Guitar Playing vs. Guitar Building

[Chuck]

This discussion group is one where it seems reasonable people gather to discuss guitar building. I have a bit of a philosophical question related to building. I was catching up on Michael Bashkin’s podcast and listened to the latest episode with Jeff LaQuatra. He’s a classical guitarist. He was quite emphatic a couple times during the podcast that a guitar builder should also be a guitar player.

This is an idea that you hear quite often. And our shared history includes people like John Guiran, Andy Powers or even Dick Boak where their personal story is as a guitar player who by hook or by crook starting building guitars because they played them. 

One of LaQuatra’s points was about the neck and the way the neck plays and how someone building a guitar who isn’t a player would not be able to discern if the neck was desirable to a player.

It seems to me that the intersection of skills required to build a quality guitar and the skills required to be a good guitar player is a fairly small intersection. Everyone in this discussion group has a fairly good understanding of the minor and major skills required to build a guitar and in fact probably understand how even some of the seemingly small tasks can become quite challenging if the requisite attention is lost during execution.

Perhaps what LaQuatra is trying to express is that a builder who is also a player would be able to evaluate his/her work and then feed that experience back into future builds. This seems a real benefit. Otherwise one must rely on other guitar players who in my experience express some very positive general feedback, but offer little information that could be used to improve future guitars.

It’s often said that it takes about 10 years of daily practice to really become “good” at some particular task. Drawing say. Or playing guitar. What level of guitar playing would be required to be a benefit to a builder? I don’t think it’s easy for any of us to add another thing to our lives. Practicing guitar daily can be a challenge. If one’s goal is, over the course of 10 years or so to become a good guitar builder, would it behoove that person to try as hard as possible to learn guitar as well?

I think sometimes it is difficult for people to understand why someone would want to build guitars if they aren’t a player. Like a chef who doesn’t enjoy eating food. 

Any thoughts?

Thanks,

Chuck Hennet

[JohnParchem]

Interesting topic, I started playing when I was close to 40; so for me more like 30 years and still trying ...  However, I do not think one needs to be a great guitar player to be a good builder. I do think it is helpful to spend time playing around on a guitar, even if one does not become a good player.  Spending time with guitars one will get a feel for how guitars feels and sound.   I think that having enough time on a guitar to be able to feel  a neck and a setup is important.   Over the time I have built guitars, 15 years or so, I have gotten better feed back from other builders than I have from players or my own insight from playing. I have  a separate passion for playing, the many hours it takes to to practice takes away from the time I could be spending mastering guitar building.  I personally mix the two, I spend 14 hours a week practicing. My passion is acoustic guitars playing and making guitars are separate aspects of that passion. In no way do I practice guitar to become a better guitar builder. 

[Doug Shaker]

I’ve tried to learn to play guitar but I’m simply terrible at it. One problem is that my fingers are dirty and fat. If I get a guitar with a fretboard that is wide enough that I’m not accidentally muffling the string next to the one I’m fretting, then the fretboard is too wide for me to reach all the strings. I do better with a bass guitar, but really the problem is I just don’t want to play guitar very much. I want to build them! 

 I’ve taken enough lessons and played enough guitar that I know what a player is talking about when they talk about what they want in a guitar, but I dont really know how to play well. For me to learn to play well would just take too much time away from my building.  

Doug Shaker

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Robert O'Brien Guitar Building Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to obrien-forum...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/878523f0-c38d-41d4-b306-aea29c73fa53n%40googlegroups.com.

[Charles Tauber]

In my opinion, it is essential to recognize that different players have different demands on their instruments and different expectations of what the instrument must be able to do. For example, someone who's playing involves exclusively strumming first-position "cowboy" chords on a steel string guitar  in their basement has very different demands on the instrument and expectations of what makes a "great" guitar than, say, a formally trained classical guitarist on a true classical nylon string instrument playing to fill a concert hall. Ditto for an electric guitar player, slide player, etc. In that context, I think that LaQuatra's comment has validity that a, say, bluegrass flat picking luthier is less likely to build a "great" classical guitar: it probably wouldn't be "up his alley" to do so. 

That it, "takes about 10 years of daily practice to become "good" at some particular task", depends upon how one defines "good" and what/how one practices during those 10 years. Someone "good" at strumming and playing first-position chords won't necessarily be "good" at playing solo Bach music, regardless of how long one practices strumming first-position chords. One is apples, the other oranges. Ditto for what it takes to be "good" at each. Apples are good and oranges are good, they are just different from each other.

