Chasing Perfection...

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by Simon Fay

John, are you saying that ginger's don't have souls?

Oh they do.... they just are of no consequence :P (my mom's red-headed!!)

[JohnM]

Oh and thanks Bobby, and Daryl!

As I said before this model is not better than any of my other models. It's just different. It does take me considerably longer to build due to the details, but I think pretty highly of my standard models, and I'm thrilled you guys do as well!

[cotten]

Originally Posted by JohnM

...I don't need a total reject out there being passed off as my normal work...

I suspected that's what it boils down to, John, and I do understand. Still, I wish it could be different, and I suspect that your total reject would be far superior to some guitars being sold today. (I say that while recognizing that some low cost guitars are surprisingly good.)

It makes perfect sense to protect your reputation as a builder of fine guitars.

cotten

[SuperB23]

What plan do you have for the bridge on this model? Will it look the same as your standard models?

Also any thoughts on a name or model designation for this new model if you decide to offer it too the public?

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by SuperB23

What plan do you have for the bridge on this model? Will it look the same as your standard models?

Also any thoughts on a name or model designation for this new model if you decide to offer it too the public?

Bridge is a different design. I'm still torn on names....

If this prototype is good then I'll launch the model. I should know within a month or so.

[Tele1111]

Looks very nice! I'm with Larry and a few others, as I think the cutaway flows beautifuly. And low grade woods? Uh, the amount of silking in that top suggests otherwise. I for one would love to hear a sound clip, whether it lives or not!

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by Tele1111

Looks very nice! I'm with Larry and a few others, as I think the cutaway flows beautifuly. And low grade woods? Uh, the amount of silking in that top suggests otherwise. I for one would love to hear a sound clip, whether it lives or not!

Thanks for the nice words.

Yes these woods (except the back which was an orphan) were total rejects. The "defects" are simple cosmetic mainly. The top has really strong dark grain streaks near the edges of the lower bout. It has a bit too much runout as well. The sides have funky mineral streaks to them.

So while, tonally speaking, the woods are fine, they are not the quality I would normally put on a instrument to sell, especially one that carries my life's work. On top of that the top is a Lutz spruce top. Not ideal for this style. It's the type of top that likes to be really driven. Not the style for this guitar, but I can take into account those things when I hear the product in the end. Also Indian rosewood for the back and sides work good, but I'd rather have used Brazilian, Madagascar, African Blackwood, Wenge, ect.. But that's why it's a proto!

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by JohnM

...

So while, tonally speaking, the woods are fine, they are not the quality I would normally put on a instrument to sell, especially one that carries my life's work. On top of that the top is a Lutz spruce top. Not ideal for this style. It's the type of top that likes to be really driven. Not the style for this guitar, but I can take into account those things when I hear the product in the end. Also Indian rosewood for the back and sides work good, but I'd rather have used Brazilian, Madagascar, African Blackwood, Wenge, ect.. But that's why it's a proto!

So what will be your recommendation(s) for the top wood on this fingerstyle model?

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

So what will be your recommendation(s) for the top wood on this fingerstyle model?

European spruce or one of it's variations like Italian, Swiss, or German. Cedar and redwood work well too for a slightly different sound. Really Lutz/Sitka can work, but they are just much more fundamental in tone. That might be someones preference so who am I to say otherwise!

[JohnM]

Well I'll know in a month or so if it worked out.....

And no apple didn't design my binding jig... it would have been made from aluminum, and had some internal camera or something :P

[revive]

Originally Posted by JohnM

As to Cotten's question. That is a good idea, and I have done something similar. However it did not work out well. Problem was the guy who got the guitar, directly from me, played it for a year or two and decided he needed money more than a guitar. Rather than give the guitar back to me as I told him not to sell it he decided to sell it anyway. So when he went to sell it he advertised it as a guitar I built, and ended up getting quite a bit of money for it. So now there is someone out there who has a reject that I would normally never let out the shop. I'm ashamed enough of my first few dozen guitars that I don't need a total reject out there being passed off as my normal work.

John, I understand your rationale. But in case you're willing to reconsider, my church could use it as a stage guitar. As such, the guitar will not be owned by me or any other individual; it will be owned by the church (whose pastor and staff don't have any particular interest in guitars). Therefore, your guitar will be very "safe" from the risk of being resold. It will be well-played and bless many people for years to come.

