The Ken Parker archtop ... the highlight of my 2012 NAMM

[Jim Soloway]

Over the course of the NAMM weekend I had the privilege of playing three of Ken Parker's remarkable archtops, including playing an impromptu set at a gathering at Ken's suite. He also spent some time with me going over some of the technical design details. The following day he brought my favorite of the three over to our hotel and I recorded a short piece with it running through my Pod HD.

Here's a link to the clip
http://www.jimsoloway.com/MiscDemos2012/Parker.mp3

Here's a photo of me with the guitar playing at his gathering.


and finally, here are a couple photos of the actual guitar

[Snap]

Beautiful voice.

[bananafist]

Nice playing and a nice even sound. These guitars sound fantastic acoustically, going by the vids on Parkers site of Frank Vignola playing one.
Sadly I shall never afford one, and probably never hear one live, here in the UK. Its still good to know some builders are pushing the boundaries in interesting and radically different ways.

[kris]

Looks nice but not my sound...:-(

[PTChristopher]

Thanks for the sample. Fantastic designs in my opinion - and tough on the builder since the interior is so easy to see (where do you hide all the glue drips?)

What are we seeing on the side-view edge of the pickguard in the second pic? Is the PG laminated wood and carbon?

[ruiner54]

wow, those are beautiful looking...thanks for making me aware of their existence

[SamBooka]

Played one at the Montreal Guitar Show..

Where I am used to playing ES175 style guitars, I would pickup some of the other guitars there and say "wow.. guitar x has better string balance or guitar y projects better or blah blah blah."

When you pick up the parker and play it there is like a period where you are like "This is EXACTLY like a guitar... but this is NOTHING like a guitar" .. and then my brain blue screens and reboots..

Thanks for the clip.

[mr. beaumont]

Damn. Just...damn...

Gotta go buy a lottery ticket.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

The Parker archtop owners thread on TGP always makes me ponder: who do I have to kill to get one of these?

Beautiful playing, and a cool guitar.

[Pat Clare]

What price range are they in?

[kamlapati]

It looks like the inside is finished? Oh my...

Wow, wow, wow.

[Jim Soloway]

Originally Posted by PTChristopher

Thanks for the sample. Fantastic designs in my opinion - and tough on the builder since the interior is so easy to see (where do you hide all the glue drips?)

What are we seeing on the side-view edge of the pickguard in the second pic? Is the PG laminated wood and carbon?

Probably. Ken Parker is really the master of using composite material for strength and wood for tone. Everything, including the pick guard is insanely thin with the composites holding the structure together. This method also produces an insanely light weight guitar. They average about 3.5 lbs and he even manages too keep them well balanced at that weight.

Originally Posted by SamBooka

Played one at the Montreal Guitar Show..

Where I am used to playing ES175 style guitars, I would pickup some of the other guitars there and say "wow.. guitar x has better string balance or guitar y projects better or blah blah blah."

When you pick up the parker and play it there is like a period where you are like "This is EXACTLY like a guitar... but this is NOTHING like a guitar" .. and then my brain blue screens and reboots..

Thanks for the clip.

Pretty much my response as well. I'm not even sure how to begin to describe what these are all about but it sure was fun playing them.

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Damn. Just...damn...

Gotta go buy a lottery ticket.

I have to keep reminding myself, that this one should not even enter into the edges of the lust center of my brain. I'm just pleased that they thought it was worth letting me play one, because I'll never even get close to owning one.

Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles

The Parker archtop owners thread on TGP always makes me ponder: who do I have to kill to get one of these?

Beautiful playing, and a cool guitar.

Thanks. I'm working on a solo album right now and I really wanted a couple of alternate sounds to mix into the blend. I think this recording is clean enough that can just use this track as it is.

Originally Posted by Pat Clare

What price range are they in?

About $30,000

[dmorash]

Fascinating guitar. I did many a gig (albeit not jazz) with a Parker Nitefly, and it was just so different on many levels. Playing other guitars became hard work afterwards.

Sounds like it really suits fingerstyle players. Thanks for posting this.

[Retroman1969]

It's a beautiful guitar in a crazy way, and I loved your sound sample of it! Really nice playing.
Sadly, 30,000 bucks won't make me a better player.

[NSJ]

Two questions:

1. Eric Solomon also commented that the side-sound hole creates better acoustic sounds than the standard F-holes. What are the benefits of a side sound hole as opposed to standard F-holes or even oval holes?

2. Why is the neck attached the way it is to the body? Looks incredibly fragile. Is it just a case of eliminating excess weight, or is there a musical reason for the neck attached in such an unorthodox fashion.

EDIT: don't give that guitar to Pete Townshend! What ever you do..I'd hate to see it get smashed to bits into an amp for some stupid machismo reason..

[mr. beaumont]

I also find the side soundhole interesting...Many flattop acoustic builders are starting to do it, more in addition to a top hole as opposed to instead of it...they say it provides a better idea of what the guitar actually sounds like to the player...Which given how expensive this guitar is, I think a lot of the people buying it will be playing for themselves...I just don't see a lot of working musicians taking the plunge...however...that sound might make some think about a home equity loan...This seems to me more a purchase a serious collector who makes some serious money in a field other than music makes. Not dissing it because of that, I just can't see myself spending half a year's salary on a guitar, and doubt many of my playing/teaching brethren could afford to do the same!

As for the neck attachment, i'm guessing it's so no part of the neck hinders the top from vibrating...I'd call snake oil, but again, the guitar sounds simply wonderful IMHO...so something's working there.

As for fragile, perhaps, but I'm guessing anyone who buys a 30k guitar is likely going to treat it better than their children.

[bananafist]

There is quite abit of info about the guitars and their construction on his website, links to articles, etc., and also a long, ongoing thread on Gear Page, for those interested in the thinking behind the construction and design.

[NSJ]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

As for the neck attachment, i'm guessing it's so no part of the neck hinders the top from vibrating...I'd call snake oil, but again, the guitar sounds simply wonderful IMHO...so something's working there.

As for fragile, perhaps, but I'm guessing anyone who buys a 30k guitar is likely going to treat it better than their children.

Now you mention it, I guess it makes logical sense. No idea if it's true.

Parker is an interesting guy--made some very unique electric guitars (solid bodies), called "Parker Flys"--Adrian Belew plays/endorses them---wound up apparently selling the company.

Wonder if he has a covenant not to compete vis-a-vis the company he sold, at least in terms of electric guitars? Which is why he ventures into the arch top field.

Yeah, you wouldn't really take that guitar to the local restaurant/cafe gig, definitely a couch/recording instrument.

[Jim Soloway]

The neck attachement is actually one of the most interesting things about the guitar. That CF block is used to set the neck angle and adjust the action. This is necessary at least in part because the bridge is non-adjustable. There is a set screw on the back of the guitar that raises and lowers the pitch angle of the neck. And here's where it goes from interesting to genius ... when you use the set screw to change the neck angle, it completely changes the voice of the guitar. At one height you can make it bark like a Gypsy jazz guitar while at another height someone like me with a very soft touch can get a warmer, fuller response. And the punchline is that when you change the neck angle and the action, IT STAYS IN TUNE! That was one of the most amazing thing I've ever seen.

As for the price ... the truth is that I don't really think about it much. It's so far above what I could ever afford that they could cut in in half and it would still be unobtainium in my world. The cool part is that both Ken and several of the owners of these guitars have made sure that several serious players have been given the opportunity to experience them for at least a short time.

Ken's only building about six guitars a year, so even if they were free, they would only end up in a very small number of hands. In the long run though, I think the real value of these guitars will be in how other builders are influenced by the many radical engineering concepts in these guitars. He has a history of shaking up conventional thought in the world of luthiery and I suspect that we'll eventually see many of the ideas in this guitar show up elsewhere.

[mr. beaumont]

Originally Posted by Jim Soloway

The neck attachement is actually one of the most interesting things about the guitar. That CF block is used to set the neck angle and adjust the action. This is necessary at least in part because the bridge is non-adjustable. There is a set screw on the back of the guitar that raises and lowers the pitch angle of the neck. And here's where it goes from interesting to genius ... when you use the set screw to change the neck angle, it completely changes the voice of the guitar. At one height you can make it bark like a Gypsy jazz guitar while at another height someone like me with a very soft touch can get a warmer, fuller response. And the punchline is that when you change the neck angle and the action, IT STAYS IN TUNE! That was one of the most amazing thing I've ever seen.

As for the price ... the truth is that I don't really think about it much. It's so far above what I could ever afford that they could cut in in half and it would still be unobtainium in my world. The cool part is that both Ken and several of the owners of these guitars have made sure that several serious players have been given the opportunity to experience them for at least a short time.

Ken's only building about six guitars a year, so even if they were free, they would only end up in a very small number of hands. In the long run though, I think the real value of these guitars will be in how other builders are influenced by the many radical engineering concepts in these guitars. He has a history of shaking up conventional thought in the world of luthiery and I suspect that we'll eventually see many of the ideas in this guitar show up elsewhere.

Wow...I kinda get the feeling this is maybe the first really new thing in guitar building in a VERY long time.

[Pat Clare]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Wow...I kinda get the feeling this is maybe the first really new thing in guitar building in a VERY long time.

I'd be intetrested to hear what some of our Luthier's would say about that. For $30,000 it would have to play and sound better than any other guitar on the planet, but very nice design and workmanship for sure!!

[NSJ]

Originally Posted by Pat Clare

I'd be intetrested to hear what some of our Luthier's would say about that. For $30,000 it would have to play and sound better than any other guitar on the planet, but very nice design and workmanship for sure!!

I think the top-of-the-line Benedettos are in that price range ($24-26K?). Actually, 20K for the "Manhattan".

And THIS one retails for $40K!

http://benedettoguitars.com/guitars/.../sinfonietta™/

[Pat Clare]

Originally Posted by NSJ

I think the top-of-the-line Benedettos are in that price range ($24-26K?). Actually, 20K for the "Manhattan".

And THIS one retails for $40K!

http://benedettoguitars.com/guitars/.../sinfonietta™/

I wonder how the Benedetto and the Armstrong would compare if you were able to play both first in your private practice room and then one a gig with the most challenging players you work with.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Originally Posted by NSJ

I think the top-of-the-line Benedettos are in that price range ($24-26K?). Actually, 20K for the "Manhattan".

And THIS one retails for $40K!

http://benedettoguitars.com/guitars/.../sinfonietta™/

Someone payed $52,000 for this?!



Dood, there's something wrong with that wood!

[Jim Soloway]

Originally Posted by Pat Clare

I'd be intetrested to hear what some of our Luthier's would say about that. For $30,000 it would have to play and sound better than any other guitar on the planet, but very nice design and workmanship for sure!!

I don't think the price is really all that important, at least not to me. Once it reaches above a certain amount (fairly low in my case) it's beyond what I can afford anyway. Does it matter if it's $23,000 or $30,000 or even $300,000 when I can't afford $3,000? Not to me. Those are all fantasy numbers. But FWIW, I did think that it played better than any acoustic or archtop guitar that I had ever played. And I cite both acoustic and archtop because it really is both of those things. That's what really sets it apart from any of the high end archtops I've played: it isn't nearly as narrowly defined. From a playing standpoint, it's also a lot more practical than any high end archtop that I've played. It's amazingly light weight, surprisingly rugged and VERY feedback resistant.

As I said earlier, I just feel very fortunate to have had a chance to play it and even more fortunate to have been able to record it.

[kris]

"The sound is in the fingers"

[Jim Soloway]

Originally Posted by kris

"The sound is in the fingers"

Not really. The sound begins in the fingers. Where it goes from there is very much a function of the gear. My fingers are very consistent and I've done way too much recording with too many different guitars to believe otherwise.

[kris]

Originally Posted by Jim Soloway

Not really. The sound begins in the fingers. Where it goes from there is very much a function of the gear. My fingers are very consistent and I've done way too much recording with too many different guitars to believe otherwise.

Sure.
but... top jazz guitarists like: Scofield,Metheny use not so expensve Ibanez guitars.

[PTChristopher]

Surely there is room for both the Benedetto sensibilities and the Parker design.

I find it just superb that someone can combine fantastic workmanship and truly original design concepts.

EDIT: Hi Kris. Interesting point of view, but maybe we are celebrating (as they say) some superb design work here. It may not be to everyone's taste, but my opinion is that ALL players will benefit from open thinking on guitar design.

Chris

[Jim Soloway]

Originally Posted by kris

Sure.
but... top jazz guitarists like: Scofield,Metheny use not so expensve Ibanez guitars.

Pat Metheny also has a collection of guitars built by Linda Mazer that range from $25,000 to $75,000. He also collaborated with Linda on a Pat Metheny signature acoustic that sold for $32,000.

EDIT: And I have never suggested that anyone needs a $30,000 to make great music. Far from it. Give me a decent Telecaster and blackface Princeton type amp and I'm sure that I'd be very happy making music and whatever audience I manage to draw would be happy listening to it. That in no way detracts from the brilliance that Ken achieved with this guitar nor does it diminish the joy that I had playing it.