Fullmental Alpinist Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Nicely done, jt. Surprise me with either one for Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Nicely done, jt. Surprise me with either one for Christmas. OK! I'll send one, but I'm not telling you which. That will be your surprise Christmas morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 OK! I'll send one, but I'm not telling you which. That will be your surprise Christmas morning. I'll take the other one, whichever it is. Please? Seriously, I watched these videos when I was agonizing over whether to buy the FON 910 rosewood SJ that Tom now has. For this style of tuned-down ragtime-y fingerpicking, the hog model holds its own, although there is a clear but subtle difference between the balance and overall tonality of the guitars. That was a pretty important input in my decision, given the cost difference between two similar guitars. The pure rarity of the rosewood model was tempting from the investment point of view, but investment value doesn't mean much if you buy guitars like this with the intention of keeping them, which has been my approach. I ended up somewhere along the way with a very, every good modern hog SJ (Fuller's 1943 re-issue) that has no collector value--yet--but is a great guitar in its own right. For Tom's use--as a hard-picked bluegrass instrument--I suspect the big, organ-like character of the rosewood guitar really comes out. It was a much cheaper alternative to a pre-war D-28--although not directly comparable. Tom may have posted links to some videos showing this guitar being hard-driven, but I can't find them now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philfish Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 What a thread, I get hung up watching and listening to Tom and jt's videos. And there goes another hour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted December 5, 2015 Author Share Posted December 5, 2015 For Tom's use--as a hard-picked bluegrass instrument--I suspect the big, organ-like character of the rosewood guitar really comes out. It was a much cheaper alternative to a pre-war D-28--although not directly comparable. Tom may have posted links to some videos showing this guitar being hard-driven, but I can't find them now. That observation is absolutely spot on. I am talking about one functional role in the corner of one genre. It is true is that it is an iconic role in both the development both 20th century American music and on the emergence of the vintage guitar market. You can also say lots of positive things about that genre and its power, popularity, cultural continuity, and the high level of virtuosity that is found there. In some quarters it is incredible popular (particularly in the highland south from which it sprang) and it is very hard to do if you are not given a banjo in your crib. BTW, here is a picture of my grandson. It is also something that is not widely known, but is easily recognized by experienced bluegrass players -- a true teaching moment. But is only very important in one corner of one specific genre. That genre is actually only one corner of our musical life. And our musical life is only one tiny corner of the acoustic musical world. One size does not fit all! I have more to say on this subject but right now I have to go see a 48 D-28. Here are some rhythm comparisons with prewar D-28s. And some lead Let's pick, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 For another comparison of rosewood and mahogany Banner SJs, I offer these clips from the CD companion to my book. On this page, track 11 was recorded with a rosewood, FON 910 SJ; track 12 was recorded with the mahogany FON 2735 SJ. And, a video with the great Lauren Sheehan playing 2735: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWOO2NaZ8l0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 For another comparison of rosewood and mahogany Banner SJs, I offer these clips from the CD companion to my book. On this page, track 11 was recorded with a rosewood, FON 910 SJ; track 12 was recorded with the mahogany FON 2735 SJ. And, a video with the great Lauren Sheehan playing 2735: Lauren Sheehan really is brilliant on this CD. You picked the right person to showcase the sound of a variety of banner Gibsons. It's a good things CD's don't wear out. I can't tell you how many times I've played my copy. Anyone who doesn't own the Kalamazoo Gals book and accompanying CD has a huge gap in their vintage Gibson education. As good as the live recording of "So Sweet" is, the studio version on the CD shows off both the Guitar and Lauren's voice to much greater advantage, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 5, 2015 Share Posted December 5, 2015 Lauren Sheehan really is brilliant on this CD. You picked the right person to showcase the sound of a variety of banner Gibsons. It's a good things CD's don't wear out. I can't tell you how many times I've played my copy. Anyone who doesn't own the Kalamazoo Gals book and accompanying CD has a huge gap in their vintage Gibson education. As good as the live recording of "So Sweet" is, the studio version on the CD shows off both the Guitar and Lauren's voice to much greater advantage, Thanks for the kind words! I'm a dedicated mahogany guy. As much as I appreciate a 1930s "bone," I prefer a 1930s D-18 (or, better, OM-18). This said, each of the rosewood Banner SJs I've played - I've played four - have slayed me. I don't play any bluegrass guitar (but do occasionally on mandolin), and appreciate Tom's insights. But, for this old fingerpicker, original rosewood SJs are sublime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted December 5, 2015 Author Share Posted December 5, 2015 I'm a dedicated mahogany guy. As much as I appreciate a 1930s "bone," I prefer a 1930s D-18 (or, better, OM-18). This said, each of the rosewood Banner SJs I've played - I've played four - have slayed me. I don't play any bluegrass guitar (but do occasionally on mandolin), and appreciate Tom's insights. But, for this old fingerpicker, original rosewood SJs are sublime. Wow, I go away for a few hours and this happens. When I leave, we are talking about the role of rare mid 30s and early 40s RW Gibson Js as a bluegrass rhythm guitar, and I come back and we are talking about post folk revival coffeehouse styling on batch 910 SJs. That is one heck of a jump. However, as children of the folk revival we have some interest in this area -- and quite a lot guitars and videos too. Like bluegrass, that genre forms another corner of the overall acoustic guitar/music scene -- with its own fans and genre properties and constraints. I think it is an interesting topic, and it juxtaposes well with the Gibson guitar history of the late 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s. Of course, that genre did not really exist before the 50s, but