Plek Question

[yoslate]

Ref steps in, cautions deluxemeat to keep his gloves up!

                                                                                   

[Kazwell]

Now folks, I don't know at this point who will benefit from this or not, but I would like all of you to check out this photo dated 1847. It is of a luthier in his shop. Now is it my imagination, or in the back of the photo (which I have to warn you is pretty old and grainy).....well.....your gonna have to see it with your own eyes, because you wouldn't believe me if I told you.....

 

the photo is here:

 

http://www.americanvocalist.com/circa1847.jpg

 

Hope this doesn't cause a tirade of impassioned controversy ;D.....like that doesn't happen around here

[Thundersteel]

Wow--CNC machines in the 1840s! I bet it ran on DOS! 

[PacerX]

I applaud your faith in quality engineering.

 

You have great faith in it too.

 

You demonstrate that faith every time you, or your wife, or your child, or anyone you love and care for gets in a car.  Every stamped part in that automobile had the tooling for it cut out on CNC machinery - all of the safety items like the ratchet that locks your seatbelts in a collision, and the seat frame or pillar that the seat belt anchors to, the canister that holds the airbags - all of them.

 

It's not intended as criticism of you John, it's just a fact of life that as technology moves along, we become better capable of doing things that used to be esoteric or difficult.

 

I started my career in the automotive industry as a manual designer - using ink on mylar and drawing by hand the products that would be produced.  Years and years would be spent developing that level of skill in a person.  Right about the time I entered the industry, computer-aided design really started to come into it's own.  Simply put, the computer was faster and more accurate and resulted in better drawings faster than could be done manually - except for one thing...

 

The brain doing the design still had to be first-class to get a first-class product out of the other end.  An idiot designer with a CAD system gives you a bad product - no matter how good the CAD system is - that much is undeniably true.  But a great designer with a CAD system gives you a better product, faster and more accurately and with fewer mistakes, than a great manual designer.

 

 

 

The human element is not eliminated in the creative end of the design and production process when we embrace technology, what we really do is streamline the process from concept to finished product, and the finished product becomes far more consistent - and consistently "better".

 

What I am using too many words to describe above is this:

 

Even if the milling/routing process is automated, the brain behind it is still the most important thing.  Heritage has arguably the best brains in the business, were they to gradually and with great thought begin to consider some automation where automation makes sense, it would free their creativity and result in a more consistent, higher quality, better guitar - faster and with fewer quality issues.

 

Fewer repairs/fixes means streamlined production, and allows the dealers and Heritage to avoid having to fix such issues after the fact.

[PacerX]

They advertise that they're hand made; I didn't know they had a CNC machine. 

 

There's no real definition of "hand-made" out there, so it's not your fault, although I think lots of companies intentionally obfuscate what they really do so that they can lay claims to titles like "old-world craftsmanship".  Honestly, given some of the reactions here, I'm not sure I blame them.

 

Both Anderson and Taylor have pretty much gone on record saying:

 

"Ummm, OF COURSE some parts are cut out using CNC.  You'd have to be nuts to think as human being could do that job better than the machine can."

 

Besides, there really isn't ANY way to 100% automate making a guitar.  If the guitar is "hand-assembled", I guess you can then call it "hand-made"... and they're pretty much ALL hand-assembled.

 

The reason so many guitars are built overseas is because the labor rates for the hand operations are so much lower - NOT because of automation.  There's the "old-world craftsmanship" for you.  The thought process for those companies goes like this:

 

One used CNC mill to do necks and fretboards may cost something between $25,000 and $50,000.  For $50,000, I can pay some poor soul in Korea $3 an hour for EIGHT YEARS  to do the same thing.   

 

That's like, SERIOUSLY old world... bordering on "indentured servitude".

 

If it were possible to 100% automate the process, ALL guitars would be built in the US - the cold, hard fact of the matter is that we build the best electric, semi-hollow, acoustic and acoustic/electric guitars in the world.

 

Some companies, such as Taylor or G&L or Anderson, state right up front and without apology that they use some automation because it results in a more consistent product with consistently higher quality.  And then get criticized for it.

