In regard to mass produced cheaper "good quality" tapping instruments ... one question you have to ask is, is there really a "large enough market" to justify the expense for R&D, tooling and advertisment needed to create this "magic" tapping instrument and can the company afford to absorbing loss of money until the product starts selling? (if it sells) I have no doubt all the major guitar manufacturers know of the Stick through trade shows and just being in the business and have enough intelligent and resourseful engineers on their payrole that they could "reverse engineer" a type of Stick that is not high end like the Stick but very playable and doesn't infringe on SE's copyrights while offering the same ergonomic advantage using "Emmett's Free Hands playing method." So why 30+ years later haven't they done that? Perhaps they think the potential market share doesn't justify the expense? I know a lot of musicians who think the Stick is simply a gimic, not a serious instrument. (Of course they're wrong) How many sales would be needed to justify all that is needed to design and mass produce a good quality, playable CHEAP tapping instrument?

I question if the potential market is large enough in this point in time. Who knows what could happen YEARS from now but currently all the kids are buying $100 to $600 basses, guitars and drums and that's all that's required to play cover music and be a local rock star! Fact of life I think. The Stick attracts musicians who like to be on the fringe, musicians who don't think like the rest, and that will always be a small minority.

I had that video in mind when I posted. I would also have to respectfully say no, not quite.
Its great to see something like that on a stick, but I agree, its really more like guitar on a stick. Its also hard with the quality to tell how much of the sound is in the backing track.
Maybe its bending the rules a little bit to say this doesn't "qualify." It certiantly is the closest thing I have seen to stick in a rock rhythm guitar role... but this feels more like guitar played on stick, than stick playing a guitar role.

And to be clear, I am not knocking that performance at all. Some of the comments are kind of angry because he didn't play it "like a stick." Who cares how he plays it? We wouldn't even have sticks if musicians always played instruments as they were intended.

Indeed if I'm not mistaken, Emmett is actually amenable to licensing *some* of his technologies. In light of this it doesn't seem unreasonable that somebody could do what you're saying.



History is rife with instruments that were "novel" at the time they were introduced, but faded rather rapidly into obscurity. Some really were just rather bad ideas, some were good, but never had a base of music that really made them necessary. While I agree the market is small now, I think the Stick has the quality in its design and engineering that it won't necessarily fade--but there needs to be a base of players, a repertoire, and a base of listeners.

You really make a valid point about there being other kinds of inexpensive instruments out there--that are probably easier to learn, honestly. There are also 12-string basses and Harpej's and Sticks and all other sorts of "fringe" instruments that seem "unconventional," but in the hands of the right player can make remarkable music. Most of these are still brand-spanking-new as far as their place in musical history. I do rather hope the Stick emerges and establishes itself in the annals of musical history, but only time will tell.

History is a poor barometer of what can work in today's web-connected world.

Finding your niche and making it work is really how many things and people become successful these days.

If you don't think Emmett has been examining the question of how to make Sticks less expensive, but also consistently playable, since the very beginning, you're sadly mistaken.

Nothing would make him happier than to see Free Hands employed by as many people as possible.

But the instrument has to play well in order for tapping to work. We're not talking about banging out chords on a guitar here. We're talking about a relatively complicated mental process of note selection, arrangement and freedom of expression all rolled into one instrument.

If you think about it, this has never really been attempted before, that's what makes it so exciting.

True, there are instruments that incorporate some of these elements (piano, harp, etc have limited expression and fewer options for note placement). And there were tapping instrument before that relegated the right hand to a different orientation with the strings, which limited the kinds of parts you could play with it.

What makes Free Hands exiting is the possibilities it offers for making new kinds of music. Any compromise in the functionality of the instrument used will only drive down the possibilities and dampen the excitement.

That's why Emmett hasn't "sold out". He could easily have traded on his name and produced a cheap line of instruments (his competitors have been trading on his name since they first started, too). He probably would have sold a lot of instruments, but where would that lead?

That doesn't mean the "great idea" that can accomplish this goal isn't out there waiting to be found. But for now, as the method is developing, the better the instruments, the more it will develop.

That's my main objection to producing instruments that are "not as playable". They don't help advance the art, for the individual or the method as a whole.

The real problem is that the more you cheapen the materials and the construction, the more human labor is needed to make the instrument play well (if that's even possible). Solve the problem of human subtlety in the fretwork and setup and you have solved the problem of mass-producing tapping instruments that play well.

Keep dreaming, maybe you'll come up with the solution.

I am sure Greg is right on this one. Cheapen the instrument and you're not helping anybody since it won't play as well. Nothing out there is a Chapman Stick except the genuine article, but that doesn't stop me wishing for something a little less expensive that doesn't suck.

I think Stick Enterprises' biggest competitor is, in fact, Stick Enterprises.

There are thousands of older Sticks still around, and while they sell for high prices they're generally less than a new Stick. When I was shopping for my Stick I bought used simply because it was available. It wasn't EXACTLY what I wanted in a Stick but it was darn close and I was making music with it in 3 days. This is probably one of Emmett's reasons for continual product improvement. By making the new Sticks better than the old ones, the demand for the old ones goes down and SE benefits. I would not buy a Stick made before the adjustable bridges became available, and I'm starting to wish I had bought a Stick with Flaps...

This is true, Ray, but there is another reason why there are so few alternatives. A lot has been done to suppress alternatives over the years. Everything from lawsuits to the daily dissing of products, concepts, and events by people paid to do so.

Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.

But I must say, that's some mighty old smoke you're blowing...

[quote="greg"]
But the instrument has to play well in order for tapping to work. We're not talking about banging out chords on a guitar here. We're talking about a relatively complicated mental process of note selection, arrangement and freedom of expression all rolled into one instrument.

...

That's why Emmett hasn't "sold out". He could easily have traded on his name and produced a cheap line of instruments (his competitors have been trading on his name since they first started, too). He probably would have sold a lot of instruments, but where would that lead?

That doesn't mean the "great idea" that can accomplish this goal isn't out there waiting to be found. But for now, as the method is developing, the better the instruments, the more it will develop.

That's my main objection to producing instruments that are "not as playable". They don't help advance the art, for the individual or the method as a whole.

The real problem is that the more you cheapen the materials and the construction, the more human labor is needed to make the instrument play well (if that's even possible). Solve the problem of human subtlety in the fretwork and setup and you have solved the problem of mass-producing tapping instruments that play well.

quote]

I think any instrument needs to be of at least a minimum level of quality to really work and be satisfying to play. However, I think it would be absolutely possible to make an inexpensive but yet fully functional tapper. You would just have to make tons and tons of them in order to make it economical, and the economies of scale probably just aren't there for something like a Stick. It would never have the subtleties of a handmade masterpiece, suitable for a professional recording artist, but certainly good enough for the average hobbyist musician.

As an example, about two years ago I bought myself an Ibanez Artcore hollowbody guitar when my previous axe had an unfortunate accident. I paid under $300 for it new and it's a terrific instrument. Great action, tone, intonation, etc... and I do a little more than bang out chords with it. Others of the same type that I have played are comparable in quality. To me, it sounds at least 98% as good as a $3000 Gibson and it something awful happened to it, well it wouldn't be the end of the world, I'd just fork out another 3 bills for a new one and not worry about it too much. I'm convinced that they must just have the right combination of volume manufacturing and quality control on that production line to get it right every time. Generally, in manufacturing the more of a particular thing you make, the more consistently and accurately it can be done so long as your QA department is doing its job.

On the other hand, based on my experience with the Artcore, I bought an inexpensive Ibanez mandolin thinking I would get comparable quality and playability. And it's horrible... The action is high and heavy, you have to put so much pressure on the strings the intonation is off by the time you're on the 7th fret. Not sure why two instruments from the same manufacturer are so different, but in one case they got the combination right and in the other got it wrong.

A cheap tapper will always sound and play like a cheap tapper.
That little bit of advice aside I can attest to the quality vs quantity argument. I have owned two Chapman Sticks, one with fret rods and one with rails. Both instruments were the epitome of a craft of love unlike the mass produced well marketed garbage that floods every sales magazine in most musicians bathrooms. I play a Box Guitar that is also made from the love of a musician named Stu Box, it was quite a change from the Stick's precision but as a guitarist I had a no use for the bass side of the Stick, but as an inspired builder Stu's guitar sings like an instrument should... the SG-12 was not in the works that time, ffs. I would like to say the world has no use for cheap tappers but that would make me a cynic. I rule!

Fiddy.

I'm not touching this with a 10-foot cattle prod.

Kev