If you're willing to donate it to my church, I'll do my part by buying/installing a nice pickup system (out of my own pocket) before handing the guitar to the church. And you'll be able to claim a charitable deduction in your tax filing

[JohnM]

Originally Posted by revive

John, I understand your rationale. But in case you're willing to reconsider, my church could use it as a stage guitar. As such, the guitar will not be owned by me or any other individual; it will be owned by the church (whose pastor and staff don't have any particular interest in guitars). Therefore, your guitar will be very "safe" from the risk of being resold. It will be well-played and bless many people for years to come.

If you're willing to donate it to my church, I'll do my part by buying/installing a nice pickup system (out of my own pocket) before handing the guitar to the church. And you'll be able to claim a charitable deduction in your tax filing

I appreciate your interest for the guitar but, if anything, I'll probably keep it. I don't even own a guitar myself so what better than the product of 14 years of work. If it turns out bad, which I doubt, I will, for sure, destroy it.

[cpabolting]

Originally Posted by revive

And you'll be able to claim a charitable deduction in your tax filing

Okay....I will handle that one. John, you can't take as a charitable donation because then that would be a double dip. When you have already deducted the cost of materials and your utilities and such as a business expense, you can't deduct the fair market value unless you claim income in the same measure.

Property Donations. When you donate property to a charity, you generally can deduct the fair market value of the property. But you must reduce the value of the donated property (including a vehicle) by the amount of income that would be ordinary income or short-term capital gain if you sold the property for its fair market value. Capital gain property is the term used to describe donated property the sale of which would result in long-term capital gain if sold.

Since sale of your inventory would result in ordinary income, you would essentially get "cost" as a donation and since you already are deducting the production cost as a business expense, you are already getting it.

Make sense? If not, the short answer is no you can't LOL

[lossforgain]

Originally Posted by JohnM

As to Cotten's question. That is a good idea, and I have done something similar. However it did not work out well. Problem was the guy who got the guitar, directly from me, played it for a year or two and decided he needed money more than a guitar. Rather than give the guitar back to me as I told him not to sell it he decided to sell it anyway. So when he went to sell it he advertised it as a guitar I built, and ended up getting quite a bit of money for it. So now there is someone out there who has a reject that I would normally never let out the shop. I'm ashamed enough of my first few dozen guitars that I don't need a total reject out there being passed off as my normal work.

So maybe that is an aberration, but I've never let another one out like that and I never will.

I hate that one bad egg can ruin it for lots of people who would benefit from this kind of donation. As Cotten said, there are so many places out there that could really get good use out of such a guitar (none that I'm personally involved with so not looking for a handout here), I hate to hear that these beauties have to be destroyed. I also recognize that your guitars are such a personal expression of art and heart that it would be in conflict with your values to have them misrepresent your character and best work, but as Cotten says, I'm sure your "rejects" are better than a ton of the guitars on the market.

It's interesting the way you describe this guitar you're working on because it seems to me that you are pursuing some of the things I like about my grand auditorium Taylors. I know those are a different animal, but it makes me wonder if someone like me who likes Taylor guitars best might like this forthcoming model of yours better than your Gibson-based models. Do you have any thoughts on this? I'm a strummer but not a heavy one anymore.

John, I have enjoyed reading about your builds and learning about your instruments and who you are. I have never heard one of your guitars (other than on Steven Curtis Chapman songs) and certainly never played one, but I am very drawn to them. I hope one day to be able to purchase one. Thanks for doing what you do.

[Michael Watts]

Originally Posted by cpabolting

Okay....I will handle that one. John, you can't take as a charitable donation because then that would be a double dip. When you have already deducted the cost of materials and your utilities and such as a business expense, you can't deduct the fair market value unless you claim income in the same measure.

Property Donations. When you donate property to a charity, you generally can deduct the fair market value of the property. But you must reduce the value of the donated property (including a vehicle) by the amount of income that would be ordinary income or short-term capital gain if you sold the property for its fair market value. Capital gain property is the term used to describe donated property the sale of which would result in long-term capital gain if sold.

Since sale of your inventory would result in ordinary income, you would essentially get "cost" as a donation and since you already are deducting the production cost as a business expense, you are already getting it.

Make sense? If not, the short answer is no you can't LOL

Nicely done sir!