 

 

 

I just finished watching a Hamer DVD about how they're made. I didn't show any CNC machines, but I'm assuming they only use them to cut out the basic body shape. Then, the body top is hand carved and sanded.

 

You not seeing the machine was probably not an accident on the part of the producers of the DVD...

 

"Shut the machine off, and make sure to angle the camera THIS way so we can't see it in frame."

 

I'll bet most of the neck is shaped using CNC, and the pickup and control cavities and neck joint are CNC.  In truth, the neck joint is so critical to a set neck guitar that I would be surprised if they did it by hand at all - you only get once chance to get it right, so it's really important to do so.

[PacerX]

But in the case of Heritage, no damn CNC piece of automated computerized nuts and bolts will ever EVER replace the hands of these Masters. Period

 

Except, apparently, for a Plek.

Which, as stated before, is basically a small CNC grinder with some fancy control software.

 

 

But, let's refine the idea above for a second...

What the Plek really does is free the hands of the Masters to do other, and more important things, that result in a better product.

It's just a tool, and tools are worthless without brains to guide them.

 

 

Guitarists are truly odd folks.  They're about the only group of people I know that will criticize somebody for making a better product.

 

Not that the following is true of Heritage, but this is basically what is being said:

"I don't CARE if the neck isn't straight, the frets aren't level, the intonation is off and the thing has terrible playability!!!  It was made BY HAND!!!"

 

When $300 Mexican Fenders show up at guitar shops and are FLAWLESS, and Gibson can't seem to ship in a $3000 Les Paul without glaring problems, we made need to rethink our paradigm.  They're both CNC produced.  One company just has their act together in the integration of knowledge of a Master Luthier in their process and good quality control, and the other doesn't.

 

That should CLEARLY show you how important the Master Luthier still is in a CNC process.  Gibson left their Master Luthiers in Kalamazoo, and their products, in a word, have a good chance of sucking.

 

Fender maintained theirs, and runs rings around Gibson quality-wise at 10% of the price.

 

 

 

 

BTW - Gibson may be trying to get better.  They asked Taylor to let them come in to Taylor's factory so Taylor could teach them how to do fretwork, and Taylor said:

"OK"

 

That shows you two things:

 

1) Gibson is at least smart enough to recognize they have issues.

 

2) Taylor doesn't fear Gibson as a competitor IN THE LEAST.

[PacerX]

would that be ed romanticism? lol

 

 

Grrrrrrr....  Just the mention of that name raises the hair on the back of my neck.

 

Ed Roman is the perfect combination of ignorance, questionable ethics, and a big mouth.

[JohnCovach]

"It's not intended as criticism of you John, it's just a fact of life that as technology moves along, we become better capable of doing things that used to be esoteric or difficult."

 

As a member of the faculty in a university with a wonderful engineering school, I have a fair amount of experience in thinking about such things.  I realize you are hoping to dispel certain attitudes about technology that you find irksome.  That's great and it's very helpful to broaden folks' perspectives on these issues.

 

I do not know enough about guitar building to judge with certainty whether CNC machines (or whatever technology) make a tremendous difference in the way a guitar feels.  I have a cheap DeArmond M77-T that was almost certainly not made by hand and I like it.  I have a bunch of Heritages, some old Gibsons, and some G&Ls that were made "by hand" (though this term is not quite accurate in a literal sense).  I really like the way they feel and sound.

 

One thing that is clear--in spite of your passionate arguments--is that how a guitar is made does matter to many buyers.  You may feel they are wrong, but that won't change much about how they think.  In some quarters it is so deeply felt that "handmade is better" that any argument to the contrary is a non-starter and considered absurd.  I would only have to walk you over to the Eastman School of Music where I teach to provide ready examples of this.  We could also walk over to the Engineering school to find many who agree with your point of view.

 

As I said above, what one "likes" or how something "sounds" or "feels" are subjective.  Contexts that surround instruments and brand names are subjective as well.  There's no right answer in all this, even if there are strong opinions. 

[PacerX]

As a member of the faculty in a university with a wonderful engineering school, I have a fair amount of experience in thinking about such things.  I realize you are hoping to dispel certain attitudes about technology that you find irksome.  That's great and it's very helpful to broaden folks' perspectives on these issues.

