An incompetently-designed harp guitar (I think that's what it's supposed to be)

guitarz.blogspot.com:
Oh no, this is just dreadful. It's another one of those cheaply cobbled-together Chinese-made guitars that pay very little consideration to the playabilty or practicality of an instrument.

I'm not sure where to start... This appears to have extra strings just for the fun of it. Now, I know that some acoustics carrying additional strings will have "sub bass" strings that are positioned outside of the neck as they are intended to be played open, harp-style, but on this neck it looks like they couldn't decide if the bass strings should be over the fingerboard or not, so we've got a little bit of both on a very strangely shaped neck.

Speaking of neck shape, just look at the back of it. It must be square in cross-section. It doesn't look very playable.

I can't imagine how useful the other eight strings mounted on the body are. I guess you could have them tuned them to a chord. I'm also not convinced about the location of the tuners mounted in that little box on the front of the soundboard. Wouldn't it damp the vibrations of the top? Wouldn't it rattle?

But the thing that bugs me the most about this sorry effort of a guitar, is the cutaway on the body. The whole point of a cutaway on a guitar is to facilitate playing on the higher frets of the guitar at the body end of the fingerboard. But here, the cutaway is nowhere near the neck and therefore useless. What is the point? Not only is it without function, it also looks absolutely appalling.

I'm reminded of those dreadful Tennessee-brand guitars, and suspect that this guitar may originate from the same source.

G L Wilson

NB: Please make sure you are reading this Guitarz post at guitarz.blogspot.com and not on a Scraper blog that copies posts without permission (and steals bandwidth) so as to profit from advertising. Please support original bloggers!