H
Hippie Dribble
Guest
For me, beautiful figuring on the wood is it's own bling..
Is it just me?
- Thread starter the52blues
- Start date
This. So much this.
I really wouldn't want some fancy inlay or what have you. I just want a good sounding ukulele made out of a nice piece of wood.
As they say, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder". If a person likes how their uke looks and sounds - bling or no bling and it makes them happy....more power to them....I am sure it is something special to them.
Agreed....
SailQwest
Well-known member
I love bling, but for me my ukulele is all about the sound, rather than the look.
In a perfect world, I would have a custom spruce/ebony concert with my tattoo inlaid on the headstock.
In a perfect world, I would have a custom spruce/ebony concert with my tattoo inlaid on the headstock.
When I started out I was disappointed that I couldn't afford a blingy uke. I drolled over them for awhile. Then my tastes changed and now I actually like a little less bling, more understated uke (and guitar) designs. I did borrow a Mya Moe once, and while not super blingy, I did notice that they used real abalone for fret markers, not the MOP stuff. You could really see the difference, the light would shimmer off of them. So, maybe a little of real abalone would be in store for me one day.
I did buy a custom uke by someone on this site, and while not a lot of adornment it has really great looking woods (western maple and port orford cedar, with flame mahogany neck). It is my favorite uke. (reminds me I told the builder I'd do a review on it. better get to that!)
Rus
I did buy a custom uke by someone on this site, and while not a lot of adornment it has really great looking woods (western maple and port orford cedar, with flame mahogany neck). It is my favorite uke. (reminds me I told the builder I'd do a review on it. better get to that!)
Rus
70sSanO
Well-known member
When someone gets a new ukulele it is always fun to show it off no matter where it rates on the cost/asthetics/sound scale. That ukulele is special to someone and that is a good thing.
Now on K brands... when people show off a K brand, I see that as the same as buying a Gibson not an Epiphone guitar. Not to say that a particular Epiphone is necessarily inferior, especially old ones, but there will always be a perceived difference.
While sound and playablilty are still the most important qualities, my next criteria for a ukulele is its uniqueness.
Case in point... There are still times when I kick myself for not going after Ken Timms Pallet ukulele. It is truly a one-of-a-kind. For show and tell, I would put that against any K brand or blinged out uke.
Just my opinion.
John
Now on K brands... when people show off a K brand, I see that as the same as buying a Gibson not an Epiphone guitar. Not to say that a particular Epiphone is necessarily inferior, especially old ones, but there will always be a perceived difference.
While sound and playablilty are still the most important qualities, my next criteria for a ukulele is its uniqueness.
Case in point... There are still times when I kick myself for not going after Ken Timms Pallet ukulele. It is truly a one-of-a-kind. For show and tell, I would put that against any K brand or blinged out uke.
Just my opinion.
John
This discussion has taken a number of interesting trajectories. I like hearing about people's preferences. My response to the original poster is that while I am primarily interested in specific sound qualities of these ukuleles, I also respond with my eyes. It just so happens that I think a Kamaka concert ukulele is one of the more beautiful instruments I have seen. I like the lines, the proportions of the body and waist, as well as the headstock shape. These elements all contribute to a wonderful whole for me, which is to say that you can't just stick a gumby headstock on any instrument. Further, I think if one were to put an abalone rosette on a Kamaka concert, it would ruin it - kind of like putting racing stripes on a Jaguar E. I am also a sucker for Style 3 Martins. I think they are the most elegant of the sopranos.
Good design is a structural issue; bling is decoration. Not that I have anything against decoration. I like it a lot on instruments that are otherwise well-designed and when it seems appropriate to the design, the aforementioned Moore Bettahs and Devines are certainly in that camp.
In the end, it's a very subjective thing, especially if you're not curating a museum show of ukuleles. I like what I like. Other people like what they like. Some folks like bling. Others go for wood grain. Still others like design. I think we all kind of steer away from instruments that sound horrible. But it's nice that we can have this conversation without bringing politics into it ;-).
Good design is a structural issue; bling is decoration. Not that I have anything against decoration. I like it a lot on instruments that are otherwise well-designed and when it seems appropriate to the design, the aforementioned Moore Bettahs and Devines are certainly in that camp.
In the end, it's a very subjective thing, especially if you're not curating a museum show of ukuleles. I like what I like. Other people like what they like. Some folks like bling. Others go for wood grain. Still others like design. I think we all kind of steer away from instruments that sound horrible. But it's nice that we can have this conversation without bringing politics into it ;-).
Boy o boy o boy, I just knew this topic would become an instant classic !!! LOL
kalmario
Well-known member
bling is cool no doubt, but if your bringing a flashy ukulele to the party, doesn't that put more pressure on playing it well?
easier to impress with a dull uke?
Cliff
easier to impress with a dull uke?
Cliff
Moore Bettah Ukuleles
Well-known member
Being accused of occasionally adding a bit of bling to the ukes I build, I naturally find this discussion interesting. Like some others here, my tastes tend to fall into a wide spectrum. I can appreciate the exquisite workmanship of a Larry Robinson or Grit Laskin, but even that level of ornamentation is usually over the top for me. (Believe me, I do draw the line somewhere!) I am also attracted to the understated elegance of a more simply built instrument. Finding that happy middle ground is an important and sometimes difficult part of what I do. My toughest customer is the one who wants their uke to look like a circus wagon and I spend a lot of my time saying "no" to people.
But I think there's some confusion over the term "bling".
One of the criteria of a good instrument for me is that is one that is built cleanly, with impeccable joinery and no mistakes or flaws, no matter how simple it might be. Impeccable workmanship on it's own can be breath taking. I looked up the word "Bling" and it is (in part) "referring to flashy, ostentatious or elaborate …… and ornamented accessories ". Here are some things I don't consider bling on an ukulele; while they may be decorative, they are also highly functional.
I don't consider bindings to be bling. Since the are made of a harder wood (or composite) than the rest of the body, their intention is to protect the corners from accidental bumps and dents. I also fall into the camp of builders who believe that binding stiffens the ribs (sides) of the instrument, allowing for better projection and overall tone. I won't swear this is true but I've built them both ways and I'm convinced that my bound ukes have a better sound. Perhaps it's the notched kerfing used when binding that improves the tone…too many variables to make an absolute statement. But I'm sticking to that story.
Rosettes were originally designed to strengthen the sound hole, the weakest and most vulnerable part of the sound board. By adding a different, most often harder, material around the sound hole, the stresses are spread out more evenly and a crack is less likely to develop there.
Fret board bindings, while looking pretty classy, also covers and hides and covers the fret tangs, that part of the fret that hurts your fingers if you are unfortunate enough to have your fret board dry and shrink on you.
There may be others if I think about it.
On the matter of wood grain, it's much easier to build an instrument from wood who's grain is plain and simple. A builder really needs to know his/her craft to get the most out of highly figured grain. "Generally", it's usually more difficult to work with and not as responsive and there can be many issues to overcome when working with it, dealing with stiffness, strength, responsiveness, etc. An excellent ukulele can be built from highly figured wood, but wood with simple, even, parallel grain already has so much going for it it doesn't need to be coaxed to be anything more than it already is.
This post is much longer than I had hoped but it's a huge topic and like religion and politics, mostly subjective. Personally, I like art, I always have. It touches my soul in some way that is necessary for me. My life is enriched by having pleasing things to look at.
For me to feel comfortable about an uke it needs to be designed right, it must have good playability, it must be built well, it must last, it should be pleasing to look at and something you need to hold, and most importantly, it's got to sound great. It's got to have that sound (whatever "that" is) that moves you and makes you want to play as often as you can. It has to transport you. If an ukulele doesn't sound great, the builder hasn't done his/her job, no matter how attractive the uke might be.
This is my opinion only and the random ramblings of someone who's been sanding lacquer finishes since 5 am this morning……
But I think there's some confusion over the term "bling".
One of the criteria of a good instrument for me is that is one that is built cleanly, with impeccable joinery and no mistakes or flaws, no matter how simple it might be. Impeccable workmanship on it's own can be breath taking. I looked up the word "Bling" and it is (in part) "referring to flashy, ostentatious or elaborate …… and ornamented accessories ". Here are some things I don't consider bling on an ukulele; while they may be decorative, they are also highly functional.
I don't consider bindings to be bling. Since the are made of a harder wood (or composite) than the rest of the body, their intention is to protect the corners from accidental bumps and dents. I also fall into the camp of builders who believe that binding stiffens the ribs (sides) of the instrument, allowing for better projection and overall tone. I won't swear this is true but I've built them both ways and I'm convinced that my bound ukes have a better sound. Perhaps it's the notched kerfing used when binding that improves the tone…too many variables to make an absolute statement. But I'm sticking to that story.
Rosettes were originally designed to strengthen the sound hole, the weakest and most vulnerable part of the sound board. By adding a different, most often harder, material around the sound hole, the stresses are spread out more evenly and a crack is less likely to develop there.
Fret board bindings, while looking pretty classy, also covers and hides and covers the fret tangs, that part of the fret that hurts your fingers if you are unfortunate enough to have your fret board dry and shrink on you.
There may be others if I think about it.
On the matter of wood grain, it's much easier to build an instrument from wood who's grain is plain and simple. A builder really needs to know his/her craft to get the most out of highly figured grain. "Generally", it's usually more difficult to work with and not as responsive and there can be many issues to overcome when working with it, dealing with stiffness, strength, responsiveness, etc. An excellent ukulele can be built from highly figured wood, but wood with simple, even, parallel grain already has so much going for it it doesn't need to be coaxed to be anything more than it already is.
This post is much longer than I had hoped but it's a huge topic and like religion and politics, mostly subjective. Personally, I like art, I always have. It touches my soul in some way that is necessary for me. My life is enriched by having pleasing things to look at.
For me to feel comfortable about an uke it needs to be designed right, it must have good playability, it must be built well, it must last, it should be pleasing to look at and something you need to hold, and most importantly, it's got to sound great. It's got to have that sound (whatever "that" is) that moves you and makes you want to play as often as you can. It has to transport you. If an ukulele doesn't sound great, the builder hasn't done his/her job, no matter how attractive the uke might be.
This is my opinion only and the random ramblings of someone who's been sanding lacquer finishes since 5 am this morning……
strumsilly
Well-known member
that about says it all