 

John, I wouldn't use the word "irksome" to describe my feelings on this - this is honestly dispassionate.

 

I have not yet been confronted with one piece of data in this discussion that supports the idea that the machines in question are somehow unable of accomplishing what a routing jig and router can.

 

Or that buzzing through a piece of wood with a human being guiding a router against a fence is somehow inherently more... well... I don't know... than a CNC mill buzzing through a piece of wood.  I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the CNC machine is going to be far more accurate and precise than the human being will, and no person here or anywhere can reasonably dispute that.

 

Were I able to find two absolutely identical pieces of wood for use in, say, an H-150 body, and cut one using a routing jig and fixture and the other using a CNC mill, and that's the ONLY thing I did differently, I would beg our friends here to identify for me how the CNC part is inferior.

 

Let's keep everything else in the process the same and just talk about that operation - I imagine if somebody could but their finger on what's different, it would be very helpful for me.  As of yet, nobody has done so.

 

I've heard talk about "romance" and "magic" and all kinds of things that are supposed to be injected in that operation when that's done, but nobody can seem to tell me whereby those things actually enter the piece of wood.

 

 

 

 

 

There's no right answer in all this, even if there are strong opinions. 

 

John, I'm convinced that there actually IS a right answer - but prejudice is getting in the way of recognizing what that answer is.

 

Passion stated at one point that the Earth was at the center of the universe, and when data was presented to the contrary, passion stood in the way of something that was simply undeniable being accepted by some for a few centuries.

 

While nobody risks being burned at the stake here on either side, the discussion is similar.  On one side is hard data showing that the CNC operation is more precise, accurate and consistent - on the other is an assertion that a routing jig and router impart some form of magic that makes the fact that the operation is less accurate, precise and consistent somehow preferable.

 

Pardon my following question, but do you honestly believe the above is a reasonable position to take?

[Dick Seacup]

 

Heh.

 

[Kazwell]

Seems to me we can make a very clear analogy to the human element in baseball vs instant replay. Some folks WANT the human element and "potential" for error.

 

Sorry Pacer X about the Photosop fun. Felt the intensity was maybe getting a bit too high and some comedy relief would ease some tension.

 

You certainly make a valid point, all we are talking here is a basic cut out. The machine does not glue the neck into the body. It doesn't lay the real MOP into fretboard. It doesn't sand and stain the maple top with some if not the best finishes in the industry.

 

The essence of the human element here is only slightly invaded if you will. Of course I know you of all people welcome imperfections as far a asthetics-I welcome people to take a look at your reply to my first post here when I commented about a blemish in the MOP.

 

I can see that if a CNC can prevent this work of art from going downhill playingwise in 10 years, then, yes, use of CNC technology has a place. I pondered this argument until it dawned on me exactly what PACER X is saying here.

 

I have a 1959 Gibson ES355 that plays like crap. It has little vintage value due to the fact if was factory refurbished before I bought it in 1976. Now, it is not only not worth all that much monetarily, it also is pretty worthless to me musically as well.

[JohnCovach]

"While nobody risks being burned at the stake here on either side, the discussion is similar.  On one side is hard data showing that the CNC operation is more precise, accurate and consistent - on the other is an assertion that a routing jig and router impart some form of magic that makes the fact that the operation is less accurate, precise and consistent somehow preferable."

 

"Pardon my following question, but do you honestly believe the above is a reasonable position to take?"

 

I don't think it's fair to those who have responded to this thread in favor of "handmade" to characterize their position in this way.  For one thing, many people do indeed like the idea that their guitar is different from others like it. In that context, I'm not sure what "precise," "accurate," and especially "consistent" mean. 

 

The question is still this: Is what you value in one of these guitars the same as what somebody else values?  If you think the answer has to be "yes," than I'd say we're not really talking about CNC machines anymore.

[PacerX]

Seems to me we can make a very clear analogy to the human element in baseball vs instant replay. Some folks WANT the human element and "potential" for error.

 

Well, I imagine that one's perspective on that has a lot to do with which side the call went toward.

 

I tend to watch boxing... so I am not as up on the use of instant replays and such.

 

 

 

Sorry Pacer X about the Photosop fun. Felt the intensity was maybe getting a bit too high and some comedy relief would ease some tension.

