|
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Hello everyone:
I have an Ovation Adamas 1681-BG that is in near Mint condition which is an exceptional guitar, but I would be willing to consider a trade for a Composite Acoustics guitar, preferably a GX Performer model, but other models might be considered.
I can send high resolution photos. Just send me an email if you have a CA guitar and would be interested in trading.
Thank you.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2008
Posts: 129
Location: UK | Would you consider an outright sale? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
October 2006
Posts: 43
| You should post this over on the Carbon Guitar Forum. http://carbonguitar.com/smf/index.php |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Hi Kevin:
At this time, i'm not trying to sell the guitar outright.
But if I change my mind at some point in the future, I will submit another post on the OFC 'For Sale' board.
Thank you.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
June 2008
Posts: 129
Location: UK | Thanks Al.
Kevin |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 333
Location: east coast usa | you might want to check into Rainsong... im told its a better instrument.. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2002
Posts: 15664
Location: SoCal | Actually, the Adamas is a better instrument..... |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Geneo and Moody:
Actually, I would be interested in a Rainsong CO-WS1000N2, as well.
I think I may even prefer the "brighter", more "bell like" and "sparkling" sound of the Rainsong over the woodier, with less harmonics, sound of the Composite Acoustics, especially since I generally play with my fingers only (without any nails to speak of, without a pick.
I have read that Rainsong may have had some quality control problems, however, in the past, which makes me a bit wary of acquiring one.
One thing that attracts me about the Rainsong and the Composite Acoustics is that I think the all-graphite construction allows the player to hear more of the sound than an Adamas.
With the more inert fiberglass bowl in an Adamas, I think that the guitar, when played acoustically, sounds better to the audience than to the player.
A graphite body, I would think, would transmit more of the sound to the player.
Despite everything that I have written above, however, I do love my 1681 and have a deep respect for the non-Adamas Ovations as well.
For many years, I have touted and defended the sound of the Adamas in the face of the many "all wood" traditionalists out there, who for years have regarded Ovation guitars, including the Adamas, with disdain.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 333
Location: east coast usa | interesting point of view Al... thanks |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | I think it depends what you are looking for. If the woody CSN&Y type sound is what you're after then nothing is going to do it like a nice wooden guitar. But that's not the sound that everyone is looking for ... and probably the reason there is about a gazillion guitar designs out there. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 53
Location: Boston | I am fortunate enough to have a Composite Acoustics 6 string, a Rainsong 6 and a 12, as well as a few Ovations and a 2080. I like them all; they are all a bit different. Most people seem to like the sound of the 2080 the most, and surprisingly to me, they tell me it is the loudest (easiest to hear in a jam session along with the other non-wooden guitars). It is the most balanced sounding, and certainly has the best plugged in sound. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | Why does it surprise you? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| I didn't realize that the 2080 was so highly regarded in some circles.
It had been my belief that the 2080 was generally less well regarded that many of the textured, deep bowled Adamases.
Is there really that much difference between the 2080 and the other Adamases, and if so, could you please be more detailed and specific with respect to exactly what these differences are?
Thank you.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 53
Location: Boston | Why does it surprise you? Somwhow the Rainsongs seem louder when I am playing them and perhaps they are to the player. But the audience tells a different story. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 53
Location: Boston | Sorry, I am not an Adamas expert. I was simply sharing my first hand experience of the 2080 compared to the CA and Rainsong models.
Tragically I don't seem to be able to part with any of them :) |
|
| |
|
Joined:
February 2005
Posts: 11840
Location: closely held secret | The 2080 is just another flavor of ice cream. Some like the swooshy soundhole, some don't. Some prefer the textured top, some don't care. Personally, I'm of the opinion that the textured tops sound better, but YMMV - in any case, I've owned a 2080 and it sounded fantastic.
The 2080 is a deep bowl - deep contour bowl.
All that aside, what I was asking was why are you surprised that the 2080 was the loudest, most balanced, best sound plugged in?
I've played a Rainsong - sounded like crystal...breaking. I've played a CA. Better than a Rainsong, but still too synthy-brittle for my taste. I was excited to see all carbon guitars when they came out, thought it would be a 'pure' sound. But to me, it's soulless and toneless.
