GREAT TRUTHS: Acoustic Guitars
Hojo2X
GREAT TRUTHS: Acoustic Guitars
by Wade Hampton Miller
This series of posts, which I am laughingly calling "Great Truths," are
nothing more than a collection of observations about musical instruments, in
this case about the acoustic guitar. These observations are my own (though
friends have contributed) and are highly subjective. Some of you will have
varying reactions, from agreement to amusement to deep annoyance.
Sprinkled throughout the text are a number of jokes, usually at expense of
guitars that I personally do not play. These are just jokes, and no harm is
intended. But if you decide to take offense, any hostile e-mail should be
directed to Steve Yetter, at clayp...@pacbell.net. The jokes were all his
idea, and he made me do it.
Now, before I get to the technical stuff, there are a couple of deep
underlying principles that need to be discussed, but rarely are. Yet they
serve as the motivation for much of what goes on in the world of music. They
are:
1. Women like men who play the guitar.
2. Women like men who play the guitar and sing even better.
3. Any male performer who claims that the women have nothing
to do with it is either lying or gay.
Now that we have that out of the way, we can discuss the acoustic guitar.
The Acoustic Guitar
1. Martin Guitars are the standard by which all steel string flat top acoustic
guitars are judged. Gibson archtops are the standard by which all archtops are
judged, Ramirez classicals are the standard for classicals, and National/Dobro
guitars are the standard for resonator instruments.
In all of these cases, the companies mentioned more or less invented these
guitars as we know them today. Remarkably, all of these firms are still in
business, in one form or another, and continue to produce high quality examples
of these styles.
Other companies have mostly imitated these designs. Others have produced
variants and still others, in a few rare instances, have exceeded the quality
of the originals. But all have used the designs of these four originators -
Martin, Gibson, Ramirez and National/Dobro - as a point of departure.
2. The square-shoulder dreadnought guitar, as typified by the Martin D-28 and
its many imitators, is the most common and popular steel string guitar design
in the world.
3. The best sounding and most versatile guitar that Martin has ever produced
is the OOO-28, in its long scale (OM) and short scale (OOO) variations. But
virtually every model that Martin has ever introduced has been a classic, from
the D-28 to the O-17. Even Martin’s relative disappointments, like the M-38
and the Jumbo series, still play better and sound better than most of what any
competing company has ever come out with. Martin’s only true failures have
been its solid body electrics, which have never done well from either a sales
or critical standpoint, and its acoustic archtops, which were clunkers
combining the worst qualities of both archtop and flat top guitars (cigar box
archtop tone combined with the low volume of a flat top) but which actually
sold quite well at the time.
4. Gibson’s best sounding flat top guitars include the Nick Lucas Special, the
prewar rosewood Southern Jumbo, and the J-185. The best sounding recent
Gibson design is the CL-40.
5. The king of the archtop guitars is the Gibson Super 400. When set up
properly and strung with the heavy gauge strings that the guitar was designed
for, a 40s model Super 400 has so much tone and volume that it can divert
rivers, clear timber and turn substandard housing into sanitary landfill.
6 The most respected and reliable 12 string guitars on the market are the
Guild 12 strings. While designed to be able to take the tension of standard
pitch, I find the tone excessively bright at this tension. To my ear, they
have a much more impressive, growly tone when strung with slightly heavier
strings and tuned down a full step.
7. Guild six string guitars have their passionate admirers, but I am not one
of them. In some people’s hands they sound terrific. Not mine. I do respect
the quality and craftsmanship of their construction.
8. Gretsch hollow-bodied electrics, like the Country Gentleman model played
by George Harrison on all the early Beatles’ tours, are wonderful. Gretsch
archtop acoustics, like the cats-eye Synchromatic model played by George
Michaels in the "Faith" video, look extremely cool but share many of the sonic
failings of production archtop guitars made in that era. Gretsch flat top
models, like the hideous Rancher model with the triangular soundhole and the
"G" brand on the top, sound about as attractive as they look.
9. Despite their marked resemblance to bicycle helmets, Ovation guitars
sport a well researched, innovative design that has a large and loyal
following. It is completely unfair and malicious to categorize them as
"guitars for the deaf."
10. Collings guitars are about the most consistently superb factory-made
guitar on the planet. You pay extra for that consistency and superb quality,
too, as well you should.
11. Santa Cruz makes the main rivals to the Collings for quality and overall
impressiveness.
12. Taylor guitars have emerged as a very viable alternative to the Martins,
with a wide array of neck widths and wood options. They have a clean, modern
sound, suitable to a wide array of styles. I admire the Taylors, because they
are the only company besides Martin that seems to have a common, unifying
aesthetic running through all their products. Nonetheless, I still personally
prefer Martin’s sound.
13. Breedlove guitars utilize a radical cantilevered bridge system that allows
the tops to be very lightly braced. This allows them to vibrate well, and
creates a very sensitive guitar with an almost instantaneous response. This is
suitable for some playing styles but not for others. To me, this bridge and
bracing system makes Breedlove the Chihuahua dog of the musical instrument
world: it’s the only guitar that shivers when it isn’t even cold…..
(Note to Breedlove fans: that was a joke. Settle down. I didn’t mean to
literally suggest that Breedlove guitars are malignant, bug-eyed creatures that
will viciously bite and draw blood if you get your face too close…I was just
trying suggest that the Breedloves are very, very sensitive. Delicate.
High-strung. "Neurotic" is probably too strong a word…..)
14. Although out of business for twenty years now, both Mossman and Gurian
guitars were superb examples of the best guitars the 1970s produced. Mossmans
were designed as bluegrass guitars, and make excellent all around rhythm and
lead instruments; Gurians are highly favored by fingerstylists. Both can still
be obtained on the vintage market for a fraction of what it would cost to buy a
similar quality new instrument in a music store today.
15. Tacoma guitars are a good quality product. Their Papoose travel guitar
and full size Chief guitar are two of the coolest and most radical new acoustic
guitar designs on the market. Highly recommended. An American-made guitar at
an Asian import price.
16. Also highly recommended is the Martin D-15, an all mahogany, bare-bones
dreadnought at an astonishingly low price. Destined to be an all-time classic.
A OOO-15 is supposed to be in the works.
17. Mother Teresa, Princess Diana, and Abraham Lincoln all played Martin
guitars.
18. On the other hand, hardened killers and recidivist sex offenders prefer
Gibsons over Martins by a ratio of over ten to one. Of course, many of these
men are Gibson CEO Henry Juszkiewicz’s brothers, cousins and former cellmates.
19. Okay, so I made those last two items up. But they COULD be true!!!!
20. Everybody seems to agree that Seagull guitars are the best sounding entry
level guitars on the market. But they should be left in their natural
state, and
not be tinkered with or have their braces shaved, as this causes severe
structural damage and automatically voids their warranty.
21. The Roman Catholic Church has determined that shaving the braces on an
inexpensive guitar like the Seagull is a venial sin, punishable by ten thousand
years in Purgatory restringing taterbug mandolins and being forced to listen to
a huge folk mass choir play an endless rendition of "Kumbaya." On nylon string
guitars. Played with flat picks. Badly.
22. The Roman Catholic Church has determined that shaving the braces on a
fine guitar like a Martin or a Collings is a mortal sin, punishable by an
eternity in hell restringing autoharps and being forced to listen to "Melanie’s
Greatest Hits" ("Look What They’ve Done To My Song, Ma," and "I’ve Got A Brand
New Pair of Roller Skates") and the entire collected recordings of Styx and
Foghat.
23. Having gone back and re-read what I have written, I see that there are
huge gaps. Oh, well. Here are my comments on a few brands I missed:
Larrivee: I really like their OM models and their inlay work.
Goodall: Superb guitars.
Takamine: These Asian -made imports run the gamut from very basic to pretty
good. The cedar-topped Santa Fe models, like the one that the guy in Hootie
and the Blowfish plays, sound just okay when played acoustically but are
excellent when played plugged in.
Alvarez-Yairi: The omission was deliberate. No, it wasn’t, actually, but I
have nothing profound to say about them. On a par with the Takamines, from
what I’ve seen.
Greven: Nice sound, great inlays, dreadful necks.
Landola (later "Peavey" acoustics) Made in Finland by toothless Finnish
grandmothers working for minimum wage, the Landolas range from "not too bad" to
"not much better." Somewhat more exciting than the original Swedish-made
Goyas, the Landolas feature backs and sides made from birch, tops of spruce.
Goya: The originals with the "Made In Sweden" label are worth grabbing if the
necks haven’t warped - these make nice party and weekend cabin guitars. None
of the later Asian-made versions are very good, except as absolute starter
instruments.
Yamaha: Perpetually consigned to the entry level of the American market.
Yamaha has tried introducing high-end guitars, like the fine LA (Luxury Artist)
series, into the United States, only to be met with a resounding yawn. They
make a nice product, but are victims of their own efficiency at making good,
cheap plywood instruments.
Epiphone: Gibson copies made in Asia for and imported by Gibson. I like the
new Epiphone archtops, but am less enthused about the flat tops. Good value
for the money, though. If you get one, be certain that it has a solid spruce
top, not the "select" spruce that usually indicates a laminated wood. Check
that the grain pattern runs all the way through the top piece at the soundhole
to make certain.
Sigma: The same deal for Martin as Epiphone is for Gibson: Martin copies made
in Asia for and imported by Martin. Generally speaking, the Sigmas seem to be
better quality and more desirable than the Epis, but perhaps a less biased
observer would find them to be much the same quality.
This is all I can think of for right now. I’m sure many of you will have
comments and elaborations and rebuttals that you’ll want to post. Just
remember, customer complaints should be directed to Steve Yetter.
