Seagull Sound Hole Too Small For Standard FeedbackBuster...

[Robertt8]

I just picked up a Seagull acoustic guitar as a backup for my regular stage guitar and was a little miffed to see that a standard feedbackbuster (soundhole rubber stopper that prevents feedback) doesn't fit in the sound hole.

What should i do about this? Any ideas or suggestions?

 

[muttley600]

Take a common bathroom sponge and stick that in there between the back and soundhole. Easier to remove, cheaper and works better than a feedback buster. You'll need to remove it to play acoustic. I was going to market this a while ago, but time has got in the way again. Patent pending however.

 

[LI_Slim]

also try it without plugging the hole. or, get really stoned, take a hacksaw and make the hole bigger.

 

[Buck62]

I just picked up a Seagull acoustic guitar as a backup for my regular stage guitar and was a little miffed to see that a standard feedbackbuster (soundhole rubber stopper that prevents feedback) doesn't fit in the sound hole.

What should i do about this? Any ideas or suggestions?

Sell the Seagull and buy my Godin Acousticaster... it's the same company, anyway.

It has a small chambered (Tele style) body, a nice slim neck and no soundhole to plug.

Plays like an electric, but sounds like an acoustic... great for acoustic leads and pickin'.

http://www.godinguitars.com/godinacousticaster.htm

They sell for $995 new... if you can even find one.

http://www.musiciansbuy.com/godin__caster_dlx_na_rn.html


I'll let mine go for $500 - shipped with Godin hardshell case.

Mint condition, still has the plastic in the back cover.

 

[Robertt8]

yeah...might have to give it a run without the cover, but i never seem to be at a PA without playing at a live show. i know there's an internal mic, but i think i can turn that off and just use the pizzo (sp?) mic.

what's this with the sponge? i find that intriguing...is that a big sponge and just jam it in there? wouldn't that deaden the sound a bunch?

 

[Robertt8]

Sell the Seagull and buy my Godin Acousticaster... it's the same company, anyway.

It has a small chambered (Tele style) body, a slim neck that plays as easy as an electric guitar and no soundhole to plug.

http://www.godinguitars.com/godinacousticaster.htm

They sell for $995 new... if you can even find one.

http://www.musiciansbuy.com/godin__caster_dlx_na_rn.html


I'll let mine go for $500 - shipped with Godin hardshell case.

Mint condition, still has the plastic in the back cover.

i just bought this damn thing and i really like it, so i'm keeping the guitar. i just need it to make sure that i don't have a bunch of feedback. that's all.

 

[Buck62]

i just bought this damn thing and i really like it, so i'm keeping the guitar. i just need it to make sure that i don't have a bunch of feedback. that's all.

Ok... then duct tape should do the trick.

 

[muttley600]

yeah...might have to give it a run without the cover, but i never seem to be at a PA without playing at a live show. i know there's an internal mic, but i think i can turn that off and just use the pizzo (sp?) mic.

what's this with the sponge? i find that intriguing...is that a big sponge and just jam it in there? wouldn't that deaden the sound a bunch?

First thing, rip out the internal mic, they are just awful. The last place you want to hear an acoustic is inside the box, doubly so in a live situation. You have all sorts of compression waves bouncing around in there and it's a recipe for feedback. There are very few good internal mics and even less good reasons to use one.

You also have to understand what creates feedback and in particular which factors of an acoustic are going to make things even worse.

Here are some unavoidable issues....

Acoustics are prone to feedback because they work by amplifying physical sound waves. The volume of a live situation is going to shake the hell out of the soundboard making your problems worse.

No acoustic onboard is going to give you an accurate representation of the sound of your acoustic. What you are after is an accurate generic sound.

The sponge is going to help by absorbing some but not a lot the compression waves inside the body that cause a lot of the feedback. It works by damping a lot of the movement of the top. It will do it better than closing the soundhole which is what the busters do. And yes a normal domestic sponge is what you need, the sort you use to wash you car. It will work as well if not better than your buster. Try it. I discovered the trick by accident. I use sponges inside the guitar when spraying to stop overspray from getting inside the body. I once left one in by accident always meaning to remove it next, and strung the thing up. When I plugged it in it raised the feedback threshold by quite a bit. It does compromise the acoustic quality, but playing live that isn't an issue.

 

[LI_Slim]

the blended system's controls do work; what works even better is putting it through a good DI box like the Baggs. I have a Breedlove with a factory Fishman blended system. At high volumes I turn the internal mic either off or down to about 20%. I found settings that work pretty well and of course I tweak everything each time. I never have feedback problems. Granted, I've never played in a large concert hall or in front of a heavy metal band or anything...

 

[muttley600]

the blended system's controls do work; what works even better is putting it through a good DI box like the Baggs. I have a Breedlove with a factory Fishman blended system. At high volumes I turn the internal mic either off or down to about 20%. I found settings that work pretty well and of course I tweak everything each time. I never have feedback problems. Granted, I've never played in a large concert hall or in front of a heavy metal band or anything...

