| Stickist.com https://www.stickist.com/ |
|
| Dragonfly https://www.stickist.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=13922 |
Page 3 of 5 |
| Author: | Balt-A-Sar [ Mon Mar 25, 2019 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
JRJ wrote: ...It is hard to make musical instruments. Personally I respect the guy and would encourage him. Who knows he might figure out an unexpected way to enhance the tapping instrument... ...yes very hard to produce, but it's very very hard to enhance the good things... |
|
| Author: | JRJ [ Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:24 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Balt-A-Sar, yes, that is why I mentioned the 7 string that Emmett built because it is the same idea that Dragonfly is using. Really, Dragonfly is making 7&8 string guitars without bodies. He is not using the tequnique  "Freehands". He is tapping, yes, but it is not the same. So it is not as Stick-like as it might appear. But you are right Emmett has set a very high bar.jRj |
|
| Author: | Jayesskerr [ Mon Mar 25, 2019 7:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
tiega wrote: @ReyStick, I can hear your point of view, yet I don't share it at all. I know by saying what I will say I will probably not raise friendly feelings. I personally own 3 tap instruments, one is a Railboard and the 2 others are from 2 different companies. The all 3 have goods and bads, and really the Railboard is great, but the 2 others too. I think it is great that not only one brand do tap instruments. What would has been electric guitar if only Fender build it, and if all their fans reacted the way you do? Maybe only few thousands in the world would be electric guitarists... Maybe you feel you are part of an elite class, and that not all deserve to discover tap playing. Personally, I think music is about sharing, and not about patents. This is great to have the choice... Yet this is only my point of view. Envoyé de mon MHA-L29 en utilisant Tapatalk Summed up right here pretty much. |
|
| Author: | rodan07 [ Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
There is a post for other tapping instruments, called tappistry.org. Less than 700 posts in, what, five years? |
|
| Author: | ReyStick [ Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Jayesskerr wrote: tiega wrote: @ReyStick, I can hear your point of view, yet I don't share it at all. I know by saying what I will say I will probably not raise friendly feelings. I personally own 3 tap instruments, one is a Railboard and the 2 others are from 2 different companies. The all 3 have goods and bads, and really the Railboard is great, but the 2 others too. I think it is great that not only one brand do tap instruments. What would has been electric guitar if only Fender build it, and if all their fans reacted the way you do? Maybe only few thousands in the world would be electric guitarists... Maybe you feel you are part of an elite class, and that not all deserve to discover tap playing. Personally, I think music is about sharing, and not about patents. This is great to have the choice... Yet this is only my point of view. Envoyé de mon MHA-L29 en utilisant Tapatalk Summed up right here pretty much. There is also a teflon section for non stick tapping instruments. which would be more appropriate. I am not an elitist by any means. I just happened to find tapping later in my life, and found the ultimate tapping instrument. The Chapman Stick is not the first nor will it be the last tapping instrument. "tapping guitar" techniques were around before Emmett created the Stick . If I created something and people were copying it, yes to a certain extent it's a compliment, but to make it look just like a Chapman Stick is a stretch. There are many different guitars, there are many different tapping instruments. Find your own style if you're going to create a tapping instrument. I'm an ass whole lio lio. I don't really care either way, I'm just on a rant,. I should find better use of my brain time. |
|
| Author: | ReyStick [ Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Although I think Emmett's was the first dedicated tapping instrument. |
|
| Author: | tiega [ Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
ReyStick wrote: Jayesskerr wrote: tiega wrote: @ReyStick, I can hear your point of view, yet I don't share it at all. I know by saying what I will say I will probably not raise friendly feelings. I personally own 3 tap instruments, one is a Railboard and the 2 others are from 2 different companies. The all 3 have goods and bads, and really the Railboard is great, but the 2 others too. I think it is great that not only one brand do tap instruments. What would has been electric guitar if only Fender build it, and if all their fans reacted the way you do? Maybe only few thousands in the world would be electric guitarists... Maybe you feel you are part of an elite class, and that not all deserve to discover tap playing. Personally, I think music is about sharing, and not about patents. This is great to have the choice... Yet this is only my point of view. Envoyé de mon MHA-L29 en utilisant Tapatalk Summed up right here pretty much. There is also a teflon section for non stick tapping instruments. which would be more appropriate. I am not an elitist by any means. I just happened to find tapping later in my life, and found the ultimate tapping instrument. The Chapman Stick is not the first nor will