The Acoustic Guitar Forum

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 06-30-2019, 12:33 PM
RP's Avatar
RP RP is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 13,455
Default Rainsong CH-OM vs. CH-WS Opinions....

I'm curious as to how folks would compare the Rainsong CH-OM and CH-WS, particularly regarding tone. Thanks....
__________________
Several Taylors, Rainsongs and a couple of Fender electrics....
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-30-2019, 01:42 PM
MiG50 MiG50 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 257
Default

I have a Shorty, which is VERY similar in construction to the current CH-OM, and I also own a CH-WS, so I can definitely weigh in on this.

The WS body is definitely larger than the OM, mostly in depth (another inch, which is substantial) but also just a tad bigger in all directions. Tonally, this translates into a much larger bass response from the WS, whereas the OM tends to be much more balanced. When fingerpicking, I tend to grab the OM; when strumming or for more power, I grab the WS. The OM is definitely more comfortable, especially over time (the shallower body is much easier to hold), and it's my overall favorite.

Any more specific questions, I'd be happy to answer.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-01-2019, 01:37 AM
casualmusic casualmusic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 103
Default

I played the CH-WS, CH-OM, and CH-PA in a 20'x30' show room.


The tone was similar and the sound volume was proportional to size.

Played in a *large space*, the larger CH-WS sounded fully and more satisfying than the CH-OM. This was confirmed by three other customers in the room. (The CH-PA was much quieter than the CH-OM and CH-WS.) I didn't compare them in a smaller checkout room.


The CH-WS is as thick as a dreadnaught, and the soundboard area is midway between the CH-OM and a dreadnaught. I thought the CH-WS and CH-OM were equally comfortable to play.

The CH-WS has a curvy waist that that we found a bit more comfortable than a dreadnaught when sitting (thigh space, tummy space, boob space).


The CH-WS played and sounded as well as the similarly priced Gibson J-15, Martin D-16, Taylor 314ce that were in the showroom.

BTW the neck profile of the six guitars played and measured almost identical.


My next guitar will be a CH-WS or an H-DR, with the NS medium length neck and the T-burst finish.


Cheers

.

Last edited by casualmusic; 07-01-2019 at 01:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-01-2019, 03:59 AM
gerardo1000 gerardo1000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,371
Default

I had both and the WS has a fuller and satisfying tone. I sold the OM and kept the wS. I had many Raindong in my life and in my opinion the CH-WS is the best Rainsong ever made, considering the quality, the tone, and the price.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-01-2019, 05:07 AM
jonfields45 jonfields45 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Allentown, PA
Posts: 2,797
Default

I've owned them nearly all of them at one time or another... I find the 12 fret neck on the WS body probably the best sounding RainSong configuration. Having two parlors with very different material sets but nearly identical tone leads me to conclude body size and 12 v. 14 fret bridge placement are the main levers to be pulled. I've not played a 12 fret DR which might top the 12 fret WS but would not let me play some of my repertoire.

But, somehow the 12 fret neck on the WS body looks kind of off to my Martin trained eye.

I really like the parlors for comfort and articulate tone. They don't have the bass of a WS but if you hit them hard they are fully competitive for single note leads with larger guitars. If you have someone play for you, I think the body size has a bigger impact on the tone/volume to the player than it does with what they push out in a jam session to others.

Now that I've debugged my first HFN install, I can highly recommend that pickup as a great sounding simple to install no glue no battery passive solution. In my parlors it is no more feedback prone than the Element it replaced in one of them. I think it is a step up from a K&K PM for tone and I can use it without EQ. It also seems less fussy about preamp/amp/mixer impedance. It might be 3+ dB lower output than a K&K.
__________________
Jon Fields

RainSong CH-PA1100NS, TKL 8975
RainSong CO-PA1100NS, TKL 8975
RainSong H-DR1100N2, TKL 8910
All 3 taped Schatten Passive HFN & Elixir PB11

Notepad-12FX, one QSC CP8 (21 lbs) high/behind
Duo gigging no mixer two SM58>Y>CP8, HFN>HelixStomp>TRS>CP8 3.5mm

www.justsoduo.com

Last edited by jonfields45; 07-03-2019 at 04:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Thread Tools



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=