Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Silly Moustache
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:58 am

Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3501Post Silly Moustache
Wed Feb 17, 2021 6:07 pm

On another forum, I have been asked to comment on the "T" models compared to the standard versions. Whilst I have four Collings guitars, I have only very briefly seen/touched a "T" so don't feel competent to comment.

I'd be interested to read/hear from anyone (everyone) who has observations about the differences, as players.

Thanks in advance.

Ol'Andy

Frank Sanns
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2018 5:38 pm
Real Name: Frank Sanns
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3509Post Frank Sanns
Fri Feb 19, 2021 3:08 pm

Hopefully some players will also comment but I can say some technical things about the acoustics.

The T series shifts the fundamental frequencies of the series around. The standard D for example has a stronger E3 peak than the E2. The frequency of the E3 is 164.8 Hz. This is in a very nice area for ear to perceive the bass.

The E2 (fundemental frequency of the open low E string) 82.4 Hz is not as strong even though this is where the string is vibrating and the guitar wants to vibrate. This is the frequency that you FEEL the guitar vibrating but the ear is not quite as sensitive to these low frequencies.

So, the standard series has a nice quick and elastic feeling response to the low strings as the guitar works to produce the first full harmonic up; the E3 for example on the open string. It also shifts up to a few more higher harmonics. It does the same for the first few notes on the guitar.

The Traditional series does not shift to higher harmonics nearly as much. For this reason, you get more E2 "feeling" experience with the series and a little less of the higher harmonics. This gives a more earthy and a little less quick snap response of the lower couple of strings. The mids and highs are also shifted around a bit to give a slightly different experience for the same reasons as previously stated.

I can certainly see the appeal of the traditional series for many people. I myself though prefer the non traditional, slightly stiffer but quicker, more affirmative response of the original standard series.

Typically there is a crowd that will swear by the original and another by the traditional. To each their own. Isn't it great to have a choice!

jackorion
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2019 7:39 pm

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3511Post jackorion
Fri Feb 19, 2021 6:59 pm

Hey Andy!

Here's a reply I posted to a similar thread here:

"I have an OM2hT and I owned a OM2h ss vn for three years and had them both at the same time for a year or so - at one point those guitars were my gigging instruments so I played them back to back a lot. Obviously there was a scale length difference but otherwise they were both standard for their respective series.

Some of the structural differences between the two were:

1. no tongue brace on the traditional
2. much smaller bridge plate on the T
3. Lighter back braces on the T
4. Overall the T was a much lighter guitar

To my ear the main difference was a flatter/drier mids on the Traditional vs the Std.

The Std had quite a brassy midrange, lots of overtones in the upper mids, 'thick' trebles, and good low end - actually as I'm writing this I really regret letting it go as it was a great guitar, but I found the shorter scale made it a bit 'twangy' on the 1st/2nd strings when in DADGAD (which is where I spend a lot of time). I also feel as if the overtones were very quick - they almost came out with the fundamental.

My Traditional still has 'thick' trebles (by thick I mean not 'plinky', with more body behind the note) but it doesn't have that ringing midrange that the Std did - to my ear I also think that the overtones come later than on the Std - they are there but you get a hit of fundamental first. The low end is clean and clear, it doesn't have the 'woof' of my Martin OM28v (which can be a good thing at times as it provides a nice bed for everything to sit on top off, although it can get a bit too much if I'm playing lots of open strings) - the bass notes on my Traditional seem to project more rather than resonating around in the box, meaning they come and go quickly - they certainly don't get in the way!

Under the picking hand the Traditional is very quick and dynamic - my Std also had this quality but I think the shorter scale tempered it a little, or maybe the heavier build?

The main difference for me, and possibly the deciding factor in moving to the Traditional was the neck carve, and more specifically the taper - although it is actually a little less full down at the nut and early frets, once you get to the 5th fret it was noticeably fuller than the Vintage Now neck, and the wider taper meant that by the 9th or so there is a lot more real estate on the fretboard - I would occasionally push the outside strings over the edges of the frets on my VN necked guitar and I couldn't play with my normal vibrato style on the 1st string as it would pop off - I'd have to push it into the middle of the neck more.

I did like the voicing of the standard, and occasionally I think about ordering a custom OM2h with a Vintage neck (bigger than the Traditional and with 2 3/8 at the saddle) but I haven't finished paying off my Traditional yet and Collings prices have rocketed in the UK so I can't see myself buying a new one anytime soon.

When the Traditionals where announced I think a lot of people hoped they would sound like Martins but be built like Collings - as a Martin owner as well that's clearly not the case - the Traditionals still sound like Collings and keep all the clarity and precision in the tone of the Stds but, to my ear, they have a flatter mids, and a slightly different overtone bloom time."

