Rainsong Vintage - Page 2

elementarymusic · #16 10-10-2019, 01:21 PM

Not for me. I LOVE that Rainsong is finally going the traditional direction. (I think there's a large market for carbon guitars that look like traditional wood guitars.) But I think it looks too basic and cheap for the price. I'm not bashing Rainsong, but my Emeralds look like high end guitars...and these look like cheap(er) wood guitars. Just my opinion...but I do love my 2 new Emeralds...

Song · #17 10-10-2019, 01:34 PM

Ovation/Adamas/Applause/Martin etcetera, etc, have been melding wood, metal, and composites for at least 50 years.
Good luck to Rainsong in the latest iteration.
I wish them well in all their endeavors...

Captain Jim · #18 10-10-2019, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eatswodo

I hope this doesn’t descend into a Rainsong vs. Emerald battle.

It is inevitable that comparisons will be made... just as they've been made here in the past. It doesn't have to be unpleasant, and certainly no need for a "battle." It is OK to prefer one brand over the other, but turning it into a Junior High "my guitar can beat up your guitar" is unnecessary and unwanted.

Things they have in common: both manufacturers make great instruments. Both seem to be customer oriented. Both are using carbon fiber.

Some differences: RainSong has tended towards traditional guitar shapes while Emerald's style is more "modern" (for the lack of a better word). The acoustic guitar world is pretty traditional, so I understand RainSong's approach and admire Emerald's designs that are more ergonomically oriented. The fact that both are using carbon fiber means that this is a choice, and neither is right or wrong.

From a personal opinion point of view: I prefer a comfortable guitar, and that means (for me) the hard edges where a guitar meets the body have no advantage.

As of this recent RainSong offering, both manufacturers are using a wood layer as an aesthetic choice... and looks definitely count! As of now, RainSong has done what you'd expect: put traditional guitar top wood as that aesthetic. Emerald is using a wide variety of veneers, almost all of which could not be used as a traditional wood choice for a top, if you were making a wood guitar. Again, a choice.

I recall a few years ago a discussion here that Emerald was "trying to make their guitars look like wood" with their veneers. I never saw that - try making a wood guitar with a stressed top made from a burled wood... without it collapsing on itself. These wood veneers have always been about the exotic look. They have been doing it for years and have made some strikingly gorgeous instruments.

RainSong, on the other hand, has decided to go in a "vintage" direction, and by using wood veneers/infusion are making their guitar look more like a wood guitar. That is not a criticism, just an observation. The fact that some here (and on Facebook) have said that these new RainSongs will be "more accepted at a bluegrass gathering" shows what their goal is.

Either way, if it brings more wood players to become "carbon fiber curious," it is a good thing.

No definitive word, yet, regarding the neck profile RainSong is using on their wood-look guitars, but for the past (almost a) decade, they have made no changes from their N2/NS neck profile. Emerald has slightly different neck profiles on their standard models, but also offers the buyer the opportunity to have a custom neck profile or scale, at an additional cost. In fact, Emerald has shown their ability and willingness to offer a variety of custom choices to their guitars, limited by your imagination and wallet, and Emerald's desire to still make a quality instrument.

If you stay with the carbon fiber weave, RainSong offers a painted top and black CF, where Emerald offers different color tints to the carbon fiber as well as full custom paint. Both do a fine job with those offerings.

Sales and marketing: RainSong sells through dealers, Emerald only sells direct. It is more complicated than "a middle man"... with RainSong, their dealers are their customers, and the guitar buyer is a customer of the dealer. With Emerald, the buyer communicates directly with the manufacturer. The upside for RS: you as the buyer can go to a dealer and "try before you buy" if the dealer stocks the model that interests you. With Emerald, you buy directly from them, so they know you as the buyer. They have a return policy if you buy a stock (no custom options) guitar from them. With RainSong, any return policy is up to the dealer.

As a personal input here: I used to be an "I have to try it before I spend my money on it" kinda guy. The first guitar I broke from that thinking, however, was a RainSong... there were no dealers anywhere near where I was at the time, and I bought the guitar over the phone and had it shipped. Just like I have done now with all 3 Emeralds that I own.

There is no "battle" with what I write, trying to be as unbiased as I can. I don't make my livelihood selling guitars, I just like to play 'em; and have for over 50 years. I have owned both brands, and currently own Emerald as my only CF guitars. They fit me better and I prefer the sound; that is not a knock on RainSong, just a personal observation. RainSong makes fine guitars, too, and I understand why others may prefer their offerings.

No battle. Just a guitar fan. For any folks reading who haven't tried a carbon fiber guitar, there are a lot of great brands/models available - it's a great time to be a CF player.

RP · #19 10-10-2019, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

...For any folks reading who haven't tried a carbon fiber guitar, there are a lot of great brands/models available - it's a great time to be a CF player.

It sure is, Captain Jim. Thanks for such a thorough breakdown of the two companies. I got my first Emerald last Friday but have far more experience with Rainsong. I've decided to go full force into CF ownership since I like to keep my guitars out of their cases, and temperature/humidity are difficult to maintain in my cabin in the woods in the winter since I heat with wood...

David Eastwood · #20 10-10-2019, 02:45 PM

That's an excellent summary, Jim - and very even-handed.

'Battle' is not the wording I originally chose, but it will do as a substitute for my original not-so-well chosen phrase. I was thinking more in terms of the 'junior high' spat, than armed combat

#21 10-10-2019, 03:08 PM

I suspect that at some point a piece of myrtle wood will drift up from Oregon and become an American veneer for RS guitars.

tbeltrans · #22 10-10-2019, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eatswodo

That's an excellent summary, Jim - and very even-handed.

'Battle' is not the wording I originally chose, but it will do as a substitute for my original not-so-well chosen phrase. I was thinking more in terms of the 'junior high' spat, than armed combat

I am not sure how "battle" got into it either, since none of the follow up posts indicated anything of the sort. I think it is the culture we live in these days, but that doesn't mean it has to be that way here. There is absolutely no reason civil discussions have to be anything but civil. We are talking guitars, not somebody attacking our families.

Tony

Captain Jim · #23 10-10-2019, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

I am not sure how "battle" got into it either, since none of the follow up posts indicated anything of the sort. I think it is the culture we live in these days, but that doesn't mean it has to be that way here. There is absolutely no reason civil discussions have to be anything but civil. We are talking guitars, not somebody attacking our families.

Tony

Certainly not throwing my forum friend David under the bus for using that word. Anyone who has been around here for a while has seen where sides get taken and someone loses their cool. David already explained his take on that word, so I think we are all good with... the discussion. One of my favorite things about this sub-forum is the fact that the participants are friendly, willing to share info and experiences, and are generally better looking than most wood guitar players.

Oh, and: a sense of humor, too.

In my younger years, I played in several "Battle of the Bands"... no blood was shed.

jdinco · #24 10-10-2019, 04:56 PM

The Emeralds and RS guitars look really nice, but I make most of my purchase decisions MOSTLY by tone. Of course they need to be comfortable and all that too, but for me it's 80% tone that drives my purchase decision. It'll be interesting to see if the RS tone has changed much with this new process. I kinda doubt it.

I do think it's awesome to see this offering from RS though for those that like the RS tone.

RP · #25 10-10-2019, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdinco

...It'll be interesting to see if the RS tone has changed much with this new process. I kinda doubt it...

We've been led to believe that the top is the main determinant of guitar tone so this should be a good test of that theory....

Earl49 · #26 10-10-2019, 05:08 PM

Carbon fiber makes for the best direct comparison. There is far less variability between two nearly identical lay-ups of CF than with two pieces of top wood, even from the same log. And both guitars will quite literally come out of the same mold so the only key difference would be veneer or not. To me this is the only way to make a valid tonal comparison.

I own Rainsong and Emerald and Blackbird, and like them all. But the contours and bevels of the Emeralds have truly spoiled me.

David Eastwood · #27 10-10-2019, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RP

We've been led to believe that the top is the main determinant of guitar tone so this should be a good test of that theory....

Emerald has been quite open about the fact that their veneers have little to no effect on the tone of the instrument.

Rainsong is calling it out as an attribute - so maybe what they've figured out is how to optimize the thickness of the spruce so that a) its sonic properties are noticeable and b) it doesn't compromise the inherent strength of the CF enough to require additional bracing.

We really won't know, until there is some actual anecdotal evidence from people who've actually played one.

Personally, I think the whole tonewood thing is a bunch of bunk - the overall tone of any given guitar is much more due to the skill of the builder than the tree it came from. So there.

David Eastwood · #28 10-10-2019, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Jim

Certainly not throwing my forum friend David under the bus for using that word. Anyone who has been around here for a while has seen where sides get taken and someone loses their cool. David already explained his take on that word, so I think we are all good with... the discussion. One of my favorite things about this sub-forum is the fact that the participants are friendly, willing to share info and experiences, and are generally better looking than most wood guitar players.

Oh, and: a sense of humor, too.

In my younger years, I played in several "Battle of the Bands"... no blood was shed.

Thumbs up to all of that, Jim (or should I call you 'Cap'n'?).

'Battle' was the word one of our esteemed moderators used to replace my original euphemism. No quarrel there - I stepped a little out of bounds in my language.

But... in light of the recent discussion about why the CF sub-forum exists - could you imagine this current conversation taking place in the General Forum, where apoplexy ensues when someone even tries to talk about Richlite?

jdinco · #29 10-10-2019, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eatswodo

Personally, I think the whole tonewood thing is a bunch of bunk - the overall tone of any given guitar is much more due to the skill of the builder than the tree it came from. So there.

Not sure I agree with that, actually I am sure I don't agree with that, I hear differences between Rosewood, Cedar, Maple, and Hog from the same builder. But wasn't there a guitar made from a pallet by Taylor at one time that did indicate a lot of the tone is determined by the builder....I guess I would say the builder has a major part in it, but the tonewood does contribute. Nothing we didn't already know in that statement. LOL

David Eastwood · #30 10-10-2019, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdinco

Not sure I agree with that, actually I am sure I don't agree with that, I hear differences between Rosewood, Cedar, Maple, and Hog from the same builder. But wasn't there a guitar made from a pallet by Taylor at one time that did indicate a lot of the tone is determined by the builder....I guess I would say the builder has a major part in it, but the tonewood does contribute. Nothing we didn't already know in that statement. LOL

Not disagreeing. There may very well be differences, but I don't believe there are any absolutes.

We'll know that CF has really arrived as a mainstream material for guitars when we start having tonefiber discussions