Matthew Larrivee Alamo music interview

[William2]

I listened to both interviews.  Very informative, particularly the (brief) history of Mr Larrivee (the elder and original) and his life.  Sounds like he had a rough start but made it through with hard work and determination.  I personally would enjoy learning more about that.  It must be an amazing life story. 

Maybe it was just Matthew's choice of words or just his conversational style, but it sounds like it's now his shop and he's running it and making decisions? ("The woods I choose, how I wind pickups, one of my designs," etc)  What role does Mr Larrivee still play?  As well as John Larrivee? etc.  Is it still a family-run company or has it become Matthew Larrivee Guitars?

It would be interesting if Mr. Larrivee were to write a biography especially since this will be a generational run business.

[Silence Dogood]

It would be interesting if Mr. Larrivee were to write a biography...

I'd be one of the first in line for that book.  I know Bob Taylor wrote a book some years ago but I've never read it. I doubt there are a lot of publishers knocking on doors for books from guitar-makers, but even something self-published and available in the Larrivee store would be great for those who know (or want to know more!). 

[Gill]

I'd be one of the first in line for that book.  I know Bob Taylor wrote a book some years ago but I've never read it. I doubt there are a lot of publishers knocking on doors for books from guitar-makers, but even something self-published and available in the Larrivee store would be great for those who know (or want to know more!). 

I agree, just listening to M L's brief outline of his Dads early life would be a very interesting read in itself,and of course,the story of how it all got going for him from his first experiences as an apprentice luthier,fascinating stuff to any Larrivee guitar fan surely.

[BlueBowman]

Thanks for posting these interviews. I watched both videos. Matt covers lots of interesting ground from the factory builder's perspective. But the one thing that really jumped out at me was his response to "voicing" guitars. He says he prefers a proven formula over individual voicing. I've read a lot about this process, and I think I've come to the conclusion that there probably really is lot of "mumbo jumbo" (Matt's words) in this process.* Go read William Cumpiano's blog on his thoughts. He thinks most makers are fooling themselves with the voicing process, himself preferring the term "minimum adequate structure" instead. He's a veteran builder and even wrote one of the first definitive books on guitar building.

Lightening the guitar in the right places will indeed make a guitar louder and bassier. Better? That's up to the individual. I know SCGC, for example, tunes their tops and backs to specific pitches. Best I can tell is they tune them a musical third apart from each other, and doing so will result in a different sound. Better? I like it, but I've also played guitars that weren't tuned in such a way, and they sound great as well. Maybe that's a kinda of voicing, I guess, but it still seems formulaic. Completely understandable in a factory setting. Incidentally, I also had a newer Taylor once that had its top and back tuned a musical third apart. I thought it sounded quite good.

Food for thought. It's great to hear guitar makers cover these topics. Well done, Matt.

*I've played too many great sounding guitars that were built to a formula to think that "voicing" is a must.

[B0WIE]

FWIW, SCGC doesn't shoot for specific pitches but a harmonious relationship between the nodes.

I'd have to personally disagree with Matt as I've found it can make all the difference in the world. But, we're also talking about a wildly different price range with base level Larrivees being less than 1/4 the cost of the least expensive SCGS. I personally think each company is the best at what they do, and absolutely worth their respective costs, but they're doing two different things, IMO.

[teh]

Writing a book would be a massive undertaking, especially one about the history of a company where the entire family is immersed in running all aspects of the business. I've learned a lot about the Larrivee Guitar Company from the videos and interviews they have produced or participated in over the years. What I like most about the Larrivee story is the fact that they built their own identity.

Perusing my bookshelves, I have 10 books written about the history of Martin Guitars. The first was "Martin Guitars: A History" written by Mike Longworth and published in 1976. Out of 219 pages, the last 101 pages cover guitar specifications and production totals. Six of the books were written or co-written by long time employee and company historian/archivist Dick Boak. One of the most interesting reads is "Images of America: C.F. Martin & Co." published in 2014 by Arcadia Publishing in Charleston SC. This 127 page book is chock full of photographs and captions that outline the company from 1796, C.F. Martin's birth year the birth of Chris Martin's daughter Claire who was born in 2004. The book shows it is available in paperback on Amazon for $13.60 and I own the other two books including "The C.F.Martin Archives" listed for $36.77. This book is a must for any guitar nerd like me.

[BlueBowman]

FWIW, SCGC doesn't shoot for specific pitches but a harmonious relationship between the nodes.

This seems a bit vague, Bowie, but I think I get what you're saying. I'm trying to get what that means, anyway 

I personally think each company is the best at what they do, and absolutely worth their respective costs, but they're doing two different things, IMO.

Agreed. I have immense respect for both companies.

And I wasn't aiming to draw a comparison of Larrivee to SCGC in my above post. As you say, that's unfair given their respective prices. I just know that often guitars in the boutique and handmade category are lighter in build than their factory counterparts. Is it the lighter tops, bracing, and backs making the difference in sound, or is it some nebulous concept of guitar "voicing?" FWIW, I don't totally agree with the idea that guitars can't be voiced (some luthiers, as mentioned above, do set the top and back to specific pitches, which is a kind of voicing, I suppose), I just think there's a lot of unsubstantiated, "woo woo" claims made about it. That stuff sells guitars.

All this is moot if a player likes the guitar, of course. That's what's most important. But I find this topic interesting. If Matt happens to be reading this thread, I'd be all ears to hear him elaborate more on the topic of voicing, if he feels inclined to do so.

[B0WIE]

This seems a bit vague, Bowie, but I think I get what you're saying. I'm trying to get what that means, anyway 

I didn't think you were aiming to do anything in particular, I was just chatting on the subject.
The intervals between the nodes. That's the relationship I'm referring to. Nodes being the areas between the braces that vibrate. The top vibrates as a whole, and the nodes vibrate as well. You're probably familiar but I'm elaborating for those who haven't looked into that sort of thing. I won't dive into the differences or advantages in this thread.

 As far as claims, I've seen videos showing the how and why but I've personally not seen one that goes into voodoo territory. I'm curious as to who is doing that. The vibration of, and relationship between nodes is also not something new. Violin makers have been studying this sort of thing for a long time. There's physics behind vibrational characteristics that are not really up for debate so I'm curious as to what's being called mumbo jumbo. But, I totally respect that some people feel it's not worth the costs associated with having a master luthier perform that process. A guitar can make beautiful music and be enjoyed for decades without being voiced.

[BlueBowman]

I didn't think you were aiming to do anything in particular, I was just chatting on the subject.
The intervals between the nodes. That's the relationship I'm referring to. Nodes being the areas between the braces that vibrate. The top vibrates as a whole, and the nodes vibrate as well. You're probably familiar but I'm elaborating for those who haven't looked into that sort of thing. I won't dive into the differences or advantages in this thread.

Thanks, Bowie. That is what I thought you were referring to in your post. My understanding is that some luthiers want those spaces (nodes) to be evenly distributed in terms of sound/pitch/response (how ever they define it).

As far as claims, I've seen videos showing the how and why but I've personally not seen one that goes into voodoo territory. I'm curious as to who is doing that. The vibration of, and relationship between nodes is also not something new. Violin makers have been studying this sort of thing for a long time. There's physics behind vibrational characteristics that are not really up for debate so I'm curious as to what's being called mumbo jumbo. But, I totally respect that some people feel it's not worth the costs associated with having a master luthier perform that process. A guitar can make beautiful music and be enjoyed for decades without being voiced.

I'm a non-builder, so my opinion ain't worth much. I'm just a serious player who also likes to tinker on cheap guitars in an effort to better understand the physics of the instrument. I make no bold claims one way or the other.

With that said, I think some of the "mumbo jumbo" talk comes from luthiers claiming they have total control over the voicing process, almost like they can nail the exact sound a customer has in their head (forget the problem of agreeing on "bright" vs "warm", etc). I've been told to be suspicious of such claims. Slightly altering this brace, or taking a minuscule amount of wood off this area, etc., can lead to the customer's idea of "perfection." I remember one respected luthier mentioning that there's an "illusion of control," when in his opinion, there's still a lot left to chance in the final outcome of the guitar's sound.

Some luthiers thickness the top for each given piece of wood (deflection testing with either hands or weights): find that "just right" place for the wood to be, and then they use bracing that's dimensionally the same for every guitar they make. This works, for sure. Some of the best builders use this process, but would it be considered voicing?

Or is it the builder that changes everything up on each guitar, bracing and top thickness and final sanding of the lower bout, etc; is that voicing the guitar? I'd think this would be a very difficult way to learn anything of the cause and effect relationship guitar-to-guitar.

That mystique of the "voicing" process sure helps sell guitars, but it seems shrouded in much mystery to me. I've often wondered how much there really is to it. Is it legit, or is it building guitars lighter, or is some combination of the two? I suppose I might never know the answer unless I start building them with my own hands!

Maybe what I'm really asking is, just what the heck does voicing a guitar actually mean? 

For those that made it this far, thanks for playing along!