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.
|
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
avimuno
Posts: 598
Joined: Feb. 9 2007
From: Paris, France
|
 RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to VAHE)
|
|
|
Just my 2 cents as an amateur flamenco player and a big fan of Reyes-style guitars (by using the word "style" I wish to include other makers as well, who build guitars that somewhat share a similar voice to the guitars of Reyes). I have never owned a Reyes, but I have extensively played 3 blancas, from different periods of Manuel's building career. I do own an amazing copy that I would rate quite highly compared to the real thing (some very knowledgeable players have agreed with me on that particular guitar).
I have owned quite a few guitars in my 12 years of playing flamenco. Some of them were quite expensive too and had a headstock shaped like a half-moon. I have also owned guitars from Granada, Sevilla and Cordoba makers. I am far from being an expert or anything like that, but I would consider that I have played enough flamenco guitars to have a decent grasp on the differences between the different schools etc.
To me, and this is only my opinion, if a good Reyes Padre was on sale today and I had the money, I would spend the cash for it in a heartbeat. There is no rationality behind this other than the fact that, as a player, I deeply connect with these guitars. I find that they have a very unique voice that I really bond with. The trebles are super sweet and have somewhat of a dreamy character to them. The basses are deep with a very musical looseness to them (I like to describe them as "greasy" for lack of a better word... in other words, they are more milkshake than skimmed milk). Overall, the sound is rich and complex, not overly bright but without being too warm and round either. They also have a somewhat longer decay/sustain than your average flamenco guitar, which contributes to the lyrical quality of the tone IMHO. I would also say that the sound is quite balanced over the entire spectrum. The mid-range does not overpower everything else whilst still being very present (the guitar, after all, is a mid-range instrument).
Despite not having the snappy and bright character of say a Conde, when pushed, a Reyes will produce a very satisfying flamenco growl, that still retains the harmonic richness and sustain you can hear when playing it lightly. Overall, I find that this provides a sort of canvas that really allows you to play with your playing dynamics, making the guitar go from a very warm and sweet tone to a powerful bark by just pushing it. As such, it really responds to your toque in a very lively fashion. Vicente Amigo has certainly made the most of that... Just listen to "Cordoba" and you'll know what I mean by going from sweet and warm to growling. You can also check his Taranta named "Un Momento en el Sonido", which is quintessential Reyes sweetness to me; and any bulerias he has to hear the more aggressive sound these guitars can produce.
All these characters are, of course, either desirable or not for a flamenco guitar. There's no right or wrong answer, just personal taste and playing style; and this is where the answer to your question lies IMHO. Putting aside the quality of the craftsmanship (Reyes Padre's craftsmanship is as close as it gets to perfection) and the demand/supply market mechanisms that have allowed the prices to go up (Reyes Padre's demise also contributing to that of course), the question is whether or not this is the voice you are after. If it is, then if you also happen to strongly bond with the way the instrument plays and feels, then that guitar will not be overrated to you, and you might find yourself getting into debts to buy one. On the other hand, if you do not like the sound and/or do not connect with the instrument, then paying such a high price for it will sound like madness to you.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 6 2017 16:35:06
 |
|
avimuno
Posts: 598
Joined: Feb. 9 2007
From: Paris, France
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to Echi)
|
|
|
quote:
My opinion is that Reyes is probably not overrated as a builder but Reyes guitars are probably overpriced at the moment.
It's probably worthy to add that IMHO many guitars are overpriced at the moment.
Looking at things from a European perspective, I would also add that the strong Dollar is probably making a good Reyes Padre more accessible to the US market. They, of course, vary in prices starting at around €6,000 for examples from his early days (60s and 70s guitars), going up to a maximum of around €18,000 for what would be considered a really prime guitar from Manuel's golden age (80s and 90s). I am always looking at prices, since I have been waiting for the right opportunity to buy one, and although they have gone up since Manuel Sr passed away, the market seems to have stabilized at around €12,000 to €15,000 here in Europe for guitars from the 80s up to the last ones he made.
These prices are not cheap, far from it, but looking at the top builders in Europe, Barba start at around €9,000 for a blanca (they are slightly cheaper if you are willing to buy direct and put your name on their waiting list, which was around 5-6 years the last time I went to see them in Seville, in 2014), with Conde primeras (both Felipe and Mariano - I am not talking about the actual quality of the guitar here, just their going rate) also going for these prices. Other top builders (like Marin Montero, Caceres and Juan-Mi Gonzalez) are somewhat cheaper but still start at around €7,000. All these prices are, of course, for new guitars.
Here again, the strong Dollar helps the US market when acquiring guitars from these european makers. But looking at the top US makers, you're talking about entry prices of slightly below the USD 10,000 mark for guitars from Lester DeVoe and Tom Blackshear (not sure how much Ruck and Brune go for these days, but I would imagine that they are at least at around this price point if not higher).
