how do you guys decide???

[jcharis]

i got the Stehr bug. i just went to the search box and typed in "stehr."
i've been trying to forget about it since i've put down the deposit but agf always makes me remember. and tonight is one of those nights.

i don't even have to make any decisions for a while!! but i'm wondering - how do you decide on the details of a build? not so much the inlay designs but the wood choices for the bindings, the purfling? the fret board, the head, the neck... there are so many colors and grains and ~#$)*#~_%

i remember the first month or so of speaking with Joel. He has me down for a Carpathian top and a Madagascar rosewood back and sides.

the more i read and admire your/Joel's builds I can't help but to ask/think:

wow, will mine be as awe-striking? beautiful?
ooh! i want that on my guitar!... wait, what was the binding called?
wait, there are options for purfling?
i have to decide on every single thing? i don't even know what certain things are called!!

so how did you guys decide on the smaller details (not options or inlay)?

or perhaps you'll all tell me simply that the builder will take care of me? (which i'm sure Joel will do well anyway)

thanks in advance for your thoughts on this restless and impatient soul!

joe

[dk63]

Good questions Joe. My build with Joel is set to begin in the next month or two I think and I have been pondering some of those same questions. I have an idea of what I like but I am going to listen to Joel's recommendations. My woods are cocobolo and carpathian for back, sides and top but the rest is still up in the air. Joel obviously has an eye for artistic creation and I may let him make many of the decisions.

[mcozma]

Originally Posted by dk63

Joel obviously has an eye for artistic creation and I may let him make many of the decisions.

+1

You'll see for yourselves how smooth the whole process is, trust me

All details will fall into place naturally, so to speak, and not only because Joel's artistry, but as result of his truly great communication and customer skills, too.

[colins]

I am sure there are lots of good alternatives for binding and purfling. Isn’t it funny how we agonize over two good alternatives whereas a good choice versus a bad choice is easy to make.

Listen to Joel’s suggestions, and comb the internet for photos of guitars with Madagascar back and sides so you can see the binding/purfling choices that others have made. Maddy can have distinct colour changes, so you can think about whether you want simple binding that will complement the glorious colours of the maddy.

Any way, it is a nice problem to have

Col

[Steve Kinnaird]

Every one is right on. Trust Joel. He does have a good eye.
The final decision of whether or not "this" wood looks appropriate against "that" wood rests with the builder. You're drawn to Joel's work which means you like what you see, and what he sees. Congrats, by the way!

Steve

[jcharis]

I had a feeling though that the responses would be like such =)

it's also amazing to see replies originating from all different parts of the US/world!
even more props to Joel!

can't wait for 2014!!

[ChuckS]

I've had a few experiences with commissioned guitars. In each of these, I pretty much let the luthier decide on the aesthetic choices.

For my '06 Bresnan, the luthier had a pretty consistent understated aesthetic. I liked what he was doing, and I did not request any change. I chose the set of BRW he used for the back/sides. I did not see any photos of the guitar as it was built; my first glimpse was of the completed guitar.

For my '10 Poling, I chose the set of Cuban Mahogany that was used for the back and sides and I asked for a Lutz top. The luthier made all the aesthetic choices. However, the builder had me ok his choices; I went along with all his suggestions and made no modifications. He chose the bindings, purflings, bridge, fretboard, peghead top and back veneers, nut/saddle/pin materials, tuners, etc.

For my '12 Carruth, I provided the set of Pernambuco that was used for the back and sides. The luthier made all the aesthetic choices. He chose the bindings, purflings, bridge, fretboard, peghead top veneers, nut/saddle/pin materials, tuners, neck wood, neck heel design, etc. I also let him decide what style of cutaway to use and whether to build a slothead or a non-slotted peghead. I also let him chose the rosette design he wanted to use. He also selected the top wood (obviously not just an aesthetic choice). Some of his choices I was made aware of prior to the build and some choices I became aware of as I got build photos.

In all cases, I was glad I let the builder determine the guitar's aesthetics. I did not have confidence that I could design the best aesthetic; if I would have done the design the guitar may have ended up looking like a bunch of individual elements put on a guitar versus a design where all the elements tie in nicely together.

[jackaroo]

Wow...I'd never be able to just let the luthier have at it aesthetically. I'm too picky to not see some options. I also see certain designs and the ones that seem successful really leave an impression...I'd shoot for a tasteful mix of things I've seen before that work for me.

All of this implies an original guitar...anything that's trying to be a reproduction, I'd just stick to the formula as tightly as possible.(Pre-war D-28).

Obviously one chooses a luthier because of the sound, playability and aesthetics that the builder seems to commonly gravitate towards. So you've already made a huge choice. The little stuff is going to be fun...

I like simply appointed intruments with basic features that are well executed. I tend to think the majority of instruments here are too much of a good thing.

I used to hear my mother tell my sister.."get dressed and then take off one accessory." Basically a lot of these guitars seem overdone to my eye. But hey...the level of artistry and craftsmanship is pretty incredible, to each his own and all that. I applaud these luthiers.

My choices would definitely be steeped in a more traditional style or at least understated modern.

I have a few builds in the works...I hope they come out nicely.


J

[mikealpine]

I loved working with Joel and my communication/friendship with him continues.

Trust is essential, but you have a style as well. He will draw that out of you. Some people like contrast, others want subtle blending. Look at guitars and notice what you like and don't like. Use that as a guide.

For me, I knew I wanted Malaysian Blackwood. After that, Joel and I discussed top choices and he suggested Carpathian. Good with me! I had a different idea in mind for the fretboard than he suggested, but in the end I went with his suggestion. However, it was truly collaborative; he sent me some pictures, I asked him to modify a few things, he did and sent more until we had a design we both agreed would look excellent. In the build, or design was possible on paper, but not "in real life" so we modified it. It was the same for the end wedge and sound port. He drew it, we modified it from there.