 

 

Kaz, I am certainly not upset with anyone here.  I must work on the way I write in that people tend to interpret my writing as far, far more confrontational than I mean it.

 

Honestly, I was pretty impressed with your photoshop skills.

 

For your next one, please remove the CNC machine and add a bucket with a label on it that says "Magic Fairy Dust" and we'll be even! ;D

 

 

You certainly make a valid point, all we are talking here is a basic cut out. The machine does not glue the neck into the body. It doesn't lay the real MOP into fretboard. It doesn't sand and stain the maple top with some if not the best finishes in the industry.

 

Yessir, that is precisely my point...

 

Nor does the machine have the ability to program itself or select the perfect woods or design the instrument in the first place - you have to have the Master's hands for that too.

 

However, the machine CAN cut the pocket for the inlay virtually perfectly, and the inlay itself, and basically eliminate the need for unsightly fillers...  Which is WAY cool if you think about it - especially since it will cut like that EVERY TIME, day in and day out.  Because the time and cost difference between a beautiful, intricate inlay and something more sedate is now less than it used to be, and beautiful and intricate inlay work is becoming more and more prevelant.

 

Heck, Schecter puts better inlays in $500 beaters than Gibson does in $3000 Les Pauls.

 

 

 

I can see that if a CNC can prevent this work of art from going downhill playingwise in 10 years, then, yes, use of CNC technology has a place. I pondered this argument until it dawned on me exactly what PACER X is saying here.

 

 

Here is a VERY good article:

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/standard-...sting-read.html

 

 

 

I have a 1959 Gibson ES355 that plays like crap. It has little vintage value due to the fact if was factory refurbished before I bought it in 1976. Now, it is not only not worth all that much monetarily, it also is pretty worthless to me musically as well.  

 

I feel your pain.  I'd fix it, no matter what it took, and ruin the investment entirely.

[PacerX]

I don't think it's fair to those who have responded to this thread in favor of "handmade" to characterize their position in this way.  For one thing, many people do indeed like the idea that their guitar is different from others like it. In that context, I'm not sure what "precise," "accurate," and especially "consistent" mean. 

 

Let me quantify for you what I mean by those terms:

 

ACCURACY is my ability to put a feature in the range of acceptability as required by a design.  If I specify my tailpiece stud holes to by 2.850" +/- .025" apart and 7.000" +/-.010" from the neck pocket, accuracy is my ability to make sure the stud holes fall within those ranges.

 

PRECISION measures the variation of my stud holes from one part to the next.  Higher precision means that the actual range of my tailpiece stud hole locations in production is as narrow as possible.  If my CNC process places those holes at 2.840" +/- .010", but a manual process is only capable of 2.850" +/- .040", then you can see that the CNC process is more PRECISE (which, btw, it inherently is).

 

"Consistency" means that I more often make a good part (one that will allow a excellent instrument to be built with all of the physical characteristics we agree make up an excellent instrument - intonation, playability, excellent fit and finish, etc...) and have fewer bad parts out of my process than another process.  The intent is to eliminate the bad parts to the greatest extent possible.

 

 

The question is still this: Is what you value in one of these guitars the same as what somebody else values?  If you think the answer has to be "yes," than I'd say we're not really talking about CNC machines anymore.

 

The question is, to my mind, irrelevent.

 

Whether or not the individual recognizes it, we as knowledgeable players of some 30 years of experience each can assert that a guitar with poor fretwork due to a poorly cut fretboard is a bad thing.

 

Eliminating poor fretwork and poorly cut fretboards is a good thing.  And brother, I am here to tell you, guitars with poor fretwork and poorly cut fretboards are out there... and some of them are very, very expensive... and if we were being honest, we could all admit that Heritage and Gibson and many other manufacturers (I've got a brand-new Godin I can point to right now...) have had problems in this area.

 

That can be fixed.

[Thundersteel]

I'll bet most of the neck is shaped using CNC, and the pickup and control cavities and neck joint are CNC.  In truth, the neck joint is so critical to a set neck guitar that I would be surprised if they did it by hand at all - you only get once chance to get it right, so it's really important to do so.

