Alan Ratcliffe wrote
Overall The Benjamins seem to have a very nice aesthetic. All to often these days I find that even the acoustic luthiers go overboard with the figured or dramatically grained woods and end up with something that looks like a wooden guitar version of a blinged-out pimp wagon. The guys that really have a strong sense of balance and restraint, producing classy looking instruments are few and far between.
Do you think so?
OK... at the lower ends of the market I see some cheesy looking stuff. I was at some new shop in Cresta center recently and they had a couple of guitars on the wall with eye-catching figuring on the tops. So eye-catching that they had to be made from kitchen counter-tops or had something like a foto-flame.
But generally I like what I see when looking at good acoustics. You can sometimes have a bit too much bling - EG inlays on the headstock, vines up the fingerboard, or all that abalone on a 45 series Martins. I like the look of good wood and good workmanship, and mostly that's what I see. Some customers do insist on holographic scratch plates I suppose...
I do like a high-gloss finish. Lowdens, for example, or the 3 series Larrivees look just a little too spartan for me. The smoothtalker I am having built has a satin finish - Mervyn doesn't offer a gloss finish on those guitars. But in that case the look is already so different that you don't notice the lack of gloss that much.
The other issue here is not an aesthetic one. If I buy a top-end acoustic guitar I want my money to go on top quality woods and fine workmanship, not on dragons laying along the fingerboard and my initials in gemstones at the 12th fret.
I might countenance a sunburst finish I suppose. Blues and greens on acoustics don't do it for me - and I always start thinking that the stain is there to hide blemishes in the wood.
