|
|
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! |
|
| |
Adamas 1681, Near Mint, For Trade for Composite Acoustics Guitar