But, to each his own. If you're happy with yours, good for you. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2008
Posts: 2683
Location: Hot Springs, S.D. | Don't know if this is relevant, but a guy came in here a couple of weeks ago with a Martin that was totally composite. It was smooth all over, no texture, and it sounded AWFUL. I'm not sure if it was the lack of texture, the bracing, or what, but I would never waste my money on one.
Haven't heard or played a Rainsong or a CA, but I have two Adamas' and I KNOW they sound wonderful. I can't get over how different the 1587 and the 1680 sound, and yet they both sound SO GOOD. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 53
Location: Boston | Hey Al, I might add that you'd find the neck on the CA quite thin. I was looking at your collection (very nice!) listed in your signature and have a felling you might be more comfortable on the Adamas neck. The CA neck is very thin and flat. Almost more like a Carvin electric.
You should try and find one to play for a bit before you commit. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Hello Allison:
I agree that the Martin composite quitars are quite atrocious.
But these Martins are not made of graphite but plastic laminate, similar to what one might see as a veneer on a inexpensive kitchen counter top.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2008
Posts: 2683
Location: Hot Springs, S.D. | Ah...that explains a lot. Thanks. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2008
Posts: 1119
Location: Michigan |
Haven't heard or played a Rainsong or a CA, but I have two Adamas' and I KNOW they sound wonderful. I can't get over how different the 1587 and the 1680 sound, and yet they both sound SO GOOD. [/QB] Played em both and liked them both. Very impressive but different sounds. The rainsong had a bright Adamas sound(to me) while the CA is amazing in the sound it produces...but different. Simply amazing volume for that size guitar(cargo). |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 381
Location: Miami | Originally posted by Albert190:
...I think the all-graphite construction allows the player to hear more...
...I think that the guitar, when played acoustically, sounds better to the audience than to the player...
...A graphite body, I would think, would transmit more of the sound to the player...
I'm not sure if the 3 "thinks" you mentioned are as in "I think this is what the 3 different models would sound like in comparison" or "I've played all 3 and this is what I think".
Which of these 2 is it? |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Jukebox:
The first.
I haven't had the opportunity yet to hear or play the Composite Acoustic or Rainsong guitars live.
I have only been able to listen to demonstration videos, which have been very impressive.
I do own a 1681 and am extremely familiar with its sound, of course.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | I have not played a lot of them, so maybe just coincidence. But every Rainsong guitar that I played was totally and amazingly disappointing. The EXPORT ADAMAS guitars are far superior tone for less money. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 381
Location: Miami | Originally posted by Albert190:
Jukebox:
The first.
I haven't had the opportunity yet to hear or play the Composite Acoustic or Rainsong guitars live.
Time out. You're willing to trade a near mint Adamas 1681 for something you haven't even heard or played yet? :eek:
At the risk of being dramatic, picture this:
You find someone with a CA or Rainsong willing to trade. You're psyched! You trade. You get that seriously cool looking new composite. You play it. Hmm. You play it again. Okay. Not bad. You think you like it. Yes. It's different. And sometimes different is good. Right? You play it some more, telling yourself more and more this was a great trade, not a bad idea at all. You put it down and stare at it, noticing how much cooler it looks than the old Adamas. You go to bed...
And you wake up in the middle of the night with gas. And I don't mean Guitar Acquisition Syndrome. I mean gas from realizing that the 1681 is gone, that different isn't always better, and that you can't trade back.
I'm not saying that's what would happen, but it certainly could. Try before you trade. If you like it, then trade and enjoy like there's no tomorrow! If you try it and you don't like it, you can spare yourself the regret, thank me later, and I'll just say you're welcome, and welcome back to the OFC! |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | A good place to start is WHY are you wanting to sell your 1681 and WHAT are you expecting to get in a Rainsong or CA that will tickle your fancy. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| Jukebox Joe:
Perhaps what you are saying does have a lot of merit.
After all, my 1681 is a great guitar.
What intrigues me about the CA and Rainsong guitars, aside from the crystal clear, bell like sound that comes through on the demo videos, is the fact that I often have to play the 1681 sitting down, with the guitar in my lap and the guitar turned so that the top is facing me, in order to optimize the sound acoustically, as I, the player, hear it.
Again, I think this is a function of the fact that the Lyrachord body does not vibrate very much and that the rounded bowl directs the sound upward, through the top and away from the player.
This is great from the perspective of the audience, but not ideal from the perspective of the player.
I have also been intrigued by the great reviews I have read of the CA and Rainsong instruments.