In short, "the guitar" is not a single instrument played in a single way. Steel string guitars differ considerably from classical guitars that differ considerably from electric guitars. How they are played is also significantly different. Being "good' at one style of playing doesn't necessarily make one "good" at all or other styles of playing. Similarly, being "good" at making one particular style of guitar doesn't necessarily make you "good" at making all kinds of guitars. What level of playing ability is required of the luthier to be "good" at making a particular style/type of guitar depends in part on the style of guitar and style of playing.

In the end, in my opinion, the greater the demand one places on one's instrument, the more important it is to evaluate an individual instrument - one needs to go beyond brand and model. If the individual instrument is all you, as a player, want it to be, it doesn't really matter what is the background of the luthier who made it or what is his or her playing ability. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. As a gross generality,  I think that the closer the luthier's musical interests and abilities are to yours, the better the chance of that luthier making exactly what you want, what you consider to be a "good" instrument.

[Joe Shuter]

I have a friend that builds guitars for Steve Miller, Ronnie Woods, Bo Diddly, Keith Richard's, ZZTop and many other A list musicians. I don't believe he plays himself. He started out building furniture with his Dad. He told me that building guitars was simply building furniture with strings.

I have discussed on this forum a few times the player/builder vs the builder player topic. In the mix now is the category builder/no player. 

My friend mentioned furniture is built to be utilized, usually, to holding something. You build a chair, plop your butt on it and if it doesn't drop you on the floor you did a good job. With all due respect to all of the builders that do not play, if you put strings on your piece of furniture and it doesn't explode you did a good job. 

The difference for me is the fact that a guitar has a voice. Furniture doesn't. I started playing guitar when the Beatles came on the scene. I started building and playing ukulele about 16 years ago. This is my mindset. If I didn't play I would be building furniture and would be basically unaware of the voice each instrument I build has. Reaching that voice is my main driving force in building instruments. To reach that voice and be aware of what made that voice appear in my instruments cannot be reached, in my mind, without playing that instrument. 

I know we are all different and what trips my trigger might not do it for you. That is perfectly alright. I don't build for you. I build for me. I hope you feel the same! Scooter

--

[erik.tosten]

Leo Fender couldn't play guitar, was blind in one eye, deaf in one ear, and he did alright.

[Chuck]

Thanks for all the thoughtful replies. I am learning toward thinking that if time and talent allowed, being a decent player could potentially make you a better builder. Here is a pretty good thread from acoustic guitar dot com on the subject.

https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184429

Chuck Hennet

[Doug Shaker]

When I started building, I went over to Gryphon Stringed Instruments in Palo Alto and asked the guys behind the repair counter, “Do you have to be a good guitar player to be a good guitar builder?” and they almost burst into laughter. 

“Naw, they’re usually terrible players.”

And I stopped worrying about it. 

Doug Shaker

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/3c73c95d-2d38-442b-9793-e28f3a1b24f8n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ken Mulvihill]

I started building guitars when I realized I couldn't afford the guitar I wanted. I've been playing guitar for over 50 years and I am just a so-so player. 

When I was introduced to Lowden, Collings, Huss and Dalton, and more they all spoke to me in different ways. But one thing was consistent: the volume and the clarity that my old trusty Guild just didn't have. That was my starting point. I believe being a player gives me the ear that fine tunes a particular resonant frequency or other technical specifications for instance. Playability also factors in here. But that's just me.

As one person commented in the Acoustic Guitar forum (thank you Chuck), if I didn't play, I would probably build furniture.

Great topic and great discussion.

Ken

[Joe Shuter]

Ken, I also discovered I couldn't afford to buy an instrument as nice as I could build. I also find that playing the instruments I build gives me insights into how to improve their quality as far as action and sonic variances are concerned. 

One of the comments on this subject referenced the fact that Leo Fender was blind in one eye, deaf in one ear and didn't play guitar and still did alright. While I am a fan of fender electric guitars there is a world of difference between building acoustic guitars and electric guitars. For the most part the wood choice makes little difference on an electric guitar. There is no internal bracing on a electric guitar. There is no air resonances to be concerned with on an electric guitar. In a certain degree building electric guitars versus building acoustic guitars is like comparing apples to oranges. 

In building acoustic guitars the wood choices for just about every piece used in the construction have somewhat of an effect on tone, volume, timber and sustain. The individual skill and methodology of the builder also contribute to the tonal qualities of the guitar. 

In building electric guitars the single most important factor in determining tone is the type of electronics used. I would say Leo Fender was very knowledgeable in electrical components. Scooter

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/908910b3-6411-4513-8434-6bf9248c36acn%40googlegroups.com.

[Richard Warr]

I am an ok player and a beginning builder. At some point in the not
too distant future I think my building abilities will be better than
my playing abilities (if you can compare apples to oranges). But I do
find that being able to play the guitar and compare my builds with
guitars I've bought has helped me start to understand why certain
design choices make sense.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/CAKJuJNHCtgw-tkvwbW67YYgwFeb77vfufPU_%2BjhavXazFRMzPA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Eric Schenk]

Interesting question. I've been playing classical since my late teens, but I would say I've never been a great player. I play for myself, but lack the discipline as a musician to really get good. I got interested in building, mostly because I wanted instruments that were very hard to buy at the time (in particular my first instrument was a lute). Since then I've mostly built instruments I found interesting, but I would say being able to play has influenced by thoughts on what makes a good instrument and how it should feel in my hands. One thing I obsess over a bit is the neck/headstock joint, and likewise the heel shape. I've picked up a number of instruments over the years at shops and put them back down when I found that these joints just didn't feel comfortable under my hand.

So all in all, I think it helps me somewhat to have the ability to play at least a little bit.

Cheers,

Eric

[Joe Shuter]

10-4 on that! Scooter

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/7528971e-5670-42ea-bf13-d5c04322c820n%40googlegroups.com.

[Paul McEvoy]

I'm in the awkward position of trying to become a much better guitar player and a much better luthier at the same time.  Both should take all my time so I don't get out much.  

I know there are many great luthiers who don't play (much).  

Personally I think being able to play, maybe play well, definitely informs my instruments in all kinds of positive ways.  And that I end up keeping some instruments around has helped me refine ideas and make them better.  I have a sounds I'm looking for and I know if I'm getting it.  

Additionally I think just being in the world of music has helped me find a place for my instruments.  And knowing what a musician might want and that language is very helpful.  

So no critique of those who choose not to play but personally I don't know how I would do it without at least playing some.  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/7528971e-5670-42ea-bf13-d5c04322c820n%40googlegroups.com.

[Roger Pierce]

Like Paul, I strive to be a better player and a better luthier, which can take up a lot of time, even in retirement. I started building because I love playing, as well as woodworking.  Every new instrument inspires me to play more, so in that way it helps me play better. Also, wanting to try different ways of playing has inspired be to build different instruments, such as my harp ukuleles, and to want them to sound and play better each time. Both passions seem to help improve the results of each other, so I do think being a player is beneficial. If I keep building though, I may need a bigger house…

Roger Pierce

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/CAP6VTpUqcTDiEQsRc92Vq8uR-UJneqi0sFakuL8ZqM7J-rjF%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com.

 

[Colorado Clem]

My take may be controversial, but if you can't play at a reasonable level, how do you know if it's a good instrument or not? I see (hear) it all the time on YouTube videos. Builders will post themselves playing their own instrument, but the problem is, they are playing at such a low level, it would be practically impossible to determine if it's a good instrument or not. 

Classic example and no names given. A few years ago, one of the most prolific steel string builders posted a video of him demonstrating several of his own instruments via his own playing. My takeaway was "OK, but so what". His playing was at such a low level I have my droughts anyone, let alone himself, could make heads or tails of each guitars merits, I know I certainly could not. 

Another example, again no names. A fairly well known flamenco and classical builder in his early years of building would have a somewhat known professional player critique his flamenco builds. He would boast about traveling great distance to have such maestro play his humble guitars, which lead him to the vast improvement in his instruments to the point they were now exceptional. The problem was, the said maestro was a mediocre flamenco player at best. What the builder was taking way from his meetings was suspect advice. To this day, this builder is still turning out just OK flamenco guitars and likely always will. Now, if he had been a reasonably accomplished player, he could have sidestepped many of the issues he is stuck with today. 

The bottom line is, if you are not a fairly accomplished musician, you better have someone that is critiquing your instruments. 

[Paul McEvoy]

I mean I guess I feel like both are true.  I want to play well and I want to get critique from good players and be realistic about my instruments faults.  

I think to do this on a genuinely high level is extremely difficult, so by all accounts you need to challenge yourself.  

I am not a great player (I would like to be and continue to push myself).  But I do have an idea what i think people are looking for. 

I've also learned a lot by a couple visits to a really good classical guitar dealer who has critiqued my sound and shown me excellent guitars that blew mine out of the water.  