 

Actually, the final neck joint shaping/fitting is done with a hammer and chisel. The CNC machine probably cuts out most of the wood first. The final neck shape is also finished by hand with a draw file.

[PacerX]

Actually, the final neck joint shaping/fitting is done with a hammer and chisel. The CNC machine probably cuts out most of the wood first. The final neck shape is also finished by hand with a draw file.

 

Interesting.

[GuitArtMan]

Eliminating poor fretwork and poorly cut fretboards is a good thing.  And brother, I am here to tell you, guitars with poor fretwork and poorly cut fretboards are out there... and some of them are very, very expensive... and if we were being honest, we could all admit that Heritage and Gibson and many other manufacturers (I've got a brand-new Godin I can point to right now...) have had problems in this area.

Yep.  Haven't owned a Gibson that I didn't do a complete re-fret on for playabilty.  If I buy a new G word I factor in that I'll have to have a fret dress done on it and most likely some nut work as well to get it to play it's best.  Then if she's a keeper I almost always have a re-fret done.

[PacerX]

Yep.  Haven't owned a Gibson that I didn't do a complete re-fret on for playabilty.  If I buy a new G word I factor in that I'll have to have a fret dress done on it and most likely some nut work as well to get it to play it's best.  Then if she's a keeper I almost always have a re-fret done.

 

Nothing takes the luster off of a brand new axe like having to rip the frets out.

 

Doing the same thing to a $300 1986 Kramer and turning it into "Uber-Axe-Shred-O-Matic #1"?

 

Well, that's just a thing of beauty.

[JohnCovach]

As I've been thinking about this discussion, I'm reminded of how far guitar manufacturing/building has come since when some of us were kids back in the 60s.  It used to be that unless you spent enough money to buy a professional instrument, you could easily buy a guitar that was impossible to tune or that could never be adjusted properly.  There were loads of these kinds of cheap guitars around.  Today you'd have to work to find a new guitar that lousy.  I can play a gig on a $400 (or less) guitar--in fact, I have.  This is no doubt due to the significant advances that have been made through well engineered procedures and processes.

 

I have no real gripe with CNC or any of the other new tools that have been developed.  It seems clear--at least with electric guitars--that the overall level of guitar quality these days is far higher than it was in the past, even if there are some great vintage guitars from that earlier era.  So I do not mean to be arguing against technical know-how and sophisticated engineering.

[PacerX]

Hey guys, if you REALLY want to get sick to your stomach about technology, check this out:

 

http://www.gibson.com/robotguitar/

 

Now, that's just wrong.  Plain wrong.  :'(

[golferwave]

Ok - I've tried to read all of this and it keeps coming down to the new vs. the old or the engineers in this group vs the traditionalists. Let me add my take on this and I don't want an engineer to respond to this. Several years ago I watched a video about vintage guitars. John Page from the Fender custom shop was talking about new vs old guitars. His take was that new guitars were better than the old due to  modern manufacturing techniques. At the same time he discussed the artists that were bringing their vintage strats and teles into the custom shop to have them "cloned"- Many of them said that theirs was the best guitar ever and after examining them he said "excuse me? - major overhang of the neck pocket and the neck was crazy" He said you could take one September 57 strat and take another and they were completely different - no consistency - What's there is the relationship between the guitar and the player"- Here in lays the point of all of this handmade vs. machine made controversy. I have many guitars and have been playing for almost 45 years. Most of the guitars I have collected are quality pieces that anyone would be happy to own. I have two guitars that are my favorites and that is because due to whatever "magic" they absolutely melt into my hands and become a part of me. One of these guitars is a Heritage and the other is a 69 Les Paul that was also made on Parsons Street. These are both "hand made" and "hand carved" -  A CNC machine will spit out the exact same carve every time and except for the small movement of the wood after carving that some of you have discussed  they will be identical.  Is this a good thing? Only if that carve melts into your hands and becomes part of you. The chances of that magical relationship between guitar and player are diminished in this type of manufacture. My opinion is that the more identical these guitars become the less collectible they will be except for very limited production models. Time will give us the verdict on this but for my money I will take the hand made vs. computer made guitar every time.

