Benedetto Artist Award - differences between Corona and Westerly

[Philmaz14]

The title sums it up - what if any are the differences between the Benedetto refined Guild Artist Awards made in Westerly, RI vs. Corona, CA. The only difference I can find is that the one made in Corona was marketed as a Johnny Smith Award, with the Johnny Smith headstock emblem and the 18 signed models, etc. Anything else? I know they're both x braced, 3 inch body, european spruce. Am I missing something? I can't help but gravitate to the Westerly one, maybe because I'm a Rhode Islander haha!

Also, I would love to hear about everyones experiences with the Benedetto AA. I plan to use it for solo, duo/trio gigs, and recording.

Thanks!
Phil

[Philmaz14]

Thanks! I'll send him a message now.

[Jabberwocky]

If you PLAY guitar talk to Ron Clegg. Ron Clegg gigged one for 3 years as a professional and sold it for an Andersen Streamline.

Players talk to other players.

Talk to Bob Benedetto. Ask Bob why he doesn't use the same scale length in his own guitars that he used in the G-Bs.

And then talk to Steve Longobardi whose first question to the seller of the G-B JSA was, What's the scale length? And whose reply to the stated scale length was, No, thanks. Seller deleted FS thread...for good reason.

These things matter to folks who play.

When you want to talk about the finer points of shading and tonewoods, talk to Patrick.

Of course, this could be bait laid for me, in which case, I have fallen for it, hook, line and sinker.

The two happiest days in a G-B JSA owner's life are the day he buys it and the day he sells it. In between, he mostly wonders why he bought it and prays he can get his money back and someone buys it. Meanwhile, over at ebay the G-B JSA started at $8500 and has steadily declined to an asking of $4999. Still no takers.

Don't think you are smarter than the market. The market knows what it knows. Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

My advice is to look for a Westerly Guild Artist Award with a DeArmond 1100. It will be playable and folks actually want to buy them for playing. Imagine that. I know where there is one for sale. But ask if there's a ski jump.

P.S. If the OP insists on buying a G-B JSA insist on the assurance of a full refund if you cannot bond with its playability. Anyone who is not trying to pass on a hot potato will give you that. That is the only way to buy it.

[Archtop Guy]

Good response Jabberwocky,that says it all.

[GuyBoden]

I actually own a Guild Benedetto Stuart, so I'm talking from experience and not second hand gossip, the scale length is similar to playing a Fender Tele. I do prefer the fact that the strings on a longer scale length have more tension compared to a shorter scale length guitar. Yes, I also have a 1949 Gibson L4C with the short scale length and plenty of Fender type guitars.

If you have tiny weeny child's hands, the longer scale length will be a problem, otherwise the Guild Benedettos are great guitars for the price.

[rob taft]

Phil, We have conversed via private message. So you know my feelings about the Guild Benedetto AA I own and play. I have no desire spend my time debating with a troll so I'll just say that if a 25' 9/16" scale length bothers you than you won't get along with the AA. Anyone who tells you its longer than 25 9/16" either has an outlier or doesn't understand how scale length is measured i.e. it is not measured by the distance from the end of the nut to the contact point on the bridge.

I own guitars with scale lengths from 24", 25", 25 1/2" to the AA with a number of my guitars having the typical Fender scale of 25 1/2". It is the scale I prefer. I have large hands but not Tal Farlow hands but it is for me not so much about hand size as its the feel and my perception that the longer scale has a bit more "snap" if you will.

[rpguitar]

Amusingly, turns out that 25 9/16 inches is equal to 649.29 mm. That's shorter by a teensy fraction than a standard classical guitar (650mm)!! What are we arguing about??!

[Patrick2]

Amusingly, turns out that 25 9/16 inches is equal to 649.29 mm. That's shorter by a teensy fraction than a standard classical guitar (650mm)!! What are we arguing about??!

Well . . I think as it relates to the difference between 25-9/16" vs 25-1/2" . . we're arguing about perceptions driven by numerical differences . . rather than the actually reality of the miniscule difference that a sixteenth of an inch would make in the ability to play the guitar with the 25-9/16" scale. It's probably a more plausible concern as it relates to tone . . than it is playability. I'd go from my Gibson L5 guitars . . the my GBJSA without noticing any difference in playability. But . . tone?? Ahhh . . that a different conversation!

