Collings AT-16 Deluxe

[kayakman]

With so many archtop builders out there,my choice was a Deluxe Campellone all acoustic,it has a great sound and some fine workmanship,IMO Mark is at the top of the heap.

[kkfan]

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky

A "standard" Collings AT-16 sells for about $12500. That's quite an upcharge for added binding.

From what I understand, it's a LOT more than just binding. It's essentially a smaller AT-17, technology-wise. I believe it's called an AT-16 only because of its size.

[backdrifter]

It's the same old story on this board. One person posts a link to a very nice, and very expensive guitar, and everyone feels the need to say why it's overpriced, why they would never buy it, or how there are infinite cheaper and better options (usually, the guitar that they own, surprise, surprise). Why are so many so threatened by expensive guitars? Inferiority complexes?

Do those same posters go to an art museum and complain that the art is too expensive? Can't you just appreciate shear beauty without worrying about the price? I'll never own an original Matisse, but that doesn't stop me from appreciating one when I see it!

If you've never played a Collings archtop, you owe it to yourself to do so. They are amazing. I've owned a LOT of guitars, and played many more. Every Collings that I've played has been top rate, and their archtops are no different. They are extraordinary in every way. I was fortunate enough to spend a few hours with an AT17, and I owned an AT16 for about seven months last year. Bills execution is absolutely flawless. I've owned many high end guitars and I've never seen any luthier that can surpass Collings' perfection, and few that can match it. Obviously this is important to Mr. Collings. Like Mr. Collings, I'm an engineer, and I appreciate that kind of perfection as well. Aesthetic perfection is not everything, but it is something!

I've since sold the AT16, but it was one of the best guitars I've ever owned. I now have another, much less expensive archtop that I love just as much or more, but that should not and doesn't take anything away from the Collings. It's not as cleanly built as the AT16, or as perfect in every minor detail, but the important aspects - tone and feel - are there in spades. Of course there are other, and cheaper, options - there always are. But again, that doesn't take away from a Collings. See, feel, and hear one in person and you just may "get" it.

Lighten up people, they're just guitars. Stare at them, drool over them, and enjoy them!

[backdrifter]

Originally Posted by Howard Emerson

I have, and I was mightily impressed.

The last one was at Matt Umanov's last winter. Here is a link to the 'sold item' that I spent about a half hour with:

http://www.gbase.com/gear/collings-at-17-2007

I'm pretty sure I posted here about this guitar, but whatever.........It was magnificent in all respects, and vastly underpriced for what it sold for.

HE

Howard,

I remember that guitar well. It haunted my dreams for the better part of a year. If I recall correctly, it was listed at $12,000, which I absolutely agree is a steal for that guitar. Try as I might, I couldn't get myself to sell three or four guitars to fund it. Now I wish I had! Interestingly, it's for sale again for $4K more than last time. I suspected that it was the same guitar, but couldn't prove it until you posted that link above and I was able to confirm a match in the "fingerprint" of the maple back.

http://www.gbase.com/gear/collings-at17-cherry-sunburst

Beautiful. This time it would cost me $16K. Should've bought it when it was $12K!!!!

[kkfan]

Originally Posted by backdrifter

Howard,

I remember that guitar well. It haunted my dreams for the better part of a year. If I recall correctly, it was listed at $12,000, which I absolutely agree is a steal for that guitar. Try as I might, I couldn't get myself to sell three or four guitars to fund it. Now I wish I had! Interestingly, it's for sale again for $4K more than last time. I suspected that it was the same guitar, but couldn't prove it until you posted that link above and I was able to confirm a match in the "fingerprint" of the maple back.

http://www.gbase.com/gear/collings-at17-cherry-sunburst

Beautiful. This time it would cost me $16K. Should've bought it when it was $12K!!!!

That's a great find, Ben!
Yes! The fingerprints match!
Is the serial number not listed anywhere?
And that latter listing doesn't state it's a 2007 model. Why hide the fact, I wonder.

[Archtop Guy]

Originally Posted by backdrifter

It's the same old story on this board. One person posts a link to a very nice, and very expensive guitar, and everyone feels the need to say why it's overpriced, why they would never buy it, or how there are infinite cheaper and better options (usually, the guitar that they own, surprise, surprise). Why are so many so threatened by expensive guitars? Inferiority complexes?

Do those same posters go to an art museum and complain that the art is too expensive? Can't you just appreciate shear beauty without worrying about the price? I'll never own an original Matisse, but that doesn't stop me from appreciating one when I see it!

If you've never played a Collings archtop, you owe it to yourself to do so. They are amazing. I've owned a LOT of guitars, and played many more. Every Collings that I've played has been top rate, and their archtops are no different. They are extraordinary in every way. I was fortunate enough to spend a few hours with an AT17, and I owned an AT16 for about seven months last year. Bills execution is absolutely flawless. I've owned many high end guitars and I've never seen any luthier that can surpass Collings' perfection, and few that can match it. Obviously this is important to Mr. Collings. Like Mr. Collings, I'm an engineer, and I appreciate that kind of perfection as well. Aesthetic perfection is not everything, but it is something!

I've since sold the AT16, but it was one of the best guitars I've ever owned. I now have another, much less expensive archtop that I love just as much or more, but that should not and doesn't take anything away from the Collings. It's not as cleanly built as the AT16, or as perfect in every minor detail, but the important aspects - tone and feel - are there in spades. Of course there are other, and cheaper, options - there always are. But again, that doesn't take away from a Collings. See, feel, and hear one in person and you just may "get" it.

