"Kevin Hall" <timberline@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:w6ydnTmTIfoOKuXVnZ2dnUVZ_rjinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Ed;
>
> The 0-16 NY model was very lightly built by 'modern' standards, and
> really not intended for steel strings. Odd little things actually.
If
> I remember rightly, and it's been about 30 years since I repaired or
> played one, they had only one tone bar down between the lower legs of
> the 'X', like the very early small bodied Martins built before they
> switched to steel strings in the early 1920s.
>
> The model was originally intended as a sort of 'dual-s****t' rig on which
> you could use either nylon or silk-'n-steel strings. Steel strings any
> heavier than extra-lights will damage them in short order.
>
> They're definitely not meant as a flat-picking thrasher, and frankly
> they're just not that good as an all-rounder either.
>
> I did a few gigs back about 1968 or '69 with a woman who had one, and
it
> was drowned by my 00-18. The woman was a member of the Canadian Olympic
> gymnastic team at the time. Wonder what happened to her and the little
> guitar?
>
> Anyway, if you want a good all 'round 12-fret slothead Martin, try
> finding a 00-21 instead, or an early 0 or 00-18.
>
> KH
Thanks, Kevin. I guess I'm not immune to the Martin allure... especially
a
'60s folkie special like the 0-16ny. (grin) As I'm second guessing it
(by
asking questions) I guess I'm not completely taken by that allure, though.
I've been totally spoiled by the feel of my Larrivee parlor. I had a 00
size (made by Ayers) that was a terrific guitar but after the parlor, it
just felt too big. I recently found a '70 0-18 that was well within my
budget but some previous (so-so looking) repairs and the fact that it
looks
like a neck reset will be needed soon combined with not being able to try
it
(i.e. mail order) makes it a non-starter. If I keep looking (and asking
questions like this post), the right thing will probably pop up.
Ed
|
