New Waterloo guitar option - Page 3

#31 03-09-2018, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBman

I think on some of the models I've listened to on YouTube they took the "bluesy" thing too far. It's almost as if they were building a $400 guitar, jacking the price up and calling it "old time sound." To me it's just a cheap sound. Half that "old time sound" is from old recording equipment and the other half is because they played on cheap guitars.

I'd love to have a Waterloo, but I'm getting suspicious.

Somebody point me back to the light, lol.

The craftsmanship and playability are pure Collings. Whether you like the tone or not, these ain't no $400 guitars. Play one and you'll know.

Looburst · #32 03-10-2018, 12:59 AM

Willie just nailed it. They're a Collings guitar without all the fancier appointments. It all depends on how adaptable you are to different guitars and sounds. Heck, even the WL-S Deluxe looks fancy but if you read the description closely, those fancy looking inlays on the fingerboard aren't pearl, they're actually an acrylic material. Where the higher price comes in is the wood marquetry around guitar and sound hole! That stuff is very time consuming and if you notice, you don't see as many of these offered in the market. Course you can go the cheaper route and get a WL-S plain too. I know, at one time, Steve told Bill they didn't
need to build the Deluxe because Steve felt they were spending too much time on the all that wood binding, lol, I'm sure glad Bill didn't listen,,,,again! Steve also, initially, didn't think the Waterloo line was going to work and be successful.

TBman · #33 03-10-2018, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willie Voltaire

The craftsmanship and playability are pure Collings. Whether you like the tone or not, these ain't no $400 guitars. Play one and you'll know.

As long as they sound like this I'm good.

and this,

and this,

But not this,

So what's the real sound? Which recordings are "doctored up"? Obviously not the last one.

robey · #34 03-10-2018, 02:58 PM

None of them are "doctor up", whatever that means.

One of them is either a good recording of a bad sounding guitar, a bad recording of a good sounding guitar or a bad recording of a bad sounding guitar.

The other ones would appear to be good recordings of good sounding guitars.

TBman · #35 03-10-2018, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robey

None of them are "doctor up", whatever that means.

One of them is either a good recording of a bad sounding guitar, a bad recording of a good sounding guitar or a bad recording of a bad sounding guitar.

The other ones would appear to be good recordings of good sounding guitars.

Or.... the last video is what they really sound like.

Kind of like the first time you saw your girlfriend without make up on,

gfirob · #36 03-10-2018, 03:32 PM

I think it is odd that people are moved to buy these Waterloo guitars rather than an original Kalamazoo KG-14 from the 30's for about the same money. If you can find a good one (and there are a lot of them around) they are a wonderful light-weight guitar fantastic for fingerpicking. Very loud, and great to cut through other instruments. These are the guitars Waterloo copied, and you are looking at wood close to 80 years old or so. I have one and it is my number two guitar after a rosewood Martin OM. It is a perfect compliment to a cross braced rosewood guitar because it is so different. Just my two cents worth...

robey · #37 03-10-2018, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBman

Or.... the last video is what they really sound like.

Kind of like the first time you saw your girlfriend without make up on,

You're giving the recording process to much credit or being intentional obtuse.

You need to play these things to make you feel comfortable. Videos, in hand descriptions and testimonials don't make you feel comfortable. I get that, retail, they are a shiny penny.

And your wife looked fine without make up.

#38 03-10-2018, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBman

So what's the real sound? Which recordings are "doctored up"? Obviously not the last one.

This is the problem when you rely on videos -- for better or worse, you're judging tone based largely on microphone placement. Go play one instead.

Nctom · #39 03-10-2018, 05:20 PM

Gifrob, my Kalamazoo sounded pretty good, played OK and I regret I sold it. But it was not the guitar my Waterloo WL-12Mh is. About the only thing going for the Kalamazoo was its age, and that also worked against it.

DukeX · #40 03-10-2018, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfirob

I think it is odd that people are moved to buy these Waterloo guitars rather than an original Kalamazoo KG-14 from the 30's for about the same money.

I do understand your point of view. And a lot of folks will agree with it. But a lot of folks want a high quality new guitar with a warranty and no potential hidden problems. It is similar, IMO, to the reason a lot of folks buy new boutique builds of Fender Tweed and Blackface amps instead of buying the vintage amps themselves.

TBman · #41 03-10-2018, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by robey

And your wife looked fine without make up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willie Voltaire

This is the problem when you rely on videos -- for better or worse, you're judging tone based largely on microphone placement. Go play one instead.

I'll have to get out and find some to play this summer.

stephenT · #42 03-10-2018, 06:26 PM

Better build, better playability, little maintenance (neck resets, frets, etc) for awhile.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfirob

I think it is odd that people are moved to buy these Waterloo guitars rather than an original Kalamazoo KG-14 from the 30's for about the same money.

#43 03-10-2018, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfirob

I think it is odd that people are moved to buy these Waterloo guitars rather than an original Kalamazoo KG-14 from the 30's for about the same money.

I'm sure there are some great Kalamazoos and Stellas out there, but taking the risk of purchasing a "project" rather than a guitar holds absolutely zero appeal to me. I'd also wager that the current materials and construction quality are far superior. In spite of its heritage and inspiration, this is no department store guitar:

Mr. Jelly · #44 03-10-2018, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfirob

I think it is odd that people are moved to buy these Waterloo guitars rather than an original ...

Note that I have been through the experience of vintage, collectable, old worn mojo guitars. I have also been through enough guitars and equipment to know a slight difference in tone or timber isn't anything to wet your panties over. These are the real deal. Not the original but they are the real deal. They are a first class build. Plus they are fun. Having an original is a little serious.

Looburst · #45 03-10-2018, 08:33 PM

I would agree with all that's been said. Wilie and Mr. Jelly make the point clear. As a person who owns 3 old Gibsons, 2 wartime Banner LG2s, a 1943 and a 1944, and one 1934 museum quality 14 fret L-Century Gibson. These guitars are fun to play but do they intonate as well as Waterloos? It's not even close, IMO.

That's some beautiful figuring on that Maple, Willie!