If he has an ego, it is well hidden. Some things he drew I really didn't like, and he was appreciative that I told him. We discussed what I liked and he worked from there.

The only area that I would not do anything with was whatever might impact the tonal goal we were after. Every choice had the same caveat; if this will work against the sound, let's skip it. We did that when I said, "I want Malaysian Blackwood." If he said we can't get the sound I want with that wood, I'd have changed it. That was most important to me. Luckily, he said it was a good choice.

As others have said, trust his aesthetic and artistic nature and you will wind up with something very special. Have you seen the one that he is bringing to Healdsburg? If that wound up coming off a delivery truck at my house, I'd be thrilled!! He'll show you what he thinks will look fantastic and you will take it from there. It will be smooth and incredibly fun, pleasant, exciting, etc.

[jcharis]

i am definitely looking forward to the next step in the process when it does become my turn.

and likewise, i initially wanted a nice rich tone like my Ps14ce flted (it's a sinker top with a mac ebony back and sides), but asked if there was a way to make it louder and a tiny bit brighter. Joel must have sent me quite a few pictures of woods and a wealth of information concerning the tones they will provide, longevity, sustain, etc.

my friends including my wife thought i had gone crazy staring at pictures of woods and researching tonal woods. and the more excited i got and shared with them... honestly as happy as they were for me, they weren't sharing in my excitement! (go figure!)

he even showed me a beautifully dark set of Brazilian rw, but it would've not allowed me to get any of the options that i had on the list.

so carpathian and mad rose was decided. haha actually after many more pictures and emails. but at this point, that's all i have decided.

i forget which of you guys had the non-abalone, wooden inlays and rosette, but that's generally the route i'm planning on taking. understated simple elegant beauty. i know it doesn't actually provide a picture but it makes sense in my mind. so i'm definitely looking forward to how Joel interprets that for me onto the guitar.

[Bill R]

Congratulations on your Stehr build. I agree with what others have said to trust the builder, however you do have some say in the process. In three weeks I'll be picking up my Greven OOO at Healdsburg. Having recently gone through the process of a custom build, I can share with you a few things I did.
1. Early in the process I communicated via email with the builder (John) and sent him a list of details that I wanted which included the basic shape of the guitar (OOO), fingerboard width, type of tuners, cutaway, wood binding, blank fretboard, etc. He asked me about my playing style and what kind of sound I was looking for. Based on that info, he recommended back and top woods (in my case Brazilian and Lutz spruce).
2. I flew to Portland to visit John in April and spent several hours with him. He let me play several of his guitars, showed me his shop, and his stash of Brazilian RW from which I selected a back and sides. I let him choose the top wood, because he know's what he's doing and I trusted him. We also settled on a binding scheme, neck carve, and several other details. He was very helpful and offered several suggestions/options for all the little details. In most cases, I went with his suggestions.
3. The biggest thing we had to work out was the shape of the headstock. I wanted a particular shape - sent him several examples of that shape on other builders guitars. Eventually he drew a rough draft and sent it to me. We edited it a couple of times and agreed on a final shape. He was quite accommodating.
4. I let John choose things like the wood to use for the rosette and a few other details based on his years of experience.
The guitar is finished - I've seen some photos - it looks fabulous.

Bottom line, I have no doubt Joel will be very easy and accommodating to work with just as John has been. I encourage you to have a lot of fun and enjoy the process. No doubt you are in excellent hands.

Bill

[mikealpine]

Mine is the dread with wood inlays that arc and a wood rosette with a gap. I got the bevel package (top, back and cutaway). One thing that was important to me were larger fret markers on the side of the neck. All in all, I love the way it turned out. I'm sure you will too!!

[muzz76]

I always respect the builders general aesthetic signature components. If I pick them to build a guitar it's because of a combination of that and the tone.

I do like having a part in the little things though. My own profession is in branding and graphic design so I've got a pretty keen eye for what does and doesn't work for me visually. However, I'd never push for details that a builder wouldn't be proud to put their name on and/or didn't look like one of theirs.

I like clean and subtle for the most part so I'm usually visually attracted to builders in that same perspective.

[dekutree64]

Usually for me, the back/sides, soundboard, or some other combination of pieces will inspire an overall theme for the guitar, and the rest of the details and inlay follow that theme. And if for any reason I have to change one detail of the design (like a piece of wood breaks), it can take a week of debate to decide how to restore the balance of the overall look

It helps to have a bunch of woods in hand to pick from, so "trust Joel" is good advice.

Curly koa binding is generally my favorite on spruce/rosewood guitars. And walnut neck, for a naturally dark color and just some variety compared to the standard mahogany.

Sometimes contrasting woods are good, but other times low contrast makes for a more soothing effect. Just depends on what you like and what the unchangeable woods are. Spruce/rosewood in this case, which already contrast eachother, so you could run with that and do high contrast in a lot of areas, or call that the focus point and do black bindings, rosewood fingerboard, etc. that don't stand out much. Or maybe maple fingerboard, so it's all white on top and dark on the back?

You're darn right it's hard to decide

[jcharis]

Originally Posted by mikealpine

Mine is the dread with wood inlays that arc and a wood rosette with a gap. I got the bevel package (top, back and cutaway). One thing that was important to me were larger fret markers on the side of the neck. All in all, I love the way it turned out. I'm sure you will too!!

aaah! i loved the wooden inlays! awesome guitar! seeing guitars like yours makes me think - are all the good ideas taken?! =D