muttley600
Banned
I'll ask nicely.Please stop, you don't know what you are talking about.
I'll ask nicely.Please stop, you don't know what you are talking about.
Light
New member
I'll add my voice to Muttley here. I have not yet seen you give a piece of advice which didn't need to be corrected. If you have questions, feel free to ask, but leave the answering to people who actually know.
Light
"Cowards can never be moral."
M.K. Gandhi
K
K Road
New member
Most appreciated Muttley.
K.
K.
muttley600
Banned
No problem, Any questions on this stuff fire away. All contributions are welcome around here as well as long as it is qualified. Some of us just get a bit frustrated at times dealing with information that is patently incorrect and presented as "gospel". Thats all.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
Muttley, I'd give you rep for basically any of the posts you've made in this thread, but evdently I have to give it out to a few more people before I can give you any more. Great posts, anyway - I know very little about luthiery, but it's still interesting reading.
Would it be safe to say, then, that the top and acoustic chamber of a semihollow or hollowbody influences the amped-up tone of a guitar in a manner similar to feedback? Not squealing "bombs over Hanoi" feedback a la Jimi, exactly, but as the string is plucked, the top picks up some of that vibrational energy, it's amplified in the soundhole, and as the soundhole and top radiate sonic energy, some of that is in turn picked up by the (still vibrating) string, which induces sympathetic vibration and changes the way the string vibrates? I mean, this is obviously not the full picture and there's gotta be a ton of other factors in play here (off the top of my head, I suspect the body of the guitar has a slight dampening effect on certain frequencies on the string, which is also responsible for timbral changes), but at a "hollowbody guitars for dummies who play mostly rock" level, lol.
Thanks for the info, either way!
Would it be safe to say, then, that the top and acoustic chamber of a semihollow or hollowbody influences the amped-up tone of a guitar in a manner similar to feedback? Not squealing "bombs over Hanoi" feedback a la Jimi, exactly, but as the string is plucked, the top picks up some of that vibrational energy, it's amplified in the soundhole, and as the soundhole and top radiate sonic energy, some of that is in turn picked up by the (still vibrating) string, which induces sympathetic vibration and changes the way the string vibrates? I mean, this is obviously not the full picture and there's gotta be a ton of other factors in play here (off the top of my head, I suspect the body of the guitar has a slight dampening effect on certain frequencies on the string, which is also responsible for timbral changes), but at a "hollowbody guitars for dummies who play mostly rock" level, lol.
Thanks for the info, either way!
Gear_Junky
New member
i, for one, don't mind being debunked - i prefer learning the truth. i usually try to state my posts less as an opinion, more as an inquiry (especially when i don't know or not sure).
what i meant in the quote below was ONLY that wood matters EVEN in solid guitars - those particular woods being "associated" with those particular types of guitar (as "the sound" of those guitars). That's why when there's a mahogany strat - it turns heads - it's not as typical and draws interest.
i won't even defend others statements - it doesn't matter. i disclaimed that "so I read".
what i'm wondering: since rockabilly-type and often jazz-type archtops are usually played electric and not acoustically, how MUCH of a difference does the top really make to the audience?
now, in an acoustic guitar we hear both the strings AND the top vibrations (no?). In an electrified guitar at ensemble levels we mostly hear strings amplified by pickups (albeit affected by the guitar material/construction in their respective ways). I just wonder, when one is playing with bass, drums and other instruments - how much of those finer components are lost, to the audience and to the guitarist?
Is this a good question?
what i meant in the quote below was ONLY that wood matters EVEN in solid guitars - those particular woods being "associated" with those particular types of guitar (as "the sound" of those guitars). That's why when there's a mahogany strat - it turns heads - it's not as typical and draws interest.
i won't even defend others statements - it doesn't matter. i disclaimed that "so I read".
what i'm wondering: since rockabilly-type and often jazz-type archtops are usually played electric and not acoustically, how MUCH of a difference does the top really make to the audience?
now, in an acoustic guitar we hear both the strings AND the top vibrations (no?). In an electrified guitar at ensemble levels we mostly hear strings amplified by pickups (albeit affected by the guitar material/construction in their respective ways). I just wonder, when one is playing with bass, drums and other instruments - how much of those finer components are lost, to the audience and to the guitarist?
