MM Lightning review

[Stevie]

There is a very complimentary review of the MM Lightning in this month's Guitar and Bass magazine.

They have marked it down on build quality, at least in terms of a score. I think that they must have missed the point somewhere. We all know what Michael's aims were with these instruments. Down on playability too...WTF? And 17/20 on VFM? I just don't geddit.

Overall, they gave it 87%. It's difficult to see any way that they can be improved at this price point. Some instruments do garner overall scores in the 90s. It's all subjective I suppose, one man's meat etc.

I would openly ask the Guitar and Bass crowd what they were thinking of, because the review itself is so complimentary. When you see so many guitars, I guess you must lose the plot a little!

I'll stop now because I just sound like a fan who has had his / her favourite artist trashed or missed out from one of those infernal lists!

[Michael Messer]

Hi Stevie,

Thank you for your kind and supportive words. They mean more to me than any review in a magazine.

I have not read the review yet (I will get hold of a copy today), so it would not be right for me to comment on its content.

In 2008 when Robin and I started the MM Resonator Guitars company I decided it was no longer ethical for me to write reviews of resophonic guitars, which was something I had done for nearly twenty years. For many of the glossy British guitar magazines I was the first call to write reviews of resophonic guitars as there are very few people in the UK (known to the magazine editors) that can speak about resophonic guitars with any authority.

Comparing a properly designed and built 1930s style resophonic guitar to anything else being produced today would not be the correct approach. It would be the same reviewing a reproduction 1950s Ford Prefect; everything about it is correct and it performs exactly as a 1950s Ford Prefect should, but the breaking, the cornering and the safety aspects of this vehicle are just not up to scratch and it cannot compare with a modern car.
The whole point of owning a 1950s style car would be missed by the reviewer.

When we first launched MM Guitars in 2008, I was discussing them with a guitar journalist and he asked me what type of pickup was installed, when I replied that there was no pickup installed and that MM guitars are totally acoustic, he told me that I could not consider it a real 'product' unless we factory-installed some kind of pickup, because without a pickup it cannot be considered a professional quality instrument to use on stage.

The MM Lightning that was reviewed in this month's Guitar & Bass magazine was sold to a forum member who absolutely loves and cherishes it. For me, that is what is important and that is why Robin and I do what we do.

Shine On
Michael.

[wolvoboy]

I should imagine that if they were reviewing a Vintage National guitar or a new resophonic because they are not made with pickups would they be concidered none professional quality and mark them down aswell,who cares what they think,all the happy MM Blues and Lighning owners would totally disagree with them,
I think MM Guitars are in a class of their own,and in years to come will be much sort after.
wolvoboy

[thebluesbear( al)]

Hi
I agree with pete who cares what they think!!!!!! how many of us would disagree i would....that is for sure

al

[Stevie]

I must emphasise again that the review was / is excellent, it's just the (subjective, I know) scoring that I can't fathom. I would further point out that they scored very highly for both "Vibe" and "Sound"
They suggested three other "competing" manufacturers; Regal, Johnson and "Vintage" (just in case you can't make up your mind I suppose) with a throwaway one-liner on each one.
MM guitars are a square peg in the market because you get most all of the sound and feel of a true vintage instrument at a steal of a price together with a rare dose of bespoke customer service into the bargain.
How can you compare an MM to those guitars? And you cannot compare an MM to an NRP due to the price difference, although I believe that it would be a more valid comparison. Playability? these are conceived primarily as slide instruments! Build quality? Do your homework.
It's a cross that Robin and Michael are quite happy to bear I reckon, because these guitars do tend to sell on recommendation. I can't recall ever seeing an actual advert for one anywhere.
It sounds like I'm having a dig at the magazine. Not true, it's the only guitar based rag that I'll consider reading (or at least paying to read!)

[snakehips]

Hi there,

I'm sorry, but the statement "... primarily for slide" severly short-changes MM's heroic efforts.
The other manufacturers mentioned build their "units" simply because they might sell - and I say "units" because many I have seen didn't qualify to be called an instrument because they were so poor quality.
Now tell me if I am wrong, but MM has spent a lot of time and effort producing a quality resonator guitar for a certain price ceiling that plays well for regular playing AND slide.
To describe it merely as being primarily for slide is tantamount to insulting to MM.
I reckon you didn't mean that as such, BUT it is.

[oldmanblue]

were to start i own both a vintage single cone that i bought second hand i then spent another £150.00 pounds getting it to play & sound resonoble,i own an M.M. blues the one that was reviewed by acoustic magazine & then given away as a prize ,i also own ian ozark less said about that the better,i know wich one i rate if i was going out to buy one i know wich one i would buy ,M.M. blues everytime i have a mate who owns a Beltona tri cone an original he rates my blues above that ,i have got to the stage were critics etc are paid to test these guitars let them spend there money to buy one & then lets see what they have to say.

