Found on the Market Greenfield G4

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by gitarro

I have never had the chance to play a greenfield. Is his tone similar to Sobell?

I would not compare a Greenfield to a Sobell at all. Totally different voice, both unique and excellent in their own way.

[gitarro]

Hopefully one of these days I hv the chance to play a greenfield then - the descriptions sound very good.

[westman]

I see it is described as having a 'Novax Fanned Fret System', does it differ from the Greenfield 'DADGAD Geometry' f/f, or are they all "very modal - very open".

[CoolerKing]

Apparently TNAG has an incoming model as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQQ2uw3RZjk

[CoolerKing]

Originally Posted by bdm0509

Go play an early one. If you love it, buy it! Who cares about the rest...

Excellent point! If it sounds great go for it. I was mainly asking because of the price differential, because especially as Guitarro points out that's an exceptionally large piece of ABW and I continue to think this guitar is relatively underpriced.

[JoeCharter]

Originally Posted by westman

I see it is described as having a 'Novax Fanned Fret System', does it differ from the Greenfield 'DADGAD Geometry' f/f, or are they all "very modal - very open".

Whether the frets or straight or crooked won't make the guitar sound more or less "modal" or "open"...

[bdm0509]

Originally Posted by westman

I see it is described as having a 'Novax Fanned Fret System', does it differ from the Greenfield 'DADGAD Geometry' f/f, or are they all "very modal - very open".

The two are orthogonal. Mike Greenfield is pretty adamant about crediting those who have helped him or who have made significant contributions to luthiers. The modern fan fret "movement" is largely a result of work done by Ralph Novax (http://www.novaxguitars.com/info/history.html). So really, any fan fret could be described as a "Novax Fanned Fret System."

I know that Mike's DADGAD geometry is what he's been calling things on his .2 guitars, but I don't know if it's the same fan he used in the late 2000s, which is when most of the guitars in this thread seem to have been built. I wouldn't worry much about that, honestly...

-B

[westman]

yeah, Joe & Brent, I came to that conclusion based on another Greenfield thread, there is no ‘DADGAD’ Geometry Optimized or otherwise they’re all just K Novax reworking of the 16th century idea - to varying degrees of ‘crookedness’.

Originally Posted by bdm0509

Mike shifted to the tone halo ring,

so is this 'ring' a contemporary take on the Tornavos ?.

[LouieAtienza]

Originally Posted by westman

yeah, Joe & Brent, I came to that conclusion based on another Greenfield thread, there is no ‘DADGAD’ Geometry Optimized or otherwise they’re all just K Novax reworking of the 16th century idea - to varying degrees of ‘crookedness’.

Well, it's possible Greenfield took into account string tensions when he devised how much to "splay out" the strings, to give them all more even tension in DADGAD tuning. If I recall correctly the G1.2 is also lattice braced.

[westman]

Quite, Louie, I would hope there was some rational applied to doing it, just as the historical application of this solution by Bandora and Orpharion makers of a few hundred years ago would have done just that - considered string ‘compensation’, possibly due to necessity due to the gut and metal string ‘gauges’ used then, though I doubt they were ‘Optimising’ a DADGAD Geometry.

meanwhile -

[BBWW]

I had a beautiful Greenfield at exactly the wrong time...and I had to sell it. I will say, it was the best guitar I had over played and maybe heard. It was wonderful beyond saying. But it came durning a very bad financial time for me and I had to let it go. It will haunt me the rest of my playing days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIShVDOi_q4

[CoolerKing]

Beautiful guitar! Filmed by our own JJI as well!

[JJI]

Honestly...that guitar is as good a guitar as any of the three of us had/have ever seen. The power was staggering...and this is just an iPhone vid!

[steveh]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

I would not compare a Greenfield to a Sobell at all. Totally different voice, both unique and excellent in their own way.

Hmmmm. Not sure that I agree 100% with this.

I've played plenty of both and I do think there are some similarities. Specifically, both guitars, on average, have a lot of separation and projection. They're both at the "leaner" end of the spectrum as well - i.e. bright and dry. I wouldn't go to either builder if I wanted huge, thunderous bass for example, but they'd be right up there if I needed crystal clear, projecting trebles. Neither are terribly "warm". Of course the Sobell, of the two, takes these characteristics to the extremes so, in that way, they are indeed "different".

It's interesting to note that when Mike Greenfield visited Trevor's shop TAMCO, the Sobells were the instruments he was most drawn to - I hope I'm recalling that correctly Trevor: might have been Brondel who visited? They share similarities with both also.

Cheers,
Steve

[cogito]

Originally Posted by steveh

Hmmmm. Not sure that I agree 100% with this.

I've played plenty of both and I do think there are some similarities. Specifically, both guitars, on average, have a lot of separation and projection. They're both at the "leaner" end of the spectrum as well - i.e. bright and dry. I wouldn't go to either builder if I wanted huge, thunderous bass for example, but they'd be right up there if I needed crystal clear, projecting trebles. Neither are terribly "warm". Of course the Sobell, of the two, takes these characteristics to the extremes so, in that way, they are indeed "different".

It's interesting to note that when Mike Greenfield visited Trevor's shop TAMCO, the Sobells were the instruments he was most drawn to - I hope I'm recalling that correctly Trevor: might have been Brondel who visited? They share similarities with both also.

Cheers,
Steve

This description of Greenfields comports with my experience of the ones I've played. Surprisingly, to me, even the G4 I tried did not have a big bass. It was certainly solid, but for the size of the body I was expecting more. No doubt it is well suited for certain playing styles, but, personally, if I'm going to cradle that large of an instrument I want the thunder. Perhaps the one identified here has it - I just wouldn't presume it.