#31
|
|||
|
|||
I own two Godins, used to routinely recommend Seagulls to my students when I was teaching, and IME that's never been an issue for any Godin product; haven't played any new Loars in a long time so I can't vouch for consistency - and they'd do well to take your hint, even if it means they no longer undercut Eastman's prices - but as you said the 1920's period-accurate neck profile can be daunting...
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Even if an all-laminate construction is less penalising to the acoustic sound in an archtop than in a flattop I don't see why a brand known for its premium acoustic guitars would introduce a completely new family via that kind of budget model. I think they'd rather want to improve on the sound, or show that an archtop can sound at least as good as their other instruments (but be more appropriate for music styles that are currently underserved by their offering, OR maybe by referring to Maybelle Carter). Quote:
I have no idea how much Loar prices would go up if they were to improve their QC enough to prove their reputation wrong (supposing that hasn't already happened). But would it have to mean they no longer undercut Eastman prices, knowing that a feature-comparable new AR805 goes for prices these days that can also buy you a luthier build (or almost)?!
__________________
I'm always not thinking many more things than I'm thinking. I therefore ain't more than I am. Pickle: Gretsch G9240 "Alligator" wood-body resonator wearing nylguts (China, 2018?) Toon: Eastman Cabaret JB (China, 2022) Stanley: The Loar LH-650 (China, 2017) |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Although Taylor certainly would be capable of developing and producing a demonstratively "better" arch top, the laminate arch top would fit well into their habit of bringing something different to the scene, especially as a way of introducing players to something a bit outside of what they have been previously playing. Laminate tops have a lot to offer; they provide a robust mechanical plate that's almost impervious to cracks, are stable in climates that are subject to humidity fluctuations, offer the builder a perfect opportunity to develop bracing that hones the sound to its desired tonality, and most importantly, can be produced economically without the need or expense of contour carving an expensive billet of wood. As far as producing a premium model, for Taylor it's all about numbers and there simply aren't enough arch top players to justify producing a high end arch top. If arch tops should shift into a higher popularity then I could see them giving some serious consideration to that, although I think it would still be based on the economics of not carving away a lot of expensive premium wood to make a solid wood top plate. Some of those Taylor flat top models currently produced are great values, and I personally believe Taylor produces them as "loss leaders" to get players into the Taylor "family". Nothing wrong with that, and I see a Taylor "budget model" arch top as filling the same role. Asa side note, Epiphone had the same opportunity to do all of this with the Olympic (and other historic models) and screwed that up by concentrating their efforts on "look" and not sound quality. Why in the world would you try to capitalize on a historic model and then provide a guitar with a big plastic box cut into the lower bout... Too bad for that. I owned a 39 Epi Triumph so I know the heritage that they ran into the ground. Last edited by Rudy4; 04-13-2022 at 07:13 AM. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Something to consider: Taylor archtops already exist - Martin Taylor (built by Peerless). Those set a "certain" standard. IMHO, if Taylor (the brand from this thread) were to introduce a cheap, all-laminate acoustic archtop they'd be accepting a de-facto position where they provide the entry-level Taylor archtops, and Martin Taylor the better ones. Again, they wouldn't need to hand-carve (and voice) the tops (on their entire archtop line). I have no idea if a pressed solid top is just as good or bad as a laminate top but from a marketing point of view it's still a pressed top.
__________________
I'm always not thinking many more things than I'm thinking. I therefore ain't more than I am. Pickle: Gretsch G9240 "Alligator" wood-body resonator wearing nylguts (China, 2018?) Toon: Eastman Cabaret JB (China, 2022) Stanley: The Loar LH-650 (China, 2017) |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
"...it's just as widely known for it's ability to bring innovative and lower priced offerings to the marketplace." I owned a mahogany topped GS Mini and it was a fine instrument, and was my "gateway" to owning a 322 presently. I purchased the GS Mini to be able to continue playing while I recuperated from a pulverized collarbone and ended up appreciating what Taylor could offer at that price point. Taylor laminate construction has little in common with pac rim plywood. Each of the 3 layers is basically equal in thickness and tht translates to a whole nuther level of influence on sound. I'm not a fan of pressed tops, as the natural tenancy of wood is to return to it's static structure. Forcing it to do something that it doesn't want to do can spell trouble acoustically and structurally over the long haul. Sorry if I seem pretty opinionated on this stuff, but I've been building instruments and doing general woodworking for the last 40 years. I'm not trying to be argumentative, simply throwing some thoughts out based on what I know about Taylor's guitar lines and their ability to bring a marketing concept to fruition. If Taylor made a budget-friendly arch top guitar it does not denigrate their branding. They are just as likely to try and accommodate newer players with solidly designed instruments that are more affordable as they are in providing upper level instruments. Look at their $500ish offerings in the Academy lineup and you'll see "lower tier" instruments that still play like higher end Taylors, sound reasonably good, and incorporate their NT neck joint. They don't cut corners by epoxying the necks on and making basically disposable guitars. Last edited by Rudy4; 04-13-2022 at 01:54 PM. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The New York-era Epiphone basses, as well as the Kay basses from the '40s-60s, are still highly prized by working players as much for their tone as their durability... Many a postwar ES-125 or ES-150 did double-duty as both an acoustic and electric instrument - the best 150's could rival contemporary L-7 carved instruments for volume and tone... Gibson's L-48, Guild's A-50, and Gretsch's New Yorker were mainstays of the better teaching studios (particularly in the Northeast US) well into the '60s, in the hands of teachers and students alike... It's long been known that laminated archtop construction doesn't have the same detrimental effect on tone as it does for a flattop - and given Andy Powers' expertise I'm certain he could take things to the next level, while still keeping it affordable for the Working Joe/Jane looking for a secondary/specialty instrument...
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) Last edited by Steve DeRosa; 04-15-2022 at 10:00 PM. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Regarding some of the discussion here about price point and level of QC, I am curious as to why Godin can make high quality instruments at a reasonable price, while some others (not all...) seem to have QC issues at that price point. All the Godin and Seagull models I have personally seen were really good guitars. I have owned a couple of their nylon string Multiac models. Tony
__________________
“The guitar is a wonderful thing which is understood by few.” — Franz Schubert "Alexa, where's my stuff?" - Anxiously waiting... |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Non multa sed multum Fecimus propter possumus The first translates literally as "not many, but much" or, loosely paraphrased, "quality before quantity"; a noblesse oblige, integrity-driven approach to guitar-making that usually finds itself comm,only expressed as "bang for the buck," "value per dollar," or even "not cheap, but a bargain even at twice the price," this motto appeared on a plaque hung over Frank Henry Martin's bed as a boy, was passed down to his son CFM III, and hung in the factory in 1920. There are a number of makers past and present that exemplify this ideal - Martin during its first 150 years, the aforementioned Godin family, archtop luthier Mark Campellone, Gretsch's MIJ Professional Series and Korean Electromatics, Halcyon, among others - and as you noticed, they just have a way of standing out from their peers totally unrelated to glitz (with the possible exception of Gretsch, but that's their trademark anyway )... The second translates as "we do because we can": coasting on a no-longer-valid reputation, cheapening production methods/materials with no real benefits in value/QC/tone, discontinuing high-value/accessibly-priced instruments that represent a threat to their big-buck boxes, constantly chasing fads and market dead ends - borrowing from a famous movie of years past, "build it and they'll buy it anyway"; if you've been in this game for a while it's no secret who the relevant parties are, and/or which periods of production we're talking about, and by and large these are the marques I avoid...
__________________
"Mistaking silence for weakness and contempt for fear is the final, fatal error of a fool" - Sicilian proverb (paraphrased) |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Putting Godin and someone like Mark Campellone into the same category almost feels like an insult. I have a Seagull guitar, and I'd hate to suggest to any independent luthier that the insides of their instruments are as nicely not-finished as that jumbo of mine (or their fretboard inlays as well aligned).
__________________
I'm always not thinking many more things than I'm thinking. I therefore ain't more than I am. Pickle: Gretsch G9240 "Alligator" wood-body resonator wearing nylguts (China, 2018?) Toon: Eastman Cabaret JB (China, 2022) Stanley: The Loar LH-650 (China, 2017) |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
I own a Godin 5th Avenue acou archtop ascwell as the 5th Avenue jazz model.
I'll sell my froggy bottom guitar before I'd sell either one of my Godin.
__________________
2003 Froggy Bottom H-12 Deluxe 2019 Cordoba C-12 Cedar 2016 Godin acoustic archtop 2011 Godin Jazz model archtop |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Steve, please correct me if I am wrong. Tony
__________________
“The guitar is a wonderful thing which is understood by few.” — Franz Schubert "Alexa, where's my stuff?" - Anxiously waiting... |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Just to be clear: I got Steve's point, but I had to read the statement twice to be certain I read what was actually written. That's why I said "it seems". I also didn't think he meant Godins and Campellones are equal in quality, I'm sure Steve is still far too lucid to even joke about such things
But stellar really isn't the term that my Seagull inspires...
__________________
I'm always not thinking many more things than I'm thinking. I therefore ain't more than I am. Pickle: Gretsch G9240 "Alligator" wood-body resonator wearing nylguts (China, 2018?) Toon: Eastman Cabaret JB (China, 2022) Stanley: The Loar LH-650 (China, 2017) |