-
Ken Parker builds wonderful guitars and I know some here have played them or own one. But other builder make nice archtops. What I find fascinating is Ken's willingness to start with a blank page and just design the best acoustic guitar. The completely independent, removable, adjustable neck is brilliant. His use of phosphor bronze strings and a pickup design ed for them as opposed to an electric pickup designed for electric guitar strings. The minimalistic bridge. I think it's great he's designing what he does. I know $30K is a lot of money but that is comparable to other top builders. I can't afford one but if I could, I'd buy one without hesitation.
-
02-24-2014 07:45 PM
-
Fully agree...
-
He definitely rethinks his approach to whatever type of guitar he designs. I just find unfortunate that he can't hire some younger talented luthiers and train them to build a version of these at more realistic price point. Maybe it isn't possible w/ his archtop design, but unfortunately they won't be used to make enough great music at the prices they currently bring.
-
Ken and some of the people who own these guitars have done a great job of getting them into the hands of players. I've played a few and I did some recording with one that was loaned to me for as long as I needed it. I've been to one event where Jay Roberts got to play one and another where both Tim Lerch and John Knowles got to play one and even got chance to play a pair of them with each other and I know that several prominent players have had a chance to both play and record with them.
Originally Posted by jads57
-
Actually, I believe that Ken can, but chooses not to do that. Originally Posted by jads57
Last edited by Hammertone; 02-24-2014 at 10:32 PM.
-
$30K (if that's the price) is a pretty serious chunk of change but I suppose if you are the only one making them you can charge what you like...
I'd like to hear one live, the videos and recordings are very good but the real truth comes out in person.
Anyways, slick looking guitars. The neck as the point of adjustment is an old 19th century concept which is being revisited by a number of modern makers in various styles. I think we're going to see a lot more examples of the player adjustable action becoming the way of the future.
-
http://www.kenparkerarchtops.com/kenparkerarchtoa.html
Who doesn't love that??
-
-
$30 000. Ken Parker archtop. $30 000. Ken Parker archtop.
I'll take $30 000. And continue to press my dirty nose against the Ken Parker shop-window.
-
The idea of marketing a $30,000 guitar to jazz musicians is pretty ludicrous.
-
I've posted this before but for those who haven't seen it and may be interested....
-
Try pricing violins.
-
I'd rather put that money into a vintage Gibson or D'Angelico.
-
No sax and violins please. We're guitarists. Originally Posted by nopedals
-
What would say is the foremost innovation of these guitars? Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
The tone sounds good enough, though not better than many instruments I've heard. On the other hand, the form and design seem to be as unique as could be.
-
He already did the whole Parker Fly production guitar thing, where he taught people to make guitars with his designs.
At this point in his career, he can afford to push the envelope of archtop design. If these were mass produced they would become commonplace and lose their wow factor.
Maybe Yunzhi could reproduce one of them for under $1000.
-
Again I mean no disrespect to Ken Parker,in fact I love his instruments. But lending a guitar for a bit of time and actually owning and really getting familiar with it's nuances is very different. I also agree 30k is not that much for a serious violin,etc. But unless you are playing concert halls and making that kind of money per night, or you're a wealthy collector. These instruments will be out of the mainstream and sadly also out of the majority of music as well.
Someone also alluded to D'A guitars, but they were priced along Gibson's offerings of the day. Not cheap but affordable to most working musicians. The reason the guitars like the icons L-5,Super 400, Emperor, even the ES-175 are in so many recordings is they were availble to the days proffesional guitarists. I also understand Ken Parker alone can't sell them at a loss or even make that many himself. That's why I said if he could enlist some talented younger luthiers and even CNC machinery to reduce his cost. Even James Olson (Flat top fame) uses CNC machinery in his guitars.
Just putting my thoughts out there, cheers!
-
The neck attachment and adjustment function and the way it interacts with the bridge design are really the big thing. The bridge is a solid piece with no height adjustment mechanism. Instead you adjust the angle of the neck by turning a set screw at the back of the body (remarkably, it stays in tune when you do this). As you adjust the neck angle, the voice of the guitar changes dramatically. With the angel of the neck and on end of its range, it sounds like a Selmer Macaferri. As you change the angle, the sound moves through different families of archtops and at the other end of its range it sounds almost like 335 or even a Les Paul so the played is able to voice the guitar to their specific needs. The use of composites combined with wood also allows him to build a very strong and stable guitar that has an absurdly low mass. These typically weigh just a bit over 3 lbs, but that's really a carry over from the solid bodies he designed. Originally Posted by Klatu
Last edited by Jim Soloway; 02-25-2014 at 11:20 AM.
-
Here is Jim's review from a few years ago.
https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...12-namm-3.html
It would be great if Jim could give us more insight into how the guitar felt.
I wish guys would get away from the cost. Yes it's an expensive guitar. But do you know how many guys in my neighbourhood have ordinary jobs and have a $60,000 deisel 1 ton 4x4s with a rack and 3 - $15,000 snow sleds on it? Other guys on other forums have many expensive $5-10K guitars and amps that must total well above $30K. They have a passion and figure out how to pay for it. After spending a fair amount of money over the last decade or so, I with I had focused on one exceptional instrument rather than a dozen average ones.
But that's not the point of this thread. The point is the technology and skill and sheer audacity to challenge the most conservative and hide-bound segment of the guitar world and turn it on its head. I would love it if someone took these concepts and produced a decent larger scale production run for around $5K. It seems Ken is shining a light for us to follow.Last edited by DRS; 02-25-2014 at 11:43 AM.
-
A question I ask myself when I see an interesting and innovative design with a higher (as pointed out, it's not all that high really) price tag: Is the gain in sound and playability, accurately reflected in the advanced price level compared to that of the competitors or am I paying for something else? In this case, I wouldn't know, until I actually played one, and would have to rely on the opinion of those in the know...However, they sure are pretty.
But you are correct DRS. Cost shouldn't be the main motivating factor but unfortunately it often is . And as a builder myself (not jazz guitars) I'm very much aware of how lucky guitarists are to have such a wide range of higher quality instruments (albeit, not many handmade) available at under $5K, even under $2K....from a makers point of view, with mouths to support, it sucks really
The technology needed, to enable the neck attachment to do what it is asked to do (I haven't seen the exact system he developed/uses, but I think I have a pretty good idea based on similar set-ups I have seen and worked with) isn't new but the skill level needed to get it to function as envisioned would certainly be of the highest level.
-
My friend Adam Miller playing a Parker at a NAMM event two years ago. Adam's a wonderful player and much more of an acoustic player than I am and he really gives it a great workout out. Not coincidentally, the song is called "Parker" as was inspired by his earlier experiences with one of Ken's guitars.
-
I've played YoYo once, breifly. It's an absolutely fantastic guitar. Without a doubt the best I've played. Also the most expensive. It's hard to tackle "is the cost worth it", as that is such a subjective thing! It's very clear to me that the quality IS trending upward with that price (though not linearly, diminishing returns has kicked in lower on this price scale). Originally Posted by Scot Tremblay
-
I want to discuss his concepts and how these concepts and his execution affect the sound and playability of his guitars. Also, will these concepts affect the way guitars are built in the future. As others have pointed out, there are other builders who charge as much for conventional instruments. No doubt I can find a $9000 guitar that sounds 98% as good or a $5000 guitar that sounds 95% as good. But what about his concepts?
A few points.
-Does the body isolated form the neck improve the tone?
-Does the movable neck work? Ken's not the first to think of the concept. Babicz sells production guitars with another version.
-How about that sound hole? Certainly not new but is it better.
-Could these things be put into a production guitar - even if not by Parker?Last edited by DRS; 02-28-2014 at 11:39 AM.
-
It's hard to isolate the individual parts and determine what they contribute to the sound. Ken Parker probably has a good idea, but for a player how can we know what new component is contributing what to the sound? Too many (> 1) new variables introduced at the same time. Originally Posted by DRS
There is some good info on Ken's website, and also in the video:
Last edited by coreybox; 02-28-2014 at 12:50 PM.
-
superb playing Jim! Originally Posted by Jim Soloway
Reply With Quote
'37 Gibson FB Radius
Today, 01:43 AM in The Builder's Bench