Official Luthiers Forum!

I've noticed that among violin luthiers there are competitions among builders. They have shows were instruments are compared and scored by a panel of judges.   

Example Violin Competition

Is there anything like this in the guitar world?

I have seen on another luthier forum a "build off" where W. Cumpiano was the judge and gave a critique of each instrument. A new build off has been proposed with a new format in the works.

It seems to me that a violin competition would be easier to judge because violins are pretty much fixed developmentally relative to guitars.SteveCourtright38967.6344560185

_________________
"Building guitars looks hard, but it's actually much harder than it looks." Tom Buck

[QUOTE=SteveCourtright] I have seen on another luthier forum a "build off" where W. Compiano was the judge and gave a critique of each instrument. A new build off has been proposed with a new format in the works.

It seems to me that a violin competition would be easier to judge because violins are pretty much fixed developmentally relative to guitars.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, I think your exactly right about the more fixed standard with violins.

However, although I can see how many would not like the idea of a competition, it seems that a competition/show with guitars could be done with many catagories making it more interesting, for example, historical replicas, playability, sound, novice (I would be interested in that one), inlay work, originality, inovation, classical, SS, rosettes, etc.. As a new builder I find it difficult to compare or find standards to work toward. The standards in guitars seem to be widespread but there does appear to be some, for example, I was surprised to find out on my last post that purple color in EIR was universally considered to be a good thing. For me, plans, books, and pictures are just not enough and my own isolated comparisons to other guitars is not enough. I would really love to see what a group of highly experienced luthiers agree on as good.

I think this is a great idea.

Steve and Marc are right that, unlike violins, there are so many variations in guitars that it can be difficult to compare them --- you can't fairly judge a dread's tone against a parlor guitar's tone. There are two possible solutions. The first is what Marc suggests --- have a whole bunch of different awards so you can avoid some of those unfair comparisons. The second is to give contestants a strict set of guidelines and criteria that instruments must meet in order to be entered. The criteria can change from year to year (this year everyone make a dread, next year everyone make a parlor, etc.).

Personally, I think simpler is better. By eliminating some of those variables, the competition turns more on the skill and crafstmanship of the luthier rather than extraneous issues like whether a particular judge prefers dreads to parlors.

I do like the idea of judging the instruments both from the players' perspective and the luthiers' perspective. I'm not sure you need to tell the players to judge tone as opposed to playability, feel, appearance, or whatever --- just tell them to pick the one they like best, and give that one the "Players Choice Award." Same for a group of experienced luthier judges, who give a "Craftsman's Choice Award."

However it shakes out, this would be educational and fun.

[QUOTE=Kelby] I think this is a great idea.[/QUOTE]

I don't...   

I've hung out at a lot of these competitions, from the
Arizona crew to the
aforementioned
VSA, to the
Triennale in Cremona, to the
British Violin Making Association competition in London, and the
controversies that always seem to arise out of these events would pale in
comparison to the can 'o worms that a guitar competition would
unleash...

Heck, violins made for competition vary by a degree of millimeters...

An archtop (for example) competition would have examples that would
vary by tens-of-centimeters at best...

And a violin tone judge thinks he or she knows what a great
sounding fiddle sounds like, but what's the standard for a great-sounding
archtop??

The hard feelings and misunderstandings that always surround these
events can be exhausting and, in my opinion, pointless...

Any GAL or ASIA event is already enough of a "competition" as it is...
Everyone knows who the "winners" are without all the angst that
surrounds a "real" competition that seems to detract from the comraderie
of
the event...

Just my 2 cents...



      

We have competitions of sorts too. Healdsburg and Newport are examples.
The winners are the ones that were sold John How38967.5869560185

_________________
Tickle your guitar daily, and it'll tickle you back.

There are still competitions for classical guitars that are held in Spain and Germany. They are not annual events but are large enough to attract a number of builders.

For classical guitars the form and sound are well enough defined as is the repetoire so that the judging can be consistent.

[QUOTE=spruce]
Heck, violins made for competition vary by a degree of millimeters...

[/QUOTE]
That's fascinating. Amazing that there is that much agreement to a standard in the violin community.

[QUOTE=spruce]
And a violin tone judge thinks he or she knows what a great
sounding fiddle sounds like, but what's the standard for a great-sounding
archtop??
[/QUOTE]

I have no idea, is there even any agreement that some sound better than others or is it all relative, do they just sound different? Admittedly, I honestly don't know what the guitar community thought is.

[QUOTE=spruce]
Everyone knows who the "winners" are ... [/QUOTE]

I'm sure that's true, and I'm also sure the experienced seasoned luthiers know exactly why they are the winners. Winning means nothing to me, mostly because I wouldn't even be in the race, I just would like to know what standards widely recognized and notable guitar luthiers agree on. Something to aim for.

Bruce (spruce), I think you've nailed it. There are just too many variables in guitars (especially steel-strings) to give any meaning to a competition.

The GAL's and ASIA's gatherings provide enough knowledge, feedback and inspiration to keep you going for a long time.

Competitions cause hard feelings and proprietary secrecy, and that's the antithesis of the openess that has developed in guitar lutherie.

You could do it like a dog show with best of breed and best of show.

Consider that one builder builds a guitar inspired by a Gibson Hummingbird while another builder builds one inspired by a Martin D28. If they both nailed the look, feel, and sound of their target instrument, who would win?

Granted you could take a D28, stuff rolled up socks in the sound hole and put on 3 year old strings and get pretty close to the sound of a Hummingbird but it wouldn't be exact

Although violin contests may involve millimeter-variances such that entries can be judged on fairly objective criteria, that is by far the exception among contests that involve music, craftsmanship, etc.

These sorts of competitions happen every day. Battle of the bands, singing contest, fingerstyle guitar contest, talent shows, or woodworking contests at the local fair. The judges don't require all the bands to play the same songs or all the crafstman to build the same table, even though it would make it easier to compare like to like. Instead, everyone does their thing, gets judged subjectively, and understands that one judge's subjective preferences may be different than someone else's.

Is it a little arbitrary? Sure. Do you occasionally get a contestant who takes it too seriously and gets their feelings hurt? Absolutely. Does that mean we should avoid having music/craftsmanship contests because they are arbitrary and hurt people's feelings? Absolutely not.

Most people can and do enjoy things like this because they are fun, even if you lose. And most of us find that going through the process --- putting on your best show and then being judged for it --- is a great way to improve.

If someone puts on a contest like this, I'd love to participate, even though I'm pretty sure I'd lose by anyone's subjective standards. It would be fun anyway.

[QUOTE=Kelby] These sorts of competitions happen every day. Battle of the bands, singing contest, fingerstyle guitar contest, talent shows, or woodworking contests at the local fair.[/QUOTE]
Most of the time, the right person doesn't win! I'm not kidding.

[QUOTE=Kelby]Most people can and do enjoy things like this because they are fun, even if you lose.[/QUOTE]
It's only fun if you're an amateur, you know you can't win and you just enjoy the comraderie. All of that can be found outside of competitions.

On the other hand, if you aspire to a professional career, as many do in the violin competitions or classical music performance smackdowns, these things can make or break your career. The stress level is incredibly high, and you can't make friends with fellow competitors because you might have to acknowledge that they're better than you, or you think that they might steal your secrets.

These things close everybody down emotionally, and create long-lasting resentments. Not good.

Carlton, I couldn't disagree more.

There are many professions in which people compete every day, with their livelihoods at stake, but still maintain good relationships and goodwill among their competitors. It's not only possible, but far more common that the opposite. I say that as a lawyer, who spends all day every day competing as fiercely as possible with my adversaries, knowing that one of us will win and one will lose, knowing that our careers may be affected by the outcome, yet managing to maintain very positive relationships with nearly every lawyer who opposes me. (In fact, most of my referrals come from lawyers who were on the other side of cases from me in the past.) In my experience, professional competition can be and usually is amicable.

There are, of course exceptions, and I don't doubt that you have witnessed some unpleasant competitive experiences. But the fact that a few people can't tolerate the stress of competition without shutting down emotionally or building resentment is not a reason not to have competitions in the first place. The world does not need to be built around the least common denominator. Those who don't enjoy the competition are not obliged to participate, but I think the rest of us can benefit from it.

Kelby,

You've made some good points, and perhaps it could work. However, when it comes to artists and craftsmen, I think my caveats are valid. Maybe we're both right!

[QUOTE=Kelby]But the fact that a few people can't tolerate the stress of
competition without shutting down emotionally or building resentment is
not a reason not to have competitions in the first place.[/QUOTE]

So what are the reasons for these competitions in the first place??

Are we so unqualified to judge an instrument for ourselves that we need
to have an "expert" do it for us?
Or, even worse, a panel of experts?

Hell, I'm a lousy fiddler and not a violin maker, but invariably I'm drawn to
the Strad "ringer" in the tone-judging part of these violin competitions
(the ones that allow listeners), and can
appreciate the eventual "winners" for workmanship...

Cream rises...

Bruce, the best answer I can give is to suggest you look at this contest:

http://www.woodcentral.com/contests/turning2/

The WoodCentral message board sponsors periodic contests. Lots of people enter. Only a couple win, but the rest all get extremely helpful feedback from some very knowledgeable people. If you click on each piece and read the judges' comments, you'll see that they contain some significant learning opportunities.

For me, that's the main draw to a contest like this. Not to win, but to get some candid, constructive feedback from knowledgeable people who are not looking to stroke your ego.

When you post a photo here at the Luthier's Forum, you are guaranteed to get two dozen "beautiful work" and six dozen clapping smiley faces. That support and encouragement is great. Similarly, when you show your work to a player, they usually go out of their way to be positive. Again, that's always nice to hear. But the best way to improve is to find a knowledgable person who is willing to bluntly point out areas for improvement that you may not have noticed.

You ask whether we are so unqualified to judge our own instruments that we need experts to do it for us. Frankly, I think the answer is yes. Not because the experts know more than we do, but because it is difficult to be objective when it comes to critiquing your own work. A fresh set of knowledgable eyes and fingers can identify weaknesses that you might not have considered.

And that's the point. Not to win, but to improve. And hopefully to have some fun along the way.

[QUOTE=spruce]
Are we so unqualified to judge an instrument for ourselves that we need
to have an "expert" do it for us? [/QUOTE]

I can judge an instrument for myself, but its limited. I feel sure that I'm unable to identify the subtle problems, flaws, and breaks in convention that a luthier with years of experience can. Imagine if I could ask a luthier like Romanillos to critique my first classical guitar, that feedback would be very valueable to me. Marc38968.6840277778

One of the most interesting sessions at GAL's conference is when they play all the classicals one at a time with a guitarist playing the same passage. When you hear this realtime on 20-30+ instruments there is always one that will stand out.

They then have a steel string session in which a similiar number of instruments are played. With the steel strings it is tougher to pick an apparent winner as some will be better strummers and some will be better fingerstyles.