Unfortunately, there is no store near to me that has CA or Rainsong guitars, so I have not been able to play one in person.
I think my inclination now is to buy a new CA guitar, with the right to return it for a refund, if it does not meet my expectations, and keep both my 1681 and the CA if the guitar does meet my expectations.
Later on, perhaps, I might get a Rainsong as well.
I think I would be extremely fortunate to have 3 very fine carbon fiber acoustics at my disposal, each with its own set of strengths.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 3969
| 2 questions:
1. Do you primarily play for yourself alone, or for an audience? If the former, then how the guitar sounds to the player is certainly the main consideration.
2. Do you base your guitar buying decisions on the compressed audio of an Internet video? Personally, I would never judge a guitar's sound on that criterion, but that's just me. Then there are all the other factors like neck profile, fret finish, etc. that are very personal to playability. You can't get a sense of those over a video. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 381
Location: Miami | Al, now you're talking sense! ;) I second what G8r said about Internet video, and I'll go further. Even a live demo with someone else playing it is NOT enough! You have to play it yourself to know if it's right for you.
As to what the player hears versus what the audience hears, it depends on 4 scenarios:
(1) You only play (as opposed to play and sing), and you only play unplugged (smaller intimate audiences). In this case you'll want a guitar with good projection, and man, do you already have the right guitar for that!
(2) You play and sing, also unplugged. In this case, you pick the guitar that works best with your voice as heard from the audience.
(3) You play or play and sing, plugged. In this case, the direction of the projection is almost negligible (not entirely, but almost) and what you need then is to find the right guitar / amp combo.
(4) You play or play and sing for yourself. In this case, you get the guitar that sounds best from your point of view regardless of what an audience would hear. And here, not to influence your decision or anything, I've played a CA with the side hole and the Adamas 1681 and while the big CA hole was more "in your face", it also had nowhere the tone of the 1681, but this again is a matter of personal opinion. I own neither, so my opinion was unattached, but still subjective since they're my ears.
Hope this makes sense, and in case I haven't emphasized my main point enough: listen and play for yourself before trading away a near mint 1681! Go with the refund option at all costs and you'll never regret it. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| G8r and Jukebox Joe:
I primarily play for myself, so for me, how a guitar sounds to me, as opposed to an audience, is what is most important.
I, of course, would greatly prefer buying a guitar after playing it in person, because as you say, there are many factors to consider in evaluating a particular instrument, but I think many of us who have bought guitars from Ebay, for example, have taken the risk that a guitar will meet their hopes and expectations when it arrives, and if not, one always has the option of selling it.
As I said, there is no CA or Rainsong dealer close to me, so I cannot try one out before I buy. But if I saw a CA or Rainsong on Ebay at a great price, I would consider buying it, sight unseen and guitar unplayed, knowing that I could always sell it, hopefully for about what I paid for it.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
July 2009
Posts: 26
| I will be ordering a new CA guitar today, on approval, with the right to return it for a refund.
I will be keeping my 1681, as well.
Thank you all for your advice.
Al |
|
| |
|
Joined:
August 2009
Posts: 381
Location: Miami | Great! Do post your findings. I'd love to get another person's side by side evaluation. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
November 2006
Posts: 3969
| Excellent plan. Look forward to your comparisons and impressions. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
March 2008
Posts: 2683
Location: Hot Springs, S.D. | Congrats Albert! Glad the OFC could be a sounding board to help you make the right decision. And as Joe said, let us know how you like the new one. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
September 2002
Posts: 806
Location: Seymour, Tennessee | I like my CA OX very much and compared to the guitars that some folks have over here (they are few and far between)it sounds waaaay better.
I'll have to wait till I get home to do a comparison with the O's.
I believe the O's sound better but I don't know what people listening to them that may be different than what I hear.
I can say that the CA OX is very powerful for having such a shallow bowland being a rather small guitar.
I am out of my playing league with probably 99% of you guys but I like how it sounds and so does everybody else here who have seen it or played it.
I wish I could compare it to an Adamas of my own but that'll have to wait till I hit the lottery or turn criminal. |
|
| |
|
Joined:
May 2008
Posts: 4996
Location: Phoenix AZ | I can say, I've never been disappointed with any CA guitar that I've tried. Nice instruments and quite well priced for what you get. |
|
| |
Adamas 1681, Near Mint, For Trade for Composite Acoustics Guitar