I ended up buying a Chinese classical that he sells that sounded absurdly good, looked pretty decent, and was cheap.  I have had touring pros play that instrument who really loved it.  

Point being there it is very helpful to have a great sounding guitar of the type you build to reference against.  If you couldn't play a note though I guess that would be difficult.  

I have a friend who has a very good ear for Selmer guitars and collects them here and there.  He clued me in once on how he hears their various sounds.  That was helpful.  

At this point with my Selmer guitars I mostly have a sound that I am shooting for that is different from most of the competition so I'm trying to refine my own thing and make it better. In that case I'm trying to best my last guitars.  Which is fun because I can see my own progression.  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/dff5039c-b8cf-4e35-a727-0e935d96e44bn%40googlegroups.com.

[barry...@gmail.com]

A wise man on this forum has written many times, your guitar your rules…

In His Name - 

Barry

On Jun 23, 2024, at 1:05 PM, Paul McEvoy <paulmc...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/CAP6VTpU8m5owVkcOLeLnVkULiE4dwkqWCS99R9-955D9kx0C%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Colorado Clem]

"A wise man on this forum has written many times, your guitar your rules"

I believe that statement was primarily targeted towards esthetics rather than tonal qualities. 

I think we can safely say in each musical style, there seems to be an accepted norm as to what constitutes an excellent instrument. If we were to hand a world class classical guitar to a bluegrass player, I believe he or she would have a very difficult time ascertaining whether that instrument has all the tonal and playability characteristics a world class classical player would expect. In otherwards, you better have some pretty good chops to evaluate your own guitars short comings, or you better place it in the hands of a player more advanced than yourself. Now I'm talking about taking our instruments to the best possible level we can. If we are happy with what we are building, so be it and disregard what I have posted. 

In my particular case, for the last few years, I have read every thing I can get my hands on and bugged as many top level builders that specialize in obtaining the fabled "Pre War" tonal qualities. I have focused my playing in a style that would give me the ability to determine if my guitars are getting closer to their mark. Now, I could be a virtuoso tuba player, but I hardly believe that ability would help me in my quest. 

[John Larson]

 

 6’q6’

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/30ac3113-62a6-4fba-b3bc-d74916ed744fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Charles Tauber]

Agreed. 

Having perused guitar-related discussion forums for some years, one of the things that continually surprises me is that relatively few players - particularly steel string players - seem to have any well-developed methodology for assessing the tonal quality of an individual instrument. Instead, what many say they do is to play through a portion of their repertoire on an instrument. If one likes how the repertoire sounds on that instrument, in that environment, it's a "good sounding" guitar. What all-too-often happens is that in the days and weeks that follow the purchase of an instrument, the individual, in a different environment, decides that that particular instrument doesn't sound like what one thought during the "audition" and no longer likes it - it is no longer "good". The result is often buyer's remorse and putting the relatively recently purchased instrument up for sale, often at a financial loss.

The above has implications in the current discussion. Do you have a specific objective method for evaluating the tonal qualities of an individual instrument - either one that you have made or one that you might purchase? 

I have a few simple playing "tests" that I use that provide, within a minute or two, some important-to-me information about the tonal characteristics of an individual instrument. Then knowing what are the tonal characteristics of that individual instrument, I can then compare that to what I prefer for those specific characteristics - what makes a "good" guitar for me. Determining the tonal characteristics is relatively objective. For example, are the duration, general harmonic content and timbre of the E note fretted at the 12th fret, 6th string the same as the same pitch fretted on the 5th string at the 7th fret and are those the same as that for the same pitch fretted on the 4th string, second fret. It is fairly easy to get a pretty objective sense of that. From my experience as a player, I've learned that I want them to be pretty similar in response - volume, duration, harmonic content and timbre. That is entirely my subjective preference that contributes to my assessment of what I consider "good" sound. Another player might prefer those three notes to sound quite different from each other and can be used by THAT player in their subjective assessment of that individual instrument - that player can test the three notes and assess if they sound sufficiently different for that player's preference. "Good sounding" is highly subjective. Tonal response can be quite objective and evaluated quite objectively. Then, knowing one's own preferences for those objective characteristics, one can quickly and easily determine if that is, according to one's preferences, a "good" instrument.

Ultimately, different players have different preferences - definitions - of what "good sounding" is. Often, makers strive to make instruments that meet their own individual preferences in tonal characteristics, their own definition of "good sounding". 

