Posted on

Letter: Defending Larry Sandberg’s Book

Letter: Defending Larry Sandberg’s Book

by Harry Fleishman

Originally published in American Lutherie #67, 2001

 

Dear Guild,

Benjamin Hoff takes what seems like a pretty severe dislike to my friend Larry Sandberg’s book, The Acoustic Guitar Guide, from its title, to its tone, to its content. What many have enjoyed, the folksy tone Larry takes, offends Hoff. He’s certainly entitled to dislike it. However, he seems intent on nitpicking as a way of discrediting the author and his work. He quotes Sandberg and brackets “sic” after “epitome” as though the word or idea were used incorrectly, and he knew better. But the word and idea are correct as a quick glance at a dictionary will show. He objects to a brief history, but this is not a history book. He objects that Sandberg writes, “the steel-strung flattop is probably the kind of guitar you want. It’s the kind of guitar most people want.” Of course Sandberg is not psychic, but even a quick look at any store that sells guitars will show this to be true. The sales of steel-strung to nylon, or to any other kind is about ten to one. I think the problem is that Hoff doesn’t agree. He is entitled to that opinion, too. However, he neglects to write that in his discussion of classical guitars, Sandberg explains why one would or would not want a nylon strung guitar, who uses them, and what they do and don’t provide musically. I think that is sufficient. Hoff writes that the chapter about flattop guitars should be designated “factory” guitars. Yet, Sandberg writes separately about custom and handbuilt guitars. (Full disclosure: Two of my guitars are on the cover of this book and I’m very proud of that. Also, as a friend of Larry’s and a sometime author, I know the depth of his knowledge as well as the limitations, constraints, and hype-oriented zeal of the publishing world.) Certainly, the subtitle is a bit over the top. That’s publishing, folks. No book could be everything to all people and Hoff’s right: the subtitle shouldn’t say it can. That said, I think this one does what it purports: it guides potential players towards a guitar and helps guitar owners to maintain their instruments. As a reviewer myself I would not wish to see Hoff or anyone else censored in their reviews, nor to see only positive reviews. Sandberg’s book has received many other positive reviews. I disagree with Hoff’s assessment and wanted to add my voice to that discussion. ◆

Posted on

Total Flame Out: Retopping a Harp Guitar

Total Flame Out: Retopping a Harp Guitar

by Harry Fleishman

Originally published in American Lutherie #100, 2009



Falling in love causes people to do crazy things. It made me build a harp guitar using a piece of redwood that was so obviously problematic that I should have run from it. But I fell in love with it for its beauty. I should have been faithful to the wonderful straight-grained wood I’d had such success with. But no; I was blinded by its gorgeous curls. Like a C-street politician, I’m paying the price now.

Replacing the top on a complicated instrument is no picnic, I can tell you. The harp guitars I’ve made have no actual centerline and no points of symmetry. But once I made the decision to go forward with the retopping, I remembered a cool description of how Taylor Guitars does it. Bob Taylor has the good sense not to trash a guitar just because it doesn’t sound good. He also has the good sense not to sell a guitar that isn’t up to his standards. He also has a CNC machine and interchangeable parts for his guitars. Not I.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of the Articles Online featured on our website for Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 3 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page.

MEMBERS: login for access or contact us to setup your account.

Posted on

Opinion

Opinion

by Harry Fleishman

Originally published in American Lutherie #74, 2003



As a builder of many years experience, I have my own methods and views. I try to teach, but more important, I try to learn. We each have our own approach and I’d never want to censor anyone’s right to spread their ideas. At this point in my career it is clear that some ideas may seem wrong, but only seem so because of my own limitations. That said, I do feel a need to respond to a recent article that purports to tell ``the truth,’’ exposing other views as false.

John Calkin’s article “The Heretic’s Guide to Alternative Lutherie Woods” in AL#69 offers some very useful information about the working properties of a good assortment of materials. I appreciate the info and will refer to it as I build and teach. However, I think he does a disservice to many luthiers who have worked hard to train their ears and to understand tone. Yes, as John says, “Guitars sound like guitars.” They do not all sound alike, though, as he implies throughout the article. He asserts that, “The concept of tonewood is a hoax.” Then am I a charlatan? I teach that each tonewood has its own qualities that have small but discernible affects on the voice of a guitar. He asks, “Can you tell what a guitar is made of while listening to an unfamiliar recording?” and answers that no one can. Well, I often can. On more than one occasion I have correctly identified the woods used in guitars that I had not seen and was unfamiliar with. On many occasions I have even identified the luthiers who built guitars, based on listening to recordings and recognizing their “voice.” I’d be surprised if many well-trained, thoughtful, and sensitive luthiers cannot do the same. John should not assume that just because he cannot hear these subtleties, no one can. Many people are colorblind, but that does not negate the difference between red and green.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page.

If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on

Letter: Replying to Binding Cutter Review

Letter: Replying to Binding Cutter Review

by Harry Fleishman

Originally published in American Lutherie #90, 2007



Dear Tim, et al.,

I must compliment you on the beautiful cover photos (AL#89). I couldn’t love it more if they were pictures of my own instrument. Seriously, thanks to Jon Peterson for making me look good.

Things got even better once I stopped admiring my own work and opened the issue... but not until I got through the very sad news of more luthiers we have lost. It’s simply hard to believe that these vital, generous people are gone, whom we saw and heard, learned from, played with, and shared with so recently.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page.

If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.
Posted on

Letter: Patents and Acknowledgement

Letter: Patents and Acknowledgement

by Harry Fleishman

Originally published in American Lutherie #81, 2005



Dear Tim, GAL members, and anyone else,

Largely because of my involvement in GAL, I have some visible presence in the lutherie community. Because I have always been interested in solving the problems, imagined or real, that I saw in conventional instruments — whether that meant developing a more repair-and-adjust-friendly neck joint or trying to wring a stronger low end from my basses without introducing too much “twang” — I've preferred to take risks, accept failure, and appreciate occasional success. Additionally, and most importantly, I have worked hard over the thirty years I have been designing and building to maintain my integrity as a luthier, if nowhere else in my misbegotten life. (Bear with me, I’ll get to the point.)

It is, therefore, with some consternation and much sadness that I have heard rumors questioning the legitimacy of my use of some of these unusual features. To be blunt, I’ve heard accusations that I have ripped people off for their ideas and not given appropriate credit, either in the form of acknowledgment or, in some cases, in the form of required licensing fees.

Become A Member to Continue Reading This Article

This article is part of our premium web content offered to Guild members. To view this and other web articles, join the Guild of American Luthiers. Members also receive 4 annual issues of American Lutherie and get discounts on products. For details, visit the membership page.

If you are already a member, login for access or contact us to setup your account.