Advice: Bourgeois or Goodall

AshrafO · #1 06-20-2011, 03:03 PM

Howdy all,

I'm selling my Mcilroy A30 (it's on ebay right now) so I can buy another
guitar in that price range. I've never played a Bourgeois or a Goodall (and I live a few hundred kms from the closest place where I could try them)
but those are the choices I've come down to for what I want to buy, mainly
because I know they'll be good, and they have good resale value, so I can
sell them easily if I want to try something else again soon.

Can you guys describe to me (as creatively as you'd like) what you think the differences between them are, please? And what you'd go for and why..

I'm looking at a eurospruce/EIR Bourgeois OM and the Goodall I'm looking
at on ebay is a englemann/walnut (1995).

Thanks

fullsmile · #2 06-20-2011, 03:10 PM

I would buy that Goodall on ebay it is an awesome guitar and the guy selling it is a forum member. He apparently has quite a goodall collection and is reputable. The resale on either is about the same so if you buy used you shouldn't lose any money. Both are a little tough to resell however because they have a more limited market than a taylor or martin would. Having said that Goodall tends to have a more full sound especially in the midrange which seem to resonate more than with most other guitars that are dominated by bass (martin) or high's (taylor) where the bourgeois will tend to be well balanced throughout the tonal range. I don't want to start any arguments about which brand is best because this is just my opinion so I dont need a bunch of rebuttals to my statement. I own or have owned both and really like both of them.

rmyAddison · #3 06-20-2011, 03:19 PM

Better is up to individual ears. To me Bourgeois are very similar to high end Martins in voicing, while Goodalls are very strong in harmonics/overtones, both have their fans.

Bourgeois OM's are nicely balanced (love OM's) while Goodalls "to me" are a bit overly lush, playing style certainly dictates preferences, I prefer Bourgeois but know many Goodall fans, both are great guitars.

usb_chord · #4 06-20-2011, 03:58 PM

I can't think of two more differently voiced guitars if I tried!

I wouldn't choose either before a demo. Is there an approval period? Most Goodalls are too wet for my playing. Bourgeois are often times too dry. If the objective is simply to get a high quality guitar, either is fine. Anything beyond that and we're gambling.

Morgan1 · #5 06-20-2011, 04:02 PM

In my experience, Bourgeois tend to sound a lot like Martins, with perhaps a flatter balance...less of that low frequency bump that many Martin models have.

Goodalls are all about harmonic overtones and responsiveness.

Personally, I'd lean towards a Bourgeois if I played with a pick and a Goodall for fingerstyle. Both make fine instruments.

Morgan1 · #6 06-20-2011, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by usb_chord

I can't think of two more differently voiced guitars if I tried!

You're right, they sound miles apart. They sure make an odd 'either or' choice.

devellis · #7 06-20-2011, 04:05 PM

I have both a a Bourgeois and a Goodall and love 'em both. They're very different and, in fact, I selected the Bourgeois (a Sitka-over-mahogany slope dread Banjo Killer) to be as different as possible from my Goodall (a Euro spruce over EIR grand concert). So, these two are less alike than more similarly constructed Bourgeois and Goodall guitars.

I don't think you could go too far wrong with either. If I had to choose one, though, it would probably be the Goodall by a nose. It's an amazing and quite versatile guitar.

usb_chord · #8 06-20-2011, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morgan1

They sure make an odd 'either or' choice.

Seriously. OP is selling his Mcilroy on ebay, though . . which I've found to be a tonal sister to Lowden . . which is considered in certain circles to be a tonal cousin to Goodall...? Man, I'm reachin!

I guess I'm gonna take the gamble and say if he enjoyed his Mcilroy ..theres a fair chance he'd enjoy this goodall.

The A30 is a bigger guitar than that Goodall GC he's looking at, though so...more variables..

Jeff M · #9 06-20-2011, 04:23 PM

As others have mentioned, best if you could play some examples of both to see which you prefer.

Bourgeouis...more "traditional" "Martinesque" tone.
Goodall, more "modern" tone, harmonic rich.
Both excellent builders, great guitars.
I tend more towards Bourgeious..because of their tonal balance.

To my ear, Goodall's tone tends to be scooped in the mids.
I found after awhile that I missed those mid tones, and sold a custom Goodall CJ some time back. I own a Lowden 025C that I would also describe as "more modern" in tone with rich harmonics, but I don't hear the mid range drop out like I did with my Goodall.
Another difference between those two.....somebody once noted that with Goodall, you get rich harmonics emphasizing the ring of the strings. With Lowden, rich harmonics emphasizing the wood of the guitar.

AshrafO · #10 06-20-2011, 04:33 PM

Thanks everybody.

I was going to go for the Goodall but the darn thing sold! And all I can find are used are Sitka topped Goodalls.. I haven't played many high end guitars, but sitka always seems just a little flat for my liking. I guess I'll go with the Bourgeois OM! It's eurospruce. I still have yet to sell the Mcilroy, guess I'd better list it on here too. I think I'll like the Bourgeois, because I'm sure it'll have a lot of headroom, I love to be able to hit a guitar as hard as I can (not litereally). If I don't like the Bourgeois, I'll trade it in for one of three nice Joshua House guitars I have been looking at forever.

usb_chord · #11 06-20-2011, 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AshrafO

Thanks everybody.

I was going to go for the Goodall but the darn thing sold! And all I can find are used are Sitka topped Goodalls.. I haven't played many high end guitars, but sitka always seems just a little flat for my liking. I guess I'll go with the Bourgeois OM! It's eurospruce. I still have yet to sell the Mcilroy, guess I'd better list it on here too. I think I'll like the Bourgeois, because I'm sure it'll have a lot of headroom, I love to be able to hit a guitar as hard as I can (not litereally). If I don't like the Bourgeois, I'll trade it in for one of three nice Joshua House guitars I have been looking at forever.

Keep in mind that a Goodall is pretty much a Goodall regardless of the woods used. Even with a sitka top, the last thing I would think to call them is flat. Enjoy the hunt!

pitner · #12 06-20-2011, 05:22 PM

I have played both and own one Goodall. For my 61 year old ears the Goodall is the winner. Play before you buy if at all possible and take your time.

dablues · #13 06-20-2011, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rmyAddison

Better is up to individual ears. To me Bourgeois are very similar to high end Martins in voicing, while Goodalls are very strong in harmonics/overtones, both have their fans.

Bourgeois OM's are nicely balanced (love OM's) while Goodalls "to me" are a bit overly lush, playing style certainly dictates preferences, I prefer Bourgeois but know many Goodall fans, both are great guitars.

I completely agree. Goodalls that I have played were "chimey" and had alot of overtones. Both are great guitars though.

vintageom · #14 06-20-2011, 07:55 PM

You will not be disappointed with the Bourgeois you chose. I love them.

TaylorKoaFan · #15 06-20-2011, 08:31 PM

Both are excellent builders. As others have noted, very different voicing between the two. It really depends what your ears like. The Goodall's I have played have sounded very "lush" (overtone rich).

And I've played a few Bourgeois'...

They're excellent guitars.

In fact, I hear there's a pretty sweet one with a Euro spruce top in the classifieds here on the AGF...