Collings vs. Bourgeois

[Silly Moustache]

Originally Posted by AMW

We love this conversation! Of course, we'll probably also end up at "equally great" but here's our well-travelled perspective on both brands:

First, the OP asked to compare sound and playability, and this thread went very much toward sound. Let's talk about playability first. Our normal line is "nothing dials in like a Collings." Their necks are reinforced with spring steel, and vs other brands, we find that the truss rods on Collings are more of a game of absolute micro-adjustments. They're just incredibly stable. We've set up Collings for folks (at their request) with dead-straight, no-relief necks, at 3/32" action on the bass and 3/64" on the treble... and they've said "PERFECT!"

...only with a Collings is this possible.

But the trade-off of that Collings stability is a slightly more robust build. There's no going around it, Collings are a little tighter when they're new. And it is kind of a sore spot for us, because so many people buy new Collings guitars and trade in and out of them before they are even close to broken in! Torrefied tops help a little bit, and the Traditional tone profile is unquestionably warmer out of the box... but there is nothing as tonally sure of itself as a well played-in Collings. We have (and will probably always have) Steve's #326 D2H (as they near #35000) and it stands as an impeccable example. Sitka, Indian rosewood, it pretty much intoxicates everyone who plays it. The "NOT FOR SALE" tag that hangs from the endpin makes us feel bad, but kinda good, too!

What we are always reminding our customers is that while the bass response is a thing that flowers and develops over time, treble response does not, in most cases. Typically, you will hear more warmth and depth developing in the bass of a guitar as you continue to play it, but the trebles never really "ascend" from where they are in the beginning. That's why it is important to have high end clarity early in the life of a guitar. It makes sense, right? As the thing settles in, as it loosens, the bass becomes more comfortable with itself, warms up, the trebles mellow a little bit and the whole thing comes into focus. Bill Collings understood this all too well, and that's why he built his guitars just a little bit more robust, with a high end that would mellow over time, but never fail the player. It was and is kind of a "long view" perspective of building a dependable, balanced guitar.

Back to playability, for the sake of the segway: we almost never have to do tweaks to the Collings factory setup to make a customer happy. The very rare occasion to shave the saddle for the most delicate fingerstyle pickers, but again, almost never.

So on to Bourgeois: though it has gotten a little better over the last 5-7 years, Bourgeois guitars generally ship from the factory with a lot of relief. The truss rod is usually engaged well into the "up bow" area, and that reflects in the action, especially if the thing is running medium strings. Not to worry, though! Bourgeois guitars ship with nice tall saddles, and between those and the relief, the adjustability is there to obtain any kind of desirable setup. BUT I will say (again, to acknowledge the OP) that it would be a very good idea to have some numbers in mind when buying a new Bourgeois, if you have an ideal setup... especially if that setup skews low. As policy, we will do any kind of relief adjustment that a buyer wants, for their particular string gauge, but we won't shave the saddle on a brand new guitar and still allow a return window... just because that saddle material can't be put back. We usually advise folks to evaluate the tone as carefully as they can, and know that down the road they will have any and every opportunity to bring down the saddle if they choose to, or ideally, bring it to their favorite tech for a perfect-for-them setup.

All of this is to say that on the sales floor, a brand new Bourgeois may be harder to play than a brand new Collings, even though the neck runs shallower on the Bourgeois and the satin finish might make it feel "faster". I usually do a little truss rod move on a Bourgeois before I hand it over, just because I know that the average player is probably after.... but easy enough to tweak back. Bourgeois has some pretty legendary tech going on in their necks. Again, anything is possible.

But that Bourgeois tone, as has been said, tends to be on the more balanced side of the Martin/traditional spectrum, with more clarity in the mids and less of a bass bias. For OMs and OM family instruments (we're bonkers about the JOM-T, obvious from our website) there might be none finer, and we will always thank Dana for his work bringing the Orchestra Model back from the brink.

Thank you for this! There is a wealth of fascinating and useful info here. Thanks again.

[Tnfiddler]

Originally Posted by zmf

Perhaps the opposite is true?
By the time you work your way to the boutiques, and prices becomes steeper, you focus more on the differences between makes. You pay more attention when A/B'ing guitars. The differences are no longer minute. As the title of this thread and many others would suggest.

And your recent threads on Bourgeois' and Martins seem to counter your statement. Guess it comes down to who's a "serious enthusiast".