Hope that helps?

Silverbeige
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:00 pm

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3526Post Silverbeige
Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:47 pm

Great posts above. In general I prefer the "less hot" mids in the traditionals that I've played and the ligher build really appeals to me. However I have not found the traditional neck profiles (either the 1 3/4" or 1 11/16") to work for me, even the 2020 models. I really like the modified V neck profiles on the Collings standard models however and love the neck on the OM1AJL.

Tempotantrum
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Jun 08, 2019 1:44 am
Real Name: David Pettorini

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3551Post Tempotantrum
Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:51 am

Hi Mr. Moustache-

I enjoy your posts over on that other forum.

I have had several Collings over the years - mostly Mahogany but all with Adirondack. As you know - when new Adi can lack some warmth until it starts to age. I think that fact along with strong fundamentals and a powerful response some see Collings are "strident". I happen to love the clarity, note separation and power of any Collings, but as they age they do "relax" I believe. Of course you already know all this. The Traditional series seems more dynamic right out of the proverbial box however. I have a 2020 D1ATS (Satin) and after only a few months I could tell this Collings was unlike any other I have encountered. After nearly a year now - this is not only the best Collings dread I have played, but honestly the best guitar I have ever played. Sounds like hyperbole I know, but I have had some humdingers from Bourgeois (D150) Martin and Preston Thompson as well as the previously mentioned former Collings. I also have a 2003 Collings OM42BaaaA - and of course it is special as well. It has a beautiful resonance combined with the mature adi top and Collings clarity and note separation - the standard Collings age so well. But if it came down to one of the two - the Traditional would win. The neck carve alone makes me want to hold it - amazing. Anyway that is my $.02

Red Oak
Posts: 433
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2021 4:00 am

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3552Post Red Oak
Fri Feb 26, 2021 2:25 pm

Tempotantrum wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:51 am Hi Mr. Moustache-

I enjoy your posts over on that other forum.

I have had several Collings over the years - mostly Mahogany but all with Adirondack. As you know - when new Adi can lack some warmth until it starts to age. I think that fact along with strong fundamentals and a powerful response some see Collings are "strident". I happen to love the clarity, note separation and power of any Collings, but as they age they do "relax" I believe. Of course you already know all this. The Traditional series seems more dynamic right out of the proverbial box however. I have a 2020 D1ATS (Satin) and after only a few months I could tell this Collings was unlike any other I have encountered. After nearly a year now - this is not only the best Collings dread I have played, but honestly the best guitar I have ever played. Sounds like hyperbole I know, but I have had some humdingers from Bourgeois (D150) Martin and Preston Thompson as well as the previously mentioned former Collings. I also have a 2003 Collings OM42BaaaA - and of course it is special as well. It has a beautiful resonance combined with the mature adi top and Collings clarity and note separation - the standard Collings age so well. But if it came down to one of the two - the Traditional would win. The neck carve alone makes me want to hold it - amazing. Anyway that is my $.02
Thanks very much for your informative post. I’m particularly interested as I have the new CJ 45 T as a possible addition to my collection.

Play your guitars in good health!!

User avatar
Haasome
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:21 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3554Post Haasome
Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:56 pm

Great information here. Thanks Frank and Jack. As a longtime Collings fan I’ve owned quite a few different models over the years. I’ve never been able to enjoy T models as much as my Standard models. I’ve always thought the Standards had a deeper base and more full & harmonic mids, with fat trebles. T models seem to lacking the pronounced mids I enjoy in Standard models. As a result, T models haven’t been as pleasing to my ear. There are many players who talk about the enhanced Bass with T models, but I do not experience that with any Ts I’ve played. I just wrote it off to my old ears. I appreciate the technical analysis provided above. I agree, it’s wonderful to have choices.
Paul

007
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2019 3:01 am

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3558Post 007
Sat Feb 27, 2021 1:22 am

I copy pasted parts of a OM1A vs OM1A JL comparison I did a while back...

JL is less “in your face,” i.e. doesn’t have the BOLD tone Collings is known for, but is perhaps more subtle and sweet.

Julian spoke about a “balance” between the neck and body in a promotional video, and I think the design is spot on relating to the weight balance between the neck and body. There is a district difference in the weight between the two models as well. The JL is significantly lighter than the OM1A.

Dryness & the JL tone. The OM1A has more chime to it. Years back, I heard Bill Collings speak about how some players desired a more fundamental tone than what his guitars offered. He learned that some players thought the chime could “get in the way.” After playing the JL, I understand what he was describing - re keeping the chime out of the guitar.

Additionally, the low end and mid response is different between the two models. The JL offers slightly deeper low frequencies, and the mid are deeper as well.

