The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 01-25-2019, 11:24 AM
gruuv gruuv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 477
Default

Bumping this to further complicate things. Where would some of the uber boutique (my classification) builders fall on our spectrum? Somogyi, Ryan, and Olson come to mind, but there are clearly others.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-27-2019, 11:53 AM
gruuv gruuv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 477
Default

I’m going to give this a bump for (my own) fun. Below is Brendan’s excellent post detailing his thoughts on several popular builders.

The question I’d like to pose is whether anyone wants to take a shot at slotting in some of the builders that might be considered ultra high end (Ryan, Somogyi, Olson) or more “budget” (Eastman).

Anyone?

Quote:
Originally Posted by brencat View Post
Here is how I hear them:

- Martin (dark timbre, bass biased, midrange scooped)
-
- Goodall TR (Traditional series) (vintage voice, slight mid scoop, very strong bass and great sustain, super resonant, loud. Think 70% Martin, 20% Gibson, 10% Collings)
- Santa Cruz (vintage voice, strong but not booming bass, midrange enhanced, tons of harmonic nuance. Think 70% Martin, 30% Gibson)
- Bourgeois (vintage voice, more midrange than Martin, puts out exactly what you put into it)
-
- Huss & Dalton (Bass timbre of Martin with Collings mids and highs. Think 60% Martin, 40% Collings)
-
- Collings (Cutting, in-your-face-all-the-time clarity, massive volume, tight quick bass (OMs don't have enough IMO), plays like a coiled spring and outputs 125% of what you put into it)
- Webber (A slightly mellower Collings with similar mids and highs)
-
- Taylor
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-27-2019, 12:13 PM
zombywoof zombywoof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,387
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bufflehead View Post
Rather than ascribe modernity according to brand, I would go with bracing, as follows:

Vintage = ladder bracing
Modern = X bracing (with forward-shifted X bracing being a bit more modern.)
Postmodern = V bracing
That does not work not only because you missed quite a few bracing footprints but because whether a guitar was ladder or X braced often had more to do with labor costs than the year built.
__________________
"You start off playing guitars to get girls & end up talking with middle-aged men about your fingernails" - Ed Gerhard
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-08-2019, 05:24 PM
gruuv gruuv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 477
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brencat View Post
Here is how I hear them:

- Martin (dark timbre, bass biased, midrange scooped)
-
- Goodall TR (Traditional series) (vintage voice, slight mid scoop, very strong bass and great sustain, super resonant, loud. Think 70% Martin, 20% Gibson, 10% Collings)
- Santa Cruz (vintage voice, strong but not booming bass, midrange enhanced, tons of harmonic nuance. Think 70% Martin, 30% Gibson)
- Bourgeois (vintage voice, more midrange than Martin, puts out exactly what you put into it)
-
- Huss & Dalton (Bass timbre of Martin with Collings mids and highs. Think 60% Martin, 40% Collings)
-
- Collings (Cutting, in-your-face-all-the-time clarity, massive volume, tight quick bass (OMs don't have enough IMO), plays like a coiled spring and outputs 125% of what you put into it)
- Webber (A slightly mellower Collings with similar mids and highs)
-
- Taylor
Bumping Brendan’s post in an attempt to resurrect this thread.

So, where do Gibson, Ryan, Somogyi, Olson, Eastman, Lowden, etc. fall?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-09-2019, 06:16 AM
zombywoof zombywoof is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 9,387
Default

In terms of old guitars and depending on what your definition of "vintage" is we do not have a clue what they sounded like when brand new and shiny. We only know what they sound like now. I mean what did that guitar which out of necessity had a thick finish shot on as it would lose 1/2 its thickness in the first year alone sound like.

If you are old enough though you will recall a time when you could not give away a 12 fretter slothead guitar other than a classical. You probably could not even find a steel string version. Today, those features along with ladder bracing and V necks have made a comeback. How long before we start seeing "H" and "A" bracing reappear?

I would say though in terms of structure the main difference would be that many guitars into the 1930s were incredibly lightly built. A Gibson Kel Kroyden clocked it at around 2 1/2 pounds while an Advanced L Body 12 fretter came in at around 3 pounds. Made for some real responsive instruments but also for a host of warranty/repair issues.
__________________
"You start off playing guitars to get girls & end up talking with middle-aged men about your fingernails" - Ed Gerhard
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-09-2019, 09:14 AM
jaymarsch jaymarsch is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: North of the Golden Gate, South of the Redwoods, East of the Pacific and West of the Sierras
Posts: 10,657
Default

There was a thread a while back that had schools of luthiery and what builders came out of which approaches. That may be a good companion thread for this discussion.

I own a couple of Wingert guitars and have known Kathy for a number of years. Her early influences were definitely on the Martin end of the spectrum.
Sparky Kramer is a builder that seems to come more from a vintage Gibson tone. Both of these luthiers developed and expanded on their own tonal signature from years of building instruments. I think that this is true of many of today’s guitar makers. Vintage, traditional and modern tonal definitions each have their own spectrums.
If you listen to the Olson guitar made for Patty Larkin, it is different tonally than the one James Olson made for James Taylor though the same model. The artists each have their distinctive style.
I have heard and played several guitars by John Slobod and the guitar he made for Steve Baughman though similar in size is very different than the one he made for another musician whose name escapes me at the moment.

We cannot hear a guitar unless it is played by someone so the player/luthier connection further informs what vibe the guitar will have and where that might fall in terms of modern to traditional.

Best,
Jayne
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-09-2019, 09:34 AM
bufflehead bufflehead is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 3,689
Default

I think of more modern tone as being brighter. Tayloresque. I think of traditional tone as being more fundamental. Martinesque. Modern also tends to be more balanced, with emphasis on the treble, while traditional tends to be more scooped, with emphasis on the bass.

I've avoided using "vintage" on purpose here, substituting "traditional." To me, vintage tone trends toward being boxy, especially in terms of vintage OM builds. Bluesy, perhaps, at best.
__________________
1 dreadnought, 1 auditorium, 1 concert, and 2 travel guitars.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Tags
bourgeios, collings, huss & dalton, martin, santa cruz

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=