Waterloo vs Bourgeois

[pmichael]

From not much of a distance, the Waterloo WL-12 MH and the Bourgeois LDB0 12-fret mahogany occupy the same niche as roughly does the Martin 000-15SM.

Each of these is all mahogany, 12-fret and is self described as representing the depression-era vintage guitars. Less bling and great for fingerstyle country blues, ragtime, etc. The Bourgeois clearly more Gibson L00 inspired, the Waterloo perhaps more Martin inspired.

The 000-15SM can be got for around $1400; the Waterloo about $2000 and the Bourgeois for about $4000.

As distance decreases, differences stand out and begin to matter.

Has anyone done a side by each with the Waterloo and the Bourgeois? Similarities, differences in everything that matters without reference to cost?

And then of course, the bang for buck question of is what makes the LDB0 worth twice the Waterloo?

I'm an an unhurried journey for something in this generl style and am looking, listening and learning.

[srick]

pmichael - They are both excellent guitars. I have a Bourgeois Country Boy 00, mahogany with an adirondack top and I have played the Waterloos too, but never a side-by-side (tho' very possibly this weekend).

I would say that there are more similarities than differences, but the Bourgeois is voiced a little more carefully and is a little more articulate. What I mean by that is, it has a bit more resonance and the string separation (ability to hear the multiple strings separately when chording) is a little better. The Bourgeois is a slightly lighter build also. I'll bet if we recorded them, you would have a tough time figuring out which was which, but if you played them live (blindfolded), you would be able to tell by their feel and their sound.

All of this is so subjective depending on the player, the strings, the humidity and the age of the instrument. I find comparisons very tough because on any given day, one guitar will 'speak to me' and another one won't. I find as I work with one instrument, I get to know its subtleties and its strengths and I automatically adapt.

best,

Rick

PS - I believe that LDB0 has a torrified top, If so, that makes a tremendous difference, as it is essentially, 'prematurely aged"
PPS - When buying a high end guitar, consider used guitars first. They are about half the price, they come 'pre-dinged', and hopefully the hard work of opening up their sound has been done by someone else.
PPPS - the Martin does sound different than both, but again, see my comment re: subjectivity

[Nctom]

I have only limited experience with the Bourgeois but I have owned a WL12Mh for almost a year so my evaluation is biased. The Waterloo may be a little less finished and polished, but it is certainly a fine guitar at less than half the price of the Bourgeois. I've also owned 00- and 000-15s and for several reasons do not consider them in the same ballpark as the Waterloo.

[Jeff Scott]

If it were my money at stake I would go with the Bourgeois.

[srick]

Originally Posted by Jeff Scott

If it were my money at stake I would go with the Bourgeois.

Needless to say, I’m a big fan of Dana’s guitars.

[George Henry]

I've got a Waterloo. It is simply as much guitar as I need. Love it.

[zmf]

Interesting question. I'd love to answer, but I haven't played a Bourgeois smaller than an OM.

I'm biased towards Bourgeois guitars, and think they're worth the extra bucks.

But if it's blues and rags you're most interested in playing, that levels the playing field a bit, and comes down to the tone you most prefer.

[pmichael]

Originally Posted by Nctom

I have only limited experience with the Bourgeois but I have owned a WL12Mh for almost a year so my evaluation is biased. The Waterloo may be a little less finished and polished, but it is certainly a fine guitar at less than half the price of the Bourgeois. I've also owned 00- and 000-15s and for several reasons do not consider them in the same ballpark as the Waterloo.

Could you elaborate a bit on your several reasons and also what you mean by not the same ballpark?

[Nctom]

The Waterloo feels light, airy and almost vintage. The neck of my WL-12Mh is 12 frets and substantial, unlike the 14-fret Martin of whatever profile. The Waterloo is bound frot and back, unlike the standard Martins. The dark, matte finish of the Martins does not compare to the soft glow of the Waterloo. Finally, the Waterloo is made from genuine mahogany unlike the Martin's "genuine hardwood" of unknown species.

This sounds like I'm bashing Martin but I'm not. I was asked to explain the differences between the two. I have owned several Martin -15 series guitars and generally liked them, but they don't really compare to the Waterloos.

[Dwight]

The Waterloo models are based on cheap guitars of the depression era and deliberately made cheaply to capture that period in guitar building. The Martin is not very expensive and the Bourgeois is a real guitar.

They are all worthy of their price points and in the right hands can produce excellent music.

[musicman1951]

This past winter I played both a Waterloo and a Bourgeois (although I don't remember the model numbers). For me there was a clear and obvious reason why the Bourgeois was more expensive - and worth every penny. But take that with a large grain of salt as I don't play the same style music you do.

[robey]

I don't really see how this is a fair comparison. Waterloo guitars are purposely made to a particular price point by cutting corners on fit and finish:

"The goal was to capture a particular sound by making the guitars like they were actually made back in the depression, and that meant stripping the process down to the bare essentials."

A more apt comparison would be a special order 001 Collins with a mohog top. Let me know when those are retailing for $1800.

I have a Waterloo WL14 and, though I don't own a Bourgeois 00, I've owned plenty of Dana's guitars and can imagine the kind of time that goes into construction and finish. They all have their own thing and place.

[Rosewood99]

Originally Posted by robey

I don't really see how this is a fair comparison. Waterloo guitars are purposely made to a particular price point by cutting corners on fit and finish:

"The goal was to capture a particular sound by making the guitars like they were actually made back in the depression, and that meant stripping the process down to the bare essentials."

A more apt comparison would be a special order 001 Collins with a mohog top. Let me know when those are retailing for $1800.

I have a Waterloo WL14 and, though I don't own a Bourgeois 00, I've owned plenty of Dana's guitars and can imagine the kind of time that goes into construction and finish. They all have their own thing and place.

What he said.

[srick]

You might want to give a listen to some of Toby Walker's videos. In many of them he is playing a Waterloo and it sounds just fine. In fact, it sounds very darn fine. It goes without saying that the guitar is just a part of the sound that results.

Good luck with your quest. You can always trade up in the future y'know.

best,

Rick

Originally Posted by robey

A more apt comparison would be a special order 001 Collins with a mohog top. Let me know when those are retailing for $1800.

Perfectly put.