Art vs Craft or - Person vs CNC...

[Brian Evans]

I had a conversation with an "artist" who said there are no mistakes in art, every detail informs the essential ethos and context of the work. After I thought about that for a while and figured out what she was saying, I thought about my work. My guitars have tons of mistakes in them, they are all over. From a binding line that blurred out to a tiny scratch that didn't get sanded out enough to an F-hole edge that isn't quite square, not to mention bits where joints got filled with that tiny bit of sanding dust and CA glue... So then I thought what about CNC machines and modern manufacturing vs what we try to do? A thread on another forum brought out how modern instruments look absolutely flawless and perfect, but under the skin of an opaque finish is filler, poor joinery, cracks and junk. A CNC machine carves a thousand perfect necks, while I carve nice necks that are all different.

So how do you resolve these ideas? Do you strive for perfection only to be eternally disappointed at not reaching it? Do you see the overall beauty of your creation, ignoring the tiny or sometimes larger flaws that you (and probably only you) know are there? Are you an artist, creating artistic perfection every time, or a craftsman, whose best work is still an infinity away from an unreachable goal of truly perfect work? What creates the satisfaction in you that makes you start yet another instrument?

Yeah, it's raining today, and Spring ain't coming quick enough...

Brian

[Peter Wilcox]

What creates the satisfaction in you that makes you start yet another instrument?

My satisfaction is in enjoyment of the process - once the instrument is done, it's water under the bridge (unless it's a player for me.) Though if I'm making it for someone, it's nice if they like it. I know it's going to have errors - no problem. Dealing with those is also part of the fun.

Of course, I have that luxury since I'm not dependent on if for a livelihood.

I was once an avid photographer. Again, it was the process, and for a short time I didn't even put film in the camera, realizing that when I saw the actual result it detracted from the enjoyment of the imagined result when I was taking the photo. But since I developed and printed, no film took away that part of the creative enjoyment.

[Randolph Rhett]

I may be wrong, but I assume you have little experience yourself with a CNC machine? Perhaps I'm wrong, but I rarely hear people who use the machines talk as if there is some central library of canonical "guitars" that you can download and simply CNC yourself a guitar.

Do you use a table saw with a fence? Do those straight cuts take away from woot artistry? Cut you binding channel with a router and baring rather than freehand with a chisel? Rout a saddle slot with a guide? Did you buy a guide for slotting your fingerboard on a cross cut sled?

A CNC is as dumb as a word processor. You don't just turn on your word processor and print out the next Great American Novel at a click of a button.

The first thing I usually tell people who express an interest in CNC is that it can't cut what you can't draw. You have to use your artistry, esthetic, and frankly considerable skill to model in 3d what you want the machine to cut. Then you have to figure out how the machine will actually cut the part. How will you index it? How will you hold the blank while it's being cut without interfering with the cutters? What if you have to move the part or rotate it?

The truth is CNC has a very limited role in a typical flat top acoustic. It doesn't thickness the plates or join them. It doesn't split braces, shape them, or glue them on. It doesn't kerf linings or bend sides. It won't cut bindings or binding channels.

It can shape and slot a fingerboard, but it won't press in frets. It can carve a neck shaft and a heel, but actually modeling that is a major challenge. Ask Andy Birko on this forum how many hours that took him (I'm guessing in the order of a couple of hundred).

The funny thing is that where I see the CNC used most is precisely in artistic flourishes and ornamentation. Want a complex inlay? It is still up to you to have a vision for it and draw it. The CNC will simplify the process of cutting the inlay and matching pocket. I once saw a rosette that was an intricate arabesque pattern where the voids were cut through the top. Very cool, but it sure didn't come built in to the CNC machine! Oh, and it could have been done by hand with carving tools and a coping saw, but that wouldn't have made it more artistic.

In short I think posing it as art vs. CNC doesn't really reflect what a CNC in lutherie is. Now, I think the craft vs art question is very interesting. Is it art to make another Telecaster copy? Another dreadnought? Is some crazy 9 string instrument with a tube for a neck more art for being original even if it is unplayable? I think that is part of what the OP is asking and I think those are compelling questions.

