Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 231.8K All Categories
- 22 >> Start Here <<
- 12 New Members
- 8 FAQs
- 83.3K Gear
- 37.9K Guitar
- 3.2K Acoustics
- 1.3K Bass
- 14.1K Amps
- 16.7K FX
- 157 Digital & Modelling
- 730 Other Instruments
- 7.9K Making & Modding
- 406 Gear Reviews
- 100 Guitar Reviews
- 72 Amp Reviews
- 119 FX Reviews
- 84 Other Reviews
- 734 Made in the UK
- 932 Theory
- 1.8K Technique
- 2K Live
- 3K Studio & Recording
- 2.1K Making Music
- 202 Events
- 15 Guitar Show 2018
- 762 Plug My Stuff
- 100.6K Classifieds
- 39.2K Guitars £
- 2.6K Acoustics £
- 132 LH Guitars £
- 836 Basses £
- 10K Parts £
- 17.6K Amps £
- 32.8K FX £
- 2.6K Studio & Rec £
- 5.8K Misc £
- 443 Personnel
- 52.7K Chat
- 35.3K Off Topic
- 987 Tributes
- 6.3K Music
In this Discussion
Become a Subscriber!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
UNPLANNED DOWNTIME: 12th Oct 23:45
NGD - Sheeran by Lowden W01 ( FINAL Nut Width Update)
Yes - they really do exist. I pre-ordered a Sheeran by Lowden W01 out of curiosity from Project Music in Exeter at the end of October expecting to have to wait for ages. They gave me a call on Monday to say it had just arrived out of the blue.
This is the cheapest model in the range with a solid cedar top and laminated walnut back and sides - and no LR Baggs electronics. I chose this one as it was most suitable for a left-handed conversion.
The appearance is undoubtedly Lowden - not surprising, having the same shape as the Wee Lowden. The fingerboard and bridge are ebony - a streaky variety which quite suits the basic finish of the guitar. Not surprisingly, the finish and attention to detail are not up to normal Lowden standards but they are not at all bad. The body and top finish appears to be a thin satin lacquer giving a nice simple open pore appearance.
It comes in a heavy duty black padded gig bag with "Lowden Guitars" on the front (no mention of Mr. Sheeran). It is strung with Lowden light gauge phosphor bronze strings (12-53).
The playing feel is very similar to a Lowden and I am surprised at the quality of the tone. Great separation, sustain and, for a small body-size, pretty good basses and mids. I had the brief opportunity to try a left-handed Wee Lowden in similar woods a few weeks ago and from memory, for playability and tone, this comes very close.
Before I embark on a full left-handed conversion I changed the strings round to check that there was no impact on the tone by doing so - which, like every other acoustic I've tried, there wasn't. The saddle is a standard compensated TUSQ saddle which seems to have had a bit of work done on it to improve the compensation. I've ordered a bone left-handed equivalent and a standard Graphtech left-handed pre-cut nut which looks like it is more or less the same size as that fitted. I haven't contemplated doing anything about the bridge saddle slot angle yet - but was surprised to find that, as it is, the effect on intonation is very minor - so that'll be a stage 2 later on.
Below are a few photos (before changing the strings round).
This is the cheapest model in the range with a solid cedar top and laminated walnut back and sides - and no LR Baggs electronics. I chose this one as it was most suitable for a left-handed conversion.
The appearance is undoubtedly Lowden - not surprising, having the same shape as the Wee Lowden. The fingerboard and bridge are ebony - a streaky variety which quite suits the basic finish of the guitar. Not surprisingly, the finish and attention to detail are not up to normal Lowden standards but they are not at all bad. The body and top finish appears to be a thin satin lacquer giving a nice simple open pore appearance.
It comes in a heavy duty black padded gig bag with "Lowden Guitars" on the front (no mention of Mr. Sheeran). It is strung with Lowden light gauge phosphor bronze strings (12-53).
The playing feel is very similar to a Lowden and I am surprised at the quality of the tone. Great separation, sustain and, for a small body-size, pretty good basses and mids. I had the brief opportunity to try a left-handed Wee Lowden in similar woods a few weeks ago and from memory, for playability and tone, this comes very close.
Before I embark on a full left-handed conversion I changed the strings round to check that there was no impact on the tone by doing so - which, like every other acoustic I've tried, there wasn't. The saddle is a standard compensated TUSQ saddle which seems to have had a bit of work done on it to improve the compensation. I've ordered a bone left-handed equivalent and a standard Graphtech left-handed pre-cut nut which looks like it is more or less the same size as that fitted. I haven't contemplated doing anything about the bridge saddle slot angle yet - but was surprised to find that, as it is, the effect on intonation is very minor - so that'll be a stage 2 later on.
Below are a few photos (before changing the strings round).
0
LOL 4
Wow! 0
Wisdom · Share on Twitter
LOL 4 Wow! 0 Wisdom · Share on TwitterBase theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
*Laminated walnut back and sides, not mahogany – and very nice-looking it is too!
Didn’t realise these came with fret markers.
How was the action?
I’ve bought a Lowden from Project Music before. Good guys and good shop. Congrats again!