Don’t be intimidated by the fact that:
1. He’s a Vietnam veteran.
2. He’s on special "medication."
3. He has a secret cache of explosives and automatic weapons hidden behind his
house.
The fact that he has computer tracking equipment and a Global Positioning
Satellite hook up so he can track you down RIGHT WHERE YOU’RE TRANSMITTING FROM
should be no problem.
So long as you’re polite…….
SStone8807
Wade Hampton Miller wrote:
>Greven: Nice sound, great inlays, dreadful necks.
Hello,
Not bad Wade, but the Grevens I've played have had nice wide comfortable necks
not unlike early (slightly wider than modern) 000 Martins. They sound like good
GIbsons (which some folks may find to be an oxymoron).
bye,
Steven Stone
Hojo2X
Steve - The reason I wrote that the Grevens had dreadful necks is that there
were a whole slew of folks who had them up here in Anchorage at one point, and
each and every one of them had such terrible neck problems that they had to get
reset. A good friend has one that got reset, and now it needs it again.
This is admittedly a small sample, but when you see the same problem over and
over again, you tend to get a bit leery.
This was a source of frustration for me, because I really like everything else
about the Grevens. But I decided not to buy one because of the problems I was
seeing.
Greven himself has a, shall we say, somewhat perverse sense of humor. A female
friend ordered a guitar and requested that he inlay a naked Poseidon, God of
the Sea, on the peghead. The guitar came, and instead of the handsome,
muscular young Poseidon with the impressive schlong she'd hoped for, Greven had
apparently used himself as the model for Poseidon: the god was depicted as
middle-aged, slouchy, pot-bellied and with a little tiny dick. Boy, was she
pissed!
The moral of the story, of course, is to be more specific. She got used to it,
eventually,but you'd get the indignation all over again any time somebody would
ask: "Uh, Sally, uh, how come you decided to custom-order a Poseidon that looks
like THAT?"
Wade Hampton Miller
Orca
Wade
>From a new reader of this board, thanks for the "Great Truths" they were
very educational for someone like myself trying to become more
knowledgeable on a subject for which is very important to me, Acoustic
Guitars. Do you have any thoughts on cutaway vs non-cutaway? Like what
it does to the sound from the instrument? I was looking to purchase a
Martin 00028EC, but recently played a Taylor 914C and am now debating
about waiting and saving the extra cash for the 914C. Again thanks for
the articles, including the jokes!
Jim
Hojo2X
Jim writes:>Do you have any thoughts on cutaway vs non-cutaway? Like what >it
does to the sound from the instrument?
Jim, for a long time I thought that the cutaway would affect the tone of an
acoustic guitar because you were losing some of the top, but Dick Boak and
others have told me, no, that part of the top is so heavily braced that it
doesn't vibrate much anyway - it's mostly structural. What you lose is
airspace inside the guitar, and that CAN make a difference. There can be some
significant loss of tone, although this is difficult to quantify.
Some builders have tried to make up for this by making the bodies on cutaway
instruments a bit deeper, but it isn't a precise trade-off.
The best solution for you would be to try a cutaway guitar for an extended
time, and to see if you really USE the cutaway. It's one thing to noodle away
at one while trying it out at a music store, but if you aren't slamming your
hand against the body trying to reach those upper frets every time you play,
you may not actually need one.
I was saved, by sheerest accident, from investing a lot of money in a cutaway
conversion to my Wayne Henderson 12 fret Triple O.
I was convinced I needed a cutaway, and this Henderson guitar had a cedar top
that had failed and needed to be replaced with a spruce top. I figured since
my repairman was doing extensive work on the guitar anyway, he might as well
put in a cutaway for me, too.
Then I lucked out by running across a guy who had a Collings 12 fret Triple O
with a cutaway. Probably the only one in the state of Alaska. Sad to say, it
was the only clunky Collings guitar I have ever played. And trying to use the
cutaway was like wrapping my hand around the leg of a piano! What had I been
thinking?!? None of my tunes really require that I go up there. And it made
the guitar look goofy - here's this turn-of--the-century design, with a 1990s
cutaway on it. It was about as aesthetically jarring as an upright piano
painted in neon dayglo colors......
Since then I have acquired a beautiful archtop cutaway guitar. I play it a
lot, but do I use the cutaway? Not much.
So you need to realistically assess whether the cutaway is something you need -
not want, but need. Does your playing really go that high on a regular basis?
Mine doesn't. If you aren't up there all the time, then a cutaway is just
another set of whistles and bells that add to the cost of the instrument.
An argument might be made that if you had the cutaway available, your playing
might well develop in that direction. That's a reasonable point. I personally
would still buy the 000-28EC, and use the leftover money to buy a Tacoma Chief,
which has a cutaway. That way you could have the 000-28EC and a cutaway, too!
If you found yourself spending more time with the Chief, way up the neck, then
you could reassess what you wanted to do.
Wade Hampton Miller
KJHannan
A truly awsome post. Thanks. But can you explain why people still keep
looking for custom mades?
Eric Wall
ew...@qualmedoregon.com
Hojo2X
Eric writes:
>But can you explain why people still keep
>looking for custom mades?
Ego, thrill of the hunt, wanting something nobody else has, and, this is much
more instrinsic to the whole process than you can imagine - helping support
luthiers and their quest for guitar perfection. You feel like you're part of
the process. Which you are. You're paying for it.
I have a number of custom instruments, and it's been a great hobby and a real
education acquiring them over the years. For the money you spend on a nice
Martin from a music store, you can get something just as nice or nicer, and
totally unique. You cut out the middle man, you see, when you deal directly
with a luthier, and so you can save a bundle right there.
Plus you feel like you're the reason this instrument has come into existence -
you wanted it built, so it got built. It wasn't something you randomly yanked
from the rack at the music store.
The downside is that you're buying a pig in a poke, and you don't know how it's
going to sound before it arrives. Custom-made guitars seem to have a much
higher rate of neck failure than factory-built guitars, and the luthiers
usually take twice as long to deliver them than they said they would.
Sometimes ideas that seem terrific when you're dreaming them up are kind of
dumb or dismal when made real in wood and steel.
But it's a cool hobby, nonetheless, and I'll probably always be dealing with
custom builders in one capacity or another.
Wade Hampton Miller
Neil J. O'Connor
Hojo2X wrote:
>
> GREAT TRUTHS: Acoustic Guitars
>
> by Wade Hampton Miller
Truly an awesome work, Wade! A nit or two:
> 6 The most respected and reliable 12 string guitars on the market are the
> Guild 12 strings. While designed to be able to take the tension of standard
> pitch, I find the tone excessively bright at this tension. To my ear, they
> have a much more impressive, growly tone when strung with slightly heavier
> strings and tuned down a full step.
Ok, we disagree. I like Martins. BUT! 12's are a hoot to play,
especially at dropped tunings. And
they're even more fun at open tunings. Which, one will notice, is THE
perfect reason to buy more than
one 12 ("But Honey, Leo has more than one....)(Nah, didn't work for me
either...and she LIKES Leo..).
> 22. The Roman Catholic Church has determined that shaving the braces on a
> fine guitar like a Martin or a Collings is a mortal sin, punishable by an
> eternity in hell restringing autoharps and being forced to listen to "Melanie’s
> Greatest Hits" ("Look What They’ve Done To My Song, Ma," and "I’ve Got A Brand
> New Pair of Roller Skates") and the entire collected recordings of Styx and
> Foghat.
Wade, mortal sins are big time bad 'uns. They call for REAL punishment,
not these mere slaps on the wrist.
The autoharp thing..yeah, that's fine. But the music would be The
Complete Carey Landry Collection, played on steel string Sears
Silvertones, into cheap mikes and an old PA system, using the Basic
Catholic Chop Strum,.......badly. Bonus track: Sons of God, done in a
round.......
Aside from that, well done! Look forward to more. Actually, maybe this
should be adopted as a chapter in the RMMGA FAQ!
--
Neil J. O'Connor
Hojo2X
Neil - Thanks for your kind post. I'm an Irish Anglican, myself, having grown
up in the Episcopal Church in this country. (Back in the County Down the name
was spelled Millar and the family attended the Church of Ireland.) We have
many of the same little Catholicisms in our traditions, which often surprises
Protestants and Roman Catholics alike. But I definately grew up attending folk
masses and hearing otherwise wonderful songs being butchered by inept
guitarists playing nylon string instruments with flatpicks.
Tell me, at your church did you also have the tradition of handing the
tambourine to the youth group member with the absolute least amount of musical
talent?
Wade Hampton Miller
GGClarke
Just curious... What is the "Basic
Catholic Chop Strum" ??
--GGC
yodel...@yahoo.com
In article <199804120558...@ladder03.news.aol.com>,
hoj...@aol.com (Hojo2X) wrote:
> Martin Guitars are the standard by which all steel string flat top
acoustic guitars are judged.
> Gibson archtops are the standard by which all archtops are judged
> Ramirez classicals are the standard for classicals
> National/Dobro guitars are the standard for resonator instruments
> In all of these cases, the companies mentioned more or less invented these
> guitars as we know them today.
I think that's very true for Martin (flattop), Gibson (archtops), and Dobros,
but not true in tha case of Ramirez. The Ramirez luthier dynasty was founded
about 100 years ago, the classical guitar in its current design is at least
200 years older.
Greg
http://www.geocities.com/Nashville/6777
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Neil J. O'Connor
Well, lessee.....how to explain....ok.
Best done on a slightly out of tune entry level guitar. A mid-60's red
Stella will do nicely ;). Use a flatpick, thick is best. Strum down on
the first beat of the measure, strum up on the second, down third, up
fourth. Hit all the strings. DO NOT play any runs. DO NOT alternate
bass notes. Play all six strings, even the low E in the basic D chord.
