57classic Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Agreed, but of course the subjective argument about sonic properties will also be resolved by the market. Just not necessarily by the guitar market alone, but by the broader range of musical markets (consumption of live music, consumption of recorded music) which convey information about what people want to hear. The market will determine more than just the sonic properties. How many of us will hold out for the best of the best? That would include solid black ebony regardless of any real or perceived sonic differences. We don't have to go any farther back than laminated rosewood for an example. I think the visual will be the determining factor at the outset and when supplies really start to tighten people will grab for what they can get. Brazilian is like that. To some, if a guitar is made from Brazilian it must be better than the alternative. I'll paraphrase what was said earlier, the legend will grow as the material becomes scarce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 The market will determine more than just the sonic properties. How many of us will hold out for the best of the best? That would include solid black ebony regardless of any real or perceived sonic differences. We don't have to go any farther back than laminated rosewood for an example. I think the visual will be the determining factor at the outset and when supplies really start to tighten people will grab for what they can get. Brazilian is like that. To some, if a guitar is made from Brazilian it must be better than the alternative. I'll paraphrase what was said earlier, the legend will grow as the material becomes scarce. Yep. You don't have to go very far in the past to confirm this one. On the "sonic" side, I am reminded of a recent study (I'm sure some reasearch would turn it up) that had sophisticated listeners compare the tonal quality of certain Stradivari and Guarneri violins (considered the ultimate benchmark, and valued accordingly)with modern instruments of comparably high build quality. The listeners' positive responses to perceived tonal quality were closely linked to what they were told the instrument actually was. If they were told an instrument was by Stradivari, they overwhelmingly identified that as tonally superior. When the actual Stradivari was identified as something else, it was deemed as inferior to a modern instrument identified as a Stradivari. There was a high correlation in this study, as I recall. Perception is a funny thing, and I guarantee you we are often attracted to certain guitars because of the perceived value of their pedigree, rather than their actual tonal quality, if such a thing can be measured. The good thing about Gibsons is that we don't generally measure them against some abstract tonal ideal. Rather, we value them as individuals because of their character. I think this will be case whether they are made of rosewood, maple, or plywood. At the same time, I've decided to hang onto the guitars I have that contain ebony and Brazilian rosewood. They may prove to be good long-term investments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 interesting and informative comments all around. Thanks! I've been on the CITES/Lacey Act/endangered wood speaking circuit for some time: an international law meeting in Athens, Greece, Healdsburg Guitar Festival, the Acoustic Guitar Meeting in Sarzana, Italy a couple of weeks ago and will speak in a couple of weeks at the Montreal Guitar Show (it's a tough job, but someone's gotta do it!). This discussion has been helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 Yep. You don't have to go very far in the past to confirm this one. On the "sonic" side, I am reminded of a recent study (I'm sure some reasearch would turn it up) that had sophisticated listeners compare the tonal quality of certain Stradivari and Guarneri violins (considered the ultimate benchmark, and valued accordingly)with modern instruments of comparably high build quality. The listeners' positive responses to perceived tonal quality were closely linked to what they were told the instrument actually was. If they were told an instrument was by Stradivari, they overwhelmingly identified that as tonally superior. When the actual Stradivari was identified as something else, it was deemed as inferior to a modern instrument identified as a Stradivari. There was a high correlation in this study, as I recall. Perception is a funny thing, and I guarantee you we are often attracted to certain guitars because of the perceived value of their pedigree, rather than their actual tonal quality, if such a thing can be measured. The good thing about Gibsons is that we don't generally measure them against some abstract tonal ideal. Rather, we value them as individuals because of their character. I think this will be case whether they are made of rosewood, maple, or plywood. At the same time, I've decided to hang onto the guitars I have that contain ebony and Brazilian rosewood. They may prove to be good long-term investments. Well yes, I agree, and we've had a fair few blind listening sessions where most of us are off the mark in terms of what we think we're hearing. But I do think that once you allow for a degree of individuality, certain Gibson models