Topic: Guitars/Gear of whatever sort--how much of a difference do they make?

[Mister Steve]

For me, the whole authentic thing is fraught with peril.

Agreed.  Example to consider: Beatlemania...and what would be the equivalent?  Robert Johnsonmania?  Charlie Pattonmania? I'm taking things to an extreme here but...

Frankly, I think much of the impulse towards "authentic" with the blues is actually directed towards an "authentic" audience with an implicit rejection/disregard of those "not in the know."  One could say, "Well, that's the blues audience/market."   It doesn't have to be that way.

Doc, you're also selling me on one guitar...there's also something to be said for playing and bonding with one guitar...sounds like heresy?  You're also right about the term "parlor guitar" getting tossed around like crazy.  Would "entry-level" be the contemporary equivalent for a blues guitar today?  Just kidding.  I think affordable and available were the most operative principles in the day.  The focus was on making music and some money.

[Mr.OMuck]

A lot of what younger people now refer to a "Parlour" guitars were actually smaller cheap no name plywood or birch instruments that we use to refer to as "Madeinusas" (Made in USA). I learned on one which I loved dearly and actually had a hard time deciding whether it was really all that much inferior to the shiny new Gibson it was being replaced with.
A "Proper "Parlour" as has been pointed out was a pre twenties narrow waisted sometimes ornate instrument with good quality wood, spruce, mahogany, rosewood, walnut & Oak. Lightly braced and generally sweet sounding.

[frankie]

authentic

authenticity is in your underpants.

[frankie]

authenticity is in your underpants.

excuse me.  I meant THE underpants.  Not any specific person's underpants.

now, where did I leave my fedora and sunglasses?

[Norfolk Slim]

I think there are three key points here:

1- JohnM's initial proposition is undoubtedly correct, and I don 't think anyone actually takes significant issue with that.  

2- In terms of authenticity, or sound, of course you can play anything with anything and a good player will always make it sound pretty good and a bad player pretty bad.  However, there are valid reasons for wanting a particular type of guitar or sound.  Some of those are comfort but most are to do with the noise that different instruments produce.  I dont own a couple of ladder braced small guitars to feel authentic, but rather because the dry bottom end punch they offer suits what I'm trying to play and helps create the sound I want on certain tunes.  I can play the same tunes on my Martin dreadnought and it still sounds like me and, hopefully, sounds half decent but the timbre is a little different and, to my ears, less suited to the tune.  Of course, my ears have been attuned to what the old players tended to play for those tunes, and that judgment is therefore entirely subjective and inherently biased.  Arguably its actually an unreliable indicator of what actually sounds best, or whether it really matters.

3- There is also an extent to which we, as (let's be honest) primarily a bunch of guitar obsessives, simply enjoy contact with, the sights and smells of, and the style / aesthetics of some of those old instruments.  We enjoy associating ourseles with instruments which are similar to those wielded by some of our old musical heroes.  Some of us realised long ago that we were more able to buy old instruments than succesfully perform old music!

Its all part of the fun and each to their own.  So long as (which was John's initial point) people enjoy it with their eyes open and dont get caught up in the erroneous belief that they must have a particular piece of kit to play the music.

[Parlor Picker]

I also think that many of the older players used cheap, ladder-braced guitars because it was all they could afford. Given the opportunity, many of them would doubtless have been playing decent Gibsons, Martins or Larsons.

At the end of the day, I just like good music and I like acoustic guitars (of all persuasions).

[Norfolk Slim]

Absolutely.  The point I was clumsily trying to make at (2) was that my ears are attuned to a particular sound because thats what they played, not because it necessarily sounds best (objectively) or because it has to be that way to be somehow authentic.

[Parlor Picker]

Absolutely.  The point I was clumsily trying to make at (2) was that my ears are attuned to a particular sound because thats what they played, not because it necessarily sounds best (objectively) or because it has to be that way to be somehow authentic.

Well said!

[LB]

Damn fine posts and since we're talking about authenticity I have a loose handle on what that is. And what it's not. A man or woman composing their own original blues music and lyrics, telling stories and passing it on..... That's pure authenticity and when doing so it removes the question of your race, what kind of guitar you have and even what kind of hat you wear.  A guy on a corner in the city playing Blind Blake covers on a Stella note for note might not be authentic at all and still have amazing skills. The real authenticity leaps out at you by visiting some of these regular folks in the country that sit on the porch daily using the same couple of tunings, same few picking and chord patterns to endlessly create songs about their daily life and stories. That is the blues, and that's all it takes to be authentic. The rest is all fun and gravy. We have skill levels on this forum that far exceed many classic bluesmen but why are they not as authentic? The biggest reason is they were playing their music. And that's the one thing we could do more of.

[uncle bud]

authenticity is in your underpants.

excuse me.  I meant THE underpants.  Not any specific person's underpants.

These are all you need: http://www.fogeyunlimited.co.uk/acatalog/Vint_Underwear.html

[Dave in Tejas]

Good stuff!
I guess we can tell by those who post on such a thread who are the "guitar weenies".

I recently had the fun of meeting a band traveling through my town, who play "string band" stuff, old timey fiddle tunes, some gypsy jazz, a little country. We had a meet and greet at a friend's house, everyone brought guitars, and I brought a few of my "finished" guitars for a sampling. I was interested to see which guitar was their favorite, based on the kind of music the band did.

Sure enough, the guitar they picked out was one that sort of matched the "era" of their music, 30's and round about there.
So the "look" is important, but if you think about it, the way a guitar looks is often related to the sound it puts out.

[eric]

Two observations:

1. Apparently, we are capable of taking a discussion down a path that starts with what kind guitars we like and ends with vintage underwear, thereby validating Mr. O'Muck's earlier assertion that we are all ****ing nuts.

2. Spats.  What kind of English vintage clothing company doesn't have spats?  Charley Patton had spats.  I want spats.  Then, I would be authentic.

I will now go play my guitar.

[dj]

Mr. O'Muck's earlier assertion that we are all ****ing nuts.

Well, it's HARD to get the right sound if you're not wearing 1920s BVDs!

[blueshome]

Yes, but then only if they're two sizes too small. (or 3 if you want to be Skip James).

[frankie]

since we're talking about authenticity I have a loose handle on what that is.

if you need that handle on authenticity to be tighter, then you should definitely try checking the underpants.

hope this helps!