Repeat throughout song, and in the big finish. Done right, it is a
truly mesmerizing sight, 2-3 guitarists with synchronized right arms
moving up-down-up-down :
Sons of God Hear His Holy Word etc
\/ ^ \/ ^ \/ ^ \/ ^
Yeah, I've done it. Mea culpa. To be fair, it is the way a lot of us
started, fresh into guitar lessons, clutching the Stella, hearing Mom
say things like "why don't you use those lessons and play in church..?"
It took me a while to give myself permission to play the liturgical
music the same way (and with the same techniques) I used when I played
my "fun" music. Canon law does not forbid a Steven Stills lick out of E
into A, I discovered. No one jumped out of the pews and yelled "Vile
Rock and Roll Devil!" when I snuck in a McGuinn Dsus4 lick at the end of
a verse (though one of my current partners rolls his eyes....but I
caught him doing it too...). So, I can't play Simon's "At The Zoo"
for recessional anymore (Midnight Mass, Marquette University, McCormick
Hall, 1970-71...). We've tweaked stuff by Emmy Lou, Carly Simon, Brewer
and Shipley (!; no, not One Toke...), and others into some nice Mass
pieces.
Frankly, there's more and better liturgical music being written for
guitar now as well. It's fun to play, is challenging in many instances,
and feels *right*. Sorry if I offended anyone with the "Chop Strum"
comment, but I figured Wade's first try at mortal sin punishment was
insufficient to the sin involved. And, yes, I've foisted the tambo off
onto the newbie on more than one occasion.......;).
Nick Naffin
> Hojo2X wrote:
>
> > 22. The Roman Catholic Church has determined that shaving the braces on a
> > fine guitar like a Martin or a Collings is a mortal sin, punishable by an
> > eternity in hell restringing autoharps and being forced to listen to "Melanie’s
> > Greatest Hits" ("Look What They’ve Done To My Song, Ma," and "I’ve Got A Brand
> > New Pair of Roller Skates") and the entire collected recordings of Styx and
> > Foghat.
>
Wade - remind me not to piss you off!
Scared
Nick
--
*********************************************
Take Note! Promotion Phone: (416) 781-4393
Toronto, ON e-mail: take...@interlog.com
CANADA http://www.interlog.com/~takenote
*********************************************
Representing musicians who excel in craft and performance,
and make a professional and heartfelt contribution to a
living, growing Canadian acoustic music scene.
Hojo2X
After reading my post giving credit to the Ramirez clan for refining the
classical guitar into the design we know today, Greg writes:>The Ramirez
luthier dynasty was founded >about 100 years ago, the classical guitar in its
current design is at least
>200 years older.
Okay. I haven't seen any classical guitars from that era that match the size
and design specifications of a Ramirez, but, truthfully, classical guitar
really isn't my field, so I was taking the word of others when I wrote that.
The 17th century guitars I have seen in museums and books tend to be very
small, and quite physically different from a modern classical, which is the
point I was trying to make: that Senor Ramirez worked closely with Andres
Segovia to produce a modern design that could be heard in concert halls over
the sound of an orchestra. The fact that Ramirez succeeded is attested by the
reality of virtually all modern classical guitars being based, to greater and
lesser degrees, on his design.
If that is incorrect, please correct me. I will acknowledge that there is a
separate school of Spanish guitar building centered around Barcelona, as in the
guitars of Juan Estruch, and of course there are the flamenco guitars, which
are another matter entirely. I did not mean to imply that Senor Ramirez was
the first person to invent the classical guitar. But he was a major, major
historical figure in the development of the classical guitar as we know it.
He also had a major 19th century predescessor, whose name is nagging at the
back of my mind and upon whose work Ramirez built. (I really should go back
and research this more thoroughly. My apologies.) So it wasn't like the
modern classical guitar emerged full-blown from the brow of Ramirez, like
Athena emerged full-blown from the brow of Zeus. But, unless I am very wrong
indeed, I think it is fair to give him a huge amount of credit for the most
popular and respected classical guitar design extant.
Wade Hampton Miller
yodel...@yahoo.com
In article <199804152128...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
hoj...@aol.com (Hojo2X) wrote:
> After reading my post giving credit to the Ramirez clan for refining the
> classical guitar into the design we know today...
"refining" is accurate. But you had written "more or less invented" and
that's what I disagreed with.
Robert Abramowitz
Hojo2X wrote:
---------------------------snip--------------------------------------
> small, and quite physically different from a modern classical, which is the
> point I was trying to make: that Senor Ramirez worked closely with Andres
> Segovia to produce a modern design that could be heard in concert halls over
> the sound of an orchestra. The fact that Ramirez succeeded is attested by the
> reality of virtually all modern classical guitars being based, to greater and
> lesser degrees, on his design.
>
> If that is incorrect, please correct me.
> back of my mind and upon whose work Ramirez built. (I really should go back
> and research this more thoroughly. My apologies.)