[Bluedawg]

I'm wondering if I could get Jim Soloway to make me one with a 27" neck ..... LOL

I came close to ordering one of his single 15s with the 27 inch scale

Too late now.

[brad4d8]

I often read about people and scale length preferences, problems moving between different lengths, sometimes a difference as small as 1/16" and I wonder if I'm a freak. This has never bothered me. When I was studying for my BMus in classical guitar, for example, never had a problem switching between my 650mm scale and friends 660mm. At that time, I also had a 12 string, 6-string flattop and an old Guild archtop. No idea what any of them had for scale length or even nut width, except for the vague classical and 12 string are wider. Anybody else feel like this?
Brad

[rpguitar]

Anybody else feel like this?

Yes, I do... I certainly know the specs of my various guitars, but I can feel at home with all of them, ranging from 24.75" to 660 mm, 1 9/16" to 2"+. When making a switch from one extreme to the other, it takes about an hour (tops) until I'm speaking that guitar's language as a native again, but I have no issues with adjusting.

I am less capable of handling body size differences at this point. I max out at a 17" bout and feel more comfortable at 16". I can barely play a dreadnought due to its rim depth of 4.875".

[Klatu]

Yes, I do... I certainly know the specs of my various guitars, but I can feel at home with all of them, ranging from 24.75" to 660 mm, 1 9/16" to 2"+. When making a switch from one extreme to the other, it takes about an hour (tops) until I'm speaking that guitar's language as a native again, but I have no issues with adjusting.

I am less capable of handling body size differences at this point. I max out at a 17" bout and feel more comfortable at 16". I can barely play a dreadnought due to its rim depth of 4.875".

I'm in RP's camp. I've got guitars with 25", 25 1/2", and 26 3/8 scales and can play comfortably with any of them without much need for adjustment.

One of the reasons I can think of which might enable this type of versatility is that I was taught classical technique as a boy. I feel that this technique allows more complete access to the fretboard to those of us who may how have the largest hands of say, a Tal Farlow.

[Patrick2]

Roger; I feel the exact same way . . strats, to Lesters to acoustics, to archies. The only time I couldn't adjust *comfortably* . . was with a remarkably beautiful guitar, tonally and aesthetically, which had a 1-13/16" nut width and a fat profile and big shoulders. It was originally spec'd out for a finger style player. It was a sunset burst Super Eagle with dual Lollar noiseless P90 type single coil pups. I really wish I could have bonded with that guitar. I eventually sold it to *The Good Dr. from Kalamazoo*.

I do notice a difference when I play a 175,575,Lester, etc., with the shorter 24-3/4" scale . . and I actually like it. But, I still prefer the 25-1/2". When I owned the GBJSA, I was constantly switching back-n-forth between it and my L5CES . . trying desperately to detect a difference between the 25-9/16" and the more standard 25-1/2", in terms of playability. I was never really able to detect any difference. But, I'm sure that others might have.

[TH]

No idea what any of them had for scale length or even nut width, except for the vague classical and 12 string are wider. Anybody else feel like this?
Brad

The more I'm actually playing, the less I actually notice. The big exception being scales and nut on nylon. Because the strings have less poundage in the tension, I think the differences are more critical. I certainly notice it more. Not so much or truthfully, not at all in a steel all other things being equal. But when is that ever the case? Much more difference felt in body size, string gauge, fretboard width, depth, profile of the neck.
But I'm one of the riff raff of the guitar world, I'm thinking of the music and not the instrument so much. I have a friend with the biggest collection (though he denies it..."I just sold 3 last week") and he picks up any guitar, tells me every production detail and historic significance associated with that guitar. Taps the string and says "Yup, that's a [some scale spec] and that's the best) and he cradles the guitar lovingly and plays the same five chords and the same three licks and puts the guitar back on the wall.
I think it takes a great expertise and focus on one aspect to really appreciate those differences. As I said, I'm just a schlump who moves my fingers on the strings. Too lost in the music to worry about the tension. I adjust for any feel discrepancy with string gauge and action, and auditorium acoustic projection is not top on my list of considerations.
David

[brad4d8]

....Much more difference felt in body size,....
David

Yes, even though I've had a few over the years, and even have one now, I've never been able to comfortably adjust to a solid body, too many years of flattops and big archies, I guess. I've often wondered if that's why Clarence White had a double thick body on his Tele, although I've heard it was to accommodate the string bender contraption he used to approximate pedal steel sounds.
Brad

[Bluedawg]

I'm in RP's camp. I've got guitars with 25", 25 1/2", and 26 3/8 scales and can play comfortably with any of them without much need for adjustment.

One of the reasons I can think of which might enable this type of versatility is that I was taught classical technique as a boy. I feel that this technique allows more complete access to the fretboard to those of us who may how have the largest hands of say, a Tal Farlow.

I studied classical while in college ...

I think the left hand technique I learned doing that has really helped me play comfortably on just about any type of neck and scale length ...

the exception being really narrow necks like 60s Gibson archtops or my 12 string Rick 360

[Jabberwocky]

TruthHertz David. How many archtop guitars out there that you pick up at random have a scale lengths longer than 25.5"?

Let's take a short tour:

Gibson: 23 1/2"", 24 3/4", 25 1/2".
Collings: 24 7/8", 25 1/2"
Ibanez: 24 3/4"
Hoboken/Westerly Guild: 24 3/4", 25 1/2"
Borys: 24 3/4", 25 1/2"
Andersen: 24.9", 25.4"
Benedetto Workshop: 25"
PRS: 25"

So it is a 100% certainty that you will be playing a guitar of any of these scale lengths. So, you are not telling the whole story when you imply that you do not notice scale lengths; of course you don't, they are nothing out of the ordinary.

So, what's one more 16th of an inch? 1.5 measly mm.

Do an experiment. Spread your fingers as widely as you can to the point of discomfort. Hold the position. Feeling pain yet? Good. Now kindly stretch it another 1.5mm i.e. 1/16" wider. There comes a point where too long is indeed too long.

Focal dystonia. Look it up. It is real.

As for Patrick, man, you wrote addressing me in your 2012 L5 FS thread that I shouldn't doubt that you have a sense of humo(u)r. I took you for your word and thought that I would wind you up a little. Turns out that you really do not have a sense of humour. So, do you have a sense of humour or do I have to ask you in advance henceforth if you're having a heavy flow day? Because I am confused as heck since I stopped living with a menstrual woman. (I'm taking the piss, ladies. You can throw the word "trog" at me.)

Besides, you do talk a lot about "shadings" (your terminology) and tonewoods. $265 Alaskan Spruce with silking. Pitch Pocket. OSB and stuff. I learnt all those things from you and so to you, I defer.

The OP Philmaz14 asked about using it for solo, duo/trio and recording. Do himself a favour and ask a professional who has to play it for a living. Ask Bob who designed it and discarded the feature. Ask someone who is a prospective buyer because one day you will have to deal with selling it and you had better know how a prospect evaluates and decides.

The requirements of one who has to play for a living are very different from one who plays for himself on a couch while the missus watches TV.

Are Ron Clegg, Bob Benedetto and Steve Longobardi less credible than Rob Taft, Patrick2 and 2bop?

Talk to them all and make your own decision.

Scale length matters. Some of you (not all) who are downplaying it are being disingenuous. Our hands are made differently. At least, be aware. Is that such a bad thing? What's disturbing is that you are all implying that those of us who do consider scale lengths and playability are somehow whacked. Are we now? Or are you trying to shill me a guitar?

And it is not my rôle to protect my friends' investment in their guitars.

As for the drive-by Bam Bam Bam, the less said the better.

[skykomishone]

Amusingly, turns out that 25 9/16 inches is equal to 649.29 mm. That's shorter by a teensy fraction than a standard classical guitar (650mm)!! What are we arguing about??!

