How Much Do Construction Methods Influence Your Buying Choice

[William2]

Since returning to the guitar six years ago, listening and discovering the different bracing patterns, neck connections, materials, and choices builders make, I have to say my choices are influenced by how the instrument is made. I started out with Eastman's, but soon got sick of that heavy gloss finish and the instrument's weight that mine had. Then I moved to the Waterloo's, but learned they had a bolt on neck. I thought how ridiculous for supposedly replica period instrument. Then I moved on to the Larrivee's because of their dovetail neck join and all solid wood construction. And lastly, I tried out a couple of the lower end Martin instruments for the same reasons I bought the Larrivee's. I haven't even considered makers like Taylor or Gibson who just throw a pickup system into their instruments. Did I say I wanted this? I must say however, I am a sucker for an eye-catching finish. I don't like instruments with necks made in two or more pieces like Iris and I believe Eastman also. I don't like the sound of the bolt on neck. There is a difference. And I guess I don't like substitute materials for materials I expect on fingerboards and bridges. This really helps me narrow down what I look at and what I will buy in my price range. Do these factors influence your buying choices?

[eded]

I play the guitar.  If they sound good and feel good in my hands, and they are what I want, I buy them.  I have never been able to hear a difference between bolt on vs glued (vs neck thru for electrics).  My 12 string is a low-end Martin with the laminated wood strip neck and "rich lite"???  or whatever they call the artificial ebony.  It does everything I need which is limited.  I tend towards satin finish but that's not a deal breaker.

I have found focussing on anything other than the sound, is a distraction.

Ed

p.s.: I've been thru everything from 70's plywood Harmony Stella's to the (mostly) Larrivee acoustics I own now, including Charvel, Blueridge, Ovation, Martin, Gibson, Taylor, Guild, etc.

[B0WIE]

I obsessively study the way instruments are made and learn as much as possible about their components and construction before buying. But... it's has very little influence on how I feel about an instrument. I reserve those judgements for the way they behave and sound.

 I also don't think that some techniques or materials are always superior because instruments aren't all supposed to sound the same. I love my Waterloo because it's dry and lively with less sustain. Collings did a lot of things to make it sound that way and it's brilliant at what it does. But, my DS guitar from that same parent company is built and sounds much different. Technically "better", but to be honest the Waterloo gets more play time.

This reminds my of another hobby of mine. Koi fish. I have some very expensive koi bred by a top breeder in Japan, raised in a special mud pond for 2 years, and selected for superior genetics. But, my favorite koi is an old yellow gal from some unknown fish farm in the US. She cost me $9 at Petco 10 years ago and is imperfect in her pattern but she's my favorite.

[Queequeg]

Dovetail neck joints look good and are very traditional but the first time you have to pony up for a neck reset you might wish it was a mortise & tenon joint or a bolt on which are much easier and quicker (read: cheaper) to  repair.
Multi-piece necks are probably less likely to warp and possibly stronger.
What does it all mean?
I like tradition and I respect it.
I like innovation, and inspired advances in technology too.
Edited to add I have a couple carbon fiber guitars which I know are cringe-worthy to many of you.

[William2]

I obsessively study the way instruments are made and learn as much as possible about their components and construction before buying. But... it's has very little influence on how I feel about an instrument. I reserve those judgements for the way they behave and sound.

 I also don't think that some techniques or materials are always superior because instruments aren't all supposed to sound the same. I love my Waterloo because it's dry and lively with less sustain. Collings did a lot of things to make it sound that way and it's brilliant at what it does. But, my DS guitar from that same parent company is built and sounds much different. Technically "better", but to be honest the Waterloo gets more play time.

This reminds my of another hobby of mine. Koi fish. I have some very expensive koi bred by a top breeder in Japan, raised in a special mud pond for 2 years, and selected for superior genetics. But, my favorite koi is an old yellow gal from some unknown fish farm in the US. She cost me $9 at Petco 10 years ago and is imperfect in her pattern but she's my favorite.