[Joe Shuter]

Clem, I put together the "Your guitar your rules" T-shirt some years back. It was NOT my quote. I have talked to Rolo, whose quote it is, many times through the years about building and many other things. I personally do not agree that the "Your guitar Your rules" quote was only referring to esthetics. I believe it referred to all phases of guitar construction. 

In my opinion, the "norm" you are referring to is a pox on the free, thinking avenue in guitar building. Too many builders seem to think if you are not respecting the time worn traditions the "MASTERS used you cannot be considered an accomplished builder. I am not in agreement with that thought process. 

I am assuming when you refer to the sound of prewar guitars you are referring to the Martin guitars built before WWII. While I think the types of wood used in obtaining a particular sound, such as the prewar Martin guitar is important, I do not think one must mimic the exact building specs. On my first parlor guitar build I was trying to get the sound of the "Golden Era" Martins. I used an 1883 Bruno plan. I used my own construction methods. I did try to use the same woods many Golden Era Martins used. Brazilian Rosewood back and sides. Adirondack Red Spruce top. Spanish cedar neck. I built this guitar with my rules. I forgot how to spell "Norm". I am very happy to report, to my ears it sounds exactly like a prewar Martin. That's my story and I am sticking to it! Scooter

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/30ac3113-62a6-4fba-b3bc-d74916ed744fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Colorado Clem]

Scooter

I told you my stance was going to be controversial! 

[Joe Shuter]

Clem, at least you have a stance. Your stance is based on many years of valuable experience. I truly love your work and appreciate your opinions. I don't think I have enough time left to be as good a builder as you are. My stance has also been called controversial. I build to the sound of a different drummer. Scooter

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/fd1cfed0-ecb3-4046-9267-bd7f8a3df387n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ken Mulvihill]

Charles, I hadn't thought about formulating a method for testing guitars. I have made note of your for future reference. My first evaluation is tactile - purely subjective and personal. But this has been refined over the years of playing a wide variety of guitars. If the instrument "feels" right, I'll move on to playing it. Then it's up to my ears. All the technical evaluation of components throughout the build will still only get the builder so far. Granted that I am using much of what I learned in Trevor Gore's class and books in my next build.

 

Clem, I didn't think your post was controversial at all. Your opening remark "if you can't play at a reasonable level, how do you know if it's a good instrument or not? " An architect may construct a build that meets all the technical requirements, but at the end of the day if it isn't livable so what. I hope my guitars are always extremely livable. 

[Paul McEvoy]

Plenty of famous guitar builders couldn't play.  Plenty could. 

I don't think I could do what I do or what I want to do without playing guitar pretty ok.  But I know plenty of people don't play and build better than I do.  

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/07014d18-930c-4e38-8435-c1d1546b2ce8n%40googlegroups.com.

[Colorado Clem]

Granted there have and will be a number of builders that produce exceptional guitars with low playing skills, but I bet they had a lot of guidance along the way from very accomplished players (or maybe they just got lucky). 

I was a friend of the late Robert Ruck. For those not aware, Robert was one of the most celebrated classical builders in the world. He was a fairly accomplished flamenco player, but would be the first to tell you his classical playing level was not overly advanced. He would also be the first to tell you without the input of exceptional players, he would have never advanced to the level he was at. 

[Patrick Harris]

Scooter

Thank you for your kind words, even if they are not justified! 

I believe my guitars took a major leap (tonewise), when I stopped trying to make them "pretty". I don't do mirror level finishes anymore. I don't fret over little imperfections as I once did. My last two guitars are just nice looking "players", built as a pair. I have played them both for a few months and haven't even put pickguards on them. I know that's hard to believe, but it's true!! 

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Robert O'Brien Guitar Building Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/obrien-forum/W3C0O0C4eho/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to obrien-forum...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/obrien-forum/a96ab235-9f6e-4e63-8115-8f49c357aacbn%40googlegroups.com.

[rolo]

Hi Scooter...and all! A blast from the past for sure. I still have my t-shirt and wear it proudly. Thank you! Just to confirm your response, yes, I agree that the "Your guitar...Your Rules" means every aspect of the build. To me, it's also the mindset of enjoying the ride/the whole process.

One thing I must clarify too...I'm an old man, but definitely don't consider myself wise by any means. I remember the days when I was young and dumb...Now, I'm just dumb. 

Enjoy the ride everyone!

I do know a very wise man that often says "Happy Building!" I agree wholeheartedly.

Rolo

[bkcarnett]

Good to hear from you Rolo, it’s been a while, I always enjoy your input.😎

Brian