Chat about Equipment Info
 #108574  by deepelem
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:15 am
TI4-1009 wrote:
Mandoborg wrote:These are the threads i always think about when Lieber comes sniffing around here with all his Doug Irwin BS. Granted this is a copy IRWINS design, but why would you even consider a guitar from someone who hasn't made a guitar in ages, probably take ages to get it, if at all, and you have to go through somebody else to talk to the guy your handing over your $$$$$$$ too ?? There are so many GREAT guitar builders today it's almost laughable what has become of the whole Lieber/Irwin thing. This work is top notch and a fair price for sure. Even the Phigas have come a LONG way. So when folks come on here and say that they might be able to get you a guitar by such and such on the thrid moon of the 14 month of the appocolypse after traveling the seven seas to find the maker......... look elsewhere.

This is not intended to be a dig at Lieber or Irwin, just a reality check, not only have builders closed in, they've surpassed.
With all due respect, I don't think statements like this are in the best interests of the board. I understand they reflect the opinions of the poster, and "it's a free country", but I think the Moderators should bend over backwards in the direction of not driving away some of the most significant visitors that we get here. Does Rick Turner ring a bell?? Comeon guys, use your heads! Count to 100, re-read your post a third time before hitting "submit".

Beautiful guitar Waldo!
Indeed all are entitled to their opinion but I would just like to put my personal experience in here. I do not know the circumstances surrounding Mr Irwin but I do know that very recently I have been in lengthy correspondance with Thomas Lieber about a guitar project. He was unfailingly courteous and produced some very firm qoutes and a timeline for when the guitar would be built. He presented options and ideas and was always available to talk with on the phone. I found him very pleasant to deal with.

And yes that is indeed a beautiful guitar Waldo ... one of these days maybe ,,,, :-)
 #108575  by KCJones
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 9:19 am
strumminsix wrote:Looks nice but are your high strings at an odd angle at the bridge?
Beautiful guitar. But something is definately awry with the tail piece. It seems much larger, wider, and spaced differently than the original. I'd be concerned with the outer strings pull with the strings being so out of allignment with the saddles. May or may not be an issue.
 #108583  by TI4-1009
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:15 am
Hey Mike- could you pop the hoods and show us some of the guts?

By the way, which buffer did you finally go with? :-)
 #108587  by Pete B.
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:42 am
KCJones wrote:
strumminsix wrote:Looks nice but are your high strings at an odd angle at the bridge?
Beautiful guitar. But something is definately awry with the tail piece. It seems much larger, wider, and spaced differently than the original. I'd be concerned with the outer strings pull with the strings being so out of allignment with the saddles. May or may not be an issue.
That looks like something that could be fixed.
 #108596  by KCJones
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:15 am
Pete B. wrote:
KCJones wrote:
strumminsix wrote:Looks nice but are your high strings at an odd angle at the bridge?
Beautiful guitar. But something is definately awry with the tail piece. It seems much larger, wider, and spaced differently than the original. I'd be concerned with the outer strings pull with the strings being so out of allignment with the saddles. May or may not be an issue.
That looks like something that could be fixed.

The only fix, if one was even needed, would be a new properly sized/spaced Tailpiece; there's no adjusting the current one.
 #108603  by waldo041
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:36 am
the observations of the tailpiece is/was already known. it does not hinder the playability of the guitar whatsoever and does not break strings. however, there is only one fix, if and when that may happen, is to replace it as noted. the great thing about this is that it is a replaceable part.

thanks for all the comments, the guitar is an absolute answer to prayers and a dream to play and own. it did come to me secondhand, and is actually Matt's 2nd tiger ever built, the first being a non sold prototype. if you guys dig this one, know that they only get BETTER after this one if that is even possible!

i'll see what i can do about gut shots!



peace,
waldo
 #108608  by strumminsix
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:27 pm
Complaint #2. You haven't invited me down to play with you! I'd bring my Modulus!
 #108613  by Pete B.
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:04 pm
waldo041 wrote:...i'll see what i can do about gut shots!
Gotta link to a sound byte?
 #108621  by waldo041
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:27 pm
Pete B. wrote: Gotta link to a sound byte?
not yet....

peace,
waldo
 #108626  by playingdead
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:43 pm
Too cool, Mike!

I have a line on one of Matt's lefty Wolfs (Wolves?) if any southpaws with deep pockets out there are tempted. Send a PM.
 #108656  by Grant
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:30 pm
waldo041 wrote:the observations of the tailpiece is/was already known. it does not hinder the playability of the guitar whatsoever and does not break strings. however, there is only one fix, if and when that may happen, is to replace it as noted. the great thing about this is that it is a replaceable part.

thanks for all the comments, the guitar is an absolute answer to prayers and a dream to play and own. it did come to me secondhand, and is actually Matt's 2nd tiger ever built, the first being a non sold prototype. if you guys dig this one, know that they only get BETTER after this one if that is even possible!

i'll see what i can do about gut shots!



peace,
waldo
ahah - i thought that brass had either been 'aged' or the guitar was second hand.
 #108661  by mijknahs
 Mon Jan 30, 2012 6:01 pm
The string angles at the tailpiece probably have no more effect than the angles from the nut to the tuning pegs (which some are much more angled). Which is to say "not much" if anything.

I still can't belive how good that guitar looks...
 #108743  by TI4-1009
 Wed Feb 01, 2012 6:52 am
"It is the mass of the guitar which determines, in most respects, its acoustic signature, or resonant characteristics. Any sound we hear can often be identified by its resonant decay pattern. On an oscilloscope we see this as a frequency height attained and characterized by the duration and mode in which the sound decays. In addition to the guitar's mass, other dominant factors that affect its sound are the scale length, the total string length, the angle of the strings as they cross over the string nut and the bridge, or the "speaking string"."

- Doug Irwin
 #108744  by Jon S.
 Wed Feb 01, 2012 7:09 am
Beautiful guitar!
 #108750  by Rusty the Scoob
 Wed Feb 01, 2012 8:30 am
TI4-1009 wrote:"It is the mass of the guitar which determines, in most respects, its acoustic signature, or resonant characteristics. Any sound we hear can often be identified by its resonant decay pattern. On an oscilloscope we see this as a frequency height attained and characterized by the duration and mode in which the sound decays. In addition to the guitar's mass, other dominant factors that affect its sound are the scale length, the total string length, the angle of the strings as they cross over the string nut and the bridge, or the "speaking string"."

- Doug Irwin

I KNEW I brought an oscilloscope to gigs for a reason! :lol: