Questions on the ryan cathedral and on any alternatives

[rogthefrog]

I personally prefer ABW to BRW because it's a little less zingy. Rounder. What Marcus describes as dark. It's my favorite wood.

Tom Bills' guitars are terrific. He's one of the "post Kasha" builders with very different bracing (like Boaz Elkayam, Steve Klein and a few others). They have the characteristic deep bass and bloom to the notes you get in Klein and Boaz guitars.

They are definitely not voiced like Ryans. And neither are Wingerts like Ryans. Kevin really has his own thing going on that I've never heard elsewhere, except maybe in a Greenfield. His upper middle range is meaty and thick and so his guitars have a less zingy tone than most. It's a lovely tone and highly recognizable. It's not for everyone, but then again nothing is.

[gitarro]

Thanks for all your comments.- it's been enlightening to read and that will help me decide better.

[colins]

Originally Posted by ericcsong

I have played a handful of Brazilian Ryans and they truly are amazing instruments. The analogy that I give (and it only works if you like dark chocolate) is that Brazilian would be like a rich creamy milk chocolate and the ABW would be similar but in dark chocolate. There is a smooth darnkess that the ABW gives. But then again, it can all be psychological!

The chocolate analogy for BRW and ABW is a good one Eric (I've just been eating dark chocolate while I play!)

Col

[jaymarsch]

Yes to the smooth darkness of both ABW and dark chocolate!

Best,
Jayne

[iim7V7IM7]

Kevin’s Cathedral model combines a very large lower bout (>16-1/2”) with a deep body (>4-3/4”) with his top bracing/bridge plate that favors overtones. I think that may be what you like. It is interesting to me to see how the same sonic attribute can attract some players and repel others. The bass response that is being discussed (e.g. cavernous, surround etc.) while a positive attribute to some is actually a deficiency to others depending on your style of play/repertoire etc. This doesn’t make this attribute “good” or “bad” but speaks to the subjective nature of euphonic preferences with guitars. Guitars are essentially about trade offs of attributes. Strengths in some areas come with deficiencies in others.

In terms of wood selection, it honestly it is best done situationally and not prospectively based on a species. Once you have selected a builder and a model see what they have to say based on their experience and your goals and what in their wood lockers (quality of the wood, they may only have high quality in one and not the other). In my experience with both ABW and BRW guitars they sound a bit different. The ABW contributes a bit differently than BRW to a guitars overall sound. I find ABW to be a bit smoother and silkier and less shimmery in the upper partials which some folks prefer and others do not.

[gitarro]

Thanks for your reply iim7v7im7.

I actually like both kinds of guitar and believe that for me personally and my tastes, variety is preferable ans thus a small collection of guitars that are completely dissimilar fron each other tone wise but are very good representatives of their own philosophy of tone, is the way to go for me rather than to own a collection of very similar guitars that only differ in wood choices or being made by different luthiers but who build in a similar way.

Since i already have a guitar that does the note separation and clarity thing better than any other guitar that I have ever played, I am now looking for its polar opposite that is thick with overtones and having a cavernous bass and reverb but paradoxically has a sparkling and bell like trebles and strong punchy mids.

It seems the consensus so far that the cathedral model.is the only guitar that fits the bill.

Originally Posted by iim7V7IM7

Kevin’s Cathedral model combines a very large lower bout (>16-1/2”) with a deep body (>4-3/4”) with his top bracing/bridge plate that favors overtones. I think that may be what you like. It is interesting to me to see how the same sonic attribute can attract some players and repel others. The bass response that is being discussed (e.g. cavernous, surround etc.) while a positive attribute to some is actually a deficiency to others depending on your style of play/repertoire etc. This doesn’t make this attribute “good” or “bad” but speaks to the subjective nature of euphonic preferences with guitars. Guitars are essentially about trade offs of attributes. Strengths in some areas come with deficiencies in others.

In terms of wood selection, it honestly it is best done situationally and not prospectively based on a species. Once you have selected a builder and a model see what they have to say based on their experience and your goals and what in their wood lockers (quality of the wood, they may only have high quality in one and not the other). In my experience with both ABW and BRW guitars they sound a bit different. The ABW contributes a bit differently than BRW to a guitars overall sound. I find ABW to be a bit smoother and silkier and less shimmery in the upper partials which some folks prefer and others do not.

[rogthefrog]

Originally Posted by gitarro

Since i already have a guitar that does the note separation and clarity thing better than any other guitar that I have ever played, I am now looking for its polar opposite that is thick with overtones and having a cavernous bass and reverb but paradoxically has a sparkling and bell like trebles and strong punchy mids.

It seems the consensus so far that the cathedral model.is the only guitar that fits the bill.

From Ryan, yes.

Outside of Ryan, if you're not set on the builder, you may want to try guitars by Klein, Bills, Somogyi, Greenfield, or Traugott.

[gitarro]

Originally Posted by rogthefrog

From Ryan, yes.

Outside of Ryan, if you're not set on the builder, you may want to try guitars by Klein, Bills, Somogyi, Greenfield, or Traugott.

Many thanks for your reply rogrhefrog. I think I recall reading you own a Klein. Do klein guitars, bills and Boaz elkayam guitsrs sound similar with the same characteristics including big bass? I have never played a Kasha braced guitar before. How would you say they differ from e.g. a ryan cathedral?

[rogthefrog]

Originally Posted by gitarro

Many thanks for your reply rogrhefrog. I think I recall reading you own a Klein. Do klein guitars, bills and Boaz elkayam guitsrs sound similar with the same characteristics including big bass? I have never played a Kasha braced guitar before. How would you say they differ from e.g. a ryan cathedral?

Nitpick: these guitars are Kasha inspired, not Kasha. Kasha bracing was a failure. But there were interesting ideas that were improved upon successfully.

Big bass is one thing they have in common. The main characteristic is a bloom to the notes that's hard to describe but very specific and recognizable. Ryan guitars don't have that. Not a criticism--it's just a different sound, and bloom isn't inherently better or worse.

To me the most unique thing about Ryans is the trebles and upper mid-range. They don't have the super bright zingy glassiness you get from many other top shelf builders. They have a sweet roundness to them that's very pleasing. Every Ryan I've played has that. It's very much part of the Ryan voice.

You can't go wrong with Ryan guitars. They can give you the huge bass and other characteristics you want.

If you want the biggest bass imaginable, a Klein 45.7 in redwood over ABW or BRW can't be beat. It's 18" across and incredible. I wouldn't trade mine for anything, even a guitar three times the cost. It's very special.

If you're in the SF Bay Area, you're welcome to come try it out.