Skylark vs. Further - sonic compariso... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Alembic Club » Alembic Basses & Guitars » Archive 2006 » Archive through March 20, 2006 » Skylark vs. Further - sonic comparison please « Previous Next »

Author Message
Username: cosmo

Post Number: 4
Registered: 2-2006
Posted on Wednesday, March 01, 2006 - 10:20 am:   Edit Post

Would those members lucky enough to have played both a Skylark and a Further please compare and contrast their impressions of the sound of each instrument? The feature differences that specifically make a impact in the sound of the instrument - and what that difference between models is like. Also, I'm wondering if a fair comparison of scale lengths would be Gibson vs. Fender. What is the Further neck like in comparison to the Skylark? I've played the Skylark, but not the Further. Thanks in advance to this great group of really helpful folks!
Username: rusty

Post Number: 17
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 6:46 am:   Edit Post

I think is a great thread and was hoping someone would be in a position to compare and contrast. If and when I am able to order a custom, deciding on the style of electronics would be the hardest part for me.
Username: cosmo

Post Number: 5
Registered: 2-2006
Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 8:31 am:   Edit Post

Thanks for the bump, Rusty. Either no one is interested in responding, or worse, there aren't enough people qualified to respond. I thought it was a great question too!
Advanced Member
Username: tom_z

Post Number: 300
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 8:38 am:   Edit Post

I wish I could help out here. I have a Skylark that I have written about many times here, and a Further on order - so I won't really be able to make any kind of specific comparisons until I can play the Further through my equipment at home. The electronics are different, and I'm sure the Further offers even more flexibility of tone than the Skylark, but I cannot comment fairly on what the difference is like. The Further also has an onboard effects loop, which the Skylark does not.

In terms of scale - my Skylark is 25.5" and the Further will be as well. From my limited experience with a Further the feel of the neck was pretty much identical to my Skylark (keep in mind, I didn't have my Skylark with me when I played the Further - so, no real A B comparison was possible).

Furthermore, I'm sure it is not uncommon for any given Alembic to sound somewhat different from any other (even the same model), given that they are not stamped out on a conveyer belt. If you check in the factory to customer section right now, you will see a handful of Furthers with different features and wood selections, not the least of which are neck laminate choices which diverge from the standard combination on the "Product Page."

Many have suggested that a Further will have greater sustain due to the through-neck design, though I feel my Skylark has excellent sustain. The Skylark is clean and bright sounding (I can even get a very convincing acoustic guitar sound out of it), and I'm hoping I will get a wider variety of dark, warm tone from the Further. I'm also looking forward to having the effects loop control at my fingertips.

Both of the Alembics I've ordered are at least a little different from the standard model in the product section of the Alembic site, and this is really one of my favorite things about Alembic. I consulted with Susan and Mica at great length prior to ordering either guitar. Susan advised on wood and features to achieve what I was after, both musically and aesthetically. I suggest you give them a call and let them know what you're looking for and what your budget is and let the experts guide you through your order. You will not be disappointed.

Senior Member
Username: lbpesq

Post Number: 1051
Registered: 7-2004
Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 8:43 am:   Edit Post

You are correct in the Fender/Gibson comparison re: scale length. The Skylark is 24.75 ala Gibson, and the Further is 25.50 like a Fender. As far as neck feel, I've enjoyed my limited time on both models while visiting the factory. Typical relatively thin/fast Alembic necks. The neck on my "in progress" Further is copied from my '61 strat which I brought up to the factory for reference when my neck was being carved.

Bill, the guitar one
Username: davehouck

Post Number: 3366
Registered: 5-2002
Posted on Friday, March 03, 2006 - 2:31 pm:   Edit Post

Robert; I'm sure there are lots of folks who wish they were in a position to tell you how both guitars sound! I'm thinking there aren't too many members of this group that own both guitars.
Username: daveo

Post Number: 35
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Saturday, March 04, 2006 - 12:52 pm:   Edit Post

I would love to have both of those guitars, but alas, can only afford one right now and it's a Tribute. I think the Tribute is very similar to the Further in electronics and with the FX loop, but the Further has the advantage of being neck through body for greater sustain and my Tribute (which seems to have plenty of sustain) has a glued on neck, I believe. I wish I owned a Further and a Skylark, but based on the electronic configuration alone, I'd choose a Further over the Skylark. But either way you're getting a totally kick-ass Alembic that you'll love forever.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration