Martin vs. Yamaha acoustic guitars
Jack
I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
Thanks for your input,
Jack
Wayne Harrison
"Jack" <jack_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1139765930.6...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
all these issues are, of course, pure opinions--but, it's a lazy sunday,
so here goes: i have a new yamaha f series mahogany dread, for which i paid
a little less than $300 bucks. to my ears, nothing short of a good d18 in
martin dreads can match it. i doubt you can get one of those for $700.
i have also played, and heard, many old yamaha laminates that were not
very good at all--boxy, and i mean cardboard boxy, that i wouldn't have
given a penny to own.
long and short is that you may have to raise the yamaha ante to beat the
$700 martin, but you are still ahead of the game by $400. still, for some
folks, that headstock script is worth it.
wayne harrison
Kol_Isha
Well, I'm probably not the most knowledgeable one to reply to this given my
limited guitar experience, i.e. I only own three, two acquired recently and
one of those two just a small travel guitar (Little Martin). But my two
"real" guitars are a Yamaha and a Martin. The Martin is a D-18 purchased in
1971. The Yamaha is an FG400A purchased for $100 from a pawn shop a year
ago so I could have an extra guitar to use in case I needed it (or for
travel so I wouldn't have to worry about it getting destroyed). My sister
also has an old Yamaha that she has had for years, and she comes over
sometimes and we play together. In my opinion, there is no comparison.
When I am playing "for real," there is no question that I am going to reach
for the Martin. It just sounds 1000 times better to my ears. Maybe it's
not a fair comparison. I don't really know how they compare feature by
feature. Obviously, one was, even originally, a much more expensive guitar
than the other... and one was purchased used and in somewhat beat up
condition. Don't get me wrong. The Yamaha is fine. I've taken it to RMMGA
gatherings and it met my needs. It's decent, it's fine. But, even when I
pick up my sister's guitar... there is no comparison. If I want to sound
good, if I want to play in front of other people, I figure the Martin is the
only "real" guitar I own.
--
Regards,
Arlene
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
"Kol Isha" - A Woman's Voice
paulki...@adelphia.net
D-15?) is constructed of solid wood, not laminates. Some of what you
pay for is the logo on the headstock, but in this case you should also
hear a marked improvement in tone. The tone of the Martin will also
improve with age, while the Yamaha (or any plywood top guitar) will
remain the same.
jimbo
My 2 cents here. I'm no expert either - but unless you play them
side-by-side (not in different buildings, on different days, with
different weather) you'll probably never really know for sure. I do know
that Martin has unparalleled quality control, and uses probably the best
materials and craftsman practices bar none (for a production guitar). They
also last forever. I've had a D28 since the beginning of time, and
recently acquired a D41. It took me a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to
get both of them - but I'll never let go of them until I'm pushing up the
proverbial daiseys! Hey - good luck.
J
Ken Cashion
Good question, Jack, and one I have learned not to ask. <g>
But it is OK if someone else asks.
The $700 Martin is not likely to sound 7 times better than a
$100 Yamaha.
But look back at that sentence to see our failure of logic.
Those numbers are very objective...and then we are trying to compare
something that is incredibly subjective.
As long as we realize we are doing it, it is OK.
All Yamahas are not alike; nor are all Gibsons alike. There
can be a big difference in sound between even the same model numbers
produced in the same year.
I have heard some Martins that just didn't measure up to the
Martin name. I think this will be even more the case in a few years
as Martin continues to produce "other" sorts of guitars.
The desired Yamahas are the Gakki models with the red labels.
These are some early and mid-seventies guitars. Those dudes are
pushing 35 years old now and they are sounding great...they are often
a surprize to other players who don't know about the Gakki guitars.
I am familiar with these old guitars...as well as a lot of
cheap guitars.
I think the light, 1972 Gakki Yamaha I have is a superb
finger picking guitar. Get one of these for this sort of playing and
you will be making no apologies to anyone.
I do not own a Martin and don't expect to. I don't dislike
them...I just think there are many much, much better deals in guitars.
Gibson advertised Tone, Finish, and Feel. That is about all
guitars have. Of these, Finish is least important to me...it is a
good thing since I have Gibsons and like old guitars.
If the Yamaha feels good to you and it sounds good, get the
Yamaha.
Ken Cashion
>Tone! The $100 guitar is made from plywood and the $700 Martin (a
>D-15?) is constructed of solid wood, not laminates. Some of what you
>pay for is the logo on the headstock, but in this case you should also
>hear a marked improvement in tone. The tone of the Martin will also
>improve with age, while the Yamaha (or any plywood top guitar) will
>remain the same.
Re the aging of ply. This is intuitively obvious. I wish that
history and observation would bear this out. It doesn't. There are
other things going on because the ply Yamahas definitely improve with
age. I don't know why.
Ken
http://www.photos.windmillpro.com/
larry...@msn.com
In my opinion yes, definitely; but you have to make that decision with
your ears, eyes, and fingers. Beyond sound, consider things like
intonation, playability, adjustability, etc.
Larry
Doug
couple of grand. I bought a Breedlove Atlas, a $600 guitar to keep at
my sisters house so I have something to play. Sounds damn good. I give
up very little. Each guitar sounds diffferent, but better? I dunno.
They are ALL three damn good.
chaya
abuse.
If you are talking of the D-15, to my ears those guitars don't have the
punch a spruce-topped Martin has.
I've owned guitars up and down the cost spectrum - the best guitar is
one you'll play, not one with a fancy name on the headstock. For years
I played my $100 Applause instead of my D-28 because it was more
comfortable. Go with what feels right.
Know what - the D-28 wasn't worth 5 times what the Applause was worth
because it never left the case.
csj
Misifus
I don't know, and if you don't know, perhaps you ought not to buy the
Martin.
Now, just for me, I have several good guitars, but I may get another. I
recently played a number of Martins, Taylors, Guilds (Yes, Billy boy),
Alvarez, and some others I can't recall. To my mind, the two that
stuck out for my purpose (a different sound than my rosewood small
jumbo), were a mahogany Martin, 000-16SGT ($1000), and a mahogany
thirtieth anniversary Taylor ($3000). They simply played better and
sounded better than the others.
Two other guitars that were outstanding, were... I forget the brand, it
may have been Guild, but they were Chinese and under $1000 each. One
was an imitation of a slope-shouldered, twelve-fret dread and the other
an amazing imitation of an OM-45. However, both were rosewood and
fairly similar in sound to one of the guitars I already have.