I re-read what I posted and I’m gonna correct it to volume for the 75%! I never noticed the bass of a Martin until I was told by everyone on AGF that the Martin bass was the standard. Oh, I’m definitely including myself in the “SERIOUS” section! I’m the worlds-worst to pick something apart versus just enjoying it! I think the overwhelming majority of people on this forum are in the serious category and are super picky about their guitars. I hate being so picky because I spend too much time chasing picks, strings tone changes that I just don’t enjoy the guitars 100%, like I should! I know so many people who could care less about Bourgeois, Collings, Santa Cruz or any boutique guitars. They enjoy the crap out of their guitar(whatever brand it may be) and never think twice about the name on the headstock, strings, picks or bridge pins! I used to be that way when my Taylor 810(2nd guitar I ever owned) was all I had and I thought it was the best sounding guitar in the world! Then I joined AGF and all of you “bad influences” corrupted me and made me start thinking too much instead of playing! LOL

[hairpuller]

Just had a guitar set up by a guy recommended by the folks at Gryphon Strings. He did a terrific job and while jabbering away I asked him thoughts on some of the "boutique" guitars that are so popular (Bourgeois, Collings, SC).

He's worked on a lot of 'em. He said for consistent build quality he thinks Santa Cruz does the best work followed up by Collings. He has not been impressed by the Bourgeois guitars he's worked on.

That's just one luthier/guitar tech, but I found it interesting. I've owned two Bourgeois OM's and both are no longer with me. Then again, I had a Collings 000 for awhile and he went bye-bye, too.

scott

[BradleyJay]

Recently got my Collings OMh2-T-baked sitka and can honestly say it’s the best sounding acoustic I’ve owned, the sound and vibrations you get when playing this are amazing
I’ve owned 2 bourgeois’s and while they sound great from the listeners perspective I never grabbed for them as much as playing them was not as rewarding, I owned a vintage deluxe Addy top/ EIR and a Soloist German/Cocobolo maybe it’s the shallower neck as many here have mentioned but the Collings is a winner for me

[LakewoodM32Fan]

Originally Posted by BradleyJay

Recently got my Collings OMh2-T-baked sitka and can honestly say it’s the best sounding acoustic I’ve owned, the sound and vibrations you get when playing this are amazing
I’ve owned 2 bourgeois’s and while they sound great from the listeners perspective I never grabbed for them as much as playing them was not as rewarding, I owned a vintage deluxe Addy top/ EIR and a Soloist German/Cocobolo maybe it’s the shallower neck as many here have mentioned but the Collings is a winner for me

I think there's a case study to be had somewhere about documenting how guitars sound to the player vs. the listener.

I've incorporated listening to every guitar I am auditioning while someone else plays it. There are definite differences, especially between different body sizes and top woods. But I always find the differences as a listener are more subtle than as a player. So I generally buy what sounds best to me as a player knowing that the differences are much more audible from my vantage point than they are for people I play for. Which is perfectly fine with me, because the vast majority of the time I'm not playing in front of other people, so why not get the instrument that sounds best from my playing position?

[zmf]

Originally Posted by LakewoodM32Fan

So I generally buy what sounds best to me as a player knowing that the differences are much more audible from my vantage point than they are for people I play for. Which is perfectly fine with me, because the vast majority of the time I'm not playing in front of other people, so why not get the instrument that sounds best from my playing position?

I agree with your perspective.

I've also had the pleasure of owning guitars that I think sound good, and also sound great when I get to listen (as in, wow, that bass really is sweet!). A gratifying, but not essential, validation of choosing a good guitar.

[LakewoodM32Fan]

To expand, whenever I've been the listener, the guitars I've listened to largely followed the same preference as when I was the player (i.e. the guitar rankings are the same to my ears). But the "sound/tone gap" between the best and worst is much narrower as an audience member than it is as a player, at least that's been my experience thus far.

Only my TD-R had a sound/tone gap that's was as wide from a listener's perspective as it was from a player's perspective, which is why I'm fairly sure I'm never going to ever part with that guitar. It beat out a Bourgeois D-V, SCGC Tony Rice, Collings D1 and D2H and another H&D (D-RH) by fairly wide margins. It's my one guitar that, as I've continued to audition guitars in shops, I've yet to find it's Sitka/EIR equal, in terms of the sound I want to hear out of that body and tonewood pairing.

[gmel555]

Originally Posted by gmel555:
"I am still hopeful of playing that Collings one day that makes me say. "Ah that's what it's all about". I'm sure they exist -probably in great numbers- but my access to Collings examples is limited."

And Lakewood responded:

Originally Posted by LakewoodM32Fan

LOL I'm in the exact opposite boat. No shortage of Collings dealers with inventory around me (hence how I was able to audition quite a few before choosing mine), but the closest Bourgeois dealer is 130 miles away...

May we both get our wish!

