Official Luthiers Forum!

I think this is a valuable discussion, and not necessarily due to any of the direct answers to the question posed.. (that's been covered pretty thoroughly). The only thing I'll add to that thought is that I've had some very good experiences with sending a direct email to William Cumpiano. He was generous with his advice and the time that it took to write the note, and he was patient with my "newbie" questions, just as the pros that do participate, and share their expertise on this forum are. so if you have a question for a specific expert, send 'em a note. They might just respond.

The discussion that has been raised here got me thinking about the forum, what I've gained from it, the mix of constructive discussion and debate, as well as the discussions that are less constructive, where a valid discussion degenerates into personal attacks, etc.

I am an amateur, will never be a pro, and will never attain a level of expertise in luthiery that will make me among "the smartest guys around" on this forum. In other words, I'm not confused about occupying any higher ground on any of these topics, should a debate ensue. at the same time, I try to contribute when I feel my perspective or experience can help someone who is asking a question that I've experienced (and likely posted requests for help as well).

I am personally thankful for anyone who, in the interest of offering help, responds to questions that I ask. Over time, I've learned that some of us are more knowledgeable than others, and in the case of differing advice, I have the freedom to choose which advice I will follow.

It seems to me that the "rules of the forum" that Lance has set up, and which are the first entry under the guitar building forum, cover the main issue that is raised; specifically not using the forum to mount a "personal attack" on anyone, even if you think that their advice is off-target, and you happen to know better.

Over the four years that I've been a member of this forum, there have been periodic and consistent debates, some of which get personal. Then it blows over and the duiscussion returns to why we're here; to share info. on guitar building techniques. I happen to see the glass as more than half full, and am very thankful for this forum and to the people that share their expertise to help me learn about being a better luthier. Maybe if we all took a quick look at those "rules of the forum" prior to writing that response, especially when we're really bent out of shape, the ratio of insightful guitar stuff to unproductive "whine and cheese" would get even higher.

That seems like a funny question to ask. Everybody has a different agenda, so the answer has to be "lots of reasons."

Me, I've been away from this place for a really long time, and just happened by for no particular reason. I do read about 8 forums daily and post fairly often, in addition to hosting my own forum (FRETS.NET).

I know any number of competent professionals who don't spend any time at all on the 'net, and some who are there a lot. Some are angry types who "don't suffer fools," and some are simply shy. Best not to read anything into a lack of participation without specific knowledge.

I've had some, er, "health issues" in the last 2.4 years, and my shop has been busier than ever, so I haven't really had time to feed my web sites (FRETS.COM, HomeShopTech.com) or add much to my forum acitvity.

_________________
Cheers,

Frank Ford

FRETS.COM
HomeShopTech
FRETS.NET

With all due respect Filippo, this point of view is precisely one I'm saying we shouldn't have. Instead of looking at ourselves and wonder what we could do different to be more attractive to luthiers (pros or amateurs), you're sort of telling them 'ligthen up guys, humans will be humans, that's life". Won't work.

The fact is more pro luthiers are moving away from the OLF than new ones come in, and it's not by putting the blame on them for leaving that will bring them back.


Todd, this is a bit simplisitic I think. Have you considered possible there might be pros who would really like to "cast a critical eye on their own and other's work and to move things forward", but in a more pleasant way then what they are seing going on here? It's like you haven't read Simon's explanations for his discomfort on his EVO thread. It's not the 'what', it's the 'how'. It's having to 'defend' a technique from people putting it down when you just wanted to help in the first place. (Or at least that was Simon's situation).

Simon's case is so much a good example of what I'm trying to point out, it's almost funny. We have a pro luthier who tried to share information, who feel he had to defend his data gathering technique from others who didn't seem to try a bit to sound polite and constructive about it, and who got fed up about it and decided to shut up in the future. From my point of view, that is a significant loss for the OLF and it's community. From your point of view, it's seem you think it's better this way, in a "so be it" sort of way.

_________________
Alain Moisan
Former full time builder of Acoustics, Classicals and Flamencos.
(Now building just for fun!)

I have a friend who is a professional Luthier with over 100 custom guitars built. Each one is different and truly custom and they are beautiful. I asked him if he ever goes on the forums. He replied no, it makes me nervous.

He has a steady clientele and doesn't need any marketing. I believe he is very confident in his outcomes and has a proven track record having seen guitars of his come in for repairs after thirty years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ken

_________________
Ken

What's even easier is to take the extra 10 seconds when composing a post to keep it from being rude and alienating. Anyone who is smart enough to have worthwhile input here is easily smart enough to do this. The question becomes "Why do a few people just keep pissing in the pool?"

_________________
http://www.chassonguitars.com

I have an uncanny sense of thread closure being imminent ...shame really...I thought it was a worthwhile topic ...

That would be a bummer. But I have a hard time believing this is what will happen. Like I said, I believe this sort of post is quite healthy for the OLF. I hope (and think) that Lance feels the same.

_________________
Alain Moisan
Former full time builder of Acoustics, Classicals and Flamencos.
(Now building just for fun!)

It seems that we have lost the skill of reasoned debate. Maybe we never had it. Once, a few years back, I disagreed with a poster on an issue. I received a PM saying that he thought that we were friends and what had he done to offend me. It took me all day to compose my response to him and smooth over some seriously hurt feelings. The important thing was that I hadn't attacked him, personally, in any way. That is the important thing to keep in mind.

If the poster is discussing the topic at hand and not attacking anyone personally, than the comments should be taken as the opinion of the poster based on whatever experience they may have. If your experience is different and you have drawn a different conclusion, then that should be OK and there should no ruffled feathers. It's when we cross the line into challenging the integrity of the poster that the forum becomes uncivil and reasoned debate breaks down.

Here are the three rules that I go by.

1. Experts in the field can look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions.
2. If someone disagrees we me, it doesn't mean that he thinks I'm an idiot or disregards my experiences.
3. If I disagree with someone, I keep my comment strictly to the topic at hand and try to explain why I disagree. I never mention the person with whom I disagree

To Todd and other like-minded individuals,
To be clear, I have absolutely no personal issues with you or anyone else on the forum. As I mentioned, I think this is an interesting crowd and I'm sure I would get along fine with all of you outside the forum. However, I do believe you are either missing or disagreeing with a rather simple idea which is the following: Communicating in a respectful and kind manner is morally superior to communicating in a blunt, rude, or sarcastic manner.

It really is as simple as that. Being respectful doesn't mean you are watering down your point. It is very easy to communicate in a concise and to the point manner while not being antagonistic. In my EVO Fretwire thread, I demonstrated what I personally consider would be a respectful and proactive response from someone who disagreed with every point I made. I think there is a world of difference between that and the first post by Todd Stock in that thread.

I am no stranger to criticism. I actively seek it out with my guitars. I also love philosophy and debate. I come from a theistic worldview and I love discussing politics and religion with people of differing worldviews. In short, I am incredibly hard person to offend -- but that doesn't mean I will choose to actively engage in scenarios that I find unpleasant.

Please note: I am not saying that anyone individual(s) is acting intolerable. But I have found that over my time here at the OLF, a fair percentage of my threads or posts have been met with posts that I considered antagonistic, dismissive, or slightly attacking. Again, not a huge deal but enough to make me realize that I would prefer spending my time doing other things. Sadly, there are several highly regarded builders who feel the same way I do about the OLF. Take from that what you will.

Simon, my recollection is that Todd explained at least twice, and maybe thrice what he meant by the "silly" " reference , and that there was no "ad hominem" personal attack whatsoever. Or as he put it ..."ad hominid" ...but hey, we can't all be Latin scholars ...

Well, SOME Loothiers like me, with a full 1/2 guitar under my belt, will continue to provide the only correct advice you'll find on this here forum. You may rest easy now...

HI Murray,
Certainly, he did - but that was a day or so later and a couple pages into the thread I believe - and so, for me, the feel of the thread had already turned south a bit. Again, not a big deal at all. I try to always give people the benefit of the doubt. But the point still stands as I could reference a great number of posts from Todd and others that have the same effect. Please understand, I am not trying to "split hairs" here and I know that sometimes people just have off days. Secondly, there are children starving in many parts of the world -- I try not to let petty things ever become more than what they are. I am no one to judge -- however, Kent's comment about "thinking a second before you post" is very salient and would make for a much more enjoyable forum for myself and others.

I think I have said all I can on this topic (and repeated myself too much at this point). I will still hang around but may do so under a different name - something subdued and humble like "The OLF's Best Luthier".

Personally I don't think that anonymity is a fitting solution to any problems. In fact I believe it would create more issues. When one is anonymous they are no longer responsible for their actions and can say/do whatever they want with no repercussion. I think that having people know who you are is a much better way to have the forum. Keeps the riff raff down IMO.

Just to clarify, my desire for an anonymous username is not that you all wouldn't know who I am. It is that my prospective customers couldn't google "Simon" and something to do with lutherie -- then find a post of mine where an idea of mine is criticized. In other words, the only reason I get "drawn" into these discussions is that I feel I have to give a defense for my ideas so that I come across as well-informed (which in all fairness to me, I am). Do any of you remember Scott van Linge? His ideas are a bit far out. If I was a potential customer of his, I know that his internet discussions would turn me away from his work just because I don't feel he was able to give a well-reasoned defense for his ideas.

Well, the same thing applies to me. Does fretwire affect tone? I mention an experiment that leads me to that conclusion. Someone responds that my methodology is flawed and that the idea is silly. Then prospective customers might come to the conclusion that my intellectual foundation as a builder is not strong, etc...

Again, disagreements are fine by me -- in fact, I welcome them -- it is the argumentative/dismissive/condescending/etc. nature that I find frustrating and not pleasant to be involved in. For the record, I don't feel that any OLF member has crossed a line with me in terms of bad behavior -- again, it just seems things are more confrontational and more argumentative for my tastes.

I hope that clarifies things...

Simon, you were actually the first to use the term "silly". in your original post in the evo vs stainless topic

You know what else does that? Being an A-hole.




Okay, so we can all understand that you are carrying some baggage onto the forum that prevents you from thinking rationally sometimes, or at least prevents you from being capable of considering other peoples opinions in a calm manner. Hyper-agression is built into your personality, so you are unable to actually tolerate an opinion other than your own, and must attack it and force others to be aggressive or retreat.

Problem is, there's more than one way to skin a cat, and different people will appreciate different points of view.

If 5 people post 5 different methods, there's more chance that someone will find a solution that works for their particular question.

Denigration and belittlement is simply unnecessary.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Hi Jeff,
I am not sure I understand your post. You are right in that I did use that term in my original posting to voice my internal position -- in other words, to show my skepticism regarding the tonal effect of fret material. However, that comment was not directed at anyone. I hope you can see the difference between thinking something is silly and actually saying to someone that their thought/comment is silly. (and yes, I know that Todd clarified his response later in that thread). A parallel would be making a post about a finish choice and stating you thought it would look ugly but were pleased with the outcome and then someone posting that they thought it was ugly.

FYI, I will be departing the forum but a good friend of mine named "Toonces" will check in here occasionally on my behalf.

Todd, cut the crap, ok? You are way articulate enough to know and understand we can have "direct, accurate, and concise communication" in a en environment that is pleasant to do so. That is a pretty basic skill required to live and function in society, regardless of the type of family you were raised in.

If you want to "better understand the pros and cons of a particular idea or methodology", there needs to be people willing to share these methodologies and knowledge in the first place.

No matter how you put it Todd, or how you see it, if more pro luthiers leave and never come back, it is not a good thing for the OLF, and futhermore for people on it. That's not rocket science. If there is anything we can change in our way of acting that can change that, I think we should take a minute or so to consider it.

_________________
Alain Moisan
Former full time builder of Acoustics, Classicals and Flamencos.
(Now building just for fun!)

Interesting. I didn't mention you specifically. Why would you think I meant YOU?
It seems to me you're taking it a little personally.

Also, according to the definition of "irrational", I was being rational. You gave a condition that caused an effect, I concurred, and offered a further condition that ALSO caused a similar effect. How was that irrational?

As to it's worth, that's a subjective matter, as it is with your insults and barbs. What makes them so worthy of expression? Your baggage?

irrational [ɪˈræʃənəl]
adj
1. inconsistent with reason or logic; illogical; absurd
2. incapable of reasoning
3. (Mathematics) Maths
a. not rational
b. (as noun) an irrational
4. (Literature / Poetry) Prosody (in Greek or Latin verse)
a. of or relating to a metrical irregularity, usually the occurrence of a long syllable instead of a short one
b. denoting a metrical foot where such an irregularity occurs
irrationally adv
irrationalness n

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Todd, don't get your panties in a bunch!


I quoted you to merely give context to what I was talking about. If I had posted immediately behind you with the same comment without quoting you, it would be the same.

I wasn't aiming the comment at you to say YOU were an A-Hole any more than you were aiming at Mike Mahar to say that HE SPECIFICALLY was aiming to stifle effective communication.

The subject of your post was "political correctness and reasoned debate", in response to something Mike said.

The subject of my post was "being an a-hole as having a similar effect" in response to something YOU said.

ANYONE could be an A-hole in that context.

So why are you getting your panties bunched over an innocuous comment of mine that could apply to ANYONE being an a-hole?

It seems to me that YOU'RE the one being irrational.

What's your rationale for taking it personally, other than "I quoted you", as quoting you merely provides context and is not enough to connect you subjectively to the comment without some reason to connect you?

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

But I wasn't trying to insult you.

I can see how you would be taking this a little personally though, so I'm willing to apologize.

I'm sorry Todd, I should have thought more about what I said.

I didn't mean for you to take it personally.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Well, it just seemed that you were taking it personally and I felt sorry for you. I know that deep down inside that tough exterior of yours is a sensitive heart of gold.

Things get heated on these forums, people take things personally when they shouldn't.

We should be willing to step back, take a deep breath, and move on.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

LOL, maybe it was just good old fashioned context clues. You quoted him, made a contextually connected response, then addressed him directly in the next paragraph.

Come on, guys. Some people have strong personalities. The strong personalities of some of the pros who used to post here drove other pros away. Ironically, Rick (repeatedly told in threads just like this he was coming off like a jerk) has always been EXTREMELY helpful to me. Todd has always been EXTREMELY helpful to me. I have a hard time weighing that against anything else and coming out thinking he's a jerk.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Todd's a little sensitive!

You have to watch how you say things to him.

The part directed towards him was the part that started "Todd".....

BUT!!
I apologized

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Can't we all just get along?

_________________
Joe Beaver
Maker of Sawdust