Quote:
Originally Posted by Grenvilleter
I can understand the skepticism and some very good points are made. Why not groove the bottom if there is any impact at all ?
Very valid point and I expect the answer is marketing. All be it, perhaps not the most effective amongst us guitar weenie's.
I can see where the link between Estaban snake oil sales and this type of hype (groove top) could be interupted as similar.
I do not think Blueberry can interpret top stiffness and grove to increase a given tops strength. I think every guitar gets the same grooving in some geometric pattern that they deem to be eye pleasing.
With that said, you can greatly increase the "stiffness" of a ordinary sheet of paper by folding it numerous times. What I am saying is, you may be able to decrease mass without comprimising stiffness or strength of a sheet of spruce which would decrease the amount of mass the strings have to vibrate.
I have a cedar board that has suffered water erosion for a number of years and it has left grooves in the wood everywhere except the resin lines / growth rings. It is in effect, "grooved". The board is still part of a door and there does not appear to be any signficant loss of strength.
As far as Blueberry goes, I don't know anything more about them other that the fact I have seen a couple and got the chance to play 1 for a few days.
I didn't see sloppy workmanship. I did see a guitar that was somewhat impressive in sound quality. Will it hold together as it was short braced in accordance to the Martin style dread ? Who knows ! Time will tell.
It is for these reasons I think those who dismiss them outright before actually seeing or playing them is being somewhat short-sighted.
With that said, I don't think Blueberry is helping themselves either with their marketing efforts. I mean...come on ??? E-BAY....??? automatically that smells bad to start with.
If drawing interest to their product via some gaudy headstock or intricate carvings is what they feel they must do to draw attention to their product, so be it. Their choice. That's what Blueridge did with their award winning BR-160 and it seemed to work for them.
I guess I would be skeptical as well if looking at it from a view most people here see it in. Fortunately, after seeing other examples of their work, I'm in a better position to draw from a more informed baseline than many.
FWIW, I don't have any affiliation with Blueberry either and if I did, I think I could do a better job at marketing. Sheshhhhhh.....E-BAY....come on !!!!
|
Good points.
Re; the paper analogy....not quite the same thing.
There, you are increasing the strength of the paper along the axis of the folds....not across the surface. Also, you are not removing material from the paper..but re-arranging it.
With the grooves, you are removing material from the top. An intact piece of wood will be stronger than one that has been scoured/carved.
As I say, I may be completely wrong about this.
At this point in time however, Blueberry holds no appeal to me...either aesthetically, theory wise or marketing wise.
I'd rather spend that money on a nice Collings or upper end Martin...or find a nice used custom built guitar. (I think I saw a nice used Baranik FS in the classifieds recently.
)
Just checked.
Yep. Here it is;
http://69.41.173.82/forums/showthread.php?t=136067
Also a used Hamblin, Collings, SCGC OMPW and Martin NB one could get in the same price range.