-
No, they are made for their function. Their aesthetic qualities are incidental.
Originally Posted by Hogtown Fatty
-
10-24-2024 02:18 PM
-
But most musical instruments are not in museums. They are in the hands of musicians, who use them for their purpose — to make music. The aesthetic qualities of instruments are secondary, and their cultural significance is still further removed from the purpose for which they were made. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
-
How does one separate a musical instrument’s purpose from cultural significance? Originally Posted by Litterick
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Someone very few have heard of. A mid-level guy who had a nice run for 5 or 7 years with a famous 57st gallery. Not like a Schnabel, but his contemporary. A little older in fact. Then Wall Street crashed about '87 and the art market took a hard dive. I got laid off a year or two later, lost track of him and left NYC in '93. I have a few reasons for not wanting to name him in this forum. Originally Posted by Litterick
I guess my point is there's really a lot of well-to-do people around for whom $50K is peanuts. Millions of them. Some like cars, some like watches, some like the finest Scotch, some like artwork, and some like guitars. If I was in that league I'd have a few of the finest guitars and I'd make music with them. I'd fly you up here for a weekend of fine Scotch and music and let you play them too! Maybe a half dozen of you guys :)
It was an awesome day job BTW.
-
Well so if owning expensive things makes one happy,great! But the good news is that it’s always the magician and not the wand.
Most great music was made on fairly modest costing instruments.
And I don’t know of any millionaires who have made great music with expensive toys. Even George Benson uses fairly affordable guitars.
Now selling them is an entirely different matter, Lol!
-
His D'Aquisto, for example? Originally Posted by jads57
-
Hah, that name always reminds of a term I've only heard used by musicians Originally Posted by ccroft
schnabbel - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Define great?And I don’t know of any millionaires who have made great music with expensive toys.
The grands he played on were probably not cheap either but then you said with
-
-
Such a great album. And the Manzer baritone just sounds wonderful.
-
To be fair, it's probably not easy for any decent baritone classical NOT to sound good in the hands of a good player! Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
-
I don't buy that. Originally Posted by RJVB
First, this was a purpose built guitar with design features implemented specifically to handle the unusual tuning he's using.
Second, Pat Metheny could play any acoustic he wanted from any builder but he has been playing and recording with Linda Manzer's guitars for decades. Clearly he believes there is something special about her guitars.
-
You don't have to buy it (I'm not selling
) but note that I said not sound good. I didn't say as good and it's pointless to into a discussion about why anyone prefers this instrument over that, or one maker over another. Or with which instrument that person sounds.
Been there, done that with a mentor and friend who went from a Storioni to a Rombouts to an Amati. I know which one can be considered as the best, I know which one I prefer (not the Amati, overall) and also that in the end he still sounds like him and anyone else playing either of those instruments won't.
-
-
Sounds great, Charles! And wonderful playing as always! Originally Posted by CharlesC
-
Yes, but does it sound 40x or so greater than, say, RMK playing on his Loar? Originally Posted by D'Aquisto Fan
-
Thanks Michael! Originally Posted by D'Aquisto Fan
-
Jim Soloway, you're right on. The Parker archtops sound very different depending on who is playing them, how -and most of all- what the setup situation is. The setup options are limitless with those things and that guitar is VERY low (too low...) for a player a fairly light touch (me) so it has more to give than the video will imply. In person, it definitely has flattop kinda stuff going on (lots of bass/low-midrange and well as that warmth, harmonic complexity at low volume). It's not the kinda vibe a player like Ted Ludwig (for instance) would be looking for but it's a damn alluring sound for some.
His guitars are overwhelming. I'll never forget the first time I played one. Adam Miller handed it to me and I almost smacked myself in the face with the thing it was so light. Sonically, it felt like I was inside and outside of the guitar at the same time playing it. Obviously they're "archtops" but in practice I'm still not entirely sure what they are. It's like a completely different thing altogether. It's like a flattop but the "poke" of the notes is WAY different and the headroom capacity is just ferocious. It's also like an archtop but with way more light touch sensitivity, capacity for warmth and this crazy bass extension. Similar to the parker fly, it's probably a guitar that came maybe a decade too soon
OP, I couldn't recommend a journey with KP and/or Linda enough. They are two of the coolest the handmade guitar world has to offer (and they're good friends, always ribbing each other). One conversation with Linda and it's immediately apparent why (separate from the celebrity stuff) she's so successful. Obviously the work speaks for itself but her personality and overall vibe is just THE best. Her archtops are killer. I really dig the treble extension on the ones I've played. Really bright and full. She's doing a more "modern" archtop tonality than like an L5 or something.
Her flattops are awesome, too - she started with Jean Larrivee so she kept a bit more of that "build'em a little heavier!" thing that they have. I think that's why I've always found her flattops to be really versatile. They dont beat you over the head with lushness or a ton of bass (unless you're crazy enough to opt for a baritone like I did). They're just really well dialed in across the EQ. Lovely mid range, nice balance and a real "woody" kinda sound. I dig'em - they've got Linda's good juju in them, no doubt.
Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
Last edited by Fretty Krueger; 11-03-2024 at 08:49 PM.
-
I started playing that video while I was watching another, through open-back headphones, on the TV. I thought the guitar sounded pretty bad, until I realized that I was hearing it though the headphones from my laptop's less-than-great speakers. Plugged the headphones into the laptop, and damn! It sounds great. I need to buy more lottery tickets, since that's the only way I'll ever be able to afford a Parker, but I want one.
-
So again great for furthering the craft of Archtops! But unless it becomes accessible to many more players it’s basically an exercise in futility imo.
Leo Fender made instruments that were meant to be played by professional musicians. Both John D’Angelico and Jimmy D’Angelico did as well. Not to be displayed in someone’s art collection
Im a big fan of Ken Parker and have owned several of his original Parker Fly Classics. I used them both live and in the studio with great success. I would hope his Archtops could follow a similar path.
-
I think anyone should be able to afford a Parker Jotter Originally Posted by sgosnell
I need to buy more lottery tickets, since that's the only way I'll ever be able to afford a Parker, but I want one.
I know of several luthiers who build following Parker's "teachings", including one who's still in what appears to be the "goldilocks" tariff in these parts (4-5k). It would be interesting to see how well Mr. Wu could approach the original other than in looks!
-
I don't think Wu has the specialized tools and jigs to build in the Parker style. Parker seems to spend (or has spent) a lot of time building jigs and tools, which seem to me to be essential to building his instruments. Normal woodworking tools and skills won't get it done. His methods are pretty revolutionary, especially the neck.
-
Isn’t that how most original production model guitars, built with custom jigs, and such? I would think with modern technology, it actually could become easier. But I’m not a luthier or that great at technology,Lol!
Again Ken a Parker did this with his Fly models. And I realize there’s much more involved with an Archtop guitar. It seems there should be some way of doing this, where the bulk of work is CNC technology.
-
Yes, there's that, but I'd think (hope) that the neck attachment/adjustment mechanism has a minor or even neglible effect on the sound (personally if I were to order this kind of instrument I'd ask for a "normal" neck and traditional height-adjustable bridge, for various reasons). Originally Posted by sgosnell
-
Well I sincerely doubt that Ken Parker would do either of those things. Originally Posted by RJVB
And I'm sure the neck attachment has a lot to do with the sound- as it does on most other guitars.
-
I said "this kind of instrument", not "a Parker". Originally Posted by bluejaybill
Reply With Quote
“Shearing style”
Today, 05:26 PM in Comping, Chords & Chord Progressions