When you take all that into consideration, a Reyes Padre does not seem to be that much more expensive, if you can find a good one at around €12,000 (that's USD 12,800 at today's rate), when you consider that you are buying a highly collectible guitar. From the point of view of their collectability, they are still priced (sometimes far) below such historical builders like Rodriguez and Esteso (which might be worth more to a collector's point of view anyways).
J-L Postigo was selling an amazing one from the 80s (can't remember the exact year) for €11,000 back in 2012... I still have nightmares about not having the money at the time.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 7 2017 12:52:45
|
|
avimuno
Posts: 598
Joined: Feb. 9 2007
From: Paris, France
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to tele)
|
|
|
quote:
They sell blancas for 3000-5000 euros
From what I have gathered, €3500 (more or less 20%) will buy you a good handmade artisan flamenco guitar in Spain these days. There's a whole new generation of luthiers emerging (not only in Granada) and offering great prices at the moment. The state of the Spanish economy is probably helping of course, but more builders also mean more competition and better prices.
I must confess to have been making the most of this opportunity by buying 2 good flamencos over the past 3 years. I have another one currently being built. That being said, I would tend to agree with Tom when he suggests that despite the competition and the prices of some instruments, people are still buying the higher end of the market. It's an eternal debate, and one which is quite circular too, but at the end of the day people spend their money the way they want to. I am no economist, but it seems to me that if some guitars are going for a certain price, even though the substitute might be cheaper, then it means that the demand is there for these instruments - until proven otherwise, no luthier is putting a gun on a buyer's head and forcing him to buy. And it's all fair game really, since it allows for the development of a multi-layered market that caters to all budgets.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 8 2017 19:40:02
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to VAHE)
|
|
|
One of my first jobs in high school was to work for a retired architect who's wife had an antique shop. I don't mean selling used junk, she dealt in European and American antiques often of some value. They had collected for 40 years, their personal collection included dozens of rare Kachina, Impressionism, Barbizon, Dutch, French, German paintings by minor but known old masters. They had glass ware, jewelry and textiles from Roman times to early 20th century- Also Italian violins from minor but known makers including Gasparo da Salo.
They stocked the shop with nice merchandise, and being in the business they attended auctions for both the purpose of buying merchandise and for the shop. They schooled me in collecting and prices. The first rule for setting a price, collect wisely and carefully, buy objects what are up and coming in collectors minds that have not been documented or shown widely yet. If you want amass a collection of a particular genre of object that you hopes appreciates in value, buy thigs you love, but collect and object that has not had a catalog published yet. Or high auction records.
Auction records set prices, and as soon as a catalog is published by a museum that gives lines of provenance and history of that genre the values of these objects increase usually according to the rarity and condition. Guitar making is not really different. Beyond name recognition most well made guitars are about the same with some general tenets form school to school, the prices are set by relationship to provenance, artistic lineage of the maker, rarity if vintage or antique. Guitars exist in a market of manufactured value. Value is created not by quality of the guitar, but by the value constructed around it in the market.
Really is comes down to which guitar do you like best for the price point you can afford. Anything beyond that and the player enters the market speculation game. This is good news for the person with a budget to buy a guitar within their means. If a guitar player really wants a first class playing guitar today it is available for between approx. $2500.00 to $5000.00 US.
One can get anything one wishes in terms of a top quality players guitar within that $2500.00 window today - After that it's all market value pricing based on manufactured value. Or whether the original maker will command a higher price and get it. The guitar market is also much less crooked than other instrument or antique markets. If one buys a guitar at dealer price from one of the major dealers, that instrument is likely to hold that value in the market. The margins of profit in the guitar market are not abusively inflated and dealer gains are within reason to create stable market values for 'Blue Chip' makers.
I just wanted to lay that out for beginners to the guitar who may be wondering what this is all about. If you choose a name maker from a well known dealer and cross reference the price with other dealers of stature, you will get value. If you choose a maker in the under $5000.00 spectrum, careful buying will win you a world class guitar.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 8 2017 1:10:05
|
|
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to VAHE)
|
|
|
Many reasons. For one the Western concept of an ensemble for classical music is centered around the bowed string section, this concept has been in play for a few hundred years. Prior to the orchestral ensemble when the violin family, really beginning with the viola in Italy, was being formed in the early 16th century, the viola then the violin became important to accompany choirs. Around 1525 the first viola and violins begin to appear, some in Brescia and in Cremona, at roughly the same time. The call for building them accelerated as churches and royal courts required them for the music that choir directors and court composers were writing. The industry began nearly 500 years ago, coming up in 2025 ish.