really do stand out as sounding collectively rather different from the majority of guitars. For years I was only interested in electrics and nylons. I really found all the Martins, Martin clones, Ovations, Ovation clones, Taylors and most other common steel-strings pretty bland. Couldn't understand why people would pay so much for them. But certain Gibsons got me sonically. Just you don't encounter them that often in guitar shops or on stage in the UK, other than at the big festivals where they're blanched by the PA. So it took a while to build up a bank of experience which made this preference evident. Sure it's subjective what we like or don't like, and sure there are many different sounding J45s out there, and many different ideals in terms of what we want to hear in a J45. But I think most of us would agree on the most typical J45 sound - the percussive bass thump, the strong mids, the strong, but not overpowering trebles, the growl. I happen to like that sound, while others don't, including some who definitely prefer the same model but have encountered a different sound from certain variants and want that sound instead. I have never found the J45 ugly, but if it were looks that were influencing my ears when I started to appreciate steel strings because of what I heard from Gibsons, I would own a J 185 now or possibly an L1, and not an SJ. The mids on a reasonably typical hog-backed slopeshoulder really do sound quite different from those on the majority of other steel-string acoustics. The looks sold me the SJ rather than the J45, but that choice came after the sound won me over from the curvy maple side of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 I have never found the J45 ugly, but if it were looks that were influencing my ears when I started to appreciate steel strings because of what I heard from Gibsons, I would own a J 185 now or possibly an L1, and not an SJ. The mids on a reasonably typical hog-backed slopeshoulder really do sound quite different from those on the majority of other steel-string acoustics. The looks sold me the SJ rather than the J45, but that choice came after the sound won me over from the curvy maple side of things. The beauty of Gibsons is that once you buy into their visual and tonal character and variety, you can't get enough of them. I have a lovely old J-45, but am now looking at an SJ of similar vintage. Will they sound any differnt from each other? Maybe, maybe not. It's like prospecting for gold: once you're hooked, you can't give it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suburude63 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Get ready ! Its all over now baby blue! Get ready for Plywood! and Plastic! subu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suburude63 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 As Hemingway said ! From class to crass ! There just to many peeps in this world !! A good Virus would clean it up. Old mother nature will take care of it! soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merseybeat1963 Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Ultimately, it's a commodity and money does the talking. Times have changed and a resource supply has dried up, as such that now makes that resource more attractive, the laws of supply and demand mean they can charge accordingly, it's the not the first and certainly won't be the last material to fall into this category. The sadness here is the short-sightedness that was clearly evident, bringing us to the position we're in. Limiting free choice with what to do with the remaining supplies is absurd, wouldn't a floor or furniture in some architecturally protected stately home preserved for historical value be a better use and open to more common enjoyment than some lounge player with the cash to flash playing some mediocre fingerpicking exercises in front of his iPad to publish on youtube and upload to a guitar forum? Is the next step a skills test when it comes to ownership? I know we're all guitar nuts here, but if we're going to talk about reality and species extinction a guild of master luthiers tossing & turning over decisions of what type of guitar to build with a slab of Brazilian seems a little ridiculous. Hi. Concerning ownership. The actual ownership of an instrument is really just a temporary thing.....5 years here..20 years there..kind of like the movie "The Red Violin" The initial buyer with the means to support the luthier that makes that type of time intensive instrument is paying the highest premium in most cases and is doing a noble service ,supporting that grade of work,dont you think. The novice with excess money will usually,in a relatively short period 5 - 15 years sell it off,almost always at a loss, making that fine thing more accessable to others with less. But the compromises built into the thing though is permanent to the instrument and ,in my opinion,need not be so. Maybe some sort of Guild certifying excellence but with no actual control..? Personally I think it is more worthwhile to build a fine instrument to some "mastergrade standard" than for Architectural work (but it is not too far behind).That quality of work is rare in both cases though. In this cultural desert we really have very little access to great houses.In the UK that experience