Exactly. Acoustic instruments have an "amplifier" made of wood. Solid body electrics do not.

_________________
Jim Bordner
Gravity Music - www.gravitymusic.com
Composer, producer, Egnater Artist

I said mahogany acoustic backs and sides are brighter, not necks.
Ned Steinberger, hes the guy that made those nasty tiny guitars all the new wave bands played in the 80's right? He's also trying to push that carbon fiber bodies. Greatest luthier or our time is definitely debateable at best. Ever heard one of those clear guitars? They sound terrible. Look really cool though.
Ed Roman would tell you he's the greatest luthier of our time, just read ANY interview with him( he's definitely one of the biggest pompus blow hards of our time). WHen all he really does is rip off other peoples guitars (like Paul Reed Smith), and then bash the original builder in print. He went on some rant on PRS making 22 fret guitars, he sounded as if PRS didnt have the right to do it "he started with a 24 fret, he should stick to it". Then when you finally see one of his guitars you see what they are; extrememly overpriced, substandard guitars. Hes got a shop in Vegas, and he must employ people cloned from his DNA, because they're almost as big a jerk as he is. You ask them a question, and they have the mindset, that if you have to ask a question, you're not worth their time.

I think "completely" wrong isnt accurate, "somewhat" wrong maybe. So a Semihollow is completely different than an acoustic? Or an archtop? They still use the same principals, just getting the audible volume in a different way. The top has more to do with sound on an acoustic than a solidbody no doubt, but its still 6 strings vibrating at the same frequencies, and shortening the string, and hence the frequency with your fretting hand.

Ed Roman isn't Ned Steinberger, and I agree with your assessment of Roman, what little I know of him, which isn't good. I can probably think of 10 reasons why the sound of a Steinberger would be one you dislike, none of which are connected to the materials in the body and neck of the instrument. The most obvious is the pickups, their placement, adjustment, and their wiring.

I have a modern maple Steinberger (Gibson-made, I think) and while it's very cool and easy to play (especially the neck), I don't like it as much as either my Strat or Jazzmaster, but it's great for traveling. I haven't figured out yet what to do with the pickups as I'm not crazy about their sound. But I don't blame the neck and body when there are more obvious causes, including between the instrument and the chair!

I also agree it's important to remember that this discussion and the points everyone is making exclusively apply to solid bodies, not hollow bodied or acoustic instruments. The "rules" for how those instruments work are, by their very nature, different than solid bodies.

Yeah, the reasons i dont like the Steinberger have nothing to do with material, I dont even know what it would sound like, I just find it super ugly, everytime I see one for some reason the image of a keytar pop into mind. Though the new one that has that crazy tremolo that works like a D-tuna, but with WHOLE CHORDS is an attractive feature. I wonder how well that, and the D-tuna work when the strings start to get stretched; but that's a pretty nice looking guitar, I just cant get over the headless neck, it just seems so strange to me. I understand the reasoning, and like you can slide a built in capo to make it a baratone, standard, and every other capo'd position. I've said tone and playability are the only thing that really matters, but only to a point. I wouldnt play a guitar that looked like a giant $@!&#, or a swastika on it (im by no means trying to say they're on par with the Steinberger, just using it for dramatic affect). But I have to ask; how does it sound unplugged compared to any of your other guitars? Is it quiter, louder? can you hear the note seperation? Rain Song claim their carbon fiber acoustics sound better than wood (obviously good is subjective), but I find it hard to believe. When I think of acoustic guitars, I think of a 'woody' sound. Im just curious about the primary tone of yours.
Ed R. is a tool. I went into his shop just because he seemed like such a D-head, that i thought MAYBE he's so good at building guitars, he has license to do so. There are alot of genius' that are jerks, but their contribution to society kind of makes up for it, this is not the case with this guy. I wanted to try a guitar, and the salesman said"i needed to leave a deposit to show i was serious!!" I couldnt believe it, Ive been in sales for 13 years, and even selling cars, the most I asked for was a license, just in case they decided not to bring it back, or me back for that matter. Another salesman pulled it down, he was an okay guy, but I couldnt believe the price for product. It was rediculously overpriced. It had shoddy workmanship; the binding didnt match up end to end, one side jutted out further than the other. There were fish-eyes, and orange peel on the finish. The frets werent dressed properly, and the neck was off-set. Now, I tried a bolt-on, and I know that that happens from time to time, but not on a $3800 guitar. I swear its not hyperbole to say; a PRS SE is a way nicer guitar, and a fraction of the cost. I dont know how he stays in business with his attitude and product. All you have to do is google his name, and a thousand stories come up. You'd think for what he charges, he'd hire one of those companies that flood the net with positive information, so that when you google them, the good stuff comes up first due to the amount of information they put on the net.

I would probably look at one of those Steinbergers if i travelled alot.

Actually, forget my question about your guitar, you already said it was made of maple, so its different from what im thinking of.

I know this about these composite materials; Parker claim their composite finish make the neck joint (which is unbelievably thin) stronger than a typical neck with the normal thickness. Ive seen 2 parker flys come in with the neck broken in the exact same spot at the heal. They can be repaired, unfortunately, no luthier has the material they use when they build it, so it will never be the same sound. Its not like gibsons; that have a big tendency for the peghead to break in half. That can be glued, and except for close inspection, most of the time you'd never know anything happened to it.

Even the Steinberger aficionado sites seem to have issues with Mr. Roman. I don't know enough to comment, but I don't doubt your word. His prices on-line seem extremely high.

"Ugly" is "ugly". I can't stand to look at flying V's, or spider-shaped, or the AK-47 bass. Still, to paraphrase my friend, you don't play the shape (he said that about color). He's freaked out by the headless design too, but I like it and in 2 seconds it's irrelevant. Traveler uses a headless design as well. It allows you to have a full length neck despite losing 6" off the end--a great travel feature.

I don't think the unplugged sustain my 'berger is nearly as long as on my Strat, but that's only a guess, not scientific. I can't make the d@#$ tremolo system work correctly so I keep it locked all the time... in theory, when set, you can tune all 6 strings simultaneously. It's taken me months to figure out how to adjust the intonation easily--the directions are all wrong.

I also find that the space between the bottom of the neck and the bridge seems awfully cramped.

The biggest problem is the right-side strap button. You have to get a strap with a very long, thin end, about 1" x 8" to hold the strap away from the body. Otherwise, it puts the strap exactly in the way of your right wrist and arm.

So there are lots of compromises with a Steinberger, true.