I was impressed by an Alvarez 0000 in all mahogany that sounded pretty
good, but I'll wait to compare it some 15 series Martins before I bite.
My point is simply that I wasn't in your store listening to and playing
the guitars you played. For me, I can see and hear and feel the reasons
why I'll pay more for a guitar than $100. If you can't, don't spend the
extra money on the high dollar model. If at some later time, you decide
you can hear a difference between you guitar and another, your $100 can
probably be recovered by reselling or trading in the first one. If not,
you're only out the $100, great!
-Raf
--
Misifus-
Rafael Seibert
mailto:raf_s...@cox.net
http://www.ralphandsue.com
Ed Edelenbos
news:F2MHf.1155$6G.835@dukeread03...
>
> My point is simply that I wasn't in your store listening to and playing
> the guitars you played. For me, I can see and hear and feel the reasons
> why I'll pay more for a guitar than $100. If you can't, don't spend the
> extra money on the high dollar model. If at some later time, you decide
> you can hear a difference between you guitar and another, your $100 can
> probably be recovered by reselling or trading in the first one. If not,
> you're only out the $100, great!
>
> -Raf
>
(replying to Raf's comments, but directed towards the OP)
That's pretty close to what I was thinking. If you can't tell, you might be
better off not plunking down the $$$. OTOH, if you are going to stick with
it, in short order you'll probably wish you had gone for the good one.
While the $700 Martin is a known brand, I'd suggest you try other guitars in
that price range because (IMO) similarly priced instruments from other
makers (pretty consistently) out perform the Martins. In the $1500 and up
range(s), this isn't as consistently true.
Ed
Mark McDonald
Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 >times better
Don't feel bad about liking the $100,00 Yamaha. I bought one for a hundred
buck a few years ago and it is a great guitar. Go here
http://www.broadjam.com/artists/artistindex.asp?artistID=13621 and listen to
either Willa Lee or West of Monterey (an allusion to Japan/Yamaha) and you
can see what I mean.
If you like the guitar and it sounds good to you, whoop there it is. BTW the
most of the rest of the songs on that page were recorded on a very expensive
Martin. Is the Martin worth 25 time as much as the Yamaha? You be the
judge.
Mark McDonald
m...@sonic.net
http://www.markmcdonaldblues.com
George W.
>Hi there,
>
>I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
>Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better....
Not if the Yamaha sounds better to you.
I don't know what the half-life of a Yamaha is but I'd be really
surprised if the Martin outlasted it.
G.
George Gleason
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
>> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
>> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
>> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>>
>
is worth 7x the cost, you'll only have to worry about which one YOU like
better
george
WadeIn...@aol.com
I'd say if you can't see, hear and feel a difference between the Martin
and the Yamaha, then, no, it's not worth it for you as a player to get
the Martin.
But the differences definitely exist. It's not the supposed allure or
"snob appeal" of the Martin brand name that convinces other players to
part with the extra money for the Martin. They get what they're paying
for.
A lot of it has to do with how much tonal control and coloration you
can get with the Martin. If, as a player, you're not doing much with
dynamics and tone colors, you won't miss them if they're not there.
On the other hand, a lot of one's growth as a musician sometimes comes
about because of almost accidental discoveries of these properties.
You're playing music late at night and discover that if you strike the
certain way, you can get a sound out of the gutiar that you never heard
before, and that leads to other possibilities.
All an all-solid wood Martin is going to have far more potential along
these lines than a plywood Yamaha will have, whether that potential
ever gets tapped or not.
Hope that makes sense. And to me, personally, it makes more sense to
HAVE those extra arrows in my quiver, those sounds and tones and loud
to soft gradations that a really fine instrument gives you, than it
does to do without them.
Martins are worth the money. The various grades of Yamaha are worth
the money, too. You just have to decide what your own needs and
POTENTIAL needs will justify.
Wade Hampton Miller
Chugiak, Alaska
Jefferson Holston
The quick and dirty answer to your question is that, depending on a few
factors, I think there's potentially a great deal more difference than
just the $600. Yes, at those price points it's at least seven times
better.
Whether you NEED to spend the extra $600 at this point in your life,
depends alot on your skill level, expectations, and rate of progress as
a player (not to mention your level of income). I'd suggest spending
some of that 6 bills under any circumstances though. Some laminates are
pretty good; but you generally get what you pay for. If you're just
starting out and strumming three chord folk songs for an hour or so once
or twice a week. And if that's as far as you hope or expect to go with
your playing, then perhaps you want to save (some of) the money. OTOH
if you're taking lessons or working your way through books, making
progress, enjoying the process and/or finding you have some talent, then
I'd suggest going for something that's at least a little better than
that $100 laminated guitar. You might start halfway in between and move
up at some later time as your enjoyment grows. You probably won't get
much enjoyment, and therefore little or slower growth in your skill
level from an ultra cheap axe.
Since you mentioned $700.00 and mahogony, I'm guessing, like someone who
responded earlier, that you're looking at a D-15. I don't know what
kind of Yamaha you're comparing at $100.00. In fact, I'm real surprised
you've found a $100.00 Yamaha these days. They do a good job of QC; but
a $100 axe is going to be a little kid thing. The D-15 is a very sweet
and well balanced guitar, even if it's somewhat homely. It has the
potential to provide endless hours of very rewarding, if not flat-out
thrilling, feel-good time for you. I've met many players who, after
developing some skill on a lower quality guitar, moved up to higher
quality instruments (not just Martins, but that's a fine example) only
to find grand new levels of enjoyment. And with that, they developed a
new and intense desire to practice/play more frequently and for longer
periods. In the 38 or 39 years I've been twiddling with guitars, I've
had that moving up a level experience a couple of times. Alot of folks
here will know exactly what I'm talking about.
So, to answer a short question with an exceedingly long and tedious
post. You may well be looking at saving $600 at the expense of
postponing (or possibly never achieving) many hours of great great
pleasure as well as accelerated progress with your playing abilities.
Guitar plays a big part in my life ( :). There's no question about
which way I'd go.
Gee, I hope I've helped a little.
Regards,
Jeff Holston
bluezfolk
How does one determine how many times better something sounds? I would
assume (make an ass out of u and me) that a $700 Martin would sound
better than a $100 Yamaha, but if I didn't play them side by side how
would I know for sure. Even if the Martin does sound better, 7x would
be so significant that you wouldn't even be asking the question. IMHO
the higher up in price you go the less improvement you get per dollar,
but you generally do get what you pay for.
