|
"Quality control" means something different to a factory manager than it does to a luthier. To them it's matter of making the process go smoothly, with an outcome that is predictable in terms of things that can be easily measured. All the parts have to be the same size and shape so they will go together interchangably, and result in an instrument that will look and feel like all of the others of that particular model. 'Tone' for a factory is like 'flavor' for a big tomato farm: nice if you can get it, but not worth a lot of effort.
A luthier is thinking about a 'quality' that is much harder to measure, and Michael's post is a good example of that. In his case the 'quality' that he needed to control was a particular sound that the customer had in his ear. Michael got it right, even though that particular quality was not as appealing to him as some others.
The factory need to minimise man-hour inputs, which are the most expensive 'part' for them, precludes them from the ability to pay attention to the sort of quality we're after. Nobody really expects them to do anything other than what they do, either. It's generally accepted that if you want to find a particularly good example of a given model of production guitar you'll have to play your way through a few (or more) to find it. Good QC up front, with things like wood selection, help them get fair consistency, but even there they can't do more than grade cosmetically, and hope that somehow that will translate into tone.
We, on the other hand, are _not_ exempt from the necessity to make instruments that meet the strict cosmetic standards that the factories set. In fact, if anything, we're expected to go them one better; by using, for example, the real 'eye candy' wood that they can't deal with. All the little time-consuming details, like wood binding and purfling with carefuly mitred corners, are rare on factory instruments, and _expected_ on hand mades. The ever-higher cosmetic standards really press in on the hand maker; that sort of stuff is a lot easier in a factory setting. Bob Taylor can put the time and money in to building a dedicated robot to buff each one of his guitars 'perfectly' because he tosses off a few thousand for every one I make. Setting up a legal spray rig is simply too expensive for most of us, nor do we ever get the amount of practice that his workers do, so it's a lot harder for us to match that level of finish. But we're not allowed to fall very far short of the 'industry standard' either.
Then, on top of that, we've got our 'real' quality control job: that of making an instrument that plays and sounds consistently great, however you define that term. Some of the things that are considered 'good' for cosmetics are 'bad' for tone. That millimeter of epoxy that Ovation sprays on the tops of their guitars has got to kill some of the sound, even though it looks really smooth and is practically bullet proof. For me to get that level of gloss with the more acoustically friendly French polish I use would take more man hours than they have in two or three (or maybe five or ten!) quitars.
The bottom line is that there is no way the factories can do what we individual luthiers do, nor do they try. They go by the sensible rule that 'for every guitar there is a buyer': no matter what it sounds like somebody, somewhere, will like it, and they just have to find that person. I've got to come close to matching their level of cosmetics while meeting the expectations of a particular client _whom I may never meet_. It's an 'interesting' job, that keeps us off the streets, although most assuredly not out of trouble.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