Methinks you mean Antonio de Torres (aka"The Stradivarius of the
Guitar"), he of the famous paper-mache demo guitar that sounded great,
whose contributions included a larger upper and lower bout, deeper
sides, scale length standardization at 65mm, the tied-string bridge that
we still hate today, elimination of superfluous decoration in favor of
the simple rosette and most important, the system of fan bracing that is
still considered the standard in classical guitars (although the last
may soon be revised if Thomas Humphrey has anything to say about it).
Not to denigrate Ramirez (or Hermann Hauser, or other master classical
guitar makers), but Torres is really De Man as far as the history of
the cat-string guitar goes.
Was that erudite, or what?
Hojo2X
Robert writes:>Methinks you mean Antonio de Torres (aka"The Stradivarius of the
>Guitar"),......>whose contributions included a larger upper and lower bout,
deeper>sides, scale length standardization at 65mm, the tied-string bridge that
>and most important, the system of fan bracing that is
>still considered the standard in classical guitars........
>Was that erudite, or what?
That be erudite, all right. Torres was the guy I was thinking of, and of
course Hauser had slipped my mind entirely.
I was trying to make a point, though, that there were some pioneering firms
that had set and still maintained the standards that everybody else was trying
to meet or beat. As sweeping generalizations go, I still think it's a pretty
valid one.
When I was living in an apartment on Fullerton Avenue in Chicago in 1979, at
the height of disco-mania, there were two young women who lived directly below
me. I'd see them in passing on the stairway, but never had much to say to
them; I was playing Irish music professionally in the pubs, and they were in
the thrall of disco music. Every night this loathsome thrumming would come
thud-thud-thudding through the floor. Sometimes my room-mate or I would thump
on the floor; sometimes they'd cut down the volume, sometimes they wouldn't.
We thought of them as "the disco bunnies."
Then one night I heard the most marvelous acoustic guitar sound coming through
the floor. Whoever was playing didn't have much in the way of chops, but he or
she was definately enthused; the music went on and on and on and on. It
sounded great, and it was clearly live - there's that crystal high end that you
can only get live, because it hasn't been compressed out of existence to fit
onto a recording.
I thought: "That's odd. I could swear that's coming from the disco bunnies'
apartment." Then I went on about whatever I was doing and forgot about it.
A few nights later I was alone in the apartment, and I could hear a smoke
detector go off downstairs. "Ah, they're cooking dinner," I thought. But it
went on and on and didn't stop, and was starting to get annoying when there was
a knock at my door.
It was one of the disco bunnies. She was a pleasant-looking young woman, about
my age, and she said: "That damn smoke detector went off, and I don't know how
to shut it off." (Yes, she'd burned her dinner.)
So I went downstairs and showed her, for future reference, how simple it was to
stand on a chair, pull the cover and remove the battery. She thanked me, and
as I was leaving her apartment, I spotted a hardshell guitar case poking up
from behind the couch.
"Is that a guitar?" I asked. "Yes. It was my father's. It's a RAMIREZ!" she
told me proudly. "No kidding! A Ramirez!! I've heard of those, but I've
never played one! May I take it out of its case?" "Oh, sure."
I pulled it out, and it was well-played, with some surface crackling on the
finish of the top. "I'm going to have it refinished!" she insisted the instant
she saw me noticing that. "Oh, no, don't do that!" I said. "That's
unnecessary! And it could ruin the tone!!"
She told me I could play it if I liked, and it was like gold. It was such a
marvelous sounding guitar - a 1957 Ramirez.
That, of course, was the guitar I had heard a few nights before, but neither
she nor her roommate played - I had heard some gentleman admirer of hers, who
had been offered a chance to play it just as I had, and took it.
So of course I went wild, and played it for at least half an hour, noodling
away at every half-assed Andalusian fanstasy I could come up with, stumbling
through "Malaguana" and "La Bamba" and "Guantanamera" and other just general
guitaristic foolishness, and it sounded so rich and so incredible I was just
transported. It was like the poor boy being allowed into the pastry shop and
told to eat whatever he likes, but just for a little while.
She sat there, quite happy by all surface indicators, then when I finally
finished playing she put it back in its case and told me once more that she was
going to have it refinished. Evidently the untidiness of the spiderwebbing
upset some sense of orderliness that wasn't evident in her housekeeping,
because she made quite a point of telling me how she wanted it relacquered. I
responded with an impassioned and detailed explanation of why this was a bad
idea,and an expensive idea, and then left.
Now, if this story was ficitional guitar-oriented pornography, she would have
been so overcome by the beauty and majesty of my playing that she would have
offered herself to me, and then, after we had finished and I was leaving her,
she would have pressed the guitar upon me as I stole away from her bedside.
"Take it!" she would have insisted, tears of gratitude mingled with tears of
parting. "Take it! I insist!! No-one else has ever played it so
magnificently since my father died in that....in that tragic accident. Take
it! He would have wanted you to have it!!"
And I would have taken it, too!! In about a half a New York second!!