[Bryan Bear]

Hobbyist here - I don't really consider mine the work of an artist or a craftsman. That is probably mostly driven by own perceived shortcomings than anything else. I would love to be able to consider myself either or even both of those terms but that is not where I'm at right now (and probably never will be). For me, it is about the enjoyment of the process and getting a little bit better each time. Better in both "craftsmanship" doing better/cleaner woodwork and "art" developing a better eye for design considerations as well as intuition about achieving better tone.

My work so far is FAR from "perfect" as far as the end results are considered but I can understand a notion that the journey to the finished product is, in a way, perfect. In someways I am horrified by the imperfections that are obvious in my work, but thinking realistically about why I am doing this I am not bothered. I have no intentions of producing world class instruments for high end owners. There are plenty of you out there doing that already. I also don't see my work being on the same scale as factory instruments. They are (hopefully) an "artistic?" expression of what I wanted to make based on whatever factors happened to inspire it along the way.

I once showed an instrument (designed from the ground up) to a coworker. He said "Wow, it looks like you bought it from a store!" I know he meant that as a compliment but it turned my stomach nonetheless. It ranked up there with the "compliments" you hear like "That's beautiful, can it be played?"

[Eric Baack]

Even with using a CNC there is a good bit of hand labor involved in final fitting of parts. And there is a good bit of skill and knowledge to machine a part using more then one fixturing setup.

I can tell you that modeling complex curvature in 3d space is not a simple task and has taken me a good bit of time to become somewhat ok at it. That and I work with 3D CAD (Solidworks) every day as an engineer. There is plenty of art still involved even when there is a CNC.

[Brian Evans]

I guess I should have said that when I said "CNC", I really meant in the context of machines making a thousand instruments a day, all the same, in that nefarious factory we've heard of but never seen... That place on the other side of the river that spits out instruments and parts anonymously. I completely understand and recognize the skill in programming a CNC, and that using it as one of the tools in the kitbag is as much a part of modern lutherie as pin routers and table saws. My little statement really failed to make that distinction clear. I have a friend that is really into this kind of stuff. I get the strong impression that he can press a button and one of his machines takes a complete digital impression of say a Telecaster neck, and a second machine prints one (I think in plastic but I'm not sure he can't do metal as well.. Pretty sure not wood). Do you compare yourself to that, or do you say different?

[Brian Evans]

I once showed an instrument (designed from the ground up) to a coworker. He said "Wow, it looks like you bought it from a store!" I know he meant that as a compliment but it turned my stomach nonetheless. It ranked up there with the "compliments" you hear like "That's beautiful, can it be played?"

This is very close to what I was asking. Do you/we strive to achieve the "store-bought" as a goal, to surpass it as a starting point, or ignore it as irrelevant?

Also an interesting point brought out - process or goal? Is the act of the making the point of the exercise, or is the final creation? For me, the making is interesting, but the realization of the instrument and hearing its full voice for the first time is wonderful. The process, for me, is quite often a pain in the patootie.

[Barry Daniels]

Do you/we strive to achieve the "store-bought" as a goal, to surpass it as a starting point, or ignore it as irrelevant?

It is very relevant. But we should be able to surpass this; maybe not on #1 but very soon thereafter. My #2 turned out great.

[Randolph Rhett]

My own progression has been:

First I thought it would be nice to build a guitar that I could throw around knowing it would be inferior to a "real" guitar. After a couple builds I realized that I could match factory guitars in sound and playability, and that my guitars were every bit "real". Then I thought I would try to build a guitar that had custom features I couldn't readily find in store bought factory guitars of similar quality. I built small bodied guitars with 13 frets to the body and a 24" scale length that would be comfortable for me to play in my office and in quiet gatherings with some friends. Then I started to dream of building guitars that did not just have some custom features, but went beyond what factory guitars are capable of. I have just started on that quest, but I honestly don't think I would play a new Gibson or Taylor even if someone gave it to me for free. I may be the only one in the world who likes my guitars, but I would rather play my own creations than any factory guitar. I hope that doesn't sound arrogant, but its how I feel. I have a Martin D-18 I haven't touched in years, and I pick up a guitar almost every day.

As to art vs craft, I admit that I take an engineer's (or perhaps a player's) approach first. I admire highly beautiful and ornamented guitars, but at this point I am still focused almost exclusively on sound and playability. That said, I have seen some instruments that are so achingly beautiful I would probably punch anyone who tried to take a pick to it. I don't know if I would ever get to the point in my building where I was so comfortable in the design and so accomplished in my execution that I could turn my focus on the pure beauty of the thing. But for those of you who are so creative, have so much sense of esthetics, and are so accomplished that you can build for beauty I have nothing but respect and admiration. An example is the "Galaxy" guitar I am following in another thread. There are aspects that are not to my sensibilities, but I don't think anyone can argue that is not "art".

[Ryan Mazzocco]

but I honestly don't think I would play a new Gibson or Taylor even if someone gave it to me for free. I have a Martin D-18 I haven't touched in years, and I pick up a guitar almost every day.

That's not arrogant at all. I'm the same way now. I came to the realization a couple years ago that I will probably never buy a guitar ever again.

It's the age old argument between the old and the new. Those who appreciate the old have a tendency to resist the new. Working with our hands is the old while CNC and computers in the new. At least from MY perspective. I use routers and power saws which may be viewed as heresy by even more traditional craftsmen than me. I actually have nothing against CNC in luthiery. I don't use it, but that doesn't mean I never will. But since I currently don't I wear it as a badge of honor and attract clientele who are attracted to that sort of thing. How much is too much? I can't answer that and I don't think anyone can draw a line to quantify how much CNC can be used for something to still be called "hand crafted." There are many builders that I know of who use CNC, but I still consider them to be hand made instruments. Others, ususally bigger factories, I don't give that distinction. But who am I to say? They're all just tools used by an artist/craftman in some way to bring his vision to reality. So, what about the guitars being produced in mass quantity? Could it be said that someone designed them and is using all the tools at his disposal to create them including CNC, robots... are the people working on the assembly line just another person's tools? (pardon the expression, but it seems appropriately inappropriate.)
Art vs. Craft... I don't think these can ever be mutually exclusive in lutherie. To me, the art is the vision and the craft is the execution. In that sense, you can't achieve the art without the craft. There are no mistakes in art? That's a very Freudian way to look at things. I guess that may be so, but there can still be mistakes in the craft.
Journey vs. destination I love both of them equally. I love the entire building process, even the parts of it that I hate. I love finally being able to play that guitar that I have spent months working on. I love hearing it's voice change in the first few hours of it's life. I love handing it over to someone else and watching them enjoy something that I have made. I enjoy getting a little money for it so I can go buy more material, upgrade my tools and do it all over again. Maybe it's because I'm still pretty new at this, but a completed guitar is not "water under the bridge." Not when I can just sit and look at it for hours and feel proud of my accomplishment. I love it when someone asks me a very simple elementary question about guitar making and hour later I'm still talking and they are politely just kinda staring through me because they didn't really want to talk about it. I seem to do that kind of thing of forums too. Let me know if I ever do that here.
BTW, have you all marked your locations on the new MIMF google map? Why not? hit the link in the soundhole section and show us where you're from.

[Bryan Bear]

"I love the entire building process, even the parts of it that I hate."

I know exactly what you mean! Well, with the possible exception of sanding <g>

[Eric Baack]

What if you build the CNC yourself too?

[David King]

As I see it CNC has the potential to open up artistic capabilities that would be nearly impossible without it. As Randolph stated in his first reply, getting the computer aided design into the machine in the first place is or can be daunting. There are obviously things that can only be done by hand that no CNC could ever be trained to do so you are left with just another tool. It's a cool tool for sure and I wouldn't mind playing around with one some day but for the one-off instruments I build it would be a huge time suck to do the CAD drawing for every part and fuss with prototypes until I got what I was after. Then again if someone sends me artwork for a very intricate inlay I don't hesitate to let the laser guy do it or most of it for me.