Roger et al, I've played guitar all of my life (since early '60's), and until I joined this forum a short couple of years ago, never once did I think about scale length. Now, I find myself taking out the tape measure on occasion to guitars I've owned for 50 years to find out what they are, including my classical guitars. I've always just played them, and if they've sounded good and I liked them, I've stuck with them. Seems that some guitars, regardless of scale length (or other attributes), just have that special something that the individual player, owner, collector, etc., really dig.

Now, I've become somewhat more educated and find myself paying attention to the correlation between the guitar attributes and the sounds that I enjoy. With an aging shoulder and other joints that effect my ability to play comfortably for hours, I think scale length probably begins to enter in, although I'm not sure yet to what extent. I expect that I seriously doubt that I'll ever notice much difference in a 'teensy fraction', either in sound or comfort. Maybe even 1/2 inch, and I've read just about everything Jim S has written about his back and scale length, as have others about scale length and sound, etc. We are all different. That's the beauty of it.

My conclusion on this is that it really only matters to me, and that if someone else wants to start ripping at me in a personal way about my choices in guitars, and insulting me because of them, that's too bad for them, it would be BS, I believe.

[Jabberwocky]

The classical cats, one anyway, weighed in on scale length. Find me one classical luthier who will make you anything over 650mm and not attach the caveat that if you do not like it it is not returnable. Find me one who will not try to talk you out of anything longer than 650mm.

Because scale length it does matter.

Nylon strings and steel strings have different tensions. My D'Addarios EJ47 pull about 82.5 pounds on a 650mm classical guitar.

[TH]

TruthHertz David. How many archtop guitars out there that you pick up at random have a scale lengths longer than 25.5"?


So it is a 100% certainty that you will be playing a guitar of any of these scale lengths. So, you are not telling the whole story when you imply that you do not notice scale lengths; of course you don't, they are nothing out of the ordinary.
.

I was addressing a question which I took to speak to an issue of how much different scale lengths mattered to me. Subjective issue. To me. That was the perspective from which I speak. I have small hands. I constantly experiment with different guitars of different specs; that's my job, I play guitar, and I build guitars. I'm presently playing one, and have been playing it, that has a longer length nylon scale. It was mentioned in my post. I wanted a longer length to find the balance I needed for a 7 string nylon with a low B with enough power to drive the double X bracing I'm using now. It is longer by measure. It doesn't interfere with my music, it enhances it. So this is a subjective statement I've made: I play music, I don't play numbers. When I'm playing many other things matter, not the length.
I appreciate where you're coming from, Jabberwocky. I really do. But I was giving a subjective answer to whether it mattered to me. Not to me.

People who obsess on how long it is... not my area of obsession. I just want to use what I have and find some mutual joy with those at the other end.

David

[Jabberwocky]

Bluedawg, didn't Jim Soloway design his 27" scale length guitar for lowered tuning? Jim uses C#, if I recall. That makes it a very different proposition, doesn't it? I would no more mistake a baritone guitar for standard EADGbe tuning.

Does anyone play Jim Soloway's 27" Swan in standard tuning? I think it was called the Swan.

[2bornot2bop]

Are Ron Clegg, Bob Benedetto and Steve Longobardi less credible than Rob Taft, Patrick2 and 2bop?

That's a question you should ask Benedetto. Ask him why he made such a beautiful guitar with a 25 9/16 scale.

I don't preach advice or credibility. Besides, a fool wouldn't heed it, and a wise man wouldn't need it

[Jabberwocky]

It is all good, David. I too have small hands. 8.25" thumb to pinky. 6.29" index to pinky. To point of discomfort. There I go again dredging up numbers.

We are speaking from our personal point of reference. I know where you are coming. No harm. No foul.

不打不相识 , you dig?

[TH]

It is all good, David. I too have small hands. 8.25" thumb to pinky. 6.29" index to pinky. To point of discomfort. There I go again dredging up numbers.

We are speaking from our personal point of reference. I know where you are coming. No harm. No foul.

不打不相识 , you dig?

99.9999...%! (with an allowance for theoretical error, which a good engineer will be able to overlook)
David

[Jabberwocky]

99.9999...%! (with an allowance for theoretical error, which a good engineer will be able to overlook)
David

Thank you, dude. You have a healthy dollop of humour.

My calc. overflowed. Made in China, you know.