Oh they work, just not as well as other options. Trust me you don't want to hear the sound of your acoustic inside the box it just isn't a very nice sound.. I have never fitted one or played one that I couldn't get a better sound from for less effort or money with a decent under saddle, soundhole magnetic or external mic and EQ. Add to that that most of the factory fitted internal mics are appalling and you have a recipe for poor sound and feedback...You have kind of demonstrated that by reducing the blend to 20% to get it to work. I hazard a guess that you could get as good a sound by eliminating it and using some simple EQ.

 

[LI_Slim]

Oh they work, just not as well as other options. Trust me you don't want to hear the sound of your acoustic inside the box it just isn't a very nice sound.. I have never fitted one or played one that I couldn't get a better sound from for less effort or money with a decent under saddle, soundhole magnetic or external mic and EQ. Add to that that most of the factory fitted internal mics are appalling and you have a recipe for poor sound and feedback...You have kind of demonstrated that by reducing the blend to 20% to get it to work. I hazard a guess that you could get as good a sound by eliminating it and using some simple EQ.

Well, I kind of see this from a performer's point of view. It gets a slightly fuller, more natural sound if you can add a small amount of the internal mic into the mix. Maybe it shouldn't, but in my experience it does. A miracle perhaps. I of course eq either way, that was the whole point of my message....

 

[muttley600]

Well, I kind of see this from a performer's point of view. It gets a slightly fuller, more natural sound if you can add a small amount of the internal mic into the mix. Maybe it shouldn't, but in my experience it does. A miracle perhaps. I of course eq either way, that was the whole point of my message....

It would boost the fundamentals quite a bit because essentially thats whats going on inside the box. What acoustician's term the A and AO modes. Effectively you have a very strong sound wave that resonates predominantly at the frequency of the note. The enclosure will also have frequencies at which certain modes will take over dominating the sound and these are fixed at certain frequencies or more accurately frequency ranges. They are important to the guitar and it's sound but more from an acoustic out front kind of way. The net effect is that you are introducing strong fundamental frequencies into your mix, which can give you a bit more umph for want of a better word. The downside is that you have no way of controlling them and they can add horribly to wolf tones and feedback. The benifit of good EQ is you can boost or cut the same frequencies and you are in control.

Of course if you are happy with your setup then I would in no way suggest it is wrong. What works for you is right for you. My point is that as a rule internal mics are not a great idea when considered alongside other options.

 

[SHEPPARDB.]

It would boost the fundamentals quite a bit because essentially thats whats going on inside the box. What acoustician's term the A and AO modes. Effectively you have a very strong sound wave that resonates predominantly at the frequency of the note. The enclosure will also have frequencies at which certain modes will take over dominating the sound and these are fixed at certain frequencies or more accurately frequency ranges. They are important to the guitar and it's sound but more from an acoustic out front kind of way. The net effect is that you are introducing strong fundamental frequencies into your mix, which can give you a bit more umph for want of a better word. The downside is that you have no way of controlling them and they can add horribly to wolf tones and feedback. The benifit of good EQ is you can boost or cut the same frequencies and you are in control.

Of course if you are happy with your setup then I would in no way suggest it is wrong. What works for you is right for you. My point is that as a rule internal mics are not a great idea when considered alongside other options.

Funny you should mention that.I was playing Zeps going to california at a gig
the other night,and people in the audience kept yelling at me that the fundamental frequencies were over bearing.

 

[Fusioninspace]

I have a Seagull as well and have used the rubber stopper thing. I noticed that it's tight on Martins, Taylors, Ovations, etc. as well. They do work, but I found the best thing was to use a notch filter to cut out the feedback. I'm using a L.R. Baggs DI/Pre that has a notch filter and couldn't be happier.

I should mention that I put a K&K Pure Western in the Seagull. So I didn't have any other adjustments available to me. The Baggs has really helped out all the live sound of some other guitars that have used it (Martin, Washburn, etc.).

I'm the lead sound guy at our church as well, and I've basically come to the conclusion that feedback is almost always avoidable if you really take time look at the basics (monitor/mike/guitar positions, gain levels, eq) and also work with the musicians and help them set up. Since I also play half the time, I can practice what I preach and try to learn more from a player's perspective.

The tight fit of the feedback "plug" is worrisome to me in that it might do some damage. But they do work to some degree, and if you never take it out, then it might not be an issue.

 

[ggunn]

Funny you should mention that.I was playing Zeps going to california at a gig
the other night,and people in the audience kept yelling at me that the fundamental frequencies were over bearing.

You played a room where audience members were yelling at the stage, "Dude! Your fundamental frequencies are overbearing!"? Tough room, and rather specific with their criticism, too. ;^)