But, of course, she didn't. She thanked me again for showing her how to shut
off her smoke detector (I think she used it as a kitchen timer,) and while I
continued to see her in passing in the hall, I never saw or played that Ramirez
again.
But it would have been nice if I had.
Wade Hampton Miller
Al Evans
In article <6h3flt$s...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Robert Abramowitz
<abram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> scale length standardization at 65mm
^^^^
I hate people who post to correct obvious typos, but I just couldn't
resist. This just brought up too many images of tiny people with little
bitty skinny fingers. Somehow, I'd always thought that standard classical
guitars were much larger:-)
--Al Evans--
Hojo2X
Greg writes, in reference to my inclusion of Ramirez in a group of seminal
guitar firms: >"refining" is accurate. But you had written "more or less
invented" and >that's what I disagreed with.
>
and grab you whenever you make huge, sweeping generalizations.
Let this be a lesson to you out there in cyberspace, kids!
Wade Hampton
Robert Abramowitz
it can feel like when you're doing a pinkie stretch up five frets.
da...@lone-wolf.com
> Best done on a slightly out of tune entry level guitar. A mid-60's red
> Stella will do nicely ;).......etc.
Wow! And I thought I was the only one that ever learned on one of these.
Dennis Bronson
Al Evans wrote:
>
> In article <6h3flt$s...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>, Robert Abramowitz
> <abram...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > scale length standardization at 65mm
> ^^^^
>
> I hate people who post to correct obvious typos, but I just couldn't
> resist. This just brought up too many images of tiny people with little
> bitty skinny fingers. Somehow, I'd always thought that standard classical
> guitars were much larger:-)
>
> --Al Evans--
Yea, sure - - - but what a GREAT travel guitar ? ? ?
dbb
___________________________________________________________________________
Bruce Stryd
da...@lone-wolf.com wrote:
>
> > Best done on a slightly out of tune entry level guitar. A mid-60's red
> > Stella will do nicely ;).......etc.
>
> Wow! And I thought I was the only one that ever learned on one of these.
Nah -- it was an ugly, mahogony topped Harmony with 1/2" string action at the
seventh fret!!
Charlie Gibbs
In article <199804160158...@ladder03.news.aol.com>
hoj...@aol.com (Hojo2X) writes:
["disco bunnies" story]
Wonderful story! (Even the fictional part... :-) I just had
to respond - such talent needs to be encouraged.
--
cgi...@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.
Serafin E. Garcia, Jr.
Neil J. O'Connor wrote:
> Catholic strum...
Funny and all-too-familiar situations...
Made me want to ask if anyone out there knew of any good newsgroups or
web sites on contemporary Catholic "acoustic" ("folk" seems to have
negative connotations these days) liturgical music. I'm always looking
for ways to improve our "guitar mass".
I tend to favor music by David Haas, Marty Haugen (I heard they're
actually Lutheran) and Bob Hurd, among others. How do you convince your
church to spring for new hymnals to replace, or at least augment, the
worn out songs in "Glory and Praise"?
Serafin
--
(When replying, please delete the underlines from our e-mail address)
JamesPVW
Try The National Association of Pastoral Musicians web site:
http://www.npm.org/
They have lots of information, plus a set of links that are worthwhile.
They also run five list-servs:
NPMUsers- an open list, available for anyone (member or non-member) to join.
NPMDMMD- a closed list, available for NPM-DMMD members to join.
NPMME - a closed list, available for NPM-MusEd members to join.
NPMChapter - a closed list, availabe for any NPM member to join at a yearly
chapter dues of $10.00. Benefits include a fixed meeting time, periodic
assistence in planning and national staff monitor to answer questions.
NPMMailing List- a listing of e-mail addresses of active NPM Members for the
sending of information from the National office to NPM members. This list is a
one way communication. Questions may be addressed to the National Office by
sending your question to NPM...@npm.org.
They have subscription info on the web site.
Good luck on getting the parish to change to new books beyond Glory and Praise.
Since it takes a good chunk of change, it takes some convincing and usually
quite a bit of politics-playing.
Jim Van Winkle
In article <6h7lt8$i...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>, "Serafin E. Garcia, Jr."
Neil J. O'Connor
JamesPVW wrote:
>
> Try The National Association of Pastoral Musicians web site:
> http://www.npm.org/
James, thanks for the info on the NAPM; I've known of the organization,
and until your post,it never occurred to me to go web surfing for them.
Gonna fix that today!
>
> Good luck on getting the parish to change to new books beyond Glory and Praise.
> Since it takes a good chunk of change, it takes some convincing and usually
> quite a bit of politics-playing.
When our parish moved into its new church, the leadership elected to
purchase new hymnals to replace both the worn out red G&P books, as well
as the special handout printings we were doing for major
feasts/liturgical periods. They chose a tome titled "Gather", and asked
for donations of $15 per parishoner (the cost of each copy). I had my
reservations, but we ante'd up the donation for each family member. I
was very pleasantly surprised when they arrived: most of the more
recent Haas & Haugen stuff was there, along with gender neutralized
versions of the G & P favorites, along with traditional organ thumpers,
along with old favorites from the monthly throwaway missalettes. One
particular favorite was there, after too long an absence: "Let All
Things Now Living", lyrics to the tune of "Ash Grove", a Welsh melody.
We've been pretty happy with the new book. We *do* augment its
collection with a few "secular" pieces, usually done right before Mass,
and occasionally (if the fit is REAL good with the liturgy) Communion.
In my former parish, we routinely referred, during practices, to G & P
as"Glory and Pigeon", thanks to the doves on the covers. You all know
what happened: O'Connor's announcing a song, steps up to the mike at
Mass, and intones, "We will be singing number 246, Glory and
Pigeon....."
One really CAN hide behind a Martin dreadnaught.........
Serafin E. Garcia, Jr.
Neil J. O'Connor wrote:
> for donations of $15 per parishoner (the cost of each copy). I had my
> reservations, but we ante'd up the donation for each family member. I
> was very pleasantly surprised when they arrived: most of the more
> recent Haas & Haugen stuff was there, along with gender neutralized
> versions of the G & P favorites, along with traditional organ thumpers,
> along with old favorites from the monthly throwaway missalettes.
"Gather" (and "Gather II") from GIA *is* a very nice set of music. Very
beautifully typeset, too.
I do also like the "Breaking Bread" annuals from OCP -- good mix of
contemporary and traditional. I especially liked the older (pre 1986?)
versions which provided chords on the "pew" editions, which made for a
very handy pocket-sized "fake book". I guess this held back sales of
the actual accompanyment books.
The OCP guitar (had to get that word in for RMMGA's benefit :))
accompanyment binders *are* a good deal, although it is frustrating
having all this music handy but being unable to use them for (most)
occasions when the congregation *must* be involved (for lack of
corresponding music at the pews at my current parish). I did notice
that the latest edition of the accompanyment binders leave out
instrumental descants and interludes, etc. -- another book to sell, I
suppose (or perhaps a genuine desire to keep the volumes to a manageable
size) (or additional opportunities to improvise instead on my flute,
violin, or -- most recently -- mandolin).
(I'm probably drifting too far off this newsgroup's scope here...)
James
I have been away for a few days, and was delighted to see a post regarding
Liturgical music, which is the type I spend 90% of my playing time on. I
have just received the newest addition of the guitar accompaniment for the
OCP music issue. I have missed a large part of this thread, so I am hoping
that I am not repeating something already discussed, but I noticed that
there was some new music - but some of the old music had been substantially
altered, with beautiful introductions or ending that had been removed to
save space or page turns. So if you want to get the musically richest
versions, use your old copies and pencil in the new words.
An another note - Steve Petrunack, an acoustic guitarist who has played
extensively with Haas and Haugen, has released an album from GIA called "The
Breath of God". It is superb and an inspiraion for the liturgical
guitarist. I have attended workshops with this guy and David Haas, and the
exposure revolutionized my playing. Highly, highly recommended for the
liturgical guitarist.
-jim-
spam control - the letters to remove in the return address will be obvious.
>snip snip<
Serafin E. Garcia, Jr. wrote in message
<6h9fuh$4...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net>...
>Neil J. O'Connor wrote:
>> They chose a tome titled "Gather", and asked
>> for donations of $15 per parishoner (the cost of each copy). I had my
>> reservations, but we ante'd up the donation for each family member. I
>> was very pleasantly surprised when they arrived: most of the more
>> recent Haas & Haugen stuff was there, along with gender neutralized
>> versions of the G & P favorites, along with traditional organ thumpers,
>> along with old favorites from the monthly throwaway missalettes.
>
>the actual accompanyment books.
>
>The OCP guitar (had to get that word in for RMMGA's benefit :))
>accompanyment binders *are* a good deal, although it is frustrating
>having all this music handy but being unable to use them for (most)
>occasions when the congregation *must* be involved (for lack of
>corresponding music at the pews at my current parish). I did notice
>that the latest edition of the accompanyment binders leave out
>instrumental descants and interludes, etc. -- another book to sell, I
>suppose (or perhaps a genuine desire to keep the volumes to a manageable
>size) (or additional opportunities to improvise instead on my flute,
>violin, or -- most recently -- mandolin).
Neil J.O'Connor
Folks:
Just finished reading this month's Acoustic Guitar. Mark Hanson covers
arranging for fingerstyle guitar in his Wood CHops cloumn, and mentions
Glory & Praise as the source of his introduction to oneof the
arrangements.
Drat. I figured I had the thing cooked with a version I have been
practicing on an open D tuned Seagull 12. Now I see Mark's
arrangement...in standard tuning...and now need to spend some time
learning that! A happy dilemma....thanks, Mark!
Neil O'Connor
Paul Wieland
It's a very nice piece. I enjoy playing it most on my nylon string.
Paul