[jrb715]

Originally Posted by AMW

We love this conversation! Of course, we'll probably also end up at "equally great" but here's our well-travelled perspective on both brands:

First, the OP asked to compare sound and playability, and this thread went very much toward sound. Let's talk about playability first. Our normal line is "nothing dials in like a Collings." Their necks are reinforced with spring steel, and vs other brands, we find that the truss rods on Collings are more of a game of absolute micro-adjustments. They're just incredibly stable. We've set up Collings for folks (at their request) with dead-straight, no-relief necks, at 3/32" action on the bass and 3/64" on the treble... and they've said "PERFECT!"

...only with a Collings is this possible.

But the trade-off of that Collings stability is a slightly more robust build. There's no going around it, Collings are a little tighter when they're new. And it is kind of a sore spot for us, because so many people buy new Collings guitars and trade in and out of them before they are even close to broken in! Torrefied tops help a little bit, and the Traditional tone profile is unquestionably warmer out of the box... but there is nothing as tonally sure of itself as a well played-in Collings.

What we are always reminding our customers is that while the bass response is a thing that flowers and develops over time, treble response does not, in most cases. Typically, you will hear more warmth and depth developing in the bass of a guitar as you continue to play it, but the trebles never really "ascend" from where they are in the beginning. That's why it is important to have high end clarity early in the life of a guitar. It makes sense, right? As the thing settles in, as it loosens, the bass becomes more comfortable with itself, warms up, the trebles mellow a little bit and the whole thing comes into focus. Bill Collings understood this all too well, and that's why he built his guitars just a little bit more robust, with a high end that would mellow over time, but never fail the player. It was and is kind of a "long view" perspective of building a dependable, balanced guitar.

Back to playability, for the sake of the segway: we almost never have to do tweaks to the Collings factory setup to make a customer happy. The very rare occasion to shave the saddle for the most delicate fingerstyle pickers, but again, almost never.

Just a few comments about AMWs great post. I now own five Collings guitars. (I've also never played a Bourgeois that I didn't like--a lot; and am missing the one that I let get away.) I've had the truss rod tweaked on all five of the guitars to make them more comfortable for me to play. While the factory set ups are obviously very good--never would have bought that first Collings if those I played in the store didn't sound wonderful to me--I've found that the "micro adjustments" of the truss rod made them not only more playable for me, but I believe in two cases made them sound better. I almost sold one of my Collings before it was dialed in thanks to information from Mark Althans at Collings. I've come to understand that I'm very sensitive to relief adjustments with a Collings (no saddle shaving has been necessary). I wonder if Brencat is as well, since his new Collings is the first he's been comfortable with.

And I can't emphasize enough AMW's comment that "there is nothing as tonally sure of itself as a well played in Collings." Two of my Collings are OMs, a five year old OM1A and an eight year old OM2GSS. The OM2 was sensational from day 1; the OM1A was very good. They have both become much better with age. The OM1 changed almost overnight at about year 2. The OM2 matured more gradually. But they are now simply wonderful guitars--they remove all temptations for OMs from other makers as well as for Traditional Collings and Julian Lage OMs.

It doesn't take all that much patience to wait--if they are set up to your liking--since they are great guitars from day one. But it's a unique reward down the road.

[brencat]

Originally Posted by jrb715

I've had the truss rod tweaked on all five of the guitars to make them more comfortable for me to play. I've found that the "micro adjustments" of the truss rod made them not only more playable for me, but I believe in two cases made them sound better. I almost sold one of my Collings before it was dialed in thanks to information from Mark Althans at Collings. I've come to understand that I'm very sensitive to relief adjustments with a Collings...I wonder if Brencat is as well, since his new Collings is the first he's been comfortable with.

I'm reading these comments and starting to wonder about a lot of things now.

And I've noticed the same thing with the Bourgeois JOMT I had and now the D-Vintage. Tiny truss rod adjustments make a massive difference in feel. Why is that so with these brands ?

[LakewoodM32Fan]

Originally Posted by brencat

I'm reading these comments and starting to wonder about a lot of things now.

And I've noticed the same thing with the Bourgeois JOMT I had and now the D-Vintage. Tiny truss rod adjustments make a massive difference in feel. Why is that so with these brands ?

Not related to truss rod, but I noticed on my SCGC OM that something as small as a 1/64" action change (via shaving 1/32" off the saddle) resulted in a very big tonal change...in a good way. I was feeling it was way too scooped in sound, especially with borderline overly boomy bass. After that reduction (which resulted in going from just a hair under 4/32" action on the low E @12th fret to just a hair over 3/32" action) resulted in completely eliminating the boominess, and replacing it with articulate and well balanced bass, and it brought the mids up as well.

