|
Post by vikingblues on Nov 29, 2015 19:38:29 GMT
It's a real annoyance. I just don't seem to be able to get on with Spruce on an acoustic guitar soundboard. It doesn't seem to matter on the variety either though Sitka seems worst. Bright, clear and articulate as it may be, and they should all be virtues, I just can't appreciate the sound as much as I obviously should be able to, as a huge majority of guitars are spruce ..... and therefore it must be hugely popular. The thought occurs it might just be the way I play! Or it might be my hearing? I just recently tried on spec a spruce top parlour with a good reputation and pretty much 100% positive comments on line and on forums - and I arranged for it to go back to the supplier the same day I received it as it was so unsatisfactory to my ears. Does anyone else have reservations vis-a-vis spruce, or am I out on that particular limb all on my lonesome? Maybe mahogany is my only option as an alternative to the cedar that both my Tanglewoods have. If it's not too muddy! Mark
|
|
|
Post by earwighoney on Nov 29, 2015 19:43:21 GMT
If you like Cedar then go with it and if you don't like Spruce then it's not for you.
Mahogany soundboard guitars aren't muddy, but they don't have the volume or dynamic range as cedar/spruce guitars. I recommend trying out the Guild M-120 Westerly if you can, a really fun instrument to play.
I agree though, there seem to be far fewer Cedar top guitars on the market.
|
|
maninashed
Cheerfully Optimistic
Mad Farmer Liberation Front
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by maninashed on Nov 29, 2015 19:45:39 GMT
I thought this was going to be about Christmas trees.....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2015 19:48:46 GMT
Have you tried Engelman spruce? A little bit warmer that sitka and European spruce. If you want something different try a redwood topped guitar- slightly stiffer than spruce, but I believe with more dynamic range. Have always loved all mahogany guitars- the one Dave White built for the road trip (all be it sapele) was a particular favourite).
But yes, I agree, sometimes we get used to a particular sound- I just could not get on with the sound of a sitka spruce guitar I have recently moved on!
Robbie
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 34,080
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
|
Post by ocarolan on Nov 30, 2015 0:26:27 GMT
I haven't owned a spruce topped 6 string guitar for some time. My Lowden and Fyldes are all cedar topped; I am lucky enough to still be custodian of the sapele DeFaoite guitar Robbie mentioned; and my recently purchased £99.99 Vintage has a mahogany top.
Mark, I suspect that, like me, from a player's perspective you appreciate the quick response and sensitivity to a light touch of a cedar top on a decently built guitar. (From a listeners angle I doubt I could tell the difference.) You don't have to like spruce tops just because the majority of people seem to.
Keith
|
|
|
Post by vikingblues on Nov 30, 2015 7:30:40 GMT
If you like Cedar then go with it and if you don't like Spruce then it's not for you. Mahogany soundboard guitars aren't muddy, but they don't have the volume or dynamic range as cedar/spruce guitars. I recommend trying out the Guild M-120 Westerly if you can, a really fun instrument to play. I agree though, there seem to be far fewer Cedar top guitars on the market. I worked out at the weekend that at my favourite guitar shop for acoustics 74% of guitars in the £200-£1500 range are spruce topped! Then 17% Mahogany, 5% Cedar and 4% other. Though I've not worked it out for the others that seems fairly typical of the other shops too. Which reminds me why my most recent cedar top acquisition had to be an on-line order. I had been researching small body mahogany top possibilities - between £200 and £1500 - and to be honest I'm not feeling like risking a big investment (ever) again. Locally my choice then looks like a maximum of 6 guitars - so not spoilt for choice. Interesting to note that one of them is that Guild M120 Westerly you mention. It'll be the end of the week before I can get to investigate the instruments for real. Have you tried Engelman spruce? A little bit warmer that sitka and European spruce. If you want something different try a redwood topped guitar- slightly stiffer than spruce, but I believe with more dynamic range. Have always loved all mahogany guitars- the one Dave White built for the road trip (all be it sapele) was a particular favourite). But yes, I agree, sometimes we get used to a particular sound- I just could not get on with the sound of a sitka spruce guitar I have recently moved on! Robbie As yet I've not encountered one in the right size range Robbie. There are a whole 2(!!) Engleman in that favourite shop of mine, but both large body guitars. I have seen that Engleman is a bit warmer which did intrigue me. The Brook Clyst I tried at Celtic Chords last year had a European Spruce top and Maple back and sides and it was a lot warmer in sound than I expected it to be. But too much in £ cost for me now. My reservation on mahogany ("muddy") perhaps is down to only experiencing it on larger guitars with a bigger bottom end that tends to swamp the higher melody notes when played like I play. I'm intrigued how it'll work out for my ears on smaller size guitars. My better half does have a Taylor GS Mini mahogany and it doesn't seem to go that muddy if I can wrestle it from her grasp and try it myself. I haven't owned a spruce topped 6 string guitar for some time. My Lowden and Fyldes are all cedar topped; I am lucky enough to still be custodian of the sapele DeFaoite guitar Robbie mentioned; and my recently purchased £99.99 Vintage has a mahogany top. Mark, I suspect that, like me, from a player's perspective you appreciate the quick response and sensitivity to a light touch of a cedar top on a decently built guitar. (From a listeners angle I doubt I could tell the difference.) You don't have to like spruce tops just because the majority of people seem to. Keith Thanks Keith - the fact that you have a good number of cedar tops is encouraging in case the mahogany idea turns out to be not for me. It was just that with my two main acoustics both being cedar top it's difficult to avoid concern that a change would be useful for range of sound. Then I have noticed how different the two I have sound, so why shouldn't a third one sound as different again. A quick response and sensitivity to a light touch are maybe virtues that are essential for the way I play. Though if there only 6 mahogany guitars locally I can try in the body sizes I'm wanting to play I'll be lucky to find even 2 in cedar! Mark
|
|
|
Post by delb0y on Nov 30, 2015 9:36:31 GMT
I just realised aside from my Martin which is Sapele I have no idea what woods any of my other acoustics (or indeed electrics) are made from, front, back, or sides. Bad Del !
|
|
Martin
Administrator
Posts: 11,890
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"http://mandocello.org/lytebox/images/adirondack.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0a530b
Mini-Profile Text Color: 4f3517
|
Post by Martin on Nov 30, 2015 10:01:32 GMT
I've played cedar topped guitars, and only own spruce topped guitars, and in most cases it makes no difference to me. I like both kinds, but would go out of my way to order a cedar topped guitar if I ever got another instrument, but that's just because I like the way it looks Mark, I'd just be happy that your ears let you easily distinguish between what you like and what you don't. Some of us don't have that power of discernment As far as mahogany goes....I've only ever found it worked for me in one case - a Martin 000-15M. Other mahogany guitars (including Martins) sounded a bit lifeless.
|
|
|
Post by earwighoney on Nov 30, 2015 11:20:07 GMT
I had been researching small body mahogany top possibilities - between £200 and £1500 - and to be honest I'm not feeling like risking a big investment (ever) again. Locally my choice then looks like a maximum of 6 guitars - so not spoilt for choice. Mark The Guild M-140 W which is the same as the M-120 but with a spruce top, which was a heavier guitar and far less responsive than the M-120 W, which is a really lightly braced and built guitar and can be bought for around £460-480 or so, and I recommend checking it out if you can. I'm in agreement when it comes to the tricky aspects of finding guitars with cedar soundboards problematic to play. I recently bought a flamenco guitar with a cedar soundboard and Padauk back and sides which was even more a leap of faith, but one that worked! I've been thinking of adding a 'vintage' voiced cedar topped steel string to my collection of guitars but like yourself I'm finding them problematic to find. Keith makes an excellent point about just because most people like spruce guitars doesn't mean you have to. There are many woods, sizes/makers of guitars a lot of people love but I despise. It took me a while to get work out what I liked though!
|
|
|
Post by scorpiodog on Nov 30, 2015 11:30:12 GMT
I guess knowing what type of wood sounds good to your ears is a good thing when you're buying guitars, but surely, once you've chosen one it doesn't make a blind bit of difference, does it?
Also, there seems more to the dark art of guitar making that has a bearing on the sound than just the choice of wood. I read an interesting article about Taylor guitars relatively recently where Bob Taylor was explaining that they were processing maple to make it sound less brittle than the norm. Now, I realise I'm referring to back and sides here, and not tops, but I don't even think about the woods, top or back and sides (and certainly not necks), when I'm trying a guitar and deciding whether I like it or not.
I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with analysis. It's probably a good way of minimising errors, but it's not for me when it comes to guitars (washing machines, irons and utility companies, yes). But it does concern me that over analysis may lead to prejudice, and that can lead to missed opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, I like to try as many different guitars as I can reasonably lay my hands on. And I've liked many guitars with different tops, different back and sides (I'm not even prejudiced against laminates) and many different designs.
On reviewing it, I can see mine is a pretty pointless post. But I've typed it now, so....
|
|
|
Post by grayn on Nov 30, 2015 12:58:17 GMT
I agree with Martin. The Martin 000-15M is a wonderful sounding and playing, guitar.
|
|
Wild Violet
Artist / Performer
Posts: 3,561
My main instrument is: Symonds OM-14
|
Post by Wild Violet on Nov 30, 2015 16:19:30 GMT
No issues with spruce, but lots of issues with cedar. It must be my heavy handed playing style, as cedar seems to turn to mush when I play it. I like spruce, and the stiffer the better. Adirondack is my favourite, followed by German/Alpine spruce. Sitka is somewhat further down the list.
|
|
|
Post by cottonopolis on Nov 30, 2015 18:44:41 GMT
I can make any combination sound bad. I do like mahogany and spruce though.
|
|
|
Post by vikingblues on Nov 30, 2015 23:00:47 GMT
I just realised aside from my Martin which is Sapele I have no idