2 new 'hammer'guitars

Costs are rising and times are tough.
Please consider a donation to keep this
place going.

Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.

This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.

We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.

2 new 'hammer' guitars

You are logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >>Discussions >>General >>

Page: [1]

Message

<< Newer Topic Older Topic >>

bernd

Posts: 680
Joined: Feb. 15 2004

2 new 'hammer' guitars

In a thread a few month ago I posted about a Snos. de Santos Hernández guitar that blew me away. A friend told me now about 2 new babes at Siccas. It´s a Ramírez 1969 by Miguel Malo and a Snos. de Santos Hernández from the end of the 70th.

http://www.siccas.de/en/ramirez-1969-miguel-malo-martinez/
http://www.siccas.de/en/sobrinos-de-santos-hernandez/

I become electric when I see such outstanding guitars. In the near future there´s no possibility to travel for checking them. Has anyone experience especially with Ramírez guitars made by Miguel Malo and can tell about his impression?

Saludos
Bernd

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 26 2014 9:20:20

Richard Jernigan

Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

I'm a little surprised at the quoted 650 mm scale length of the '75 Ramirez blanca. My '67 1a blanca is 656 mm. I thought they kept that up. The current 1aF model has a 656 mm scale.

Miguel Malo is indeed a very fine luthier.

In conversations I had with them, Felix Manzanero and Manuel Contreras Sr., both of whom worked for Ramirez as oficiales (master craftsmen), questioned the idea that instruments assembled by the different craftsmen had any identifiable differences.

Both emphasized that Jose Ramirez III was a very strict taskmaster, who enforced exact adherence to his designs. The instruments were made up of parts prepared by various workers, the neck by this one, the sides and back planed to thickness by that one, and so on. The initials are those of the master craftsman who assembled the instrument. They were responsible for assuring that the preparations were done right, subject to Ramirez's final approval of each instrument. My impression, though I don't remember verifying it with Contreras and Manzanero, was that the final thicknessing and bracing of the soundboard was done by the assembler whose initials appear on the finished product.

I have played maybe only a half dozen Ramirez primera clase flamencas. But over the years I played several dozen 1a classicals. My experience was that there was as much variation in the output of a single oficial as there was variation across the output of all the oficiales.

Having said that, I do observe a difference in price attributable to whose initials are on the foot of the neck.

RNJ

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 26 2014 22:46:29

bernd

Posts: 680
Joined: Feb. 15 2004

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

Hi Richard,

thanks for your info, very interesting!

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 28 2014 8:01:53

RobJe

Posts: 731
Joined: Dec. 16 2006
From: UK

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

I visited the Ramirez workshop in 1968 the year before this guitar was made. I was surprised to see that the 69 guitar has a spruce top. Based on my experience I had believe that from 1966 onwards most had cedar tops. When discussing guitars in the Ramirez workshop nobody referred the initials on the heel stamp. I get the impression that the favouring of one set of initials over another is very much a dealer inspired game and my (admittedly subjective) view based on playing 20 or more of the guitars from this period is that following the initials is no way to find the best guitar.

It is true that Ramirez employed a range of skilled craftsmen, provided meticulous training and exercised close control of the whole operation. However, the output eventually grew so rapidly it is difficult to believe that he could continue to have the same influence over production.

Labels with numbers for 1a guitars on were introduced in the middle of 1967 (initials on the heel had already been used for a number of years). Numbering started not at 1 but at about 2000 – perhaps representing the number of guitars produced in the 10 years from 1957 when serious labelling started. In the next 10 years production increased rapidly from 1967 when they made about 400 guitars and in the next 10 years a total of about 10000 guitars was produced. Eventually (sometime in the late 80s?) the numbering system and initials were abandoned reflecting the fact that Ramirez was now a factory operation.

There are plenty of nice Ramirez flamenco guitars around from the late 60s and early 70s but don’t rely on the initials. Coincidentally someone is bringing one to my house this weekend.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 28 2014 19:28:20

Richard Jernigan

Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to RobJe)

My ´67 Ramirez 1a blanca has a cedar top, as did the one from the same era that Sabicas played late in his career, but I have seen and played a handful of spruce ones from the late ´60s'--early '70s.

RNJ

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2014 16:50:41

bernd

Posts: 680
Joined: Feb. 15 2004

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

Siccas has uploaded a video on this guitar (cedar top) with Murat Usamnas playing Sabicas´ Zapateado in D:

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 14 2014 17:14:26

Ruphus

Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

My impression from a 1970 2A ( top stained, I suspect it to be cedar):
Of the round and lush type ( not hoarse nor edgy) with a very pristine ringing upper register.
Quite sonor and very flexible with modulation.
Bass could be stronger to my taste ( but I want more of it than most on the foro). Separation is quite good, but can be had better still.
Intonation could be better as well, however is not worse than with your average specimen, while the guitar compensates for the slight flaw with general sonority. ( And if I wasn´t so lazy I could probably adjust by only filing a new saddle.)
Response is good, guitar very willing to translate even your gentle touch into very audible tone.
She will crap out when going really hard on her, but that could be merely due to the low action at very dry conditions.
Pulsation is towards the soft side. Playability near perfect.
As a peghead she is my lightest guitar. Weight must be very little over 1 kg.

She is a warhorse. Has been beaten through the decades, but keeps going without cracks, even though now living at around 30% RH.

In fact I am not certain whether to be judging her at full capacity or not.
Because she had been severally dried out and keeps recovering since 4 years now. Apparently still getting better, leaving me wondering about where she is still heading to.
With her you sound just like from a major record.

What counts to me quite some is substance. I appreciate what you could call deeply routed tone that gets compressed and dense so to say before it leaves the corpus. And that is where the Ramirez lacks no bit. ( And I would say that is what the brand is traditionally reputated for, including their classicals, eventhough me being not so enthusiastic about those.)

Actually, I tend more towards the raspy and growling kind of flamenca.
However, the way the Ramirez emits its smooth, still well articulated and bold tone is just too musical to not like anything about it.

The good thing in my case is that you won´t worry too much regarding her anyway beaten up body. That way she must be the best thinkable beater (unlike other guitars that keep me running after humidity control or worrying when animals wag around the guitar stand ).

If your Ramirez be like mine, and costing you not more than ~ 2500-3000€, I´d say go for it. Of the little chance to get some comparable bang for buck should be a guitar made by our fine luthiers here.

Be prepared for the pegs to be a complete mess. If they are like mine, taper and diameter have been sub optimal to say the least and users will have only worsened the function.
-

Having sad all that, personally I would be more curious about the Hernandez.

Ruphus

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 14 2014 19:08:04

bernd

Posts: 680
Joined: Feb. 15 2004

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to Ruphus)

Thanks Ruphus.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ruphus
Having sad all that, personally I would be more curious about the Hernandez.

I´m in a re-education process as business management assistant. Therefore I have very short time to play. It´s seldom more than 2 hours a week. So I don´t see to make a video with Siccas on the Snos. Hernández. I´ll be surely there in summer when I´m on holliday. It could be possible to make it then. Otherwise maybe Murat makes the next video. Let´s see

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 14 2014 20:06:32

C. Vega

Posts: 379
Joined: Jan. 16 2004

RE: 2 new 'hammer' guitars (in reply to bernd)

Just a little information:

Feliciano Bayon de la Morena, the maker(?) of the Sobrinos de Santos Hernandez guitar on the Siccas website, was only related to Santos Hernandez by marriage. He was not a blood relative. He was married to Esperanza Ruiz who was a niece of Santos' wife Matilde Ruiz Lopez. He was a competent self-taught maker but no Marcelo Barbero by any stretch of the imagination. He merely inherited the business from his wife's Tia Matilde and kept the Santos Hernandez name going. He never trained with Santos and it's very possible that he never met Santos. He didn't marry Esperanza until several years after Santos died.
Feliciano did, however, name his son Santos (big surprise, eh?). Santos B. (born 1951) was trained by his father and he continued running the business after Feliciano's death (d. 1997) until his retirement a few years ago. He labeled his guitars Santos Bayon-Sobrino de Santos Hernandez. (surprise again!)

You have to be careful with guitars like these. Both of the Bayon boys sold a lot of outsourced/factory guitars.....many, many more than they ever made themselves. Don't get all worked up over a name on a label.
The headstock crest shown on the Siccas website is rather different from other examples of Feliciano's guitars that I have seen and those narrow headstock slots are very un-Spanish in appearance although they do appear sometimes on old Valencian factory cheapies. I'm not saying that this is a factory guitar but these things and the fact that it is not dated do raise a red flag or two.
Compare it to the 1982 example on the same website. That headstock looks more like it should...pretty much a Santos knockoff.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 14 2014 21:20:43