Quote:
Originally Posted by iim7V7IM7
My current opinion is that a guitar constructed with:
- Well seasoned, quartersawn woods;
- By a master luthier skilled in the art who has;
- An understanding of the goals and playing style of a guitarist and;
- Adjusts their build based upon this understanding and the properties of the materials on the bench;
Is far more important than;
- A guitar constructed to target dimensions;
- Using top woods that have been exposed to simulated conditions
- To accelerate the kinetics of physical changes that occur with real-time static aging (no playing).
I am not saying that it does nothing. I would argue the top list results in a first order effect and the latter is likely a second order effect. There is too much focus on the novelty of static age, and no recognition that the guitars have not been played nor have they been built with an understanding of their owner nor the mechanical properties of the woods used.
My $.02
|
Eric, I find that difficult to argue with - I think you have stated that very well, and logically.
I have no intention of changing or upgrading my guitars - even my "basic" Sitka topped Collings and Santa Cruz, but for us fading Baby boomers who (like me) feel that we don't have the playing time left to break in and open up new adi-topped instruments - this may be a good way of getting us old fellows to part with some more green.
Ah - if I were only 25 years younger!