The demand for violins, celli and viola became so great that soon Cremona evolved as a great center for the industry, along with other Italian cities. The development of a system of standards and apprenticeship also evolved. The other enterprise than that began to evolve was the secondary violin market. The guitar secondary market which sets prices via dealer offer and auction after the primary price set by the maker is perhaps only a hundred years old or less in its capacity to be self sustaining. In other words, guitar dealing is much younger business than violin dealing. Prominent dealers for worldwide trade did not really set up shop until the 1950's. Contrast that with violin speculators who scoured Italy for violins made by the masters of the Cremona tradition. The collectors of Italian violins saw a need to collect and preserve these instruments and made trips through Italy at the end of the so called Golden Era of the Cremonese industry. The Cremona golden era lasted 200 years, between roughly the 1560s and the 1760s, after that the situation changed and violin making moved to other European city centers. By 1780 there were collectors and dealers who were vying for the instruments of Strativari, the Guarneri family, the smaller independent masters like Bergonzi, Serafin, and casting an eye towards the great cello makers of Venice Gofriller and Montagnana. There was already a 200 year old tradition of makers setting the prices in the primary market direct from the makers the likes of collectors like Count Cozio and Tarisio who championed the great Italian makers now in the late 18th and early 19th century resold these high value instruments in a secondary market thus creating the first set of secondary market prices for violins.
Later dealers in London and Paris acquired these rare instruments and then resold them into the 19th century market, often times one dealer brokering the same violin over and over as one customer returned it to pick up another violin to trade up. A Paris dealer named Vulliaume claimed to have sold the same Strad five or six times, and he no doubt raised the price each time. After Mr. V there came the Hill Family of London. The Hill family examined and wrote books about the Guarneri's, Stradivari, Maggini, and several other makers, including the famed Guarneri del Gesu. That scholarship elevated the prices even more as the Hills published book after book on the Italians. Later in the 20th century other books about the complete history including the French, German, Czech, English, Dutch etc maker came to be published. As these compendiums rounded out the catalogs on schools an individual makers the prices of those instruments rose.
The complex answer to why violins cost more than guitars is predicated on many factors: Violin making is a much older industry as a mature art form, importance of the violin family and it's central musical role within the entire canon of Western music, the much older and better researched secondary market,. Violins have risen in price over the centuries, and the most rare from the top Cremonese makers have entered the commodities market. Top old Italian violins are also place holders for money, they become investment pieces. There will be no more Sanctus Serafin violins made and no more Strad violas made, not more Gofriller celli, therefore the rarity increases and the value is driven up by further auctions sales of these works, these objects as commodities. The top violins have left the realm of being affordable to top musicians mostly, and are purchased by banks, music foundations to be loaned to players, or bought by pure value speculators who have no interest in music whatsoever and store the instrument in a safe like an expensive diamond or moon rock. Violins today in the top tier have left the secondary instrument market and have entered the investment market.
Pretty depressing until you think that you can get a good guitar for $5000.00 and it will last a lifetime and appreciate in value if you buy well in the primary market. If not your guitar will still outlast every car you will ever own, and probably see you through every break up, and marriage that ends.
So money well spent when you consider how much cars, homes, lawyers and therapists cost. I encourage you all to buy a guitar from an independent guitar maker!
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 8 2017 5:28:15
|
|
BarkellWH
Posts: 3458
Joined: Jul. 12 2009
From: Washington, DC
|
|
RE: Is Manuel Reyes Sr. overrated? (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
Stephen,
Kudos for your superb, detailed history of the evolution of the market for violins and other instruments in the bowed string family. With your comprehensive knowledge of the history of music and musical instruments, as well as your interest in all aspects of the arts and literature, I think you missed your calling in academia as a professor and advocate for the humanities. Nevertheless, you probably made the right decision not to make a career in academia because the trends sometimes lead to nonsense. The trend toward "Postmodernism" in philosophy and the arts ("Nothing exists outside the text") has just about run its course, but now we have academics and students who demand "trigger warnings," an end to "micro-aggressions," and "safe spaces" where they can assume the fetal position and reject concepts and ideas that don't mesh with their own.
And woe to him who bucks the trends in academia. When Henry Kissinger signed on first as Nixon's National Security Adviser, then as his Secretary of State (He wore both hats for a couple of years), the Harvard Faculty Senate voted not to accept him back into the fold. When asked about their vote, Kissinger replied, "The politics of academia are so bitter because the stakes are so small." A classic observation. So you are probably better off remaining as you are, making instruments as did the luthiers of old.
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white,
With the name of the late deceased,
And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here,
Who tried to hustle the East."
--Rudyard Kipling
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 8 2017 13:21:39
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.078125 secs.
|
Printable Version
