Question about tops

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by kydave

I think history has already determined the tone question to a large degree. Martin is the oldest and most copied and referred to reference for great tone; Ovation was justly known for fast, electric guitar-like necks and being one of the most early producers of factory acoustic-electric guitars. Acoustic tone was rarely a prime reason people attributed to being interested in them.

They are also out of business.

Maybe if they'd stuck to spruce...



p.s. I'd also be pretty comfortable using Howard's criteria for tone over that of folks who value bubinga for a top wood. His criteria would be a lot closer to mine.

Mmmm, guitar history began centuries before Martin ever existed, so based on that fact alone, there are flaws in your argument. In reality, classical guitar is much more copied, but that's not the point. In terms of steel string guitars, certainly, Martin tone is referred as "the tone," but many people hate Martin guitars (not me, BTW). And Ovation was not only known for their necks or their electronics, so you should check your facts. But the thread is not about Martin or Ovation.

And they're still in business, even if it's overseas, FYI.

The thing is there are more woods than the usual suspects for any kind of guitar and there are more tones for our use. Dismissing any wood just because it doesn't sound like the usual woods or because its tone is different from what we (or the majority) think or because its properties don't match what we think the property of a wood should be. . . it's just an unwillingness to think outside the box. For some people, that's good; for many of us, it's not.

[Wade Hampton]

Guitarplayer PR, you asked us what we thought, and the folks answering this thread have told you what they thought. I certainly didn't give you my response in hope of entering a debate with you or anybody else, and instead just gave you my overall impressions of bubinga itself, which I think is a terrific tonewood.

Charles pointed out that I didn't answer your specific question, which is fair enough. Here's my specific answer: I like bubinga far more as a back and sides wood than as a top wood. I'd love to own a guitar or two with bubinga back and sides, but given the sort of traditional guitar designs that work best for the music I play, I would pass on any guitars with bubinga tops.

I wrote that I doubted that an Ovation with a bubinga top would work particularly well in a loud acoustic music environment, which I illustrated by mentioning bluegrass jam sessions; you replied that you don't live in the US and don't know much about bluegrass.

So let me be more specific: while I haven't played any bubinga-topped Ovations, I have played a number of Ovations with hardwood tops in all the various Ovation bowl depths. I have not found ANY hardwood-topped Ovations to work very well in loud acoustic situations. The purely acoustic tone on those guitars has never been such that I would want to own any of them, either. It's never been a sound that I've sought or admired.

About the only Ovations I have ever found effective for any of the styles of music I play have been deep-bodied solid spruce topped examples, used as rhythm guitars. Those work pretty well for me for that sort of use. However, I still prefer the tone I get from all-wood guitars like Martins, Gibsons and the various custom-built guitars I own.

Personally, I get a little irked when people post on here and other online guitar forums and say snide, negative things about Ovation guitars. That's unkind and unnecessary, because those instruments clearly suit the playing needs of a great many people around the world. Something I've noticed the times I've been to Japan is how respected and highly esteemed Ovation guitars are over there.

So a great deal of this is perception, nothing more.

Having said that, my own playing needs are better served by spruce-topped all-wooden guitars. I'm glad you like the tone of these bubinga-topped Ovations, but that's not a tone I would ever seek out.

Now, is that explicit enough for everybody?

Guitar perceptions entirely aside, I want to wish you and everyone else who reads this a Merry Christmas. For the Jewish people among us, I'd like to wish you a Happy Hanukah just past. For those of you who don't observe any religion, I'd like to wish you all a safe and relatively sober secular day off.

Eat well, drive carefully, and be safe and sound to welcome the New Year almost upon us.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Like I said before, my favorite wood for tops is cedar, which is very different from bubinga. In fact, my other guitars, including the other Ovation, are spruce-topped guitars because it's more versatile.

Acoustic guitars are not only hobbies or pastimes, but tools for work, at least for me. It's good we can have different guitars, different tops, different shapes and, sometimes, think outside the box. Probably bubinga-topped guitars are an acquired taste, but it's safe to say it's good to appreciate tones other than the ones we've always thought to be the best or the correct ones.

[Bearclaw Spruce]

Originally Posted by Guitarplayer_PR

I own an Ovation with a spruce top (6768), but it's a deep bowl, so comparing both of them based on tops is tricky, since the bowls are different. Even with that, it's kind of a no-brainer to recognize that the spruce one is warmer tone-wise, regardless of the bowl. The bubinga has better string definition and clarity, more treble, kind of stiffer than spruce, but it's not harsh to my ears. And it sustains like crazy

So what you're saying is that it is a no-brainer that the definition and clarity, amount of treble, stiffness and lack of harshness and crazy sustain is due to the Bubinga top, not the depth of the bowls?

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by Bearclaw Spruce

So what you're saying is that it is a no-brainer that the definition and clarity, amount of treble, stiffness and lack of harshness and crazy sustain is due to the Bubinga top, not the depth of the bowls?

No. The no brainer is the warmth of spruce compared to bubinga. What I said later about the bubinga Ovation is another thing. Of course, super shallows will project faster (not necessarily more) and will have more treble, regardless of the wood, but I've owned super shallows only based on its plugged tone, and they sound very different from the one I own now, so the wood plays a part. Or maybe the fact that Elites, by themselves, are kind of warmer than other O's, . . . well, that makes me think.

But my main point is: don't dismiss Bubinga as a top wood

[Tom West]

Originally Posted by Guitarplayer_PR

For some people, that's good; for many of us, it's not.

Sorry, but I think you have it wrong.

Should read " For most people, that's good; for some of us it's not".
Tom

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by Tom West

Sorry, but I think you have it wrong.

Should read " For most people, that's good; for some of us it's not".
Tom

I stand corrected. But I think many people would love to think outside the box. Peer pressure, specially in the guitar world, works.

[printer2]

Originally Posted by Guitarplayer_PR

I stand corrected. But I think many people would love to think outside the box. Peer pressure, specially in the guitar world, works.

I have enough 1/8" Balsa to do a guitar.

[kydave]

Originally Posted by Guitarplayer_PR

I stand corrected. But I think many people would love to think outside the box. Peer pressure, specially in the guitar world, works.

I think only a few quirky people would like to think outside the box when it comes to a thing like the steel string guitar, which was arguably at its best in the thirties...

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by kydave

I think only a few quirky people would like to think outside the box when it comes to a thing like the steel string guitar, which was arguably at its best in the thirties...

Really? Sincerely, I'd question that, but in reality, it doesn't matter,

[kydave]

Mmmm, guitar history began centuries before Martin ever existed, so based on that fact alone, there are flaws in your argument. In reality, classical guitar is much more copied, but that's not the point. In terms of steel string guitars, certainly, Martin tone is referred as "the tone," but many people hate Martin guitars...

The steel string dreadnaught, arguably the main modern steel string guitar, is a Martin innovation. No single brand of classical guitar is copied like the Martin D-28 and D-18.

Statistically, very few people with any real discernment concerning the steel string guitar "hate" Martin guitars, even if they prefer something else.

Martin is the well, when it comes to steel string guitars.

How often are you likely to hear "Wow, that sounds as good as an Ovation?" compared to the other?

But the point is, bubinga is going to be considered a top wood choice by very few people, even outside the box.

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by kydave

The steel string dreadnaught, arguably the main modern steel string guitar, is a Martin innovation. No single brand of classical guitar is copied like the Martin D-28 and D-18.

Statistically, very few people with any real discernment concerning the steel string guitar "hate" Martin guitars, even if they prefer something else.

Martin is the well, when it comes to steel string guitars.

How often are you likely to hear "Wow, that sounds as good as an Ovation?" compared to the other?

But the point is, bubinga is going to be considered a top wood choice by very few people, even outside the box.

I may not be as big of an Ovation lover (I like different guitars, including some Martin ones) as you are a "Martin lover," but answering the question about "X guitar sounds as good as an Ovation:" it's kind of silly, since Martin tone can be copied (and in some cases, doing it better than the original) and Ovation is in a unique position, since not even composite guitars that came later have the same specs or tone Ovations have. Does that mean one is better than the other? Of course not and even if it means it, who cares? It just means that Martin guitars are successful and many companies replicate what they've done, because they can be copied. On the other hand, for all the hate (and love) Ovations provoke, no other company have even tried to copy it simply because they can't.

As for bubinga as a top wood, basically what you're saying is: "bubinga is not a good top wood because I say so." OK. Good for you.

[printer2]

Originally Posted by Guitarplayer_PR

On the other hand, for all the hate (and love) Ovations provoke, no other company have even tried to copy it simply because they can't.

I guess they all are not smart enough.

[Guitarplayer_PR]

Originally Posted by printer2

I guess they all are not smart enough.

Ask them. I'm sure they'll tell you.

[printer2]

Your the one that said they can't. Why should I ask them as you already have the answer?