Eric
George Gleason
"George Gleason" <tbmo...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:JEMHf.10341$Nv2....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Misifus" <raf_s...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:F2MHf.1155$6G.835@dukeread03...
>> Jack wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
>>> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better,
actually you should ask if it is 3x better
a 100$ guitar to get one twice as good(by your reasoning, which I don't
accept as valid) would be 200$
to get one twice as good as the 200$ guitar it would be a 400$ instrument,
and twice as good (3 steps up from the 100$ guitar) would be 800$
other wise it gets quite foolish to ask if my new mandolin is 300X better
than the 100$ mandolin I started on
I have no idea how that could even be determined
buut it could easily be 5x as good
george
William D Clinger
and a steel-string, in a formal concert of classical music.
One of those guitars cost me about 40 times what the other
one cost. Only one person noticed that one of my guitars
was better than the other, and his opinion shouldn't count
because he was a guitarist and recognized the name on the
headstock.
In my opinion, my most expensive guitar really is about 40
times as good as my least expensive. You should keep in
mind, however, that most listeners won't notice such small
differences in quality, especially when the person playing
the instruments plays as badly as I do.
I also have two guitars that would have cost about the same
when new. IMO, one of them is about 5 times as good as the
other. Both are nice guitars, though.
The big step in quality comes when you go from no instrument
at all to one that's playable. Beyond that, it's subjective.
You're the one buying the guitar, so yours is the opinion that
counts.
Will
Tony Done
because we like nice looking things. I admit to all three. I tried a new
Martin D28 in the local shop this weekend. To my ear it sounded
significantly worse than a plywood topped Cort at 1/10 the price and an
ancient Maton 325 at 1/5 the price. But I'm not wild about the sound of the
majority of Martins I have played
It comes down to individual guitars, your personal tastes, and whether you
really want a big name brand. It's like most things in life, you pay a
premium for the things you really want, regardless of their value as
dictated by functional logic.
A digression - I want the Maton, but the thought of divorce proceedings
discourages me. Very beat up, the soundhole is worn away completely on the
treble side from vigorous flatpicking, but the neck is comfortable and
straight with a fabulous smoothness that comes from age and much use. The
top has no lift at all, with a low action and more saddle showing than most
new guitars.
Tony D
"Jack" <jack_p...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1139765930.6...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Inyo
> "George Gleason" <tbmo...@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
> news:JEMHf.10341$Nv2....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >
> > "Misifus" <raf_s...@cox.net> wrote in message
> > news:F2MHf.1155$6G.835@dukeread03...
> >> Jack wrote:
> >>> Hi there,
> >>>
> >>> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> >>> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better,
>
> actually you should ask if it is 3x better
> a 100$ guitar to get one twice as good(by your reasoning, which I don't
> accept as valid) would be 200$
> to get one twice as good as the 200$ guitar it would be a 400$ instrument,
> and twice as good (3 steps up from the 100$ guitar) would be 800$
Say what? The original poster is basing his comparison, in order to
gauge tone quality, on a proportionally increasing percentage of dollar
value. In other words, would a 700 hundred dollar Martin that is 700
percent more expensive than a 100 dollar Yamama sound seven times
better? Pure percentage calculation, in increments of 100 dollars.
Note, though, that even if we accept Gleason's basic reasoning, a
400-dollar instrument is still 4-times better than a 100-dollar
guitar--not three times as Gleason says. Why? Because 2 times 2 equals
four.
Here's why: Gleason starts off on the right foot, by stating that a
guitar priced at 200 spondulix would by the original poster's
calculations sound twice as good as one priced at 100 dollars. Then,
Gleason postulates that one which costs 400 bucks is two steps up from
the original 100 dollar guitar--in other words, the 400-dollar
instrument is twice as good as the 200 dollar guitar, which in turn is
twice as good as the original 100 dollar guitar. So, if the 200 dollar
guitar sounds twice as good as the 100 dollar instrument, and a 400
dollar guitar is twice as good as a 200 buck guitar...well, that's 2
times 2 and that equals four-times the sound quality as the 100 Yamaha
in question--not three times as Gleason claims.
So, bottom line--what the heck does all of this calculating matter?
Probably very little in a concrete sense. Arguably more than a tad, but
less than a scosch. Or, somewhere between minuscule and nil.
At any rate, for what it's all worth, my personal view is that the
difference in tone quality between a 100 dollar Yamaha (based on the
Yamahas I have played) and a 700-dollar Martin (based on the Martins I
have played) would increase in the Martin not in a direct
percentage-based proportional line, but more in an exponential manner,
much like the well-known Richter Scale used to assess the degree of
ground motion during an earthquake. For exampe, an earthquake of
magnitude 7 is not merely 7 times more powerful than a quake of
magnitude 1. A Richter 7 would be generate roughly one million times
the ground motion of a Richter 1--because each whole number increase in
Richter magnitude equals ten times the greater ground motion than the
previous whole number (a 2 is ten times more powerful than a 1; a 3 is
thus 100 times greater than a Richter 1 and so on...).
"The Acoustic Guitar Solitaire Of Inyo: Volume 2"
http://members.aol.com/Waucoba4/music1/acousticinyo.html
Kol_Isha
"Inyo" <in...@altavista.com> wrote in message
news:1139783761.1...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> George Gleason wrote:
>> and twice as good (3 steps up from the 100$ guitar) would be 800$
>
>>
> difference in tone quality between a 100 dollar Yamaha (based on the
> Yamahas I have played) and a 700-dollar Martin (based on the Martins I
> have played) would increase in the Martin not in a direct
> percentage-based proportional line, but more in an exponential manner,
Ah... so without a calculator, I was right. My Martin DOES sound 1000 times
better than my Yamaha. :)
Ken Cashion
wrote:
>
>"Inyo" <in...@altavista.com> wrote in message
>news:1139783761.1...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> George Gleason wrote:
>>> and twice as good (3 steps up from the 100$ guitar) would be 800$
>>
>>>
>> At any rate, for what it's all worth, my personal view is that the
>> difference in tone quality between a 100 dollar Yamaha (based on the
>> Yamahas I have played) and a 700-dollar Martin (based on the Martins I
>> have played) would increase in the Martin not in a direct
>> percentage-based proportional line, but more in an exponential manner,
>
>
>Ah... so without a calculator, I was right. My Martin DOES sound 1000 times
>better than my Yamaha. :)
But the Yamaha has a three-layer top, consequently the area of
the top is three times what the total wood area of the Martin would
be.
At least, that is another way of looking at taking objective
quantities and comparing them to subjective quantities.
My hearing might be 1/7th worse than it was when I was young.
Should we take that into consideration?
Ken Cashion
wrote:
>I think many of us buy expensive guitars for mojo, because we are snobs and
>because we like nice looking things. I admit to all three. I tried a new
>Martin D28 in the local shop this weekend. To my ear it sounded
>significantly worse than a plywood topped Cort at 1/10 the price and an
>ancient Maton 325 at 1/5 the price. But I'm not wild about the sound of the
>majority of Martins I have played
Yeah, that is the way I am. I am a snob and only buy upper
scale guitars. You only go around once...or twice in some belief
systems.
Ken
http://www.photos.windmillpro.com/
Ken Cashion
I hate to take this further off a tangent than it already is
but why do you care what the guitar sounds like? Aren't you really
interested in what YOU sound like?
Consequently, will the $700 guitar make YOU sound seven times
better than when playing on a $100 guitar?
I know from experience that I top out at about $200 Chinese.
Any more than that and I am wasting money.
I be serious here.
Jefferson Holston
I think you nailed a great big important difference. I drove in that
direction in my response to the OP a bit farther down the thread (I'd
actually started to kick in when there were two reponses, then pondered
for a couple of hours before finishing and sending); but you were better
able to express what I was feeling and hinting. That incredible
inspiring sensation that you get, as you wrote typically late at night,
of "wow, I didn't know a guitar could make that sound" (or at least,
"hey, no guitar I was holding ever made a sound like that") is seldom
realized in less expensive and less versatile/dynamic instruments.
Conversely, it's fairly regularly achieved at various levels of
proficiency with a better axe.
Those extra arrows in the quiver, depending on the skills AND progress,
AND goals/intent of the marksman, might make the difference potentially
far more substantial than the sevenfold cost differential.
Regards,
Jeff Holston
Stephen Calder
> Hi there,
>
> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>
> Thanks for your input,
>
> Jack
>
If you're asking which guitar is better value for money, I can tell you
Yamaha guitars are great value. You'll get a guitar that sounds good,
plays well, and is of good quality for the price.
Martins are generally superb in tone and build. They are not as good
value for money as the Yamaha. In my opinion (I said I'm swearing off
opinions but this one might be helpful).
--
Stephen
Lennox Head, Australia
Ken Cashion
wrote:
Stephen, don't confuse observations and opinions. Opinions
may or may not be qualified. Observations based on a few years have a
little more weight than "opinions."
At least, that is my opinion.
Ken
http://www.photos.windmillpro.com/ al. dado
Stephen Calder
yep, thanks. I just give what I got.
Tony Done
>
I am a snob and only buy upper
> scale guitars.
Hmmm. Witness the blue chinese guitar? <g> You buy according to the dictates
of your own logic, at which I wouldn't want to guess
>You only go around once...or twice in some belief
> systems.
>
I think plastic Macs were badly behaved lutes in a previous existence
Tony D
Misifus
Are you saying you expect the Yamaha to last longer than the Martin? Is
this relevant if it doesn't sound or play better? Is swiss cheese
inherently superior to brie? For the answer to these and other
questions call .... 1-900-555......
Misifus
> But I'm not wild about the sound of the
> majority of Martins I have played
>
>
We only send the rejects to the Antipodes.
-Raf (Pace, Mike) <g>
Stephen Worth
Engelmann/EIR Yamaha from the L series, and try as hard as I can, I
can't find any aspects of it that are inferior to guitars that cost
three or four times as much. If you are going to spend $500 on a
guitar, you will get a lot more guitar for your money by buying a high
end Yamaha than you would buying a low end Martin for the same price.
See ya
Steve
--
Rare 78 rpm recordings on CD! http://www.vintageip.com/records/
Building a museum and archive of animation! http://www.animationarchive.org/
The Quest for the BEST HOTDOG in Los Angeles! http://www.hotdogspot.com/
Rediscovering great stuff from the past! http://www.vintagetips.com/
Tony Done
Honestly, I've sometimes wondered about that.
Tony D
rock...@chariot.com.au
> -Raf (Pace, Mike)
Pity you don't charge reject prices.
My HD28V cost me $6200.
#8^)
MJRB
rock...@chariot.com.au
> Any more than that and I am wasting money.
> I be serious here.
I know that a better guitar has improved my playing, I think it's
something to do with trying to live up to the guitar's potential.
I haven't done that yet, but I live in hope.
And even the wrong notes sound better.
MJRB
rock...@chariot.com.au
Yamahas that knocked my socks off.
In your case I doubt that the $100 Yamaha would be in the same ballpark
as a Martin, unless you got hold of a lousy Martin (and they do exist
believe me).
Even the Formica Martins sound pretty good for the price IMHO.
And remember that all of these replies are just somebody elses opinion,
and informed opinion perhaps, but still an opinion.
MJRB
William Black
<rock...@chariot.com.au> wrote in message
news:1139821639.5...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I know from experience that I top out at about $200 Chinese.
> Any more than that and I am wasting money.
> I be serious here.
I know that a better guitar has improved my playing, I think it's
something to do with trying to live up to the guitar's potential.
--------------
My experience is that a better quality instrument is actually easier to
play.
Moving from a plywood Korean guitar as a starter to a Seagull was an
astounding experience.
Having played a couple of Martin 'Standard series' guitars, it is as great
a difference again.
I can't actually put my finger (no pun intended) on exactly what the
difference is, it seems to be a combination of neck shape, weight and
balance and the noise the instrument makes.
I can't justify buying a standard series Martin as I'm not playing
professionally at a level where the outlay would bring a commensurate
return, but if one day I find I'm rich...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
Tony Done
something to do with trying to live up to the guitar's potential.
I haven't done that yet, but I live in hope.
And even the wrong notes sound better.
MJRB
That's something I hadn't considered in my original response, but I agree
with it entirely. My Bourgeois isn't the easiest guitar to play, but I think
it sounds so good, I just want to keep workng at it.
Re living in hope - the journey is more important than the destination.
That D28 I tried at the weekend was **nothing** like one I tried in Brizzie
a few months ago (which I would be proud to own) - they vary a lot.
Tony D
rock...@chariot.com.au
Do you remember me posting a while ago about a Braz/Addy dreadnought
that Bryan DeGruchy had built for himself, and was selling?
Well a friend who attends our song circles has bought it, and it
really is a guitar that stops you in your tracks, I've played it a
couple of times now, and it simply stuns me.