The JL has a more “scooped” EQ than the OM1A. The OM1As response lends to a balanced EQ shared by all the strings. In promoting the JL, Julian described his ‘39 000-18 having “phantom bass.” After playing the JL, I hear what he and Collings were going for with the JL.

When reading about the Traditional Series, a “rounded” fretboard has been described. Again, after A/Bing, I can notice it on the JL.

In sum, I think the OM1A provides much of what the JL has, but delivers more in terms of chime (for lack of better description), and has more volume. But to some players, that buries the sought after fundental tone offered in the JL.

shotzy
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2019 9:21 pm

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3560Post shotzy
Sat Feb 27, 2021 7:51 pm

My impressions are pretty similar to what's already been said, in my case owning an OM1A that I later traded in for an OM1AT.

While the standard was a superb guitar with limitless volume... as a predominantly solo fingerstyle player, I found the T to suit me better due to its wider string spacing, enhanced responsiveness, and deeper bass / low-mids. I was very happy with the standard, and I am exceptionally happy with the T. :D

I also found this earlier post by Buckaroo that I think really nails the differences:
buckaroo wrote: ↑Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:21 pm
My sense of it:

The T box is not as "tight". It is built just a bit "looser". Just like tuning a drum head so it is not tuned as tight and rigid as possible, the resulting fundamental tone is a bit lower. In the T series, the looser box translates to a very slightly darker / deeper sound, but most apparent is the fundamental of the string's sound is way more prominent. There are less high / sparkling "overtones". Some describe this as a "dryer" tone (an analogy to reverb in amps) and I think "dry" is an accurate descriptor for sure. So the T series attempts to emphasize a dryer tone that is focused more on the fundamental (as opposed to overtones) of a given note and is relatively dry sounding compared to an original Collings guitar (wetter tone). Think of an old guitar that is 60+ years old today and it's box is not as rigid as when it was new. This old guitar today sounds warmer with less overtones. {Not at all UNlike a much older Martin guitar sounds today ;)}

One thing that contributes to the looser box is the lighter weight wood specs, another is the way the individual pieces of wood are specifically put together. Several subtle construction elements are "tweaked", relative to the original series, and those individual tweaks have a combined outcome of a subtle change in the overall sound and responsiveness. It is as if they have "aged" the guitars tone by altering the assembly of the box, vigilant selection of lighter wood and reducing the thickness of the finishing coat. Kind of ingenious really...but the "money" question is how will it age over time? Unknown for now...it remains to be seen / heard what "future players" will value most in hind sight...original versus T series Collings designs.

The necks have a shape that seems a bit more "old style Martinesque" IMO. The overall guitar finish is just way thinner and ages way faster, in a very good way thus far. Add it all up and you have a different animal called the T series. They are lighter weight, slightly dryer (maybe deeper) sounding and very well physically balanced as you hold it! Nice guitars that are different animals than the original series. They sonically have a bit more in common with the Waterloo models IMO...others may disagree?

As I alluded above, the real question will be, "do they still sound great after 30 years"? I have a two of them and have played several others. I like them a lot right now, but I like my original series Collings guitars just as much and maybe a bit more than the T series... as those original series guitars are getting on in years now and starting to evolve a lovely sonic of their own, not to mention a sweet broken in feel. I am surprised how much my youngest original series, my 5 year old "main player", a varnish D42 (original series and Bill Collings signed) has mellowed and gotten louder and more resonate in just half a decade! The varnish looks like a guitar easily twice it's age already. It is evolving to be a T series sounding guitar all on it's own...with lots of sweet years ahead! I find this to be true as well for several 1990's and early 2000 ish Collings original series guitars as well. It takes time for them to age and open up...and when they do it is very sweet.

Just like any other guitars, some of the T specimens have more magic than others. You just have to play them until you discover the one that speaks to you. In the end buy what you like, and what you think you could sell (if the need arises).

Buck
----------------------------------
Collings OM1AT
Santa Cruz OM Grand (German / EIR)

My youtube guitar channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCj1rzB ... 3l6XeRMktQ

armdog
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 2:13 pm

Re: Direct comparison between standard ad "T" models?

Post: # 3603Post armdog
Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:27 pm

Thanks Frank for the harmonics review of the T model vs the standard. I always tune to the harmonics and your post gives me a good feel for why my 2008 Collings CJmhA is so special. It took a few years for the red spruce to calm down (as Tempotantrum said) and as normal for the stiffer woods, my former D2HG took 2-3yrs.

I've played only one T model (OM2HT, that a friend owns) but the non-T works great for me. I have a much better understanding for why after reading this very informative post.

When Bill and Lyle got together on the CJ's development it was a great day for many of us.

bert

Post Reply