[honeyboy]

Just to confirm, Tom Attah gets a nice sound out of his MM Blues, with not a slide in sight..

[weemillie]

I've not seen the review, but have to agree with the comment above about the scores not really being relevent to anyone looking to buy one of MM's guitars. I bought a Blues last year as a newbie to resonators. Having spent significant time looking online for info about what to buy it was utterly clear that the only possible choice was a MM guitar. Every review, every comment and every testimony from an owner is clear that there is nothing like them in the price bracket, or indeed a bracket or two above. Having bought it, played it every day (probably almost as much fingerstyle as slide, for the record...) I can't imagine being without it. Stunning, stunning piece of kit. Still brings a smile to my face every time I pick it up.

[Stevie]

Oh really, I had no idea that my remarks were so insulting.
I must try harder.
Mea culpa.
Just for the record, I play mine 95% of the time without a slide. Even cod flamenco and "jazzy" bits! and of course they are just as eminently playable without a slide, but I still associate the instrument's genre with slide playing. That's just my perception, it may not be any one else's.
OT (btw) perhaps a comment on the score for playability would be more appropriate to the thread, such as it is! As we seem to be agreed that the instrument is excellent for non-slide playing, what do other contributors think of 16 out of 20?
Now THAT'S an insult.

[Deleted]

I could be right, I could be wrong, I could be getting off the subject. I currently use my national for slide 100%, and my tricone for 'standard' stuff 100%. Regardless, I could barely tell the difference between my old yellow thing and old nicks MM blues (thats a good thing I think).
TT

[Michael Messer]

I just read the review and I think it is very good. The writer certainly likes the instrument and in fact if that one hadn't been going to a forum member in Brazil, I think he may have wanted it.

I think the difference in reviews written by resophonic experts (coneheads) is that they are looking at the guitar from a different perspective. When I review (or used to review) resonator guitars I use vintage Nationals and Dobros as my benchmark, of which I have seen and played literally thousands. I have also seen and played almost every respectable brand of resophonic guitar that doesn't have National or Dobro written on the headstock. So I am writing from a position of serious in-depth knowledge of my subject. This writer, who I have to say has been extremely complimentary, is comparing the Lightning to a few other mass produced budget priced resophonic guitars being made today, which is not wrong because that is probably the only experience he has.

The questionable star ratings are a strange thing because back when I was writing, if I wrote a really glowing review with 100% positive comments, the editors often asked me to pull down the star ratings so the review was not just a gushing load of compliments. Equally - if I wrote a really bad review, they would ask me to find something that I could be positive about, even if it was just the colour or good quality fretwork.

I am very happy with the review and grateful for the space in the magazine. Thanks Huw.

I am also very grateful for all your positive comments about MM guitars. Much appreciated.

Shine On
Michael.

[Deleted]

Hello All,

I agree 100% with Michael’s comments that the review is very complimentary. To me, the reviewer was indeed surprised and overwhelmed by what he's heard and felt. Sure, the MM Lightning looks amazing, but it is when you play it that it actually enchants you! As the proud owner of the MML175 11, featured in the review, I must say the reviewer echoes of my own feeling when I first played it (and when I play it now). Even the comment on his son, wife and neighbours coincides with what has happened to me. I'm no critic, but I do agree that the Michael Messer Lightning has helped me discover that I'm actually better than I ever imagined!

As far as the ratings are concerned, anyone who reads the review will agree that they are inconsistent with the text. Even those who have never played a MM Lightning will notice it. It is only necessary to read the Verdict section to realise the ratings seem to refer to a different instrument altogether. I think Michael’s comments regarding the review trying not to be so openly complimentary are very true.

The format of the reviews on the magazine includes "alternatives". Since there are no real "alternatives" around, my guess is that the reviewer has picked other resophonic guitars within the same price range as the MM Lightning. It would be an easy hands down win for the MM, if compared to modern day Nationals and Dobros.

Besides, the true value of having the article on a magazine such as Guitar & Bass is to make it more widely known to people and to draw their attention to the guitar. It serves as a pointer to further research. The article does mention, for instance, Michael’s site, which leads to the forum. And, once in the forum, there is no way anyone would buy another resophonic guitar.

I'm incredibly pleased with my MM Lightning. I've played two modern Nationals and one modern Dobro recently that cost nearly three times more and, frankly, I prefer my MM Lightning.

“The writer certainly likes the instrument and in fact if that one hadn't been going to a forum member in Brazil, I think he may have wanted it.”

So, lucky me it is thousands of miles away .

My MM Lightning is very special to me and there is no way I would give it any rating other that 20 out of 20! I will never trade it for any other guitar in the world!

Regards,

WL

[Michael Messer]

Hi WL,

Thank you for coming in on this thread. I appreciate your kind and complimentary comments very much.

Shine On
Michael.

[Deleted]

Hello Michael,

It is my pleasure to share with all my fellow forum members my delight for my MM Lightning.

Best regards,

WL