If I can raise the cash, I'd like to get Bryan to build me a Braz/Addy
parlour.
MJRB
Ken Cashion
wrote:
>I don't have a Martin, but I've played them. I do have a high end solid
>Engelmann/EIR Yamaha from the L series, and try as hard as I can, I
>can't find any aspects of it that are inferior to guitars that cost
>three or four times as much. If you are going to spend $500 on a
>guitar, you will get a lot more guitar for your money by buying a high
>end Yamaha than you would buying a low end Martin for the same price.
>
>See ya
>Steve
But you might mention that the "L" series did have solid/no
veneer tops. They were the best of the Yamahas.
Ken Cashion
wrote:
>
>
>>
>I am a snob and only buy upper
>> scale guitars.
>
>Hmmm. Witness the blue chinese guitar? <g> You buy according to the dictates
>of your own logic, at which I wouldn't want to guess
I have posted here often enough about cheap guitars making
beautiful music that I thought folks would find that comment a little
off the wall.
As for the blue guitar...logic...it sounded really good and
not like my other guitars, its finish was superb...much better than
the rosewood J-45...it feel was as good as any I have after they were
reworked by a good set-up guy in New Orleans...I didn't have a
cut-away flat top and wanted one because I had gotten use to cut-aways
on a couple of arch tops...I had no guitar with onboard, preamp, EQ,
and wanted to try them...and I didn't have a blue guitar. With only
one guitar, I filled several guitar "needs"...that is pretty good
logic, I think. <g>
Other than that, I bought it on a whim from the music
department in a South Texas service station when I really had just
gone in to get some picks...I had even left the car running I was in
such a hurry.
>>You only go around once...or twice in some belief
>> systems.
>I think plastic Macs were badly behaved lutes in a previous existence
No, not really. They, as all plastic products, will become
more prevalent when we stop murdering the trees that give us the very
breath we breathe.
Ken Cashion
But think how many time better it sounds than a $100 Yamaha.
(He says trying to get back to the topic. <g>)
Ken Cashion
>To the OP, I have heard Martins that I wouldn't want to own, and
>Yamahas that knocked my socks off.
>
>In your case I doubt that the $100 Yamaha would be in the same ballpark
>as a Martin, unless you got hold of a lousy Martin (and they do exist
>believe me).
>
>Even the Formica Martins sound pretty good for the price IMHO.
It is not an opinion but an observation that Martin is making
plastic guitars and using more and more plastic. It is an opinion
that some day they will discover the true tone plastic -- old growth
Styron. <g>
Ken
http://www.photos.windmillpro.com/
Ken Cashion
I am a powerful influence. I have even been fussed at here
for being so.
I am such a powerful influence that a better guitar does not
elevate my playing, but rather, I drag the better guitar down to my
level of mediocrity.
Besides, I have heard Al Sato play my G-40 and my J-45 for
quite a while. He doesn't have trouble matching their
potential...which is a heck of a lot higher than mine.
Mmmm...a better sounding wrong note....I will have to think on
that.
Ty Ford
(in article <1139765930.6...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>):
> Hi there,
>
> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>
> Thanks for your input,
>
> Jack
>
I bought my D28S in 1971 for $385 with hardshell case. Apparently, now it's
worth about $4,000.
I was in a guitar shop in Annapolis, MD a few weeks ago. They had some
canadian guitars that really sounded quite nice for under $500. Don't
remember the name.
Regards,
Ty Ford
-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
Ed Edelenbos
news:dMadnQmoKtO...@comcast.com...
> On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 12:38:50 -0500, Jack wrote
> (in article <1139765930.6...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>):
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
>> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
>> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
>> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>>
>> Thanks for your input,
>>
>> Jack
>>
>
> I bought my D28S in 1971 for $385 with hardshell case. Apparently, now
> it's
> worth about $4,000.
>
> I was in a guitar shop in Annapolis, MD a few weeks ago. They had some
> canadian guitars that really sounded quite nice for under $500. Don't
> remember the name.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
Most likely one of the LaSiDo brands... Seagull, Norman, Art & Lutherie,
Simon and Patrick.
Ed
Misifus
> "Misifus" <raf_s...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:XrTHf.1176$6G.153@dukeread03...
>> Tony Done wrote:
>>> But I'm not wild about the sound of the majority of Martins I have
>>> played
>>>
>>>
>> We only send the rejects to the Antipodes.
>>
>> -Raf (Pace, Mike) <g>
>>
>>
>
>
> Tony D
>
>
That was why I put a grin. I might believe you if Mike Brown hadn't
recently posted a review of a number of Martins he'd just tried. Iirc,
some of them were pretty good.
-Raf
George Gleason
champion,a vintage 1982 laminated all black Yamaha 335 wearing the medium
D'Adarrio j17's
tonights challenger fitted with Phosper Bronze m-150's
A Martin D-15
OK boys lets have a clean fight, no picking below the saddle, and I will
seperate you if you resort to excessive barr chording
on the down beat come out strumming
George
Bill Chandler
<tbmo...@peoplepc.com> brewed up the following, and served it to the
group:
SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAYYYYY....
Sorry, couldn't resist. I'll stop now.
Ty Ford
(in article <Jc-dnSStcsEwP23e...@speakeasy.net>):
Thanks for the multiple choice Ed! It was Norman. The above are all made by
the same company?
Ed Edelenbos
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:15:59 -0500, Ed Edelenbos wrote
> (in article <Jc-dnSStcsEwP23e...@speakeasy.net>):
>
>> "Ty Ford" <tyre...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:dMadnQmoKtO...@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> it's
>>> worth about $4,000.
>>>
>>> I was in a guitar shop in Annapolis, MD a few weeks ago. They had some
>>> canadian guitars that really sounded quite nice for under $500. Don't
>>> remember the name.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ty Ford
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Most likely one of the LaSiDo brands... Seagull, Norman, Art & Lutherie,
>> Simon and Patrick.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>>
>
> Thanks for the multiple choice Ed! It was Norman. The above are all made
> by
> the same company?
>
> Ty Ford
>
>
> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
> audiocentric
> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>
Tony Done
<sigh> I overstated my case, after being left sour by the recent d28
experience. My perceptions are shaded by the high cost of US makes in Oz.