I love your comments. They always make think and consider my position. I loved my Waterloo WL-12 when I bought it. I played nothing else. And then I decided to purchase the Jumbo King by Waterloo. After playing it, it was so hard on my fretting hand, I thought, my God what have I done? It sat there for several months. Reassessing the instrument, I replaced the strings with lights, and this helped my hand greatly. And while I still hated the large V neck, it quickly took over first place as my favorite instrument. My repertoire sounded perfect on this instrument, and it had none of the thin, nasal, limited dynamics of the Waterloo 00 instruments. It was a piano on 6 strings if you are a fingerstyle player. Then I found out about the bolt on neck, and it ruined my thoughts about this instrument. I was watching a small store that sold lefty instruments and became interested in Larrivee Guitars based on demos they made and their build. I wanted a 12-fret instrument, and it was coming but there was a delay, so I purchased the D-40r and loved it for its neck and sound. Soon after followed the arrival of the SD-40RW I wanted and after playing it, I decided reluctantly to sell the Waterloo JK. With the exception of that neck style, I still regret this. It had incredible sustain and that is where I got the idea that its light weight had to be a factor. Still missing my Waterloo experience with the JK, I discovered the Martin DSS-17 and also considered the Iris brand. I dismissed Iris because of its price and neck build, and I thought based on demos, the Martin DSS-17 sounded or could sound as good in the right hands, mine LOL!!! And it was $1000 cheaper. I had an urge for that cheaper, non-piano sound my repertoire requires, I just have to learn pieces that sound good on these types of instruments. I've just found it hard, not technically, just keeping my interest. I love listening to this music, however. I am sorry I sold the Martin's. At my age, I decided to limit the number of guitars I own. You can only play one at a time. And I felt the less time I spent bonding with my instrument. less successful we would sound. I am considering one last guitar, and maybe I should open my construction ideas to other possibilities. I don't worry about costs related to a neck reset at my age, let the next guy worry about it LOL. There is a brighter harsher sound with a bolt on neck. Some like, I don't.

[ducktrapper]

Like when eating a delicious dinner, I generally have zero thoughts about the preparation. 

[Queequeg]

Like when eating a delicious dinner, I generally have zero thoughts about the preparation. 

Foie gras, anyone?
Haggis?

[ducktrapper]

Foie gras, anyone?
Haggis?

I said a delicious dinner. 

[Queequeg]

I said a delicious dinner. 

[guitarman001]

Foie gras, anyone?
Haggis?

Haggis yum yum!

[kevbroce]

I appreciate traditional materials and construction with Acoustic guitars. I've always acknowledge Taylor to be nice guitar but I don't have much interest in them. I picked one up a the store the other day and was kinda shocked by how nice and resonant it was. It was lower end model with a matte finish, and was practically the opposite in tone an feel than I assumed a Taylor would be... quite nice really. But even still, I'm emotionally drawn to more traditional instruments. I'm more Martin than Taylor but I've never owned either. It's not really logical. But then again, I view instruments as artistic creations as much, probably more, than as tools, so why not.  As far as neck joint, I haven't played enough nice guitars to notice a difference... Huss and Dalton, Bourgeois, Collings are bolt ons, Santa Cruz and Larrivee are dove tail. I own a Santa Cruz, but all the others I've played have been nice enough. Bust still, emotionally give, me a dove tail..

[William2]

I appreciate traditional materials and construction with Acoustic guitars. I've always acknowledge Taylor to be nice guitar but I don't have much interest in them. I picked one up a the store the other day and was kinda shocked by how nice and resonant it was. It was lower end model with a matte finish, and was practically the opposite in tone an feel than I assumed a Taylor would be... quite nice really. But even still, I'm emotionally drawn to more traditional instruments. I'm more.kartij than Taylor but I've never owned either. It's not really logical. But then again, I view instruments as artistic creations as much, probably more, than as tools, so why not.  As far as neck joint, I haven't played enough nice guitars to notice a difference... Huss and Dalton, Bourgeois, Collings are bolt ons, Santa Cruz and Larrivee are dove tail. I own a Santa Cruz, but all the others I've played have been nice enough. Bust still, emotionally give, me a dove tail..

I should say I prefer a dovetail neck joint. I have owned bolt on necks. I can hear the difference, but a bolt on neck does have a sound the has its fans. I know little about neck joins. Recently I read that a Martin I owned had a simple dovetail neck join. Apparently on their more expensive instruments they use a compound dovetail neck join and this also has its own sound. I would say I personally prefer an instrument that is light weight with as thin a top as possible. And a primary criterion is an instrument should have sustain. I don't care how it is accomplished. with an Adi top, sanded thin or both, I think solo players look for sustain to have a melodic line that is there over whatever bass or arpeggio things that are going on. As a left-hand player, I haven't had the opportunity to play boutique instruments and I wonder if these are lightly built instruments. The power and sustain of some that I have listened to sure has me curious about this.

[B0WIE]

I honestly don't notice a difference with neck joints in acoustics. If it were a cheap bolt on I might but a well built dove tail or bolt are both fine for me.
In electric guitars and ESPECIALLY with electric bases I do notice a strong difference. Particularly when the tuners and bridge are mounted on the same piece(s) of wood. The sustain is much stronger.

The neck and body on an acoustic don't have the same relationship as in an electric though. The body/top/bracing is far more impactful for me and works somewhat independently.

As someone who dabbles in woodworking, I do appreciate the dove tail on that level.

[Queequeg]

I should say I prefer a dovetail neck joint. I have owned bolt on necks. I can hear the difference, but a bolt on neck does have a sound the has its fans.

So if I hand you a guitar, you can play it and without looking- just from the sound- you can tell whether it has a bolt-on or dovetail neck joint?
That's... amazing.

[William2]

So if I hand you a guitar, you can play it and without looking- just from the sound- you can tell whether it has a bolt-on or dovetail neck joint?
That's... amazing.

Thank you. Well, if I was comparing two instruments I could. I'm not knocking bolt-on necks, I may even change my point of view if I ever played one of the big boutique makers instruments. But I always have in the back of my mind that this is maybe a time cost saving measure by the maker.  Today I was watching a video review of a Martin 1937 Authentic on Alamo Music.  Everything was period construction and the person giving the review said I can just feel it vibrating from the sound of my voice. At the end he played a few notes that he stopped and slowly turned the instrument completely around and you could hear these notes he had played and stopped.

[ducktrapper]

I've always tended toward dove tailed neck joints on acoustic guitar always feeling that bolt on necks were for electrics. However, I would love to set up blind tests with all these variations of construction methods, materials etc. For my own sake, I'd like to see if some of the things (I think) I know are really true. 

[nctom]

I always preferred  dovetailed necks and bought Martin's, Gibsons, Yamaha, and others exclusively. Then I happened to try a Waterloo, loved the sound and playability and general build. Since then I have bought three, two 00's and a jumbo and they became my new favorites. I still like the others, but not obsessively.

[nctom]

Oops, forgot to mention my two Larrivees, a great Forum III and an older custom 00-09. Both great guitars.

[William2]

I always preferred  dovetailed necks and bought Martin's, Gibsons, Yamaha, and others exclusively. Then I happened to try a Waterloo, loved the sound and playability and general build. Since then I have bought three, two 00's and a jumbo and they became my new favorites. I still like the others, but not obsessively.

I'm a dovetail person also. I had two Waterloo's, but the neck was too rough on the Jumbo King. And the Wl-12 was too repertoire limiting. There is something harsh to my ears with a bolt on neck. That is why I'd get a Martin or Gibson if Larrivee didn't exist.

[Silence Dogood]

I wouldn't be able to tell anyone how a guitar was made based on playing it.  Someone might play a Taylor and say, "Oh yeah, all this because of the bolt-on design..." or when playing a Gibson, "It's the dovetail that makes the difference for sure..."  I'm honestly suspicious of all such talk.   I've also never heard great musicians talk about such things. They just play music on the guitar that feels good in their hands.  That's what I'm striving for.  YMMV.