What makes the ULTIMATE acoustic guitar?

[Headless]

Hey guys, I’ve been spending quite a lot of time in the Czech Republic lately and recently did a bit of work for Furch Guitars which is one of the largest guitar manufacturers in Europe (but still not very big).

If you haven’t heard of Furch (sometimes badged ‘Stonebridge’ in the past) they make high end acoustics that easily hold their own against the Martins, Taylors etc of this world. They are not cheap per se, but they offer much better value for money than the premium American brands. Their instruments are stunning – I have toured the factory and the workmanship on display is just incredible. Everything is made by hand (only the necks are CNC’d) and every guitar is treated individually to get the best tone from the woods. They have built an impressive reputation across Europe with many pros using them as their weapon of choice.

Anyway, I have become mates with some of the Furch guys and instead of accepting money for the work I did, I said to put it towards a guitar But this is the tricky bit - all the guitars I played at the factory were outstanding - choosing my ultimate guitar is gonna be much more difficult than it might seem.

So what would you guys look for if you were to choose the ultimate guitar? (I am talking about a steel string acoustic here)

Some considerations:
Body-shape??? - Primarily for home playing & occasional recording, not live

Wood types? - They offer a wide range with many different combinations. Some are more aesthetically pleasing than others, but what about sound? Durability? I kinda like the nice grainy woods.

Finish – I am in 2 minds about this because while I generally prefer a more basic matt finish, some of their top glossy models are just incredible works of art with amazing inlays etc. I could easily be persuaded.

Obviously sound & playability are important but everything I saw was so damn nice. Can get it set up just to my liking too of course.

So what would you choose??? Any thoughts/suggestions appreciated.

[alanp]

It's a bit like comparing a Rolls Royce to a Lamborghini. Both are damn nice cars, but very different, and do different jobs. Pick the one that fits you and what you want.

You seem to know what general wood type you want (nice grainy one), have you asked if they can do a really nice satin finish with amazing inlays?

[Headless]

Yeah it's difficult to decide and I guess I'm kinda going through the fantasy stage (blond or brunette? hehe) a bit. I could choose a different instrument every day...

Maybe (hopefully) I'll do a bit more work for them and start building my harem I fully intend to get one of their foldable travel Little Jane's at some point too (check out the pix, cool as hell and they play well too).

What about body shape/size? I guess dreadnought is pretty standard and you can't really go wrong, but there are loads more. Probably the only thing I have decided on is a cutaway as from what I've researched, human ears are incapable of telling the difference between that and a normal body.

[Miza]

Yeah it's a heard one to answer for someone else. It's all personal taste, and also depends on what you've already got.

If it was my first acoustic I'd be going for a Dreadnaught body style. Can't go wrong, they sound so great. It's the sound of so many famous acoustic recordings of the last 60+ years.

Of course I've got a decent dreadnaught, so it if were me I'd go for an OM size or something (actually my next purchase will hopefully be a 12 string).

Again woods is preference. The generally accepted/traditional best tone woods for an acoustic is Sitka Spruce for the top and Indian Rosewood for the back and sides (according to the guy from Taylor at the recent roadshow), but again others would disagree...

Taylor make some really good videos on YouTube about body size and wood type that might help you narrow down your search.

You should look at what the company does really well, what their most popular model is. Chances are others have discovered the gem in their line up!

[Slowy]

It's not hard to refine your options. Starting with home playing and occasional recording:

What and how do you play. Fingerstyle? Flatpick? Are you a delicate player or do you dig in and hit your guitar hard?

Physically are you large or small....or neither?

Examples:

Delicate fingerstylist: 000 or OM body size (Though I'm a huge fan of Larrivee's L body shape) Cedar soundboard and either Mahogany or Rosewood back.

Not so delicate Fingerstyle: Same but with a Spruce top.

Heavy flatpicker: D size body, Spruce top, Rosewood back.

Smaller bodied guitars are less boomy which makes them easier to record. Dreadnaughts are better to accompany a singing voice. (More bass.)

Maple looks fabulous but produces a bright, cutting tone. It's perfect to be the lead instrument in an acoustic ensemble, but not as well rounded as Mahogany or Rosewood for solo work.

These are general principles, not hard and fast rules. But they might help you get a bit further down the track.

[bender]

I loathe recording Dreadnaughts- they always require either heavy EQ or very careful mic selection and placement, plus I find them big and awkward. My personal favourite is a Grand Auditorium. To me, that's the best of both worlds. It still has the low end strength of a Dreadnaught but it's more balanced and the low end is tighter. It sounds equally good for fingerstyle or flatpicking. I currently have a Walden CG2010 http://www.waldenguitars.com/CG2010.html and would love to replace it with something fancier in the same style.

[otisredding]

I like small bodied guitars.

Here is my Gibson LG-2 with my voice.

https://soundcloud.com/darrenwatson-nz/ ... e-on-in-my

[bender]

I like small bodied guitars.

Here is my Gibson LG-2 with my voice.

https://soundcloud.com/darrenwatson-nz/ ... e-on-in-my

That's a stunner.

[Miza]

See, lot's of different responses based on experience.

I've never recorded anything, only played live while singing, so my experience on a dreadnought is only favourable.

To my ears, the DN has a much richer, more textured tone. Great for strumming chords. Apparently they're the choice of bluegrass players too.

[Eruera]

I agree with bender regarding dreadnoughts and grand auditoriums, my 314 is very nice and balanced. I also think D's look corky with a cutaway.

That said, if it was me I would go for a super jumbo with heaps of bling

[rickenbackerkid]

I prefer jumbos, but that’s because I love the balanced tone. Not a dread or OM fan at all. Grand Auditorium can be nice too.

Woods, I prefer cedar as a top. Side wood I’m less fussy about. I much prefer an ebony fretboard.

I cannot stand inlays, gloss finishes, fancy rosettes on any other non-tone related bullshit on an acoustic guitar are a waste of money. An acoustic guitar has one purpose to me and that is to sound good. Therefore features that don’t add tonal goodness are a waste. I’m all about thin, thin finishes.

So if I was buying a Furch, I’d spec Jumbo, Cedar with mahogany back/sides/neck, ebony fretboard, no inlays, simple rosette, open pore finish.

And if I was specing that, I’d just buy a Lowden.

[robnobcorncob]

Depends if you're talking modern or traditional.... vintage style or otherwise...

My Bourgeois OM stops me thinking about acquiring another acoustic instrument, it's a mixture of vintage spec but with a modern touch.

[rickenbackerkid]

Rob’s OM is the exception to my dislike for OM’s. Probably more accurate to say I don’t like MARTIN OMs. Or indeed any Martins really.

[SimonHirst]

Rob’s OM is the exception to my dislike for OM’s. Probably more accurate to say I don’t like MARTIN OMs. Or indeed any Martins really.

Haha you mustn't have played a good Martin then....

[ash]

What Ben and Ben said seems to cover my thoughts the best.

What kind of work were you doing for Furch?