The median income here is about Oz$37,000, and the rrp on this D28 was over
$4200, so you might get it for $3600 after discount. I guess the price looks
a good deal more favourable in the US. There is also the problem of limited
choice, a few Martins, even less Taylors, and very few Collings and Santa
Cruz (at very high prices), with a good choice in decent locally made
guitars at about half the price of the US makes, and a lot of reasonable
Asian imports at perhaps 1/10 to 1/3 the price of Martins. Taking all this
together, this puts a heavy burden of expectation on the US makes. -
Something like you getting a custom guitar; Mike paid over Oz$6000 for his
HD28, whereas we can get a basic custom guitar for about half of that.
In fact, maybe half the Martins I have played have sounded good to me,
mostly in the lower price ranges and mostly mahogany, but I haven't tried
many of the more expensive models. The best I can remember was a 000-18, and
the worst a OM (000?) 42. I would have bought the 000-18, except the
retailer wouldn't discount it at all. I think my D16 is worth what I paid
for it.
Tony D
Tony Done
"Ken Cashion" <kcas...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:a721v19pm4hmmtf79...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 03:34:13 GMT, "Tony Done" <tony...@bigpond.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>I am a snob and only buy upper
>>> scale guitars.
>>
>>Hmmm. Witness the blue chinese guitar? <g> You buy according to the
>>dictates
>>of your own logic, at which I wouldn't want to guess
>
> I have posted here often enough about cheap guitars making
> beautiful music that I thought folks would find that comment a little
> off the wall.
> As for the blue guitar...logic...it sounded really good and
> not like my other guitars, its finish was superb...much better than
> the rosewood J-45...it feel was as good as any I have after they were
> reworked by a good set-up guy in New Orleans...I didn't have a
> cut-away flat top and wanted one because I had gotten use to cut-aways
> on a couple of arch tops...I had no guitar with onboard, preamp, EQ,
> and wanted to try them...and I didn't have a blue guitar. With only
> one guitar, I filled several guitar "needs"...that is pretty good
> logic, I think. <g>
> Other than that, I bought it on a whim from the music
> department in a South Texas service station when I really had just
> gone in to get some picks...I had even left the car running I was in
> such a hurry.
>
myself a few times, *but* I've always ended up selling them again in fairly
short order (I'm a real snob, not an off-the-wall one like you <g>).
>>>You only go around once...or twice in some belief
>>> systems.
>
>>I think plastic Macs were badly behaved lutes in a previous existence
>
> No, not really. They, as all plastic products, will become
> more prevalent when we stop murdering the trees that give us the very
> breath we breathe.
>
I'm hoping to see more use of plantation timber in guitar making. I think
the Martin Smartwood series is a good start, and both Maton and Cole Clarke
use plantation bunya pine in their guitars. A wider range of timbers is now
being used than a couple of decades ago, but I have no idea how eco-friendly
they are.
Tony D
Ken Cashion
wrote:
I do not think I have bought anything with the idea of selling
it. If I didn't want to have it, I wouldn't have bought it in the
first place. However, I have convinced myself to buy something by
telling myself that I could always sell it and get my money back but
again, I never do that.
>>>>You only go around once...or twice in some belief
>>>> systems.
>>
>>>I think plastic Macs were badly behaved lutes in a previous existence
>>
>> No, not really. They, as all plastic products, will become
>> more prevalent when we stop murdering the trees that give us the very
>> breath we breathe.
>>
>
>I'm hoping to see more use of plantation timber in guitar making. I think
>the Martin Smartwood series is a good start, and both Maton and Cole Clarke
>use plantation bunya pine in their guitars. A wider range of timbers is now
>being used than a couple of decades ago, but I have no idea how eco-friendly
>they are.
I know. I used to know my woods but not anymore.
Ken
Misifus
Well, I'm not arguing against you, Tony. Just trying to understand.
Here in the states, most retailers discount Martin by about 40%.
They're not required to, of course, but the market forces them to. If
the prices you're quoting are in US dollars, they're considerably higher
than what we would pay, however, if the dealers aren't discounting at
all, that would account for a lot of it.
As to quality, I doubt that anyone at the factory takes the time to sort
the guitars so as to send the dubious examples abroad. I'm not saying
it can't happen, but if Marting intends to build world wide sales,
that's not the best way to do it.
I think a number of posters from here in the states have indicated that
they have found Martins here that there were not impressed with. As
with any mass produced item, that will happen. It's also possible that
Martins just aren't your cup of tea. There are a lot of folks here in
that position, too. In fact, I suspect that dissatisfaction with the
offerings of Martin and Gibson created the market opening that allowed
Taylor, Larrivee, Santa Cruz and others to flourish.
Anyway, it's good to read your thought on the subject.
-Raf
Misifus
That's Ed's way of saying, "Yes."
-Raf
Ed Edelenbos
> Ed Edelenbos wrote:
>> "Ty Ford" <tyre...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:WJ-dnbF7ifm...@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> by
>>> the same company?
>>>
>>> Ty Ford
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other
>>> audiocentric
>>> stuff are at www.tyford.com
>>>
>>
>> www.lasido.com
>
>
> That's Ed's way of saying, "Yes."
>
> -Raf
Well, yes beyond a shadow of doubt. (grin)
Ed
rock...@chariot.com.au
MJRB
Zeke Skarland
Jack wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>
> Thanks for your input,
>
> Jack
It's only 6.5 times better, so the prices are a little out of whack -
either the Yammie is overpriced or the Martin is.
JOKE... seriously, ya can't answer that question. What you should do
is just decide for yoruself how much you can afford and then whether
you find a guitar that you actually think is worth that much - if it
gives you that much pleasure to play it. In terms of sound, feel,
looks and mystique (whatever that means to you). For example, many
people would simply enjoy having a Martin because it's a Martin -
there's nothing wrong at all with that. I've really enjoyed many
cheap guitars, but also really, really enjoy the couple of "good" ones
I have and don't have any second thoughts whether they're worth it or
not. good luck, have fun
le...@visi.com
> Hi there,
>
> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
>
I look at the Price-to-performance ratio as being a hyperbolic
curve. Thus, "7 times better" really does not apply. This
viewpoint applies to guitars, cars, skis, stereos, shoes,
whatever.
Another thing to consider is how well *you* will be able to
exercise the full potential of the [insert item here]. My take
is that if you can't forsee yourself reaching at least 80% of
an item's capability, why would you spend the money,
other than ego?
Ken Cashion
<le...@visi.com> wrote:
Gosh! But I like the way you think!
And going one step further, when we are producing more
efficient and cost-effective music at the same 80% of ability were
achieved on a cheapo as compared to a hand-built.
Of course, there are folks who buy guitars to look at more
than play. (Have you seen a picture of my glue guitar?)
Misifus
Here we go again, salvation by grace, or salvation by works? <g>
le...@visi.com
> On 17 Feb 2006 06:21:30 -0800, "le...@DESPAMvisi.DESPAM.com"
> <le...@visi.com> wrote:
>
> >Jack wrote:
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> I am looking at a Yamaha ($100) that is 1/7th the price of a Martin
> >> Dreadnought ($700). Is the Martin really 7 times better, what is IT
> >> that one is really paying for/getting with a Martin besides Mahogany
> >> wood and perhaps greater longevity ?
> >>
> >
> >I look at the Price-to-performance ratio as being a hyperbolic
> >curve. Thus, "7 times better" really does not apply. This
> >viewpoint applies to guitars, cars, skis, stereos, shoes,
> >whatever.
> >
> >Another thing to consider is how well *you* will be able to
> >exercise the full potential of the [insert item here]. My take
> >is that if you can't forsee yourself reaching at least 80% of
> >an item's capability, why would you spend the money,
> >other than ego?
>
> Gosh! But I like the way you think!
<grin> Why..thank you, sir.
> And going one step further, when we are producing more
> efficient and cost-effective music at the same 80% of ability were
> achieved on a cheapo as compared to a hand-built.
I'm sorry, I don't quite get your drift there. But as the original
poster was wondering why he might fork over 7X $$$ for one
guitar compared to another, I thought I was on the topical target.
I was *not* beginning a one man crusade for "cost-effective"
music production(!)
> Of course, there are folks who buy guitars to look at more
> than play. (Have you seen a picture of my glue guitar?)
Well yes, I've seen the glue guitar - who amongst has not?
<grin> I *did* consider expounding upon how acquisition of
functional objects primarily as art could/should be considered
an ego trip, but decided it was self evident.
Ken Cashion
wrote:
Nope...salvation by money. Buy your way to a Heavenly sound.
Ken <g>
Ken Cashion
<le...@visi.com> wrote:
I have had this demonstrated to me so many times, I thought it
was intuitively obvious. <g>
>> Of course, there are folks who buy guitars to look at more
>> than play. (Have you seen a picture of my glue guitar?)
>
>Well yes, I've seen the glue guitar - who amongst has not?
>
><grin> I *did* consider expounding upon how acquisition of
>functional objects primarily as art could/should be considered
>an ego trip, but decided it was self evident.
I have learned the obvious...which, lets face, it is not that
difficult to do...that availability increases consumption...then
availability of a guitar makes it so easy to play, it get played more.
So I wonder how many of us keep their guitars in cases and those who
keep them out within reach and how much they play said guitars.
I used to take immaculate guitars from their cases and now I
don't have a guitar that doesn't have smudges from playing.
Ken
le...@visi.com
The start of another "scientific poll"?
Put me down for 3 "cost effective" guitars on stands in the living
room, and the "expensive" $2000 guitar hanging from the wall in
the bedroom upstairs, serving as ready to play art.
"Why 3 guitars?", someone will ask. Because I haven't built
any more stands - two more guitars live in cases in the closet.
6 string dread, standard tuning
6 string dread with "stock" action, tuned to OpenG for
delta blues slide and or Keith Richards licks
12 string dread, standard tuning
John Holbrook
"Ken Cashion" <kcas...@charter.net> wrote in message
> >Here we go again, salvation by grace, or salvation by works? <g>
> >
> > -Raf
>
> Nope...salvation by money. Buy your way to a Heavenly sound.
>
> Ken <g>
Neither, salvation by force! Haven't you heard of the Salvation Army? <g>
John
Remove capo to rep;y
Ken Cashion
<le...@visi.com> wrote:
<snipping - mine, too>
>> I have learned the obvious...which, lets face, it is not that
>> difficult to do...that availability increases consumption...then
>> availability of a guitar makes it so easy to play, it get played more.
>> So I wonder how many of us keep their guitars in cases and those who
>> keep them out within reach and how much they play said guitars.
>> I used to take immaculate guitars from their cases and now I
>> don't have a guitar that doesn't have smudges from playing.
>
>The start of another "scientific poll"?
>
>Put me down for 3 "cost effective" guitars on stands in the living
>room, and the "expensive" $2000 guitar hanging from the wall in
>the bedroom upstairs, serving as ready to play art.
Having guitars hanging on walls ... like if they fell they
would really hurt themselves, bothers me. This would not have been
possible here when they were testing the Saturn engines nearby.
>"Why 3 guitars?", someone will ask. Because I haven't built
>any more stands -
Building, huh? Like how? I finally settled on the Ultimates
200s after I messed with them a while. And after I cut six legs off,
I found out that they are very sturdy.
>two more guitars live in cases in the closet.
I only have one decent guitar in a closet and it is my G-40
Maccaferri Maccaferri. I just have the 12-string Framus in a case in
the music room. It needs a set up and if I don't get it out, it will
never happen...but first the studio needs to be made more secure.
> 6 string dread, standard tuning
> 6 string dread with "stock" action, tuned to OpenG for
> delta blues slide and or Keith Richards licks
> 12 string dread, standard tuning
I keep saying I am going to put some lights on something light
and try my hand at Taro patch but haven't done it yet. I am thinking
the 3/4 guitar would be nice for that. We will see.
Ken
Ken Cashion
Yeah...I've heard of them... I give them money all the time.
I also remember the song, "The Song of The Salvation Army."
"We don't eat fruit cake,
'Cause fruit cake has rum.
And one little bite turns a man
To a bum.
Can you imagine a sorrier sight
Than a man eating fruit cake
Until he got tight?"
"We don't eat cookies,
'Cause cookies have yeast.
And one little bite turns a man
To a beast.
Can you imagine a greater disgrace
Than a man in the gutter
With crumbs on his face."
"Take it, John."
Ken (who, two nights ago played a funny CD song and got all
the words to "Backin' To Birmingham." Thanks...)
le...@visi.com
> On 17 Feb 2006 14:54:13 -0800, "le...@DESPAMvisi.DESPAM.com"
> <le...@visi.com> wrote:
>
> <snipping - mine, too>
>
> >> I have learned the obvious...which, lets face, it is not that
> >> difficult to do...that availability increases consumption...then
> >> availability of a guitar makes it so easy to play, it get played more.
> >> So I wonder how many of us keep their guitars in cases and those who
> >> keep them out within reach and how much they play said guitars.
> >> I used to take immaculate guitars from their cases and now I
> >> don't have a guitar that doesn't have smudges from playing.
> >
> >The start of another "scientific poll"?
> >
> >Put me down for 3 "cost effective" guitars on stands in the living
> >room, and the "expensive" $2000 guitar hanging from the wall in
> >the bedroom upstairs, serving as ready to play art.
>
> Having guitars hanging on walls ... like if they fell they
> would really hurt themselves, bothers me. This would not have been
> possible here when they were testing the Saturn engines nearby.
Charlie Hoffman convinced me that hanging was as good as any
other way outside of a case. I *do* have a very heavy duty hanger
(whose name I can't recall) and I was lucky to line up on a stud.
I guess we weren't thinking about rocket engines, but up on
the wall does pretty much keep it out of the way of children
and large dogs. No stand can do that.
>
> >"Why 3 guitars?", someone will ask. Because I haven't built
> >any more stands -
>
> Building, huh? Like how?
I'm working on some designs that I hope to turn
into a product. I'm trying to use wood and other
"green" sustainable materials.
> I finally settled on the Ultimates
> 200s after I messed with them a while. And after I cut six legs off,
> I found out that they are very sturdy.
Interesting.
>
> >two more guitars live in cases in the closet.
>
> I only have one decent guitar in a closet and it is my G-40
> Maccaferri Maccaferri. I just have the 12-string Framus in a case in
> the music room. It needs a set up and if I don't get it out, it will
> never happen...but first the studio needs to be made more secure.
Go get the Framus set up, secure the studio a bit, then don't
leave a case in there. I doubt that any thieves would bother a
Framus without a case. <grin>
I'm hoping to meet up with you mighty mighty Framus players and
compare sound vs my "vintage" Fender F-80-12s someday soon.
Kinda pointing toward the EC gathering.
>
> > 6 string dread, standard tuning
> > 6 string dread with "stock" action, tuned to OpenG for
> > delta blues slide and or Keith Richards licks
> > 12 string dread, standard tuning
>
> I keep saying I am going to put some lights on something light
> and try my hand at Taro patch but haven't done it yet. I am thinking
> the 3/4 guitar would be nice for that. We will see.
Yeah! Explore more for shore....
Ken Cashion
<le...@visi.com> wrote:
Oooo...I didn't think about that. We have a dainty little dog
and the kids have been grown and gone for so long I forget about them.
>> >"Why 3 guitars?", someone will ask. Because I haven't built
>> >any more stands -
>>
>> Building, huh? Like how?
>
>I'm working on some designs that I hope to turn
>into a product. I'm trying to use wood and other
>"green" sustainable materials.
Good luck...the perfect guitar stand hasn't been built.
I just had an idea...you can always enlarge a photo of your
favorite person, glue that to ply, cut it out and then put little
support pieces on it, and put guitar supports where you can just stick
the guitar in the playing position on that person.
Like maybe I could have a life-size Emmy Lou and she could be
standing there holding my J-45 and I could saunter up and say, "Wow!
Emmy Lou, that is a really nice guitar. Mind if I play it some?"
And I could take it from her and play. And later, I would be
able to say, "I was talking with Emmy Lou the other day and she gave
me her J-45 to play, and...."
The problem gets serious should I start to remember what she
said to me.
>> I finally settled on the Ultimates
>> 200s after I messed with them a while. And after I cut six legs off,
>> I found out that they are very sturdy.
>
>Interesting.
For small-ish guitars, it is Ok to cut about 4" off. I
wouldn't do this for a big 17" bout though.
>> >two more guitars live in cases in the closet.
>>
>> I only have one decent guitar in a closet and it is my G-40
>> Maccaferri Maccaferri. I just have the 12-string Framus in a case in
>> the music room. It needs a set up and if I don't get it out, it will
>> never happen...but first the studio needs to be made more secure.
>
>Go get the Framus set up, secure the studio a bit, then don't
>leave a case in there. I doubt that any thieves would bother a
>Framus without a case. <grin>
Good thinkin'. <g>
>I'm hoping to meet up with you mighty mighty Framus players and
>compare sound vs my "vintage" Fender F-80-12s someday soon.
>Kinda pointing toward the EC gathering.
The Framus won't be there...what about D/FW or TX in near
Austin in October?
>>
>> > 6 string dread, standard tuning
>> > 6 string dread with "stock" action, tuned to OpenG for
>> > delta blues slide and or Keith Richards licks
>> > 12 string dread, standard tuning
>>
>> I keep saying I am going to put some lights on something light
>> and try my hand at Taro patch but haven't done it yet. I am thinking
>> the 3/4 guitar would be nice for that. We will see.
>
>Yeah! Explore more for shore....
I have three CD how-to's and three or four how-to books. How
hard can it be with all that help?
And more importantly... and this is big time...I have a video
tape I made of Fran Guidry sitting on the tail gate of Bob Buick and
he is giving me a lesson and concert on that stuff. Fran is so
good...and nice.
Ken, I might be nice someday.
le...@visi.com
> On 18 Feb 2006 07:41:05 -0800, "le...@DESPAMvisi.DESPAM.com"
> <le...@visi.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
> I just had an idea...you can always enlarge a photo of your
> favorite person, glue that to ply, cut it out and then put little
> support pieces on it, and put guitar supports where you can just stick
> the guitar in the playing position on that person.
> Like maybe I could have a life-size Emmy Lou and she could be
> standing there holding my J-45 and I could saunter up and say, "Wow!
> Emmy Lou, that is a really nice guitar. Mind if I play it some?"
> And I could take it from her and play. And later, I would be
> able to say, "I was talking with Emmy Lou the other day and she gave
> me her J-45 to play, and...."
> The problem gets serious should I start to remember what she
> said to me.
But maybe I could guess what the wife might say...
<snip>
>
> >I'm hoping to meet up with you mighty mighty Framus players and
> >compare sound vs my "vintage" Fender F-80-12s someday soon.
> >Kinda pointing toward the EC gathering.
>
> The Framus won't be there...what about D/FW or TX in near
> Austin in October?
We'll see. In retrospect, I should have bagged all my
troubles and hit the road for the last TX gathering.
<snip>
Ken Cashion
<le...@visi.com> wrote:
I will assure you that is what we did. We had just gotten
back telephone service since the hurricane and I still had days of
chain sawing to do, but I really needed a break from all the hurricane
stuff.
TX people and music makes me feel a whole lot better about
everything.
Ken