Originally Posted by justonwo (Post 6597248)

Knowing Matthew, he was just trying to annoy people. I’m offended I wasn’t included on the list as one of the forum’s foremost authorities on back seat luthierie.

Originally Posted by Rmccamey (Post 6596872)

I don't understand the end result you are looking to achieve. You come up with a list of lutiers who build Martin inspired guitars or Martin clones. So...........what would I do with such a list? If I call a luthier not on the list and ask if they could build a Martin clone and they say "Yes" does that then qualify them to be on the list? If I call a luthier not on the list and ask if they had ever built a Martin clone in the past and they say "Yes" does that qualify them to be on the list? If I call a luthier on the list and ask if they build Martin clones and they say "No" would they get taken off the list? Is the list luthiers we, the general public, "think" build Martin clones or luthiers who actually state that they build Martin clones?

Sorry, it just seems like this list could or should contain the vast majority of luthiers who build or who have ever built a steel string guitar. I appreciate the discussion and viewpoints given, I just do not see much purpose for this long list of luthiers that will never be completely accurate.

Originally Posted by jt1 (Post 6597307)

Knowing Matthew, I'm confident he had no idea what he was trying to accomplish.

Thankfully, he managed to offend Juston.

Congratulations, Matthew!

Originally Posted by vanceen (Post 6601706)

A definition of "best" is pretty important when we're talking about Martin replicas.

Collectors and players have different values about guitars. A Martin or a Martin replica can fall into either category.

A collector would put value on hot hide glue construction, nitrocellulose finish, no adjustable truss rod, a dovetail neck joint, slotted bridge holes with slotless pins, a long "through" bridge, etc. etc. Any deviation from the above pretty much ruins a guitar for a collector of Martin-like vintage guitars.

And in my opinion and experience (though it's smaller than many on here), a spectacular guitar can be made without any of those things. I'd be willing to bet that something very much like an excellent vintage Martin can be made without any of those things.

Les Paul purists have these issues as well.

Originally Posted by CarolynS (Post 6591751)

My vote goes to Kim Walker.

And if we weren’t already on Kim’s list, I would commission a guitar from John Slobod.

Originally Posted by justonwo (Post 6601848)

Hmmm. I’m not sure I agree with you there. Most people I know of are happy with some modern deviations from the Martin recipe, and I haven’t see that impact the value of those guitars. I know of almost no builders that follow all aspects of the original formula. But I agree with you that there are many approaches that yield great tone.