My H&D similarly has a huge reaction to a similar sized action adjustment. But my Taylors and Martins don't react in the same way. Yes they do change tonally, but not as drastically as that. I have yet to adjust the action on my Collings, but that's on the books. Relief is perfect, so it's going to be a reduction in saddle height on that one.

[Samiamx]

Originally Posted by AMW

We love this conversation! Of course, we'll probably also end up at "equally great" but here's our well-travelled perspective on both brands:

First, the OP asked to compare sound and playability, and this thread went very much toward sound. Let's talk about playability first. Our normal line is "nothing dials in like a Collings." Their necks are reinforced with spring steel, and vs other brands, we find that the truss rods on Collings are more of a game of absolute micro-adjustments. They're just incredibly stable. We've set up Collings for folks (at their request) with dead-straight, no-relief necks, at 3/32" action on the bass and 3/64" on the treble... and they've said "PERFECT!"

...only with a Collings is this possible.

But the trade-off of that Collings stability is a slightly more robust build. There's no going around it, Collings are a little tighter when they're new. And it is kind of a sore spot for us, because so many people buy new Collings guitars and trade in and out of them before they are even close to broken in! Torrefied tops help a little bit, and the Traditional tone profile is unquestionably warmer out of the box... but there is nothing as tonally sure of itself as a well played-in Collings. We have (and will probably always have) Steve's #326 D2H (as they near #35000) and it stands as an impeccable example. Sitka, Indian rosewood, it pretty much intoxicates everyone who plays it. The "NOT FOR SALE" tag that hangs from the endpin makes us feel bad, but kinda good, too!

What we are always reminding our customers is that while the bass response is a thing that flowers and develops over time, treble response does not, in most cases. Typically, you will hear more warmth and depth developing in the bass of a guitar as you continue to play it, but the trebles never really "ascend" from where they are in the beginning. That's why it is important to have high end clarity early in the life of a guitar. It makes sense, right? As the thing settles in, as it loosens, the bass becomes more comfortable with itself, warms up, the trebles mellow a little bit and the whole thing comes into focus. Bill Collings understood this all too well, and that's why he built his guitars just a little bit more robust, with a high end that would mellow over time, but never fail the player. It was and is kind of a "long view" perspective of building a dependable, balanced guitar.

Back to playability, for the sake of the segway: we almost never have to do tweaks to the Collings factory setup to make a customer happy. The very rare occasion to shave the saddle for the most delicate fingerstyle pickers, but again, almost never.

So on to Bourgeois: though it has gotten a little better over the last 5-7 years, Bourgeois guitars generally ship from the factory with a lot of relief. The truss rod is usually engaged well into the "up bow" area, and that reflects in the action, especially if the thing is running medium strings. Not to worry, though! Bourgeois guitars ship with nice tall saddles, and between those and the relief, the adjustability is there to obtain any kind of desirable setup. BUT I will say (again, to acknowledge the OP) that it would be a very good idea to have some numbers in mind when buying a new Bourgeois, if you have an ideal setup... especially if that setup skews low. As policy, we will do any kind of relief adjustment that a buyer wants, for their particular string gauge, but we won't shave the saddle on a brand new guitar and still allow a return window... just because that saddle material can't be put back. We usually advise folks to evaluate the tone as carefully as they can, and know that down the road they will have any and every opportunity to bring down the saddle if they choose to, or ideally, bring it to their favorite tech for a perfect-for-them setup.

All of this is to say that on the sales floor, a brand new Bourgeois may be harder to play than a brand new Collings, even though the neck runs shallower on the Bourgeois and the satin finish might make it feel "faster". I usually do a little truss rod move on a Bourgeois before I hand it over, just because I know that the average player is probably after.... but easy enough to tweak back. Bourgeois has some pretty legendary tech going on in their necks. Again, anything is possible.

But that Bourgeois tone, as has been said, tends to be on the more balanced side of the Martin/traditional spectrum, with more clarity in the mids and less of a bass bias. For OMs and OM family instruments (we're bonkers about the JOM-T, obvious from our website) there might be none finer, and we will always thank Dana for his work bringing the Orchestra Model back from the brink.

Resurrecting this post because I found it to be incredibly helpful and consistent with the experience with Collings. Quick question for AMW or others if they see this. What are the sound, tone and general tendencies of Huss and Dalton?

I’ve owned a H&D 00 engelman/rosewood and it was very light, loud for its size and the playability was very good. Curious about others experience with H&D as I feel like they fly under the radar vs Bourgeois, Collings and SC but I think they are just as good.

[Mark L]

Thanks for resurrecting.

The post by amw should become a sticky, somewhere, somehow.