[Bill Raymond]

I can't even be sure what exactly what is meant by "art" and "craft". Perhaps if we start out clearly delineating what we consider art, what we consider craft and what are the specific differences between the two?

[Ryan Mazzocco]

I can't even be sure what exactly what is meant by "art" and "craft". Perhaps if we start out clearly delineating what we consider art, what we consider craft and what are the specific differences between the two?

I thought I did that.

[Jason Rodgers]

Oh geez, I saw the title of this thread and thought, "Great, another CNC-shaming rant!" Though people clearly have strong feelings about this, measured in inches of text, I'm glad to see that this has been a fairly balanced conversation, so far. At least, it's not ultra-polarized (...yet).

I once had romantic notions of doing everything by hand with as few electric tools as possible. I quickly realized two things: 1- I don't have the time. My shop time, during the school year, is a few hours per week, usually in 1-2 hour increments. When I have time in the shop, I want to get things accomplished, and reasonably accurately and consistently. Sure, I could probably get faster at thicknessing a body blank with a plane with practice, but that taught me the second point... 2- I don't want to wear my body out prematurely. I still want my hands to have the dexterity to play, and there have been some times that the impact and repetition of tasks over a couple hours on the weekend has wrecked my hands/wrists for the whole week.

I don't have a CNC, but my friend and fellow MIMF-er John Sonksen does, and there are some parts we're working on producing to satisfy the two points above. And in planning my build processes, every step and every jig is created to meet those criteria. If I had my own CNC (and the skills to CAD-CAM it all), though, I'd machine it all in a heartbeat.

[Brian Evans]

As the OP, I again apologize for the title - I meant the CNC generated instruments in their thousands from anonymous factories. The sense I get is that CNC in the small lutherie shop is fully accepted, as accepted as using routers for binding channels instead of gramils and chisels. I was very interested to learn today that guitars like the Benedetto "Andy" are fully carved on CNC now, but then again they aren't trying to be acoustic guitars first and foremost.

I think that in terms of visual presentation, sound, fit and finish - we all strive to do our best, and we have to compare ourselves to what we see in stores. When I'm in a store now, I see the opaque finish at the edges and joints, ultra high gloss, and just wonder what is under that. On mine, the wood is hung out there for all to see, warts, sanding scratches and all. I need to learn to take more time, even in a process that by drying time alone must be rushed. Zen and the art of applying stain... I think that as luthiers we can create our individuality by building unique instruments, each one of a kind. I am already starting to research my next project.

Brian

[Bill Raymond]

Ryan Mazzocco wrote: "I thought I did that." However, I think that the distinction you made relies on your artist friend's opining that "all art is perfect", a dubious assertion at best. Artists can be seen as craftsmen who strive for perfection and whose "mistakes" or "lucky happenings" create something we admire, often because of these happenings which weren't what the artist originally visualized. Thus, I think the distinction you made can be regarded as a false distinction (at least that's my take on it), though I mean no disrespect for your or your friend's opinion.

[Brian Evans]

It was my artist friend who said that (I am the original poster), and she is a bit of an arrogant twit when it comes to art (which she further defines as two dimensional work only, to us that means paintings hung on walls). But yes, she honestly believes that ART is fully realized as created. Boggles my mind, but there you go.. It was nothing more than the thought that got me thinking further about what I do with my instruments and the goals that my craft (or art in some people's kind opinion) lead me to pursue.

[Bill Raymond]

Sorry, Brian, I sort of collapsed this whole thread into a single long posting in my mind, somehow. Going back and reading more carefully, I agree with Ryan that the assertion by your friend is questionable. "Perfect" is a concept that is ideal rather than real and isn't achieved. She seems to define "perfect" as the result of "art", thus creating a tautology and seems to exclude "craft". As I wrote above, I think there's no true distinction between the two: most of what we consider art is also craft, but not all craft is art. Apologies to Ryan as well. Anyway, I lost interest in arcane philosophical discussion back in graduate school <G>.