|
|
#61
10-21-2011, 05:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As someone slightly complicit in this "experiment", I would have to say that "The Eighteen" is "something in the middle"... When Laurent and I were shooting the breeze about build philosophies, the idea of a combination approach...a "Brondelized" version of pre-war Martin tone, feel, and look...came up and quickly evolved into the 2 guitar controlled comparison undertaking... My ears and eyes (and very soon my hands) tell me the "experiment" is an unqualified success from a number of perspectives... My wife Nancy and I get to play these guitars as well as a few others this weekend as very privileged showcasers for Laurent's guitars at the Woodstock guitar show... Talk about a new Golden Era indeed..! I'll report back next week for those interested.. LC 
|
|
#62
10-21-2011, 10:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
yeah, vintage!
Laurent;
Once again, you have built two more stunning guitars and the sound clips clearly show the differences between the two build styles, vintage and modern. I have been talking about this top structure effect for decades, but this set of samples is the best way to hear the difference side by side in real time. Thank you for taking the time and effort to make up these test instruments and sharing them with us. It is very instructive. The arching of the top, regardless of species, radically increases the tension and high-end response of the instrument, shifting the spectrum to the treble side and the highest partials. The flatter vintage top is "looser" and better able to produce that woody, warm, but still articulate bottom end and mids. Martin tops all the way back to the early teens at least, have traditionally had about a 50' arching which translates into a 5/32" difference over the length of the X brace. Once these tops go under string load, they appear to be essentially flat (even though not so) and over time take on the S curve of the more mobile lightly arched top. This structure is essential for producing the vintage voice. By contrast, the modern arch concept of 26-30' stiffens the top significantly, raising its fundamental as much as 3 or 4 whole steps, making the tone brighter, more sustaining, less woody and warm. The stiffer top does not move as readily as the flatter top, especially with the longer bass wave forms, but it does have outstanding highs. It sparkles and sustains super well. I hear more string and less wood in the modern build than the vintage guitar. There is also a bit more "depth" to the tone of the vintage one. Did I mention I am very biased? Hmmmm...... Both are excellent instruments in their own right, just different due to the structures of their tops. The oustanding quality of these two guitars(Laurent, you are amazing!) very clearly articulates the tone of both the modern and vintage sound. This effect is totally consistant regardless of who makes the guitar, being only slightly altered by choice of species for tops and backs, scale lengths and other details. Thank you for sharing this adventure with us, outstanding work. Your friend, John
|
|
#63
10-21-2011, 10:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Watching these guitars from start to finish makes me even more anxious for Laurent to return from Woodstock so he can start my guitar, an Essential A2 of Wenge and Carpathian Spruce.
I look forward to a more modern sound than my Merrill and Franklin OMs provide. Well done Laurent, and I hope you sell everything you take. All the best, Matt
__________________
rubber Chicken Plastic lobster Jiminy Cricket.
|
|
#64
10-24-2011, 07:24 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm kicking myself because I only played on Laurent's guitars at Woodstock yesterday. Man, was it a killer
 Just perfect in every way.
|
|
#65
10-24-2011, 09:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Steve
__________________
Still crazy after all these years.
|
|
#66
10-24-2011, 10:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks Laurent for your experiment and sharing your experience with us. Did you document the back and side thicknesses? You mentioned the back of the 2nd guitar was a bit thinner. I have worked on some old mahogany Martins as thin as .055" but many were in the .070"-.075" while others were +.090". They seemed to have a lot of variation in the back and side thicknesses. Did you record the guitars with active or passive backs, i.e. the back against or away from your body? I would think it might be interesting to record them with the backs damped so more of the top is heard in the recording, that is if you still have them? None the less, thanks again for your diligence in sharing. FWIW, I really like the tone of the burst
|
|
#67
10-24-2011, 02:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
cotten
|
|
#68
10-25-2011, 05:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
John, you are way too kind! Thank you for chiming in. This project would not have happened without your encouragement and light.
Matt, the wood is on the bench, today is the day of conception! Eric, your comment humbles me. Tim, I'll be back with measurements, it's in my notebook in the shop. All I can say is IME Martin back thickness for mahogany is always in the .100"- .115" range, depending on size. The sides vary a lot more because of the aggressive sanding to smooth them, but they should start around .085". Especially in the '60s and '70s they can get very thin in places, as thin as .040". Mahogany is very forgiving… Woodstock was great, as usual!
__________________
Laurent Brondel "Faiseur d'instruments"
|
|
#69
10-25-2011, 09:23 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nice guitars.
Last edited by Bruce Sexauer; 10-28-2011 at 12:39 PM.
|
|
#70
10-25-2011, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I was lucky enough to get the chance to play both at the show. I played them right in the big room so I didn't have the luxury of a quiet closed space but much of what everyone else heard I would agree with.
Both guitars played wonderfully, it took almost no effort to bring forth complete and full notes. They sat lightly in my lap and felt "right". I much prefer the look of Laurent's standard build, I really think the domed top and back look beautiful. I expect on a larger guitar it would make it much more comfortable to play as well. At this size I didn't really notice a difference. The standard build did have more power, especially in the mid and treble notes. I heard better note separation as well. It had a modern sound (as I describe it), there was a clarity and a wonderful treble quality to all of the notes, even the bass. It was not lacking in depth at all but even the deep note rang across the spectrum and had an upper sparkle. As for the difference between this and the traditional build I would agree with Bruce. The traditional guitar had less power but felt looser and ultimately was much more fun to play. By less power I don't mean that it was weak at all, it too had a treble quality, or crispness, across the register and was in excellent balance with itself. It did not seem to have the same separation though, everything blended a little more together in a very pleasing way. Ultimately it was a revelation to play them both and hear the differences. I played them first and they set the bar for the other guitars I played at the show. I am always impressed and inspired by Laurents work and was even more so in this case. I am sure many of you know what I mean.
__________________
Burton Boston, MA
|
|
#71
10-25-2011, 05:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I also spent a good deal of time with both these guitars and agree with both Bruce's and Burton's comments...
My wife and I were honored to do a mini-concert showcase for Laurent's guitars and had to fight over...er... um.....I mean discuss, who got to play "The Eighteen"... Being the consummate gentleman I acquiesced to my wife's wishes and "settled" for playing the showcase with the Brazilian/German spruce A2 that Bruce mentioned above...which is one of the finest guitars I've ever played... But as impressive as that A2 was, I'm still dreaming of that "Eighteen"...it was the guitar-istic equivalent of slipping into your most comfortable pair of jeans...Laurent nailed the essences of the pre-war Martin sound in a package that played and felt great, and with it's beautiful sunburst and half arrow purflings and rosette, was absolutely gorgeous ... LC
|
|
#72
10-27-2011, 06:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tim, on the "regular" A-2 top is .114" and back .106". On the "pre-war" A-2 top is .119" and back .113".
Burton and Larry: thanks, and I am glad you are in agreement. It seems to be the consensus. Burton, you know I love your work, you have a great eye for originality while staying in the classical realm. It's not a small gift. Nancy and Larry's performance was stellar, who cares about the guitars? It's all about the music.
__________________
Laurent Brondel "Faiseur d'instruments" Last edited by Laurent Brondel; 10-28-2011 at 05:42 PM.
|
|
#73
10-27-2011, 10:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In a recent interview Eric Bibb was asked about a certain Guitar that had belonged to the late Booker White that he recorded with.
He goes on to say "it's about the song" then he says "The Sound is in my inner ear and I have been marinating my soul in it for a long time" Laurent, its builders like You that help us bring out that inner Music. Thanks So Much for this unfolding project You shared with all of us. Carlos
|
|
#74
11-02-2011, 03:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Loved this thread!!!
__________________
| Jagtime Millionaire (ragtime, folk, fingerpicking) : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCn3...igKBIVh_CQacdw | Pairdown (acoustic duo, fingerstyle, Brit-folk) : http://www.pairdown.net
|
|
#75
11-03-2011, 03:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Gentlemen, thanks again.
Perhaps of interest to some of you, when I recorded samples for those two guitars I took the opportunity to record all the guitars I have in the shop at the moment. I just had set-up part of my studio, which was in boxes since we moved over 2 years ago… Anyway, I have a long scale red spruce / Brazilian A-2 (visible here, build thread here) and I thought it would be interesting to compare the sound samples. Same construction as the Carpathian / Honduran MH A-2 above, except for the long scale. Sound sample 1 Sound sample 2 Sound sample 3
__________________
Laurent Brondel "Faiseur d'instruments"
|
