clarity being found in context, the Devils in the details. I'll address your remarks accordingly.


There are any number of features on guitars that are not associated with any build her in particular -- 12 strings, baritones, compound radius fingerboards, etc. On the other hand, there are features such as Novak's Fan-Fret/multi scale guitars, the Manzer "wedge," the Laskin armrest, and the Ryan bevel that were either popularized were created out right by an individual builder.

These features are associated with particular builder who either conceived of it on their own, modernize a feature on a historic instrument, or adapted a concept into a new idea.

In the case of the Ryan bevel, it is an original adaptation of the Laskin armrest, which has clearly delineated entry and exit points, Kevin Ryan adapted it to have sinuous entry and exit points that shift the visual line of the guitar to make continuously changing bevel that interprets the body shape.

Linda Manzer independently conceptualized the "wedge." Subsequent to this a patent discovered that outlined the concept predating Linda's work. As far as I've been able to tell, nothing was done with the patent, and consequently is not unreasonable to credit Manzer with the wedge as she's the one who popularized it.

The aforementioned are features, and while one should attribute these designs when using them, it is otherwise fair use.

Rosettes and peg heads traditionally are the identifiable mark of the maker. They were never copied. Doing so is a faux pas. We can add to this bridges, logos, and end grafts. These are all marks of the maker and no one is entitled to use them. Flipping a design to a mirror image is not design. It is a shortcut. No builder should be purloining prior art.

Now you mentioned Taylor's use of the bevel. Taylor had permission from Kevin to do the armrest. They came to his shop and he showed them how to do it. Many of us asked Kevin for his blessing, and acknowledge his contribution. I have two pages on my website devoted to the bevel's history and acknowledging both Grit and Kevin's work.

My SJ

To the extent that my F and J bodies are jumbos, and owe their general shape/category to Gibson, then they are derived from that concept. However, none of my bodies were copied. They were drawn with boundary dimensions much as described in Cumpiano, French curves and compasses, and refined into my shape. They are my designs and no others. It was a conscious decision. I really liked the Santa Cruz F and spoke openly about making one with the repair man with whom I apprenticed. He said, "Why? Make your own." I never looked back. My J which is the first of my jumbos and the F which was derived from the J, look nothing like the Santa Cruz or anyone's "SJ" when they were conceived in 1995 and 1997 respectively.

And there's the rub. Copying versus actual design. And so there is a big difference and copying someone's design feature and acknowledging it's origin, and simply calling it your own work. Clearly the latter is not original work. Calling it inspired by without saying by whom, is a cop out.

Canon timeline

Gibson, Martin, fender, Torres…these folks died a long time ago. Their designs have been around in most cases just short of a century. That's a clear delineation of public domain. Purloining identifiable art from a living, currently building luthier is a fair indication that you shouldn't be copying their designs. It's not your work product. You are not entitled to it at any price.

Use and Market segment

Sure. No knowledgeable consumer is going to confuse a Greenfield for a Goman. But that is not the point. Where is Michael's compensation for the use of his work product? Musicians have control over the use of their work for advertising, as well as in some cases who can cover it. There is no price curve that demarks when something is acceptable. The governing principle isn't market confusion, (although, it does have its place in so far as diminishing the value of Michael's work product) but rather ownership and control of one's own work product. Goman isn't entitled to it because it is not his work product.

Ultimately, Roger, who are we to determine for the artist if they want their work product copied and sold at any price with no formal acknowledge or attribution whatsoever.

[rogthefrog]

Originally Posted by dberkowitz

Ultimately, Roger, who are we to determine for the artist if they want their work product copied and sold at any price with no formal acknowledge or attribution whatsoever.

I was with you until the sarcasm here.

I agree copying without attribution is not right.

However, there aren't clearly defined, non-arbitrary, well-agreed-upon criteria for defining what's "in the canon" and what isn't; who's allowed to copy, and who isn't; what is ok to copy, and what isn't.

Making 100% exact replicas of Martin and Gibson models (except for the logo) seems to be ok, even admired and sought after. When Kopp makes a Gibson-like guitar, even a model Gibson still sells, everybody seems to love it. But when Martin makes a Gibson-like guitar (a recent CEO model), everybody loses their minds. Why is that?

The same question applies to all the examples I gave above and I won't repeat them here. Instead I'll just post this.

The Kopp K-200 was born out of a guitar that started life as one of the most dressed up and tonally distinctive jumbo’s in the world.

