The issue that may come to your mind as you are exploring this website is: Why copy someone else’s work and build a replica? Why not work on something “original” instead?

In fact, when I talked about this project with colleagues and musicians, this question came up many times. Let me explain my motivation to delve into the sphere of replication:

So-called “copies” in the tradition of the Spanish makers are abundant. Almost every luthier apprentice makes one, and most luthiers’ instruments have some reference to Torres guitars. The question is whether maybe the name of one famous maker has over time become a mere label, with only little meaning. For example, many of the aforementioned “Torres-inspired” guitars exclusively use Titebond as an adhesive and feature a Nitro finish. Maybe the relationship to the old Spanish guitar makers is a bit diluted today – and a more puristic approach is due.

The term “copy” is used rather loosely, which is why I insist on using the term “replica” for the more precise copies of historical instruments. If you look beyond guitar making, there are some artists that are known for their forgeries – and not every one of them lacks individual style. I actually believe that a good imitation deserves to be called an art form of its own, unfortunately a form of art that has a negative connotation in today’s world with such a heavy focus on individuality. So please bear with me and let me prove to you that complete assimilation and thorough imitation deserves to be called at least as artistic as the abundant timid variations of the classical guitar of the 19th century.

And in case you are still not convinced: There is no way I will cease to work on innovative contemporary instruments. The most radical examples can be found here.