Is this a good question?
K
K Road
New member
I think this is a good and valid question.
Muttley provided a fine answer to my original question; one that I greatly appreciate. It convincingly addresses the issue in "hard data" terms of how the type of wood used for the soundboard in hollow bodied guitars can affect the tonal qualities produced by a pup in an amplified situation.
Your question, as to whether or not the subtle variations in tone thereby produced will be appreciated by an audience in a drums, bass trio situation is another aspect to the question. I personally think not.
My experience of playing live (as opposed to recording) with a band is that the g. only occupies a relatively narrow range of the sonic spectrum that is the guitar's alone. Being a mid-range instrument there are too many other "noises" competing for the same aural space as it were. All those subtleties of tone which may shine through (with intelligent and sensitive tweaking of amp knobs) in a solo situation, are lost in the cacophony of crashing symbols, kick drum, snare and agressive (electric) bass playing.
On the other hand, from the guitarist's point of view, playing a quality arch-top (or any other type of g.) is kind of an end in itself. Any old car or motorcycle will get us from point 'A' to 'B', but do it on in a Bently or on a vintage Triumph - well, that's half the buzz... ain't it? And like it or not, just like good cars and bikes, good guitars are status symbols. The difference is, most anybody can ride a motorcycle or drive a car. But there isn't anything more embarrassing or humiliating to a muscian than someone in possession of a fine guitar who can't play the damn thing (but think they can)!
K.
Muttley provided a fine answer to my original question; one that I greatly appreciate. It convincingly addresses the issue in "hard data" terms of how the type of wood used for the soundboard in hollow bodied guitars can affect the tonal qualities produced by a pup in an amplified situation.
Your question, as to whether or not the subtle variations in tone thereby produced will be appreciated by an audience in a drums, bass trio situation is another aspect to the question. I personally think not.
My experience of playing live (as opposed to recording) with a band is that the g. only occupies a relatively narrow range of the sonic spectrum that is the guitar's alone. Being a mid-range instrument there are too many other "noises" competing for the same aural space as it were. All those subtleties of tone which may shine through (with intelligent and sensitive tweaking of amp knobs) in a solo situation, are lost in the cacophony of crashing symbols, kick drum, snare and agressive (electric) bass playing.
On the other hand, from the guitarist's point of view, playing a quality arch-top (or any other type of g.) is kind of an end in itself. Any old car or motorcycle will get us from point 'A' to 'B', but do it on in a Bently or on a vintage Triumph - well, that's half the buzz... ain't it? And like it or not, just like good cars and bikes, good guitars are status symbols. The difference is, most anybody can ride a motorcycle or drive a car. But there isn't anything more embarrassing or humiliating to a muscian than someone in possession of a fine guitar who can't play the damn thing (but think they can)!
K.
G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
Actually, all we are hearing is the top/body of the guitar when we listen to an acoustic guitar acoustically. The strings alone are nearly inaudible.
Gear_Junky
New member
right, strings alone would be about as loud as an unplugged electric solidbody, right?
that only reinforces my point (and i'm not trying to prove some point, just to figure this thing out)
G
ggunn
Crystal Flavolian
Less than that, actually. The body of an electric solid body guitar is an acoustic sounding board, too, albeit a much less efficient one.
muttley600
Banned
Not quite. In the case of feedback you have a sympathetic vibration happening which is putting more energy back into the string than it is losing. A closer comparison there would be a bowed string which has a constant supply of energy being put into it, but not so the system becomes overloaded.
As you summise the whole thing is complex and everything has an effect to some degree or other. Think of the energy in the string being like a tennis ball. When the ball bounces it loses some energy and bounces with less velocity and with less energy than before it landed. The ball being the string and the surface being the body. The ball behaves differently when it bounces on a clay court as opposed to a grass court. That is because of the influence the surface has not the ball. Different types of timber reflect and absorb different parts of the strings energy or harmonic spectrum.
Thats exactly it except to a acoustician damping is a seperate property but thats for another day.I suspect the body of the guitar has a slight dampening effect on certain frequencies on the string, which is also responsible for timbral changes), but at a "hollowbody guitars for dummies who play mostly rock" level, lol.
Thanks for the info, either way!
Different body timber, shapes, everything effects the manner in which energy is lost or reflected. When you pluck a string you don't just set up a vibration at the "fundamental" note, you also set it moving quite aggressively at all the frequencies of the harmonic series. The way these are reflected and lost is also of great importance.
muttley600
Banned
Your correct, the wood matters to any guitar. Whether you like the sound is a subjective issue, but it definitely matters.
The reason I asked for clarification from you was because I wasn't sure thats all.what i'm wondering: since rockabilly-type and often jazz-type archtops are usually played electric and not acoustically, how MUCH of a difference does the top really make to the audience?
now, in an acoustic guitar we hear both the strings AND the top vibrations (no?). In an electrified guitar at ensemble levels we mostly hear strings amplified by pickups (albeit affected by the guitar material/construction in their respective ways). I just wonder, when one is playing with bass, drums and other instruments - how much of those finer components are lost, to the audience and to the guitarist?
Is this a good question?
The top (and many other things make a difference. You mention rockabilly and jazz as styles but those were founded on various types of archtops. Gretsch have been mentioned and Brian Setzers sound is definitely not solid body. Equally John Pizzarelli's sound is not LP or strat. For a good example of how a good solid top archtop should sound check out Martin Taylor. You can definitely hear wood in his tone. He's not alone but he has a lovely sound going for him that you wouldn't get from a solid body.
Of course if you just plug in and turn up your going to lose a lot of that tone. Thats true of any instrument but that is down to a bad mix or PA rather than anything intrinsically lacking in the instruments.
muttley600
Banned
Hey I could hear a triumph coming from miles away and never mistake it for anything else.
Trust me if you have the volume right and the PA is decent you can tell the difference between solid body, archtop, LP, Strat etc. Sure if you twiddle too many knobs and chuck in pedals etc your going to lose the tone. Your deliberately trying to engineer it into something else by doing that. Same as chucking chillies in a curry, eventually you aren't going to tell if it's chicken or lamb.
muttley600
Banned
Thats right. The acoustic and the Archtop behave differently acoustically because the method of transferring the strings energy into acoustic sound is different. The strings energy passes into the top via the bridge. The bridge drives the top and that pushes air around the room. It's a remarkably inefficient system with works extremely well.
S
stevieb
Just another guy, really.
If somebody already said this, I apologize for missing it:
"Jazz boxes" always seem to be, not just hollowbodies, but also arch tops. (Macaffini-types, and Gypsy jazz being exceptions) Now, this may just be because almost no one makes an electric flat top, but I suspect that it is because arch tops are NOT sustain machines. The design was developed before electric amplification, to channel as much of the sound box's energy into projection, to be heard over larger and larger jazz combos. If jazz developed with that "barking" guitar quality as part of it's sound, it follows that when jazz guitars became electrified, they would still be more projection, less sustain. Thus:
It is NOT "all down to pups and amps." Even if it were to come to that, the jazz tradition would still hold sway- and "pups and amps" made to play jazz would emphasize projection, not sustain.
I think (not sure, tho- so don't flame me) that the majority of arch tops, regardless of quality, are laminated tops. Perhaps this is done because sustain is not highly valued in jazz, and thus makers have (correctly, I think) deduced that there is no good reason to go to the expense of a solid top? If I am correct about this, then the relatively rare solid top may be more marketing and/or snob appeal than actually needed.
Certainly the construction of a hollowbody jazz box- it's hollowness, it's archtop, etc. have a desirable effect in the jazz guitar sound, so I would say that much of the guitar's wood construction- box design, wood, etc. DO play a huge role in the guitar's tone. Perhaps much more than solid body/rock and roll playing- jazz players insist on clean tones, rather than using (as a crutch?) distortion.
Just my two cents.
"Jazz boxes" always seem to be, not just hollowbodies, but also arch tops. (Macaffini-types, and Gypsy jazz being exceptions) Now, this may just be because almost no one makes an electric flat top, but I suspect that it is because arch tops are NOT sustain machines. The design was developed before electric amplification, to channel as much of the sound box's energy into projection, to be heard over larger and larger jazz combos. If jazz developed with that "barking" guitar quality as part of it's sound, it follows that when jazz guitars became electrified, they would still be more projection, less sustain. Thus:
It is NOT "all down to pups and amps." Even if it were to come to that, the jazz tradition would still hold sway- and "pups and amps" made to play jazz would emphasize projection, not sustain.
I think (not sure, tho- so don't flame me) that the majority of arch tops, regardless of quality, are laminated tops. Perhaps this is done because sustain is not highly valued in jazz, and thus makers have (correctly, I think) deduced that there is no good reason to go to the expense of a solid top? If I am correct about this, then the relatively rare solid top may be more marketing and/or snob appeal than actually needed.
Certainly the construction of a hollowbody jazz box- it's hollowness, it's archtop, etc. have a desirable effect in the jazz guitar sound, so I would say that much of the guitar's wood construction- box design, wood, etc. DO play a huge role in the guitar's tone. Perhaps much more than solid body/rock and roll playing- jazz players insist on clean tones, rather than using (as a crutch?) distortion.
Just my two cents.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
In very general terms:
A solid carved spruce top on an archtop guitar is more efficient than a laminated top at translating string vibration into sound. When played without amplification, it will have better tone, volume,and sustain than it's laminated counterpart played the same way. We have not discussed solid spruce tops that have have been pressed into shape. They fall between laminated and carved tops in terms of responsiveness.
You are right that there are many more guitars produced with laminated tops than are made using the other methods. The laminated tops are much less expensive to produce in quantity but that's not the only reason for their popularity. For one, the very properties that make a laminated top a less efficient acoustic platform reduce it's tendency to feed back or sound muddy when heavily amplified. Then too you can make a guitar with a beautiful highly figured top using only a small amount of the most expensive material. Laminated construction is less fragile and more stable than solid construction making the instruments more roadworthy. There are other reasons these are just a few.
We haven't talked about the weight of two humbucking pickups mounted to the top somewhat equalizing the advantage carved construction gives acoustically.
The bottom line is, let your fingers and your ears tell you which to choose. If it sounds good and plays good it is good, PERIOD.
Milnoque
Resident Curmudgeon
Playing a great carved archtop guitar with a floating pickup is a religeous experience. No other construction method sounds quite like it. This is not about snob appeal. This is about real difference.
zazz
hmmmm
my jack casady hollow body bass guitar always struck me as having bags more sustain and richness of note than my solid bodies.
i liken it to comparing an acoustic drum to a woodblock....totally different.
but hollow bodies are jazz standard tools of the trade??
i liken it to comparing an acoustic drum to a woodblock....totally different.
but hollow bodies are jazz standard tools of the trade??
T
Thurgood
New member
I could use some real religion (floating pu arch top) but have to settle for my ak 100, which sounds pretty good. Wish it where here but dog sitting today for a friend. I really like the ibanez ak 100, it sounds good but could prob benefit from new pots (with better taper). I am a big fan of Freddy Green and also Tal Farlow, Bucky Sr. and Jr. Joe Pass etc. " man I dig his style, that **** can roll.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
Again, Muttley, I'd rep you if I could. Thanks!