[golferwave]

And I don't mean to offend the engineers in the group. Two of my best friends are engineers and most of the time we end up agreeing to disagree because they think differently than I do. Must be that right brain - left brain thing. Hope you all have a great day!

[PacerX]

Ok - I've tried to read all of this and it keeps coming down to the new vs. the old or the engineers in this group vs the traditionalists. Let me add my take on this and I don't want an engineer to respond to this.

 

I am going to respectfully decline your request that no engineers respond to this - and respond anyway.

 

 

 

 

"What's there is the relationship between the guitar and the player"- Here in lays the point of all of this handmade vs. machine made controversy.

 

Nah, the point is really the fact that way back in the 50's-70's, for every one of the super special guitars, Gibson and Fender in particular made a whole lot of clunkers.  If you got a pair of super special ones, I am really and honestly happy for you.  It's the people that got clunkers and a substandard instrument that I would be worried about.

 

Having a relationship with an awful guitar is difficult - kind of like having a relationship with an awful gal.  She's tempermental, she won't sing in tune, she plays badly, and she costs a whole lot of money.

 

So you either have to fix her, or let her go.

 

 

 

These are both "hand made" and "hand carved"

 

Please define "hand made" for us.  There are still tools involved.

 

Furthermore, there are hours and hours of true hand work involved regardless of how you cut the body or neck out - particularly on a set neck.

 

 

 

A CNC machine will spit out the exact same carve every time and except for the small movement of the wood after carving that some of you have discussed  they will be identical.  Is this a good thing?

 

As long as you start with a super special design and materials (Heritage uses great materials - some of the woods in particular are just amazing), and maintain that quality throughout the process with the input of a Master Luthier, I would submit that making a higher percentage of super special guitars and fewer clunkers is a good thing for everyone concerned - particularly the guy who would have got a clunker, but got a super-special guitar instead because the process corrected the issue that would have resulted in a bad guitar before it happened.

 

 

 

The chances of that magical relationship between guitar and player are diminished in this type of manufacture.

 

I humbly submit that the truth is actually the reverse of the above.

 

Let me ask you this:

What is an acceptable number of guitars that make it to a dealer that have significant flaws for you?  A "significant flaw" being something that requires the dealer to attempt a repair prior to sale of the guitar.  NOT a setup or a simple adjustment, an actual REPAIR.

 

Let's just use a percentage... Go ahead and throw a number out there.  10%?  20%?

 

 

 

I'm going to throw some actual data at you now, because I have been doing my homework on this:

A guitar store in my area carried "Brand X" and Paul Reed Smith.  "Brand X" and PRS are roughly in the same price range.  "Brand X" would be considered by many here to be "hand-made", while PRS is considered a "machine-made" guitar because PRS unapologetically uses CNC machinery.

 

I talked personally with the owner of the store.

 

For a recent calendar year, 25-30% of "Brand X's" guitars either required repair at the store, or had to be sent back to the manufacturer to correct a problem AS SHIPPED (in other words, it came in the door messed up).

How many PRS's required for the calendar year required a similar repair?

 

None.

 

Not one.

 

Zero.

 

For this very reason, the store dropped "Brand X". 

 

 

Now, one could argue that when "Brand X" hits the mark, they might make a better guitar than PRS - but no reasonable person could say that when "Brand X" delivers a clunker that needs repair (and they did so with 1 out of every 4 guitars they built) that's somehow preferable.

 

You may or may not like PRS, but that's not really the point.  PRS delivers what they say they are going to deliver without requiring a dealer to spend money repairing it, or a customer being disappointed by the fact that on that special day when his new special order guitar he's been waiting for (and paid for) arrives, he finds out that the guitar is so riddled with flaws that he can't take delivery of it for a few weeks longer because it has to go back to the manufacturer or straight to repair.

[Kazwell]

Pacer X-Think about this statement I made "Some folks WANT the human element and "potential" for error."

 

And now this isn't completely my viewpoint, however, I think the mindset could be that the good percentage is MORE special because say 20% are in fact bad.

 

If all were uniform-say in the case of PRS who I have heard before makes a very consistent product, there is a precieved level of blandness or for a better way to put it "lack of excitement."

 

I contend that many folks enjoy the gamble. Leaving it in the hands of fate whether they get that special sweetheart guitar that stands above the rest in that product's line.

 

You will get more consistency with an instant replay, and many sports fans agree, however they still want the "human element" to be part of the equation.

 

It is then a gamble as to whether the human element delivers or  not. It keeps things exciting. Sports music, doesn't matter, there is an overall psychology at play here that needs to be addressed that trancends the content of debate or whatever you want to call it.

[GuitArtMan]

Wow, what started out as a simple question about the Plek machine has gone on into a whole debate over “hand made” vs. “machine made”.

 

I’ll start by tossing these questions out.

Does the wood know if it was carved by hand or by machine?

Does the wood care if it was carved by machine or by hand?

Should we?

 

What is “hand made” any way?  Does that mean the luthier uses his bare hands to carve and cut and shape and drill the wood?  That ridiculous.  Of course he uses tools.  Does that mean he only uses non-power tools?  There are some who would argue “yes”.  Is a hole cut with a hand auger better than a hole cut with a power drill?  I don’t think so.  If a luthier can drill the holes for the tuning machines using a power drill in say 1 minute, and it takes him 30 minutes using an auger, which is better?  If the outcome is the same, the obvious answer is the one that takes less time as this allows the luthier to be more productive in other areas.  A CNC machine is a time saver.

 

I’ll agree with PacerX that for every great vintage Gibson or Fender out there, there are at least that many clunkers.  And for the ones that are great players, were they that way out of the box or did it take years of settling in and tweaking and a pro luthiers set up to get them that way?  We seem to accept that a new Gibson or Heritage may take a few years to “settle in” and may require seasonally truss rod adjustments.  Then why did the PRS custom I owned for 8 years never need a truss rod adjustment?  In that same time frame I probably adjustment my Les Paul’s truss rod at least once a year.  None of the Tom Andersons I’ve owned have ever needed a truss rod adjustment.  They've maintained their flawless set up year after year after year after year...

 

I love the feel of a good vintage Gibson or Fender as much as the next guy.  Something happens when an instrument is lovingly played on for years and years.  There are manufactures now that can obtain that great played on feel on brand new instruments.  Hint – it’s not Gibson or Heritage. 

 

I find it frustrating that I’ve owned four H-535s with subtle, to not so subtle neck shape differences:  Almond Burst – Medium Large D shape, Antique Natural – Slim C shape, Antique Natural 2 – Slim D shape, Dark Almond Burst – Medium C shape.  And my H-137 has a Medium D shape.  Why can’t Heritage be more consistent?  In fact I tried to custom order an H-535 with a deep C shape and ended up with a deep D shape.  I loved the guitar, but the neck didn’t feel right in my hand and I actually sent it back for a re-shape.  I  know when I pick up a Tom Anderson with a TA standard neck carve it will feel like a Tom Anderson with a TA standard neck carve.  I know when I pick up a PRS with a wide thin neck shape it will feel like a PRS with a wide thin neck shape.  Since when is repeatability/consistency a bad thing?  If you read on many of the forums you will know that one of the biggest complaints about the current Gibson’s is there QA, and one of the biggest factors there is lack of consistency.  You can pick up two guitars of the same model and they may feel and play and sound like completely different instruments.  Golverwave would lead us to believe this is a good thing – I say poppycock.  If I were a pro and needed a back up to my number one instrument, wouldn’t it be great if the manufacturer were consistent in their building process and that two instruments of the same model played and felt and sounded as similar as possible (given that no two pieces of wood are the same)?  I’ll even suggest that many of the new kids on the block are more selective in regards to wood – if it doesn’t meet their criteria they don’t use it – plain and simple.  This again leads to instruments that are more consistent from guitar to guitar.  This is not a bad thing.

 

This all started because someone asked how long a Plek job lasts.  If it’s used on an instrument that was precision crafted using properly seasoned woods the set up should last a long, long time.  If it was used as a band and to cover up inherently flawed fretting process on a guitar with poorly seasoned woods, it may not last from the manufacturer to the dealer’s show room.

 

So why do I continue to buy Heritages and Gibsons?  I like their designs.  I just wish they were more consistent in the manufacturing of their time proven designs.