Tom Sands guitars - have you played?

[Fsgeek]

The description of Dennis is apt....
Most Somogyiesque guitars do have the "brittle trebles"......
I dont associate it w hardness of the sound... The best Somogyis have soft and blooming notes.
Though there are examples that did sound cold... most of those were from his apprentices

[dennisczech]

Edit: I did not mean to post an unhappy face in the title, sorry!
I realise that I was generalising by lumping the Somogyi school together, this can be misleading, and I am sure many of you have wonderfully sweet and not at all brittle sounding instruments from the man himself and his apprentices. I was purely speaking from my own limited experience. Nor did I mean to equate "brittle" with "cold" or "harsh": certainly, I would not describe Tom Sands' guitar in that way at all, it was in fact warm and woody. But a tad brittle in the mids when played fingerstyle...! For the original poster, the main thing is, the people who have Tom's guitars are absolutely smitten with them, bedazzled and in love. I have no doubt that this young man is a world-class builder.
If it's an issue, which it may not be, he is still relatively affordable within that school.

As for me, I like gitarro's description of Claxton: sweet and supple. The one guitar I would wish to have, apart from my Burghardts, with which I am in love, is a mahogany Claxton OM. The one that was at TAMCO was heavenly, and was resold a couple of years ago...I missed out on it. The perfect combination of sweetness, responsiveness, balance and power. Just my personal preference.

[SiliconValleySJ]

Originally Posted by gitarro

Having said that, this tone is entirely different from the guitars made by the ex somogyi apprentices that I have played in the past. Based on that, I don't think somogyi's sound can necessarily be equated to the guitars of his ex apprentices, because while the apple may not fall too far from the tree, the apple still has a long long way to go before it becomes a tree and ervin somogyi still has at least 25 years more experience than his most experienced ex apprentice.....

Ervin does not require his apprentices to build his sound. It's actually the opposite from what I understand--each apprentice comes in and walks away with ideas of how to achieve the tonal profile that he/she wants.

And that is why each apprentice can be very different. My experience has been that many apprentices are quite similar, but there are those who aren't. I tend to equate Gaffney with the closest to the master's tonal profile. Kostal/Buendia build their guitars a bit heavier (but still very light) and with some more treble emphasis. Etc etc.

Tom Sands his own tone. Some people here are huge fans. Others prefer other apprentices. Only the OP can decide if he/she likes Sands guitars by playing some of them.

[borborygmus]

I'm struggling to attribute the word "brittle" to my Sands OO (Tzalam/Sitka Spruce). It is certainly quite articulate, distinct and un-muddy.

[gitarro]

Listening to the sound clips alone without playing them, I have found that I liked the clips of Tom sands' guitar at least as much and indeed probably slightly more than any of somogyi's more recent crop of ex apprentices apprentices. He is clearly a young luthier of great promise and talent.

[Adamski]

As you all know, I was fortunate enough to discover Tom whilst he was still at Ervin's. I commissioned a guitar with an option on a second, which I bought. (Then immediately commissioned a third).

As I see is there are a number of drivers when considering a guitar. How it sounds, how it plays, how it looks and how much it costs and for every player the emphasis and requirement in each of these areas may be different.

The Sands guitars I own are notably different from each other but all are very good.

As for tonal balance, it very much depends where you're coming from. I love the Sobell sound and have owned a couple and played many. I love the articulation and the brightness. None of my Sands are that bright although the OM is closest.

The MMD is much more "mellow" sounding. It has a more "relaxing" sound. It is more like a Ryan than a Sobell.

Tom's building is, and many people have said this, incredibly consistent and the nice thing about that is that at a gathering where there are lots of his guitars you can hear the difference that the body shape makes.

From my experience, the OM is a brighter more agile sort of sound, the MMD is a deeper more resonant sort of sound, and the 00 is a more balanced sound (not better, just a mixture of the two) - but, as many have said, it's very subjective.

SteveH and I go to quite a few events together and play the same guitars...often playing the same pieces...then spent the journey back arguing about the relative merits of each instrument!

[steveh]

Originally Posted by Adamski

SteveH and I go to quite a few events together and play the same guitars...often playing the same pieces...then spent the journey back arguing about the relative merits of each instrument!

Yes, and it's really important for readers to understand that we spend most of the time disagreeing!

One man's meat is another's poison.

You have to try and play these beasts for yourself and build up an internal reference of what is working for you.

Tom is a case in point: Adam likes the OM most. I prefer the MMD or 00.

None will dissapoint though.

Cheers,
Steve

[nobo]

Just to chime in:

I've had the pleasure of playing 4 of Tom's guitars (including Adamski's 3). Really lovely, world class instruments. Lighter built than some Somogyi apprentices. Very responsive and articulate. Impeccable workmanship. I'm not someone who's in a position to regularly drop a lot of money on high end guitars and I'm really hoping to end up with 2 or 3 contrasting high-end instruments that I'll get to know inside out and keep for a lifetime. I'm fortunate in that I think I'm well on the way to that .... but I liked Tom's so much than I've put a deposit down for an interesting project (which I think may be a first from the Somogyi camp) and am considering a second. There will be a build thread (or two...!). So if you're looking for an endorsement...!

On a slightly separate note, Steveh's totally on the money about it all being very subjective (I know we disagree on a few guitars - but the world would be a dull place if everyone agreed that X brand of chocolate ice cream was the only ice cream worth eating! ) This is compounded by it being very difficult to talk about tone. Nonetheless, in my experience there's usually certain treble zing to many Somogyi-school instruments. I wouldn't call that harshness or brittleness, but that may just be a terminology issue as I think I know what's being referred to; Dennis' comment about the supporting mids may have something to do with it. I'd describe, for example, Greenfield's trebles on his larger instruments as being more rounded and fatter, richer even, but perhaps at the expense of some definition and clarity in the initial attack when compared to my experience of some of the Somogyi apprentices jumbos and MDs. That said, Tom's OO's had sweet, fat and rounded trebles... so... take from this what you will! Though at least in part that will be due to the (less vitreous) wood choices, scale length and nature of the OO design.

My Kostals (madrose/Euro OM and claro/German MD) are both quite different guitars - but, being as responsive as they are - right hand technique has a huge influence on tone. If you want rich, fat and rounded trebles, they are there for the taking, depending, for example, on the angle of attack, varying the ratio of nail to flesh, sui tasto positioning, etc. I usually prefer quite a mellow sound, but I see the Somogyi style of build as being able to offer a pretty comprehensive range of expression for the fingerstylist - who can then coax the specific tone they're after from that wide pallet. In other words, it's all open and out there for you to control. So I don't see that treble quality (whatever we're going to call it) as a negative, but as an option that's there but can be dialed down through technique and string choice (whereas it's much harder to dial it when wanted in on a guitar that doesn't have it). Anyway, that's just one perspective on it!

[nobo]

There's a really rather lovely set of videos (beautifully shot; lovely audio too) featuring Will McNicholl's delightful playing up on Tom's website, for those that want to get a bit of a flavour of these stunning instruments. Even better in the flesh, of course - but they do give you an great idea of what these guitars are capable of.

http://www.tomsandsguitars.com/media/

Enjoy!