Even the name is almost the same as its inspiration, the J-200. Many people born the year it was introduced (1937) are still alive and well. Is it ok to make an almost replica?



Gomans clearly lists Lowden and other brands as inspirations, even more clearly than Kopp does (Kopp doesn't mention the Gibson J-200 by name). They don't list Greenfield, but that seems more like an oversight than malice since they acknowledge everybody else they copied. So I utterly fail to see how the above is any different from the Goman/Greenfield/Lowden kerfuffle.

Nothing against Kopp, btw, it's just an obvious example that came to mind.

Best to end this conversation now, because we're not getting across to each other.

[Justin Kim]

Well.. interesting in terms of all the facets..

Apart from all the contentious idea, how's sound and the quality of building as a musical instrument?

[pappywatts]

OK having had sometime to play this one in, and had a good look inside and out, everything about it oozes quality from the maple binding on the body and fretboard,spruce top well matched, and the rosewood body has a wider grain than i've seen before.Scalloped x bracing inside, finish is clear nitro- gloss, including the neck,feels solid and even, I had a L'arrivee D09 in 1998 then costing twice as much as this one, and this has just as much bottom end, well balanced tone and level across the strings, mids are slightly scooped, until you dig in, it is loud, single note lines up and down the neck very sweet , it resonates well, and intonation is spot on.Truss rod adjustment from the soundhole, and L shaped key supplied. Surprisingly the tuners are very good quality, no brand on them, positive, stable and accurate, possibly 1:19 ratio, won't have to swap these out, unlike some other far eastern copies I've had.. It puts me in mind of another brand ..The FS Santa Cruz which I've tried, but couldn't afford..
It had phospor bronze probably new martins, strings 12's fitted, personally I find them a bit noisy/ whistly, until they're broken in...Frets medium jumbo, and low action, lower than I've had before on any acoustic, so didn't have to tweak anything action wise.The neck profile is quite shallow similiar to taylor's 400 series but wider at the nut 49.5mm, possibly because of the fan fret layout. Might do some recording with this one in the new year, but am loath to think about drilling holes just yet, have fitted a clear pickguard though...

[westman]

yeah lotsa design elements being replicated in these guitars thought I don’t see an optimised DADGAD fan fret on their site.
Would be interesting to see what bracing design they’ve used.

[pappywatts]

Originally Posted by westman

yeah lotsa design elements being replicated in these guitars thought I don’t see an optimised DADGAD fan fret on their site.
Would be interesting to see what bracing design they’ve used.

Well the bracing although scalloped around the bridge going either side of the sound hole is quite wide but shallow, so that area is very stiff.
Handles drop D very well, I'm into CGDGBE...( richard thompson tuning) at the moment capo on the fourth, handles "At Seventeen" fingerstyle very well..
Even with my hybrid claw style... Flicking the Harmonics ring clear and bright too.

[SeattleCard]

Very interesting thread. Pappywatts, do you have any soundclips available of the Gomans guitar you own? How is the build quality?

[pappywatts]

Originally Posted by SeattleCard

Very interesting thread. Pappywatts, do you have any soundclips available of the Gomans guitar you own? How is the build quality?

Well the quality is covered in all my other posts, am testing out various pups, and UST D-tar wavelength dual source on order from Ted Blue, apparently Rick Turner has parted company with Duncan, so thought I'd better snap one up quick..
Had some good results with those in other guitars, so mebbe do some samples in the new year,at present have a shadow mag SH-145 G pup in the soundhole going through a solstice preamp for tweaking, and very encouraging results so far.I'm steering clear of the baggs anthem systems, not that impressed for recording stuff.

[CoolerKing]

I agree with the OP. Please let him enjoy his NGD without the rest of us ruining it.

[JoeCharter]

I think the "off-topic" posts were untimely at best and rather disgraceful considering the context.

The OP has been extremely good-natured and amiable throughout this thread. A true gentleman.

From the photos, the craftsmanship looks pretty good. Congratulations on your new guitar.

[ukejon]

Originally Posted by pappywatts

Well the bracing although scalloped around the bridge going either side of the sound hole is quite wide but shallow, so that area is very stiff.
Handles drop D very well, I'm into CGDGBE...( richard thompson tuning) at the moment capo on the fourth, handles "At Seventeen" fingerstyle very well..
Even with my hybrid claw style... Flicking the Harmonics ring clear and bright too.

How is the CGDGBE work without the capo? Good resonant bass and note separation? Sounds like it is a lot of fun to play. I'm very tempted by the fan fret Avians that Michael Watts has at the shop in London.