The W01 is described as having walnut back and sides whilst the more expensive walnut ones as "figured walnut". I was therefore quite pleased with the nice figured grain.
I now await the delivery of a new lefty nut and saddle to continue with the conversion and optimise the set-up with the strings changed round. You'll probably note that the truss rod adjustment is done at the headstock unlike the very awkward position on a Lowden (I use a shaped old style Larrivee truss rod for my S32).
I've not had many dealings with Project Music but they have always been very helpful and have a great stock (of right handed guitars anyway)
With a cedar top and thin finish it is likely to be susceptible to dings. I won't bother with the pickguard with my light fingerstyle playing but will take extra care with protection when changing strings.
Lowden appear to have the approach of scaring people off making truss rod adjustments themselves, implying it is something only a technician is qualified to do - which is nonsense as long as you proceed with caution.
I tried using a Graphtech nut which would fit a Lowden (6134-L0) and it was too wide - and the string spacing just a little too great to prevent the outer strings occasionally slipping off the edge of the fretboard even if I trimmed the ends. The next step is to try a different size.
The string spacing at the bridge is the same as a Lowden.
The spec on the Sheeran website says that the nut width is 1 3/4" (no metric dimensions given). The standard Lowden nut width for a Lowden on the Lowden website is also stated as 1 3/4" although the metric dimensions are slightly larger (45mm - the actual width). Therefore - I was expecting the Sheeran to be the same.
43.5mm (Lowden refer to it as 1 11/16" in imperial although it is closer to 1 23/32") is what Lowden call their narrow nut width - available on the FM range and, I think, as an extra cost option on standard Lowdens.
A difference of 1.5mm may not sound like much but it makes a significant difference to the guitar's feel - particularly at the lower frets when the variance in the standard Lowden string spacing at the nut is over 2mm. To some this won't matter, to others it may even be an advantage but for me it is a bit of a compromise.
For the conversion I have replaced the nut with a Graph Tech PQ-6116-L0 TUSQ nut, which fitted without any modification. The string spacing with this nut is slightly wider than that originally fitted which makes playing at the lower frets less cramped without the risk of dragging the strings off the fret ends. It should be noted that the PQ-1728-L0 nut is a precise match for the original narrower right-handed string spacing.
The saddle was replaced with a Graph Tech left-handed compensated one (PQ-9280-L0) and 2mm mother-of-pearl side marker dots were installed on the left -handed side. I would normally get the saddle-slot filled and a new, correctly angled one cut but the impact on intonation of the existing saddle angle is so minimal I'll live with it for a while. Besides, the luthier who normally does this work for me can't stand Ed Sheeran
The guitar's tone is very good for a small body with that complex Lowden ring, crisp trebles and good basses and mids. Playability is very good with an excellent action - although, for me, it would have felt a bit cramped on the lower frets without the small increase in string spacing at the nut. The guitar looks good in a minimalist sort of way and I would rank it at least as good the best parlours that I've played which makes it excellent value.
I've contacted Sheeran/Lowden regarding the nut width in their published specification as it is inaccurate and misleading if mine isn't from an incorrect batch and I am awaiting a reply. The Dutch resellers TFOA describe the nut width in their YouTube review as "1 3/4" - that's 43.5mm" (which it isn't) - so I don't think that mine is the only one.
I'D BE INTERESTED TO HEAR FROM OTHER SHEERAN W & S OWNERS REGARDING THE NUT WIDTH on their guitars In the meantime, here's a photo of my converted guitar.
The feel of 11/16 over 3/4 is dramatic
To a certain extent yes - but once you've found the right nut width that suits you then anything narrower can feel a compromise. In addition to the nut width reduction of 1.5mm, the string spacing at the nut is about 2.3mm less than the standard Lowden 38mm. With the nut replacement I've managed bring the string spacing reduction to about 1.5mm - the same as the nut width. This, for me, is tolerable although not ideal.
I only got the ruler out when something didn't feel right - but when you order off spec (as many will have done) you expect the fundamentals of the spec to be correct.
If 43.5mm is the correct nut width for the range then this should be in the spec - it will put some off but to others it won't matter and to some it may even be an advantage.
What's the advantage of making a neck that narrow?
45mm should be the best compromise surely, I prefer 46mm (or even 47.5mm sometimes) but 45mm would be OK
To many this won't matter and to some it may even be an advantage. For me, I've managed to mitigate the issue by using a left-handed Graph Tech TUSQ nut with a slightly wider string spacing.
That issue aside, and a few very minor quality issues, it is a incredibly good guitar for the money.
To illustrate the nut width issue, below is a photo of the original W01 nut which I removed for the left-handed conversion compared with the 1 3/4" (45mm) nut on my S32 lefty.
Makes me interested in it. I like 1 11/16".
My biggest gripe about the newer Martins is that they have switched to 1 3/4" from 1 11/16".
Yes - I think many will prefer the actual narrower nut width and would have been put off by the 1 3/4" on the incorrect published spec. Thus it is a surprising and careless goof. They told me they are going to change their published spec - although this probably won't happen until everyone gets back from NAMM.
I'm just surprised that no-one else has pointed this out to them.