I guess the basic premise to John’s lutherie is that the mojo of that magic guitar you might come across a few times, after wading through many average ones – is a quantifiable, repeatable thing. What I mean is, if one Strat (for example) could have that certain “it” factor while the 20 shipped before it weren’t as good, why can’t they all be as good as the first? He’s spent a lot of time trying to demistify the “mojo” and create processes to make consistently good guitars. I could talk about the timbers, combinations, options, pickups (my lord these are good!) for quite a while, but a solid read through their website will give you an indication that this is a company hell bent on excellent guitars every time.
I think the combinations are crucial too. John and his team knows exactly how every component affects the overall tone, whether it be neck timbers, profiles, fingerboard material, body material, even saddle shapes. They know every facet of this stuff, and that’s the kind of company you want to build you a guitar at some point in your playing career. The attention to detail is worth it IMO.
I have a 1997 Fender Lone Star Strat. It was a solid player when I got it, but nothing emotionally magnetic if you know what i mean. I’ve spent years tweaking it, playing it in, gigging with it, changing the pickups, setting up multiple times to get it to play nicely, and finally in 2009 it really started to come into it’s golden era. Then, I get my Suhr in December and it comes out of the box already playing and sounding better than a 12 year old guitar that’s had some serious playing in! Yes, they retail for more that a 1997 Fender did, but they hassle of making my Fender what it is now is gone. And to top it off, every feature of my Suhr compliments and enhances the whole package.
.
