ilovefuzz.com

dubkitty wrote:

Moustache_Bash wrote:

dubkitty wrote:why does everybody play dreadnought-sized acoustic guitars when they're ill-suited for so many styles of music?

Could you please tell me more about this? I never understood the significance of the body size in acoustics, except bigger body=louder.

the typical size of acoustic guitar that you see people playing is the dreadnought or "D" size. this is the type of acoustic universally used by bluegrass players because it's big, loud, and balances relatively well when pummelled at the volume at which bluegrassers play. when played more quietly they tend to be over-bassy and to have somewhat limited treble response compared to a smaller guitar.

these differences can be attributable to a number of factors. size and shape are paramount. the physical size of the instrument determines the vibrating area of the top and the resonant chamber behind, and thus determines the absolute volume. the shape affects the tone and harmonic content of the sound; a larger lower bout adds bass, while a narrower waist tends to reduce low mids. the combination of the shoulders and waist is very determinative of the high-end content. the relative sharpness of the corners of the guitar also affects the tonal quality.

the type of wood and construction of the guitar are also important. different top and side/back woods have different tonal characteristics. most acoustic guitars have spruce tops, which have been traditional on stringed European instruments for hundreds of years; some, especially more recently, follow in the Spanish "classical" tradition and use cedar tops. sides and back are usually mahogany, rosewood, or sometimes maple. mahogany is relatively neutral and mikes well; rosewood is lovely and warm in the room, but can be a little dense harmonically on mic; maple is bright, hard, and pingy. and the way the top is braced and the way the bracing is shaped are important in how freely the top--your speaker cone--can vibrate.

given these factors, acoustic guitar sound is to some extent predictable by size and shape. using the dreadnought as standard example, "jumbo" guitars like the Gibson J-200 are larger and rounder in both the upper and lower bouts; this makes them louder all-round but paradoxically clearer in the bass than dreadnoughts, but they're awfully large to play. going smaller from D-sized guitars, we come to what are usually called "OM" (Orchestra Model") guitars after the Martin designation. these guitars are smaller than D-style guitars and have a narrower waist. many fingerstyle acoustic players prefer this size of guitar or its close relative the OOO because the bass is clearer and quieter and stands up better to the thumping of a thumbpick, and the treble is brighter due to the narrower waist and tighter upper bout. the next sizes smaller in Martin designation are--wait for it!--OO and O. you can tell they put a lot of thought into this. the OO and O appears as 14-fret models that are progressively smaller versions of the OOO, and as 12-fret versions the size of a "parlor guitar." they are more tinkly and sustain less as they get smaller due once again to physics. you're amplifying the same tone with a smaller resonating chamber and a smaller membrane, ergo, you're creating fewer audible low overtones.

all this is incredibly oversimplified, but it's something. really, it's all logic and observation if you learn some stuff about the way sound behaves in a confined space. small roundish space (OM): bass is softer and even; large squarish space (D): bass loud and muddy; large round space (J): bass is (duur) big and round.

rbtr wrote:I don't understand how everything can sound one great one day, and then the next day I throw the switches and it sounds awful.

dubkitty wrote:so there's the next question: why do the angels in my tubes die?

masked elwood wrote:remember.....even dylan went electric.

dubkitty wrote:why doesn't anybody make a decent semi-hollow double-cut bass any more that doesn't cost $4000?

DuoSonicII wrote:

dubkitty wrote:why doesn't anybody make a decent semi-hollow double-cut bass any more that doesn't cost $4000?

I just snagged one of these a couple weeks ago...it's pretty great.

rfurtkamp wrote:

masked elwood wrote:remember.....even dylan went electric.

And this was not a good thing.

My ears nearly died seeing him live in 1990. I didn't stay in the auditorium for long.

dubkitty wrote:

Moustache_Bash wrote:

dubkitty wrote:why does everybody play dreadnought-sized acoustic guitars when they're ill-suited for so many styles of music?

Could you please tell me more about this? I never understood the significance of the body size in acoustics, except bigger body=louder.

the typical size of acoustic guitar that you see people playing is the dreadnought or "D" size. this is the type of acoustic universally used by bluegrass players because it's big, loud, and balances relatively well when pummelled at the volume at which bluegrassers play. when played more quietly they tend to be over-bassy and to have somewhat limited treble response compared to a smaller guitar.

these differences can be attributable to a number of factors. size and shape are paramount. the physical size of the instrument determines the vibrating area of the top and the resonant chamber behind, and thus determines the absolute volume. the shape affects the tone and harmonic content of the sound; a larger lower bout adds bass, while a narrower waist tends to reduce low mids. the combination of the shoulders and waist is very determinative of the high-end content. the relative sharpness of the corners of the guitar also affects the tonal quality.

the type of wood and construction of the guitar are also important. different top and side/back woods have different tonal characteristics. most acoustic guitars have spruce tops, which have been traditional on stringed European instruments for hundreds of years; some, especially more recently, follow in the Spanish "classical" tradition and use cedar tops. sides and back are usually mahogany, rosewood, or sometimes maple. mahogany is relatively neutral and mikes well; rosewood is lovely and warm in the room, but can be a little dense harmonically on mic; maple is bright, hard, and pingy. and the way the top is braced and the way the bracing is shaped are important in how freely the top--your speaker cone--can vibrate.

given these factors, acoustic guitar sound is to some extent predictable by size and shape. using the dreadnought as standard example, "jumbo" guitars like the Gibson J-200 are larger and rounder in both the upper and lower bouts; this makes them louder all-round but paradoxically clearer in the bass than dreadnoughts, but they're awfully large to play. going smaller from D-sized guitars, we come to what are usually called "OM" (Orchestra Model") guitars after the Martin designation. these guitars are smaller than D-style guitars and have a narrower waist. many fingerstyle acoustic players prefer this size of guitar or its close relative the OOO because the bass is clearer and quieter and stands up better to the thumping of a thumbpick, and the treble is brighter due to the narrower waist and tighter upper bout. the next sizes smaller in Martin designation are--wait for it!--OO and O. you can tell they put a lot of thought into this. the OO and O appears as 14-fret models that are progressively smaller versions of the OOO, and as 12-fret versions the size of a "parlor guitar." they are more tinkly and sustain less as they get smaller due once again to physics. you're amplifying the same tone with a smaller resonating chamber and a smaller membrane, ergo, you're creating fewer audible low overtones.

all this is incredibly oversimplified, but it's something. really, it's all logic and observation if you learn some stuff about the way sound behaves in a confined space. small roundish space (OM): bass is softer and even; large squarish space (D): bass loud and muddy; large round space (J): bass is (duur) big and round.

Mudfuzz wrote:

dubkitty wrote:

Moustache_Bash wrote:

dubkitty wrote:why does everybody play dreadnought-sized acoustic guitars when they're ill-suited for so many styles of music?

Could you please tell me more about this? I never understood the significance of the body size in acoustics, except bigger body=louder.

the typical size of acoustic guitar that you see people playing is the dreadnought or "D" size. this is the type of acoustic universally used by bluegrass players because it's big, loud, and balances relatively well when pummelled at the volume at which bluegrassers play. when played more quietly they tend to be over-bassy and to have somewhat limited treble response compared to a smaller guitar.

these differences can be attributable to a number of factors. size and shape are paramount. the physical size of the instrument determines the vibrating area of the top and the resonant chamber behind, and thus determines the absolute volume. the shape affects the tone and harmonic content of the sound; a larger lower bout adds bass, while a narrower waist tends to reduce low mids. the combination of the shoulders and waist is very determinative of the high-end content. the relative sharpness of the corners of the guitar also affects the tonal quality.

the type of wood and construction of the guitar are also important. different top and side/back woods have different tonal characteristics. most acoustic guitars have spruce tops, which have been traditional on stringed European instruments for hundreds of years; some, especially more recently, follow in the Spanish "classical" tradition and use cedar tops. sides and back are usually mahogany, rosewood, or sometimes maple. mahogany is relatively neutral and mikes well; rosewood is lovely and warm in the room, but can be a little dense harmonically on mic; maple is bright, hard, and pingy. and the way the top is braced and the way the bracing is shaped are important in how freely the top--your speaker cone--can vibrate.

given these factors, acoustic guitar sound is to some extent predictable by size and shape. using the dreadnought as standard example, "jumbo" guitars like the Gibson J-200 are larger and rounder in both the upper and lower bouts; this makes them louder all-round but paradoxically clearer in the bass than dreadnoughts, but they're awfully large to play. going smaller from D-sized guitars, we come to what are usually called "OM" (Orchestra Model") guitars after the Martin designation. these guitars are smaller than D-style guitars and have a narrower waist. many fingerstyle acoustic players prefer this size of guitar or its close relative the OOO because the bass is clearer and quieter and stands up better to the thumping of a thumbpick, and the treble is brighter due to the narrower waist and tighter upper bout. the next sizes smaller in Martin designation are--wait for it!--OO and O. you can tell they put a lot of thought into this. the OO and O appears as 14-fret models that are progressively smaller versions of the OOO, and as 12-fret versions the size of a "parlor guitar." they are more tinkly and sustain less as they get smaller due once again to physics. you're amplifying the same tone with a smaller resonating chamber and a smaller membrane, ergo, you're creating fewer audible low overtones.

all this is incredibly oversimplified, but it's something. really, it's all logic and observation if you learn some stuff about the way sound behaves in a confined space. small roundish space (OM): bass is softer and even; large squarish space (D): bass loud and muddy; large round space (J): bass is (duur) big and round.

You are right on most of the stuff you have there except classical top wood, that is a newer thing and more of a marketing thing, the norm for the last 200ish years has always been spruce. Also The "too much" bass thing on a Dread only applies if it is set up for that, you put lighter strings on them and they will behave more because you are not driving the top as much. On the other hand that is how a classical guitar works, the top is very light and flexible so you can put strings with very little tension and yet still fill a room with the thing.

sylnau wrote:My Antonio Aparicio clasical guitar have a cedar top (sound darker)... but you're right... we see spruce top more often. And I prefer normal tension strings on this.

Things you don't quite understand.