is amazing. All the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParlourMan Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Hey, I take your points but I would also say: What purpose would a guild serve that the buying public doesn't already? most things about any guitar or any guitar design are subjective and of limited appeal. A guild would only serve over museum pieces, a la Ren Ferguson type bespoke stuff, now, factor in an alternative thought; Imagine Ren Ferguson was not responsible for saving a legacy name from the acoustic graveyard of the Norlin years, would anybody be paying over 100k? I doubt it... Any administrative body appointing or electing itself over such a thing would then have an influence over such matters, that's an administrative cost that would be passed on to the end customer as all manufacturers would want to be considered, it would only be a matter of time before that was donation dependent. We're all double-guessing what would be better in an industry we probably know little about aside playing the end product. It's kind of like a private individual who sold a car on eBay once telling Henry Ford where he was going wrong. Just some random thoughts..... All the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robatsu Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Mr. Taylor insultingly talks to his audience like they are children. This guy is totally disgenuous, typical guy trying to wrap his motives for making a buck in "saving the world, esp. African world, sincerity". What a tool. Just another grain of sand on the beach of reasons not to buy a Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewilyfool Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 I don't know about you guys, but every chance I get at garage sales and yard sales if I see a nice table top on some furniture, I buy it and store it in my garage for future guitars...I'm cornering the market!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
57classic Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Mr. Taylor insultingly talks to his audience like they are children. This guy is totally disgenuous, typical guy trying to wrap his motives for making a buck in "saving the world, esp. African world, sincerity". What a tool. Just another grain of sand on the beach of reasons not to buy a Taylor. Yes, he is a business man. Yes, he's putting his company in a great competitive position and expects to make a lot of money on this deal. No, he isn't a saint or savior and I don't think he's claiming to be. He always speaks in such a deliberate manner. If you've been paying attention to the opinions and attitudes of the buying public it would be apparent that the public is unaware of the forest mismanagement that has led to material shortages of tonewoods. This, he isn't making up. The public whines about things like how wide the grain spacing is on spruce tops and whether there is enough silking and ray flecks. How black ebony boards are has been a sign of premium quality for years.The public isn't ready for alternatives to traditional tonewoods, hence, his professorial delivery. The message needed to be put forth in an elementary way. The material shortages are real and will eventually affect all builders. If by his actions the supply is extended and the resource better managed, I applaud him. Just because he stands to benefit by this move doesn't mean he isn't doing the right thing. He is the one taking the financial risk investing in a foreign country. Why shouldn't he reap rewards? Tool, I don't think so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j45nick Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 Yes, he is a business man. Yes, he's putting his company in a great competitive position and expects to make a lot of money on this deal. No, he isn't a saint or savior and I don't think he's claiming to be. He always speaks in such a deliberate manner. If you've been paying attention to the opinions and attitudes of the buying public it would be apparent that the public is unaware of the forest mismanagement that has led to material shortages of tonewoods. This, he isn't making up. The public whines about things like how wide the grain spacing is on spruce tops and whether there is enough silking and ray flecks. How black ebony boards are has been a sign of premium quality for years.The public isn't ready for alternatives to traditional tonewoods, hence, his professorial delivery. The message needed to be put forth in an elementary way. The material shortages are real and will eventually affect all builders. If by his actions the supply is extended and the resource better managed, I applaud him. Just because he stands to benefit by this move doesn't mean he isn't doing the right thing. He is the one taking the financial risk investing in a foreign country. Why shouldn't he reap rewards? Tool, I don't think so. Agree 100%. It is entirely possible to conduct business in a way that is both personally profitable and socially responsible. It's just not a combination we often see, and we are instantly suspicious of motivation. A healthy dose of skepticism is always the best approach, but do your own research before dismissing Mr. Taylor's motivation out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.