Just appearing on UK shores this year is the new Touchstone Vintage Series
Vintage/TS | Guitar Models | Bourgeois Guitars The products of Bourgeois collaboration with Eastman of China. The business model is that Bourgeois make the tops, ship them to China for Eastman to add the rest of the guitar and then they ship them back to Bourgeois for final setup. Bourgeois are confident enough of their input to put their name to the headstock.
So far an OM and a square-shouldered dreadnought both of which borrow Martin herring bone purfling, Martin headstock shape, Martin Rosette, Martin style fretboard markers. In fact, lets be honest, they look an awful lot like an OM28 and a D28 don't they.
The Bourgeois Touchstone Vintage OM is more analogous to the Martin OM28 Standard rather than the top of the range Modern Deluxe lacking as it does the Modern Deluxe features.
But here's the thing Bourgeois Touchstone Vintage OM TS £2,599
Martin OM 28 Standard £3,659
Martin OM 28 Modern Deluxe £4,499
So if you want a very good OM with a premium US brand name on the headstock take a look at the more mid-range Bourgeois. Yes, they are all different instruments when judged on the basis of tone. But they also vary in the extent that they represent good value for essentially very similar instruments.
Well done Bourgeois. Parking on other peoples lawns is totally acceptable commercially
and benefits the customer.
On the way? An OO and a slope-shouldered dreadnought at, one suspects, a similar price point
Martin OM28 Modern Deluxe
Bourgeois Touchstone Vintage TS OM
And yes, I know, just because guitars look alike doesn't mean they're the same.
Comments
I think what Bourgeois has done with these new models is really excellent and shows the ability of producers to innovate in their business models and production methods. To our benefit and theirs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_MTYms5fxE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZuNzRP1mWY
Bourgeois has always been essentially about making a better Martin - the changes are to the finesse and bracing/tuning of the top, not changing the shape just to be different.
I personally would have liked to have to seen the 10/20 series Eastman's with the Bourgeois neck joint. I've seen they are cropping up some higher models.
I think we can afford to ship a few hundred guitar tops and guitars.
In any case, I would assume Bourgeois doesn't want to let their trade secrets in terms of process leave the company. If you teach Eastman to make tops as well as Bourgeois do there's no long-term partnership for Bourgeois because Eastman wouldn't need them
Personally I think its got more to do with Bourgeois being able to put their name on the headstock so that the not inconsiderable number of people who feel only the US can make good acoustics ( and won't buy anything else) will buy one. And fair enough to a certain extent - the acoustic is an American 'invention' after all. But that attitude comes at a cost.
I personally think that, as an acoustic player, broadening your horizons to explore US and non-US instruments gives you a lot more fun.
Hopefully Bourgeois have had a say in the ethics of Eastman's wood sourcing. I think so. This from Bourgeois Guitars website when discussing the production philosophy for its link-up with Eastman in 'An important message from Dana Bourgeois' 10th Oct 2019........
"........Bourgeois will be responsible for design, materials selection, voicing, setup, and quality control, and Eastman will contribute efficient manufacturing and sourcing capabilities and expertise in global distribution. This project builds upon a successful model pioneered by Eastman and its other high end manufacturing partners."
Dana is staying on board as CEO of Bourgeois and Eastman is now the majority shareholder in Bourgeois. Is this correct?
The arrangement between them seems to be somewhat opaque.
It's an Eastman with a badge and a marginal spec difference to sell the price tag.
Whatever the reality, the perception can be that this sort of deal devalues the brand. There's just no way that Dana can exercise the sort of personal attention and QC that he did in his own workshop. And to be cynical: why would he? When he no longer owns the company.
If there's a risk that big, on a guitar with a price tag that big, it undermines that spiel: "we're experts with unforgiving standards, so you can be assured of premium quality". (My paraphrasing.)
I could debate all your other points, but I don't think this is an appropriate forum for it.