Lighten up people, they're just guitars. Stare at them, drool over them, and enjoy them!

Hear! Hear!

Well said.

[backdrifter]

Originally Posted by kkfan

That's a great find, Ben!
Yes! The fingerprints match!
Is the serial number not listed anywhere?
And that latter listing doesn't state it's a 2007 model. Why hide the fact, I wonder.

I bought a guitar from Scott at CSG and he is as good as they come. I'm sure leaving the serial number out was an honest omission, and not an attempt to hide anything.

Originally Posted by Archtop Guy

Hear! Hear!

Well said.

Thanks, Archtop Guy! I always enjoy all of your posts. They're so positive, upbeat and informative. You clearly have a deep love and appreciation for all archtops. I feel the same way. We may play different guitars, as is likely the case. Yours may cost more or be more rare. I'll likely prefer mine, and you yours. That's great - variety is the spice! Let's jam!

[kkfan]

Originally Posted by backdrifter

I bought a guitar from Scott at CSG and he is as good as they come. I'm sure leaving the serial number out was an honest omission, and not an attempt to hide anything.

That's very good to hear!

[Sturob]

I'll come clean. I own that guitar.

Am I a Collings fan boy? Yeah, I am. I really do like it. It's the most versatile archtop I've ever seen or heard. It can do swing and jazz, or more mainstream acoustic stuff with a more archtoppy sound. It's powerful and dynamic.

I own one other, a Gibson Special 7. I like them both, but the Collings is a luthiery tour de force. And it's way more than just a binding difference, it is basically a 17 built at 16" size. Yes, there's fancy binding, but also a cutaway and an ebony tailpiece. Someone else may know if the bracing is different. And, it also came with a Calton.

Do I think it was too much? I don't know, but I don't feel like I was cheated or taken advantage of. I've been playing it almost every day since I got it, and as it begins to open up, I like playing it even more.

It's a relatively shallow instrument, also; I am additionally shocked at how ergonomic the AT is. It's great.

Stuart

[Archtop Guy]

Originally Posted by Sturob

I'll come clean. I own that guitar.

Am I a Collings fan boy? Yeah, I am. I really do like it. It's the most versatile archtop I've ever seen or heard. It can do swing and jazz, or more mainstream acoustic stuff with a more archtoppy sound. It's powerful and dynamic.

I own one other, a Gibson Special 7. I like them both, but the Collings is a luthiery tour de force. And it's way more than just a binding difference, it is basically a 17 built at 16" size. Yes, there's fancy binding, but also a cutaway and an ebony tailpiece. Someone else may know if the bracing is different. And, it also came with a Calton.

Do I think it was too much? I don't know, but I don't feel like I was cheated or taken advantage of. I've been playing it almost every day since I got it, and as it begins to open up, I like playing it even more.

It's a relatively shallow instrument, also; I am additionally shocked at how ergonomic the AT is. It's great.

Stuart

Cool to hear from the lucky owner! Welcome aboard. I'm looking forward to hearing more about your guitars and your music. Clips?

Regarding depth / shallowness... I own a couple of archtops that are 17" across and 3" deep. Almost everyone who picks them up comments on how surprisingly comfortable they are. I also have a couple of 16 inchers and they really don't feel that much different to tell the truth. Anyway... it's not so much the width that gets you, it's the depth! When I pick up my dread these days I can scarcely believe how big it feels.

[Sturob]

I know, I know! CLIPS!

I need to do that. I don't record, so I have to figure out a good way to do it. I've tried with an iPhone but it doesn't do it justice.

I've read somewhere that Bill Collings feels like the 16" size, at least the way they make it, is "ideal" in some way. Maybe someone knows the actual quote, I don't mean to put words in anyone's mouth.

Yeah, a dread does feel quite weird after holding the AT. I actually found myself gravitating towards electrics for a change rather than playing flat-tops.

I have lurked in this forum for a while. I am lucky to own both these archtops, really. The Gibson is in perfect condition, although I inexpertly changed the strings the first time I did it and made a couple new shallow grooves in the bridge. Whoopsie. Eh, I beat myself up about it and then gave up.

Very different, these two instruments. One made from parts during wartime, the other made from the "best" stuff now. Very cool.

I had to wait quite a while after NAMM to take delivery of the instrument: my understanding is that it went back to Collings to get final setup (and probably buffed and stuff). It's just amazing. A friend of mine who plays has played it and can't bring himself to use a pick yet and just uses fingers. I have no such qualms. Kinda fun figuring out what works to play it, I've been moving towards using relatively thick Red Bears and it seems to like that.

Stuart

[kkfan]

Originally Posted by Archtop Guy

Regarding depth / shallowness... I own a couple of archtops that are 17" across and 3" deep. Almost everyone who picks them up comments on how surprisingly comfortable they are. I also have a couple of 16 inchers and they really don't feel that much different to tell the truth. Anyway... it's not so much the width that gets you, it's the depth!

Very true about the depth. And, if I'm not mistaken, Stuart's guitar is 2 3/4" deep. Perhaps Stuart can confirm?

[Sturob]

I shall take a measuring tape to it and find out!

Stuart

[kkfan]

Originally Posted by Sturob

I shall take a measuring tape to it and find out!

Stuart

Great!
Looking forward to the result.

[Sturob]

2 3/4" on the nose.

Depth of the side, binding to binding. So the top and back arches make it deeper, but yep, 2 3/4".

Stuart