it be the last tapping instrument. "tapping guitar" techniques were around before Emmett created the Stick . If I created something and people were copying it, yes to a certain extent it's a compliment, but to make it look just like a Chapman Stick is a stretch. There are many different guitars, there are many different tapping instruments. Find your own style if you're going to create a tapping instrument. I'm an ass whole lio lio. I don't really care either way, I'm just on a rant,. I should find better use of my brain time. It is most probably not the right section to put this info. And agree, Stick is most probably the first dedicated tapping instrument made. Now having an instrument without a body, strings and pickup is not necessarily a stick copy. It is simply an instrument without body, stings and pickup. Envoyé de mon MHA-L29 en utilisant Tapatalk |
|
| Author: | ReyStick [ Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Thank you. Sorry, I will try to think before I press submit in the future. RoKnRoL. |
|
| Author: | mark-df [ Fri Apr 19, 2019 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Hi there! I'm Mark, the guy that makes these instruments in Patagonia Argentina. My attention was drawn to this thread through visitors to our website and I just wanted to throw in my two cents ... in particular to comments regarding us making "cheap knock-offs" I understand that a lot of people can't get past the fact that our instruments look a bit like the Chapman Stick. I also realize that our prices compare favorably in the international market so often it is assumed that we make cheap (and nasty) copies. I appreciate the more balanced comments already made in this thread, but thought it might be of use to say something directly. Each one of our instruments is unique, made individually by hand from selected and seasoned (in most cases 5-10 years) timbers. We take pride in high-quality workmanship and use top components and craftmanship to create another option for those looking to explore the world of tapping/touchstyle. The only thing that can perhaps be considered "cheap" is the final price tag ... reflecting our endeavour to provide the best possible musical value for money and the reality that we live in a devalued local economy. Admittedly our central models are long, skinny, electric fretted instruments designed with tapping/touchstyle in mind ... does this make them Chapman Stick "knock-offs"? Upon further investigation I think anyone will realize that our design criteria are completely independent. True, we both use guitar-style tuners on a similar shaped headstock and go with a minimalist body, but other than that all other design elements (materials, scale, construction technique, body and neck shape, bridge and nut design, damping, truss-rods, pickups, electronics, strap-design etc) are completely different. All respect goes to Emmett (who has developed a fine bunch of instruments) and although I don't share aspects of his vision I'm his I'm very happy for his success. From what I can see (even though I've never actually touched one) the Chapman Stick is a very nicely engineered design solution and has done a lot to introduce so many to another world of possibilities. It is nevertheless a design (as with any design) that comes with certain pros and cons. Our instruments offer a different set of pros/cons, just as others (Warr Guitars, Touch Guitars, Kelstone, Harpejji etc) offer theirs ... and that in itself is something that should be celebrated by musicians world-wide looking to explore what these different tools have to offer in terms of musical expression. I'm happy to discuss any of these things in further detail. All the best - Mark |
|
| Author: | ixlramp [ Fri Apr 19, 2019 10:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Dragonfly |
Hi Mark. I like your instruments and was very happy to discover your site. I was disappointed to see such silly comments in a community i assume to be of above average intelligence. I get no impression your instruments are 'copycat', 'rip-off', 'knock-off', 'imitation' as these are just slightly similar looking instruments, just like the instruments of 1000s of guitar and bass luthiers. Because form follows function, it is natural that instruments end up looking somewhat similar. If a luthier decides to make a minimalist tapping instrument from a single laminated blank and with the shortest possible headstock, it is highly likely it will end up a long thin thing with a triangular headstock. In no way does that suggest the copying of another design. In the world of guitars and basses, there are very many, very similar looking instruments from 1000s of luthiers, we are used to this and appreciate the variety. it seems to me, because the Chapman Stick is such a unique instrument, and so few tapping instrument designs exist, when something appears that looks slightly similar (for understandable and legitimate reasons) there is more chance that some Chapman Stick enthusiasts might react aggressively, because they are just not used to there being slightly similar looking instruments. Having looked at your instrument, beyond the basic shape it is very different from a Chapman Stick. The price 'cheap'ness is much appreciated amongst a variety of extremely expensive tapping instruments (none of which i can afford and will probably never be able to). |
|
| Page 3 of 5 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|