Is anyone familiar with these small-sized guitars. Are they a bad idea for any particular reason, ... meaning, are the chords all wrong, or are they just limited in their range.
I've been looking at a couple of wonderful examples recently... The Larrivee is the best appearance-wise, and probably extremely nice in tone, but at $500-$600 it is twice as much as the delightful "Baby" Taylor... especially the one with the mahogany top...
Wouldn't they be intended for players with small hands? If made well I see no reason why they shouldn't play as well as the larger ones and have a good tone, even if the volume may be a bit reduced.
trevor
Ottery - On the grounds that ladies are small (in which case, I'm no lady, because I'm no' wee ...) or that they stay indoors a lot (in which case ...)?
No, on the grounds that in America in the 19th Century, 'Parlor Styles' were very popular. They were simple finger style arrangements of popular songs, hymns and dances and were considered specially suitable for women, as the open tunings which were frequently used were consided more manageable for smaller hands than those nasty big stretchy macho finger chords. I assume that the smaller 'parlor guitars' have the same origin. And yes, you're right, I guess it was considered more appropriate for women to 'stay indoors a lot', rather than lugging a guitar down to jam with the good ol' boys at the Last Chance Saloon.
I in no way wished to imply that I thought women were delicate creatures with little hands, I was merely pointing out that that was the general view in the 19th Century!
For their small size they often have a very "open" tone, the notes have less overtones & the individual notes are clearer. They are painfully uncool in this day of dreadnaughts, that's why the old ones are going for around $500usd or so. Those are the handcrafted 100+ year old instruments from solid tonewoods! Thank god so many guiatrists are stupid & leave these treasures to be snapped up while they praise their factory guitar with a plywood soundboard.
I did not get the impression that modern parlor guitars were made with anything in mind other that extreme portability, not for women, kids, small animals, etc.... . They are usually sold with backpack style soft cases, they are know and advertised to fit comfortably in overhead baggage compartments. If I am correct, they are made in 3/4 scale to the full size guitar... Which would mean a reduction in the number of frets, but I would be surprised if the neck was radically downsized. I don't think it is. Now again,... I'm talking about the modern parlor styles by Larrivee and Taylor, not the classics which gave them their historical name "parlor"... who's got a parlor in their house anyway? I am now curious about the vintage models, particularly if they are out of favor and are being thrown away at embarrasing low prices...I like to buy high quality vintage instruments when nobody else seems interested. Compare these low prices to the vintage rage for old Martins, Gibsons and the like. 1930's to 1950's acoustic guitars are easliy in the $3000usd price range and headed higher. I am just smitten by the Taylor "Baby" mahogany top for $225 to $250 dollars and I've no doubt, I'll have one in my hands within the week.
On the old ones the scale length was slightly smaller, but the body was a lot smaller. Nowadays it more or less means 3/4 sized guitar. The Taylor is nice, i had the chance to play one once. Anything that has the Martin or Gibson name on it is going to have the prices artificially inflated by the guitar whores who can only merit an instrument by it's name. The no name hand mades from europe just before the turn of the century will be the highest value for the dollar.
Modern parlor guitars are portable, if you want a small portable style, and they are useful for smaller people, because they can't handle a big guitar if that's what you want. Originally I believe they were made with 'ladies' in mind. I was merely pointing out the reason why I said they were originally made for ladies to nastygirl, who I thought was about to accuse me of some sort of sexist/sizeist transgression(!).
And of course everyone has a parlour in their house, they just call it the lounge or sitting room or living room these days.
If you're getting into parlor guitars, you better hurry. A number of acoustic guitar "gods", such as Leo Kottke, Adrian Legg, Richard Thompson, and Phil Keaggy have all recently "re-discovered" the parlor guitar. Soon the masses will follow...
I have oo size - ooo size and a Larrivee Parlor Guitar - I love them all, I like the Larrivee because of the wider fretboard - more room between strings. I find fingerpicking easier on this then the standard narrower fretboard. Also I've never had any trouble getting it on an airplane as carry on.
Mike, I appreciate the remark on the difference between the Larrivee and the Taylor. I was just assuming that they were identical. And I knew that something was up in regards to these 3/4 size guitars, becoiming more popular I mean, they are starting to pop up all over the place. (there goes my hope for finding a nice vintage piece at a give-away price).
I am almost always ready to hop on a "coach-fare" bandwagon,.... i.e., the Larivee or Taylor, but when you talk about $3000 - to $5000 vintage guitars, a "first-class" bandwagon ticket, I'm a seller, not a buyer. I would personally look into one of the wonderful new custom makers in the $1500 price range before I would buy a 1950's Martin for twice that amount, ugh! You REALLY need to know what your're doing in regards to buying high priced vintage instruments. Many things can happen to an instrument over half a century....v hidden defects, shoddy repairs, etc.
So Mike, now you've got me leaning towards a Larrivee parlor guitar,.... such as one with KOA wood or bulbilinga back and sides, and maybe mother of pearl inlays...beautiful!!! And man, those are only going for $500. Nice to have choices! Sux, not to have buckets of $$$$. (smile).
About 12 years ago I found a Washburn parlor guitar ca. 1930's in a music store in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I paid $350 for it. It had significant playing wear but a wonderful sound. My interest in it specifically was it's wide neck, i.e. wider than a regular steel-string guitar, but not quite as wide as a classical gut string model. Because I play fingerstyle I wanted a steel string guitar with a neck wide enough for my fingers to work around as a classical guitarist does. The small body has a wonderful tone, but perhaps not overall as loud as a dreadnought. You don't want to drown people out of the parlor. Most of my playing is for small gatherings of quiet people who enjoy lyrical music where the notes are clearly distinguished. The small size fits me better than a large guitar because I'm not all that large myself.
Chris
Speaking of small size guitars, I just picked up a tenor guitar (4 strings, tuned GDAE like the fiddle) for cheap, and is it ever a sweet instrument to play!! I also play mandolin and tenor banjo, but the difference with the tenor guitar is that you can sustain the notes a bit more and get a sweeter sound, especially for slower jigs, waltzes and airs. Anybody out there tried one? What do you think of it as an ITM instrument? John Carty plays one---there's a few cuts on his latest album "Yeh--that's all it is"--Aoife
There is an odd relationship between the banjo and the bodhran Geoff, or at least banjo, and drums in general. Here in America... three of the largest drum manufacturers, Ludwig, Slingerland and Rogers once had banjo's at their largest product line. Slingerland and Ludwig made the instruments and Rogers provided the heads which at that time were actual skins, similar to the wonderful natural skins of the irish bodhran today. There is a lot of interesting history on this, but to answer your (farceical) question Geoff, (ya trouble maker, you, ~wink).. Yes, in looking back at the vintage banjo's of the day, I've seen many weird shaped mini-banjo instruments, and of course, there's the infamous Guiness bodhran souviner,.... more suitable as a table coaster for your lager, than a actual drum....
As I understand it, parlor guitars weren't made as a smaller alternative to "real" guitars, they were the standard long before the larger bodies were developed. The "O" (for "orchestra") size, was made a bit bigger to project more, and was followed by the "OO" and "OOO", which eventually lead to the "Dreadnaught" ("D") size, which has been the standard for the last fifty years or so. So to say that parlors were "made for ladies" is misleading - you might be more accurate to say that the Dreadnaughts were made for insecure men who needed compensation. If you wanted to say such sill ythings at all, that would at least reflect the evolution of the guitar as I know it.
The smaller bodied guitars being made now - ranging from traditional "parlor" size to triple-ought - are sounding very nice. I've played some Tacomas that have sounded great, and my Martin is a good instrument for accompaniment, but not so good for flatpicking.
Well, my contention that parlour (parlor) guitars were made for smaller hands was based on what I knew of the history of parlour music, and the fact that I knew this was supposed to be a 'suitable occupapation for ladies'. However, I had a look around the web and found the description below, which contradicts both my 'ladies hands' and
the portability theory....
The term "parlor guitar" dates back to the days before recorded music where entertainment was conducted live and often in the parlors of those who were lucky enough to have them. Today, the term describes a size and style of guitar. Parlor guitars have smaller bodies than dreadnaughts and often are smaller than even classical guitars. Contrary to popular assumption, their reduced size isn't intended to accommodate smaller players but, rather tler players but, rather to provide for a more even frequency response. In other words, bass, treble and all of the frequencies in between are the same volume. In an acoustically near perfect environment like a "parlor" or concert hall, this even frequency response is a must if the music isn't to be overwhelmed with bass.
I don't know how well-informed this is, but it sounds convincing.
I'm not convinced that parlor size guitar was some sort of original standard, or if indeed there ever was a standard size, either. Spanish guitars are usually quite large (apart from the smaller ones!), and I believe they've had guitars around in Spain for a while before such measurements as O, OO, or OOO were devised.
Ola!
The thing to watch for is the scale length - the length from nut to bridge. The Laravee and Seagull have a full-size standard guitar neck and scale length - only the body is compact. The Baby Taylor, on the other hand has a 3/4 length neck. If you are used to playing a standard guitar I would stay with a standard scale length. Otherwise, the finger positions will be different. If you keep with a standard scale length - the body will be smaller but the playability will remain the same. I bought a Seagull for my young son who was too small for a full dreadnaught size guitar. I wanted the necks to remain constant so they would feel the same when switching between a parlor and full size guitar...................just some advice.
I have two parlor size guitars from about 1880. One is a George Bauer from Philadelpia and one has more ornate inlay around the sound hole but has no identity. Both have wide flat fingerboards and have a unique sound that would not be able to compete with a modern day Martin. However, in a small location with good acoustics it would do well with a fiddle, mandolin or concertina. The Bauer has ultra light steel strings and the other is strung with nylon (per advice of the guitar repair expert).
Parlor guitars.
Parlor guitars.
Is anyone familiar with these small-sized guitars. Are they a bad idea for any particular reason, ... meaning, are the chords all wrong, or are they just limited in their range.
I've been looking at a couple of wonderful examples recently... The Larrivee is the best appearance-wise, and probably extremely nice in tone, but at $500-$600 it is twice as much as the delightful "Baby" Taylor... especially the one with the mahogany top...
# Posted on August 28th 2003 by irish ruff
Re: Parlor guitars.
Wouldn't they be intended for players with small hands? If made well I see no reason why they shouldn't play as well as the larger ones and have a good tone, even if the volume may be a bit reduced.
trevor
# Posted on August 28th 2003 by Trevor Jennings
Re: Parlor guitars.
I think they were originally made for ladies.
# Posted on August 28th 2003 by Ottery
Re: Parlor guitars.
Ottery - On the grounds that ladies are small (in which case, I'm no lady, because I'm no' wee ...) or that they stay indoors a lot (in which case ...)?
# Posted on August 28th 2003 by nastyweegirl
Re: Parlor guitars.
No, on the grounds that in America in the 19th Century, 'Parlor Styles' were very popular. They were simple finger style arrangements of popular songs, hymns and dances and were considered specially suitable for women, as the open tunings which were frequently used were consided more manageable for smaller hands than those nasty big stretchy macho finger chords. I assume that the smaller 'parlor guitars' have the same origin. And yes, you're right, I guess it was considered more appropriate for women to 'stay indoors a lot', rather than lugging a guitar down to jam with the good ol' boys at the Last Chance Saloon.
I in no way wished to imply that I thought women were delicate creatures with little hands, I was merely pointing out that that was the general view in the 19th Century!
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by Ottery
Re: Parlor guitars.
For their small size they often have a very "open" tone, the notes have less overtones & the individual notes are clearer. They are painfully uncool in this day of dreadnaughts, that's why the old ones are going for around $500usd or so. Those are the handcrafted 100+ year old instruments from solid tonewoods! Thank god so many guiatrists are stupid & leave these treasures to be snapped up while they praise their factory guitar with a plywood soundboard.
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by B Rad
Re: Parlor guitars.
I did not get the impression that modern parlor guitars were made with anything in mind other that extreme portability, not for women, kids, small animals, etc.... . They are usually sold with backpack style soft cases, they are know and advertised to fit comfortably in overhead baggage compartments. If I am correct, they are made in 3/4 scale to the full size guitar... Which would mean a reduction in the number of frets, but I would be surprised if the neck was radically downsized. I don't think it is. Now again,... I'm talking about the modern parlor styles by Larrivee and Taylor, not the classics which gave them their historical name "parlor"... who's got a parlor in their house anyway? I am now curious about the vintage models, particularly if they are out of favor and are being thrown away at embarrasing low prices...I like to buy high quality vintage instruments when nobody else seems interested. Compare these low prices to the vintage rage for old Martins, Gibsons and the like. 1930's to 1950's acoustic guitars are easliy in the $3000usd price range and headed higher. I am just smitten by the Taylor "Baby" mahogany top for $225 to $250 dollars and I've no doubt, I'll have one in my hands within the week.
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by irish ruff
Re: Parlor guitars.
On the old ones the scale length was slightly smaller, but the body was a lot smaller. Nowadays it more or less means 3/4 sized guitar. The Taylor is nice, i had the chance to play one once. Anything that has the Martin or Gibson name on it is going to have the prices artificially inflated by the guitar whores who can only merit an instrument by it's name. The no name hand mades from europe just before the turn of the century will be the highest value for the dollar.
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by B Rad
Re: Parlor guitars.
Modern parlor guitars are portable, if you want a small portable style, and they are useful for smaller people, because they can't handle a big guitar if that's what you want. Originally I believe they were made with 'ladies' in mind. I was merely pointing out the reason why I said they were originally made for ladies to nastygirl, who I thought was about to accuse me of some sort of sexist/sizeist transgression(!).
And of course everyone has a parlour in their house, they just call it the lounge or sitting room or living room these days.
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by Ottery
Re: Parlor guitars.
If you're getting into parlor guitars, you better hurry. A number of acoustic guitar "gods", such as Leo Kottke, Adrian Legg, Richard Thompson, and Phil Keaggy have all recently "re-discovered" the parlor guitar. Soon the masses will follow...
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by dfost
Re: Parlor guitars.
I have oo size - ooo size and a Larrivee Parlor Guitar - I love them all, I like the Larrivee because of the wider fretboard - more room between strings. I find fingerpicking easier on this then the standard narrower fretboard. Also I've never had any trouble getting it on an airplane as carry on.
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by mike880
Re: Parlor guitars.
Mike, I appreciate the remark on the difference between the Larrivee and the Taylor. I was just assuming that they were identical. And I knew that something was up in regards to these 3/4 size guitars, becoiming more popular I mean, they are starting to pop up all over the place. (there goes my hope for finding a nice vintage piece at a give-away price).
I am almost always ready to hop on a "coach-fare" bandwagon,.... i.e., the Larivee or Taylor, but when you talk about $3000 - to $5000 vintage guitars, a "first-class" bandwagon ticket, I'm a seller, not a buyer. I would personally look into one of the wonderful new custom makers in the $1500 price range before I would buy a 1950's Martin for twice that amount, ugh! You REALLY need to know what your're doing in regards to buying high priced vintage instruments. Many things can happen to an instrument over half a century....v hidden defects, shoddy repairs, etc.
So Mike, now you've got me leaning towards a Larrivee parlor guitar,.... such as one with KOA wood or bulbilinga back and sides, and maybe mother of pearl inlays...beautiful!!! And man, those are only going for $500. Nice to have choices! Sux, not to have buckets of $$$$. (smile).
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by irish ruff
Re: Parlor guitars.
About 12 years ago I found a Washburn parlor guitar ca. 1930's in a music store in Albuquerque, New Mexico. I paid $350 for it. It had significant playing wear but a wonderful sound. My interest in it specifically was it's wide neck, i.e. wider than a regular steel-string guitar, but not quite as wide as a classical gut string model. Because I play fingerstyle I wanted a steel string guitar with a neck wide enough for my fingers to work around as a classical guitarist does. The small body has a wonderful tone, but perhaps not overall as loud as a dreadnought. You don't want to drown people out of the parlor. Most of my playing is for small gatherings of quiet people who enjoy lyrical music where the notes are clearly distinguished. The small size fits me better than a large guitar because I'm not all that large myself.
Chris
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by unique
Re: Parlor guitars.
Speaking of small size guitars, I just picked up a tenor guitar (4 strings, tuned GDAE like the fiddle) for cheap, and is it ever a sweet instrument to play!! I also play mandolin and tenor banjo, but the difference with the tenor guitar is that you can sustain the notes a bit more and get a sweeter sound, especially for slower jigs, waltzes and airs. Anybody out there tried one? What do you think of it as an ITM instrument? John Carty plays one---there's a few cuts on his latest album "Yeh--that's all it is"--Aoife
# Posted on August 29th 2003 by aoife
Re: Parlor (sic) guitars.
Does anyone make parlour banjos or bodhrans?
# Posted on August 30th 2003 by geoffwright
Re: Parlor guitars.
There is an odd relationship between the banjo and the bodhran Geoff, or at least banjo, and drums in general. Here in America... three of the largest drum manufacturers, Ludwig, Slingerland and Rogers once had banjo's at their largest product line. Slingerland and Ludwig made the instruments and Rogers provided the heads which at that time were actual skins, similar to the wonderful natural skins of the irish bodhran today. There is a lot of interesting history on this, but to answer your (farceical) question Geoff, (ya trouble maker, you, ~wink).. Yes, in looking back at the vintage banjo's of the day, I've seen many weird shaped mini-banjo instruments, and of course, there's the infamous Guiness bodhran souviner,.... more suitable as a table coaster for your lager, than a actual drum....
They do make a nice pair of earrings though!
# Posted on August 30th 2003 by irish ruff
Re: Parlor guitars.
As I understand it, parlor guitars weren't made as a smaller alternative to "real" guitars, they were the standard long before the larger bodies were developed. The "O" (for "orchestra") size, was made a bit bigger to project more, and was followed by the "OO" and "OOO", which eventually lead to the "Dreadnaught" ("D") size, which has been the standard for the last fifty years or so. So to say that parlors were "made for ladies" is misleading - you might be more accurate to say that the Dreadnaughts were made for insecure men who needed compensation. If you wanted to say such sill ythings at all, that would at least reflect the evolution of the guitar as I know it.
The smaller bodied guitars being made now - ranging from traditional "parlor" size to triple-ought - are sounding very nice. I've played some Tacomas that have sounded great, and my Martin is a good instrument for accompaniment, but not so good for flatpicking.
# Posted on August 31st 2003 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Parlor guitars.
Well, my contention that parlour (parlor) guitars were made for smaller hands was based on what I knew of the history of parlour music, and the fact that I knew this was supposed to be a 'suitable occupapation for ladies'. However, I had a look around the web and found the description below, which contradicts both my 'ladies hands' and
the portability theory....
The term "parlor guitar" dates back to the days before recorded music where entertainment was conducted live and often in the parlors of those who were lucky enough to have them. Today, the term describes a size and style of guitar. Parlor guitars have smaller bodies than dreadnaughts and often are smaller than even classical guitars. Contrary to popular assumption, their reduced size isn't intended to accommodate smaller players but, rather tler players but, rather to provide for a more even frequency response. In other words, bass, treble and all of the frequencies in between are the same volume. In an acoustically near perfect environment like a "parlor" or concert hall, this even frequency response is a must if the music isn't to be overwhelmed with bass.
I don't know how well-informed this is, but it sounds convincing.
I'm not convinced that parlor size guitar was some sort of original standard, or if indeed there ever was a standard size, either. Spanish guitars are usually quite large (apart from the smaller ones!), and I believe they've had guitars around in Spain for a while before such measurements as O, OO, or OOO were devised.
Ola!
# Posted on August 31st 2003 by Ottery
Re: Parlor guitars.
The thing to watch for is the scale length - the length from nut to bridge. The Laravee and Seagull have a full-size standard guitar neck and scale length - only the body is compact. The Baby Taylor, on the other hand has a 3/4 length neck. If you are used to playing a standard guitar I would stay with a standard scale length. Otherwise, the finger positions will be different. If you keep with a standard scale length - the body will be smaller but the playability will remain the same. I bought a Seagull for my young son who was too small for a full dreadnaught size guitar. I wanted the necks to remain constant so they would feel the same when switching between a parlor and full size guitar...................just some advice.
Steve
# Posted on September 3rd 2003 by Rice-st
Re: Parlor guitars.
I have two parlor size guitars from about 1880. One is a George Bauer from Philadelpia and one has more ornate inlay around the sound hole but has no identity. Both have wide flat fingerboards and have a unique sound that would not be able to compete with a modern day Martin. However, in a small location with good acoustics it would do well with a fiddle, mandolin or concertina. The Bauer has ultra light steel strings and the other is strung with nylon (per advice of the guitar repair expert).
# Posted on September 4th 2003 by fiddlersgreen