Why Are Luthier Harps in the A model Style and not the better B Model?

written in 2002 and not previously published:

I am not one to be easily dismissed. The following is quite long but that's because it touches upon very central issues relating to my interest in building autoharps. Actually I would rather just play them, but no one builds what I really want personally, primarily for the very reasons Pete cites here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Why Are Luthier Harps in the A model Style and not the better B Model?
From: ADFRNTDRMR@aol.com
To: Cyberpluckers
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 00:29:04 -0500


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Lewis wrote:

Most want to be louder and more clear and do not generally have a focus on a vocalist's requirements.

Pete Daigle replied:

Just want to note that we are talking opinions here and not absolutes. Quite a number of vocalists, professional and otherwise abandoned the B model in a hurry when given the opportunity to own custom A model 'harps. Bryan Bowers is probably the best known.

He does very few instrumentals and owns luthier 'harps for pay or pleasure. The A model bridge transmits sound more completely throughout the instrument. This is a measurable certainty. Why do you suppose they are louder? This can and has been tested (though I can't personally validate more than my own testing and experience)with 'harps of similar size, mass and air cavity, but not identical 'harps as far as I know.

I'm sure it could be (and probably should be) done with the same 'harp set up both ways, but the effect is obvious enough to most by what they hear. But others just prefer the sound of the B model. Karen Mueller does, and she plays mostly instrumental, not vocal! She does, however, perform strictly with her pickups plugged in.

Bottom line is, there probably will be more of each model to choose from in the future, but it certainly is not a with a lack of consideration for vocal accompaniment that most luthiers build A models. Luthiers focus on the wants and needs of those who will buy the instruments.

From a manufacturing point of view the B model is easier and quicker, even without a drill that punches all holes at once. I'd be happy to explain why if anyone is interested.

Pete also wrote:

"Quite a number of vocalists, professional and otherwise, abandoned the B model in a hurry, when given the opportunity to own custom A model 'harps. Bryan Bowers is probably the best known."

[Bob]

Factual maybe, but you're forcing assumptions about why that might have happened. If I'm reading you correctly, first you dismiss my statement as merely an opinion and then immediately follow that with dogma of your own. Let me just say that my perception seems just as real to me as yours does to you. Your ideas, at least on this topic, are no less opinions than mine.

I don't think too many would say that a common model B is their preference over other alternatives, when cost is not an issue. I can think of a number though who definitely prefer one of the higher end versions of the model B, built in the US, yet outfitted with chord bars to their liking. Unfortunately those harps don't serve all keys particularly well. They are generally outstanding in F but tend to be less responsive otherwise, especially in popular key choices. Using the same string set, it's hard to move far from that favored key without making the body deeper...a luthier instrument.

With all due respect, you have taken to making sweeping pronouncements, and your comments seem self-justifying, displaying the same preoccupation with volume as most of the rest of the luthiers. You seem to have the usual lack of objective appreciation for a good specimen of the model B or its justification. Most luthiers are of the same opinion as you (we've talked), and that is the credibility we are fighting here.

A harp trying to be as loud as possible is just not what a singer needs. I am not talking about belting out audience rousing favorites here. I mean pretty singing with a good voice that has something of its own to offer beyond just the lyrics. It does not need competition from the instrument but rather should be complemented by it. Aside from the composite sound, the singer does not need the distraction of the instrument's own sound while trying to focus on singing well. The autoharp is particularly problematic because it is held close to the singer's ears. The proximity of both the voice and the instrument to any microphone is actually an advantage, unless there is a need to balance the two, one significantly more powerful than the other.

I think we know that loud luthier instruments have to be played with a light touch, if trying to sing at the same time. Professional performers with a focus on microphone response could have a different view of all this. But I don't think they typically play for pleasure in any case. I once had an interesting conversation with Laurie Sky about that very issue.

We don't really know what Bryan prefers to play, especially privately. Bryan is known as playing Orthey harps perhaps because he may be under a long standing contract to play them exclusively in public. That is to say that he may not be allowed to play anything else. Perhaps we are supposed to believe that he wouldn't play anything else. We'll never know for sure what he'd really like to play, if he is still content, or if he even thinks about it. He is too discreet to comment. I can only speculate.

He has long since settled into what he does. Using his Ortheys, he enjoys the advantages of good chord bars and the stability in tuning and structure that is so critical to his long term use of them, some of which have been rebuilt or refurbished at least once. We don't know what he thinks about the actual sound differences. He is probably so glad to be rid of the road warrior issues and gerryrigging with his old harps that it would be difficult for him to focus on the real acoustic sound quality issue. If you know anything about Bryan, you know that he wants a harp to be in precise tuning and to stay there. I assume that he would like the felts to do a good job, running close to the strings, and for the chord bars to be quiet. Anything else is gravy. He doesn't need an extraordinary instrument to sound good tuned to a single key. In fact, something too powerful could be overwhelming in that tuning. He has some very old Orthey models that still meet those needs, yet there are newer ones that might actually sound better in multiple key tunings. It so happens that some of the old ones do rather well in a single key like Bryan typically uses. I have heard George describe them exactly that way.

A cooperative arrangement allows Bryan to have George as a resource to maintain his instruments for him.

Aside from how the harps sound to him, Bryan would be very concerned about how they came across to an acoustic audience, a sound system, or a recording. As a professional performer who would rarely play for personal pleasure, he could have different priorities than the average player. Bryan performs and practices frequently enough that playing strictly for pleasure might actually be pretty rare. I don't really know, but I'll bet playing autoharp is not his idea of taking a break. He wouldn't just pick up a harp because he would want to tune it first. He'd probably go fishing instead.

My favorite recordings for the sound of his instruments were his earliest using the old beat up model B harps he used to play. In no small way, that is partly due to the influence these recordings had upon my own playing and inspiration. Later recordings are markedly different, perhaps less captivating a sound.

I don't observe him playing instrumentals too seriously so much anymore, probably because he is older, has suffered hand or finger injuries, and is supportive but reserved on the subject of flashy and fast playing from others. We see him focus more and more on singing and story telling, his real strengths at this stage. He is visibly more comfortable with that part of his program. While he certainly needn't be, I wonder if he is self conscious about the number of good players now, many of whom were actually inspired by him. He is very generous in offering opportunities for many other players to perform with him . He often leaves the main instrumental part of the program to those collaborations...anything that would include him and be complementary to or based upon his existing material.

Bryan's best model Bs did not survive his relentless tuning efforts and bashing about in a trunk going from place to place. He was long ago separated from Oscar Schmidt's ability to provide him with instruments worthy of his work. So, without direct testimony, he just is not a good case in point for undermining the credibility of a vintage model B, especially a good one, most notably a US vintage Centurion or Festival model. The term OS model B means nothing, except that it is not a model A. We have to be very specific about which ones we are talking about. Otherwise generalizations are just not useful and exceptions will abound.

In the context of what's available today from Oscar Schmidt, and speaking only of the model B in general, I don't think I would resist the idea at all that a pro is going to select an A model style, luthier instrument instead, for want of other alternatives. But we have to separate the issue of chord bars, since for many, diatonic configurations cannot be done admirably with Oscar Schmidt parts. Most have hand made chord bars. Buying a luthier harp is one way to get them, but you have to then accept that the instrument sounds and feels different as well.

Karen's harp, a US Centurion, is a great one with or without pickup, used because she too is a professional performer with an overriding concern about what the audience can hear and the ease with which she can provide a good, full sound, yet still enjoyable to her.

I am speaking for these people and perhaps shouldn't try, but I know more than a bit about what they do and why, drawing what I believe are more valid conclusions in the proper context.

As far as the rest of the general group of vocalists and performers to which you refer, I am of the opinion that they were most attracted by good chord bars, stable tuning, and the belief that they owned the best available. There was the lack of availability of truly valued US vintage instruments as well. Some keys are better served by specific luthier instruments, so something better in GDA and louder to boot was bound to be popular, especially if it included nice chord bars.

Those that sing with a band have more concern about how the instrument blends with their group. If the autoharp is a band instrument at all, it is probably best in that context without the ringing quality of the model B. I believe Cathy Britell voiced that opinion some time ago. I don't disagree, but it would depend on the instrumentation of the group. I can't say "don't use a model B in a group". Karen Mueller might have something to say about that. There is room for preference and different contexts here.

Vocalists, especially soloists, like the sound of model Bs under their voice for very valid reasons and a shared opinion about it. There are only a few autoharp performers that actually sing very well in any case. The more casual players, less focused on the instrument itself, I observe as the ones that tend to have "the better" voices and more of a love for singing. While the instrument may be secondary to them, it is an important element of what they do. Thus you could be right that in sheer numbers, the professionals will and do prefer luthier instruments. The story could be different if they favored the key of F, had better voices, typically opted for prettier material, and considered singing a priority.

I believe that the most coveted spot on any waiting list is for a Bob Taylor harp, model B all the way. You need to get a look at Charles Whitmer's Taylor harp some time. He let me play it once, and I now know what I want someday. Your harps may be nice and have a place but are not of the only valid, respectable design approach. However, they may be the more versatile. There are enough luthiers around now that we don't really need another everyman harp beyond simply providing the total capacity to keep everyone supplied with nice, basic instruments in timely fashion. There is IMO still room and demand for specialty instruments sufficient to keep any one luthier quite busy.

I never said that luthiers in general don't consider or care about vocalists. What I stated or implied was that they generally don't see or understand vocal accompaniment as a priority, dismissing any request to build something with the virtues of a good model B. It then becomes the singer's job to make a potentially overpowering instrument work for them just inches away from their voices and ears. My frustration with luthiers in general, i.e. what I would really prefer to own, is that they choose to provide only one model, most likely for practical reasons, being able to sell everything they want to build regardless. If we as players don't necessarily buy into what they offer, or have somewhere else to look, it would help.

I am grateful for and respectful of what is available, but someone shouldn't assume that just because I own it means I think it is the greatest thing ever offered, or that I have no visions of improving upon it, or that I don't miss what I used to have available to me, or that I don't really prefer old favorites that were actually relatively cheap. One should also not assume that, if I don't own or play something, I don't respect it or think it valid as someone else's choice.

You can't take a whole community of people that like to play the autoharp such as it is and suddenly decide they need something significantly different. Many will bite, but some will not. Some will buy it just because they can, perhaps realizing someday that they don't actually play it very much. When lucky enough to have a good one, playing an old OS harp or a new, premium version of it is a perfectly valid thing to prefer, along with any preference to the contrary. I do have the concern, none of my business actually, that some play an expensive investment because they think they are supposed to like it by definition or can't deal with admitting that it just doesn't please them. One does not need an exponentially more expensive instrument to be accepted, credible, or valid as a serious player. We have very strong examples that tend to put that argument to rest.

Current luthier offerings leave some people out, aside from cost, thereby leaving a spot for someone to fill. A good autoharp is more than something that serves well playing GDA all night in a jam. If one harp serves exceptionally well in a single role, it is likely to present a problem, a challenge, or a limitation in a different role.

Playing the autoharp or tuning and carrying one or more around is full of compromises. If one isn't careful, they wind up hauling a whole wagon load of instrument options around with them. Nothing fills the bill for everything and everyone. To say otherwise is merely representing the compromise that one has accepted. The love/hate relationship is either always there, or how we use the autoharp is so limited in scope that our view is myopic. Thus we have the defiant or dismissive saying "it works for me!" or something to that effect.

[Pete]

Luthiers focus on the wants and needs of those who will buy the instruments.

[Bob]

In the confined context of the harp body itself, I would say that actually luthiers generally want people to buy what the luthier wants to build. Until the demand dries up or fails to materialize, that won't change. Cynical maybe, but closer to the truth IMO. We usually see that a luthier offers what is in fact preferred for the luthier's personal playing or that of someone close by, an often unilateral judgment validated by sales or lack thereof. But one can only have enthusiasm for that in which the person believes or which proves successful regardless, providing financial reward and/or acclaim.

I believe that providing instruments just for personal satisfaction is a motive that quickly becomes compromised by practical necessity. At some point, building them is a job, although still how one might prefer to spend his time...doing what he does well and making people happy. To say that it is always a labor of love is overly romantic. The fellow does actually have 10s of thousands of dollars worth of shop and equipment that must be paid for with lunch money left over.

**********

Jean Hogan's autoharp cozies

Since I am working through some new tunes almost daily at present, I have been leaving instruments out on a stand. In order to do that I needed some dust covers. The following is the three piece set, completed today, with Rufus modeling in the foreground.