|
|
Joined:
May 2002
Posts: 1026
Location: Back in the Valley of the Sun Mesa Az. | Here I go asking questions again, but;
Is there much difference in construction/value between a Legend and a Balladeer of the same vintage? Specifically, I am looking at a 1981 Balladeer model 1651 on e-bay. It looks identical to my 1981 Legend 1117 except that the Balladeer has electronics. If the only difference is the elec., I guess I have no reason to be interested in buying it.
Any thoughts?
Norse(bugging big Al with more of my obnoxious questions)man1 |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2002
Posts: 1900
| Legends have better wood facing, bound fingerboards, tortoise-shell enlays, custom tuners, better bracing and have always been the high-end of the standard single sound hole ovations. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2002
Posts: 6202
Location: Phoenix AZ | The biggest difference will be the bracing and the cosmetics. At one time in the mid 70's I owned "identical" balladeer 1111 and legend 1117. In a blind test with my friend playing, I could not tell them apart. They sounded slightly different, but I'll be darned if I could say which was which or which was "better". Still blind-folded he put each one in my hands to play and I could not feel any difference at all (until I felt the tuners - balladeer had klusons, legend had grovers). I sold the balladeer and kept the legend (still have it), just because it looked fancier. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2002
Posts: 5750
Location: Scotland | The early Balladeers were cross-braced while the Legend had Ovation's proprietry VT bracing. Current models of both are A- braced. The main differences apart from the bracing in the older guitars is the grade of spruce used for the top, tuning machines & fingerboard inlay/binding. Even the humble Balladeer had a 5-piece neck in the early days. I've played some old Balladeers which sounded spectacular, just because they were bottom of the range doesn't mean they are going to be inferior in sound or playability. A friend of mine has just bought a current standard Balladeer & I was expecting to hate it. While I don't think it has the finesse of the early versions I had to admit that it played & sounded far better than I would have believed. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2002
Posts: 6
Location: colorado | Hi, I'm new. In addition to the more technical difference already touched on, The neck on an 1867 is much flatter than my 1861. The nut width is also different. These are minor playability issues.
-nathan |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2002
Posts: 6202
Location: Phoenix AZ | Nathan,
Is the nut width really different on the 1861 vs. 1867? The Ovation web site says the 1867 is 1 11/16 (which is nornal for all ovation 6 strings, I think). It lists the 1861 as 1 7/8. I assumed this was a mis-print on the 1861, because 1 7/8 is the 12-string neck. Something strange here. Also I thought the radius on all Ovation 6 string necks was 11 degrees (except Classic which is flat). Again, maybe they changed something. I'm just an analog guy in a digital world.
Dave |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2002
Posts: 6
Location: colorado | Ooops. If Ovation's website is wrong, then I'm wrong. I can measure the two sometime to get the real scoop. Also, I wasn't clear: The fretboard radius is identical, as far as I know, but the balladeer's neck is fatter. There is more wood between your thumb and fingers. I actually find this to be marginally more comfortable then a legend.
-nathan |
|
| |
Legends and Balladeers