it drew (or stole, depending on who you talk to :)) from a lot of well established tradition genres/cultures. There is a Martin piece to this story as well. Rather than wreck and clutter up this thread, I would rather start a new thread. I'll get one up in a day or two. All the best, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Wow, I go away for a few hours and this happens. When I leave, we are talking about the role of rare mid 30s and early 40s RW Gibson Js as a bluegrass rhythm guitar, and I come back and we are talking about post folk revival coffeehouse styling on batch 910 SJs. That is one heck of a jump. You are most welcome! :) Rather than wreck and clutter up this thread, I would rather start a new thread. I'll get one up in a day or two. Sorry for "wrecking and cluttering" your thread! In my defense, as always, you posted such cool stuff that I couldn't resist posting about the outer reaches of what you'd suggested. I'll do my best to refrain from posting in your next thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars68 Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Lauren Sheehan really is brilliant on this CD. You picked the right person to showcase the sound of a variety of banner Gibsons. It's a good things CD's don't wear out. I can't tell you how many times I've played my copy. Anyone who doesn't own the Kalamazoo Gals book and accompanying CD has a huge gap in their vintage Gibson education. As good as the live recording of "So Sweet" is, the studio version on the CD shows off both the Guitar and Lauren's voice to much greater advantage, I agree with everything said above, and I would also like to point out how great this CD sounds. In my opinion it is perfectly recorded. The recording does not get in the way of the music or the sublime sounding guitars, rosewood or not. Lars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Thanks for the kind words, Lars. I take credit only for the idea. Brilliant engineer and co-producer Eric Dawson Tate sculpted the sound at the state-of-the-art studio in Connecticut, Firehouse 12. Eric has done miraculous work, most notably engineering the orchestral recordings for major films like “The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby,” “Looper,” and “The Day I Saw Your Heart.” We used a pair of stereo matched DPA 4052 microphones, augmented by a Royer stereo SF24 microphone. Our Legacy console provided series 212L preamplifiers, though we used an AEA RPQ preamplifier for the Royer. Anyway, sorry, again, for “wreck and clutter” to Tom’s thread. But, I really did want to share the clips of rosewood SJs recorded with $5K microphones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave F Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Since we're on the subject I have a question for JT and Tom. When JT released the CD he asked us to review it and to pick out our favorite based on the sound of the guitar. I picked out the maple recordings and up to that point was not aware of my preference. Since that time I've done quite a few test on my own and the results are fairly consistent. While playing I consistently prefer the sound of rosewood over mahogany, maple, koa, and walnut. When I record them and play them back I prefer the sound of maple. Is there any scientific reason for this or are there too many variables such as the recording equipment? P.S. Good to have you back John! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted December 6, 2015 Author Share Posted December 6, 2015 I'll do my best to refrain from posting in your next thread! Well, you are failing as usual. When JT released the CD he asked us to review it and to pick out our favorite based on the sound of the guitar. I picked out the maple recordings and up to that point was not aware of my preference. Since that time I've done quite a few test on my own and the results are fairly consistent. While playing I consistently prefer the sound of rosewood over mahogany, maple, koa, and walnut. When I record them and play them back I prefer the sound of maple. Is there any scientific reason for this or are there too many variables such as the recording equipment? That is a really complex issue if you are interested in doing faithful reproduction of vintage guitar sounds, and a lot of the answers are counter-intuitive. That is very different from maximizing the perceive quality of the recordings -- the fact that humans actually prefer their recorded music to be distorted in pleasant ways means there is not great commercial reason for "getting it exactly right." I was immersed in the science behind this my whole career and a lot of the work that was done on the perception of quality in speech and audio communications systems is applicable to understanding the perception of acoustic music, but there needs to be a bit of work. A couple of Ph.D. theses should do it. Because I think this is so important, we are preparing to leave our instruments to an institution that can combine that work with a good music program for traditional acoustic music. Whenever I talk about the science on-line, responses vary from boredom to attacks for spouting techno-babble, so I seldom try anymore. However, I have started a blog -- not too much progress yet, but I am planning to make this one of the articles. http://vintageacousticinsruments.blogspot.com/ This would be another good separate thread I think. Best, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blindboygrunt Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 Am i the only one who detects some sexual tension? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 When I posted, "I'll do my best to refrain from posting in your next thread!" Tom responded: Well, you are failing as usual. I haven't failed yet, but there's still hope! The next thread would be, uh, the next thread. Anyway, I'm sorry to have angered you (and confess that I've no idea why you are angry). I really won't post in your next thread or any thereafter, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted December 6, 2015 Author Share Posted December 6, 2015 Anyway, I'm sorry to have angered you (and confess that I've no idea why you are angry). I really won't post in your next thread or any thereafter, either. I am not angry, but having known you for years, I don't think you can do it. It is going to be interesting how long you can contain yourself. . Best, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 6, 2015 Share Posted December 6, 2015 I am not angry, but having known you for years, I don't think you can do it. It is going to be interesting how long you can contain yourself. . Best, -Tom Weird. Best, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpbiii Posted December 7, 2015 Author Share Posted December 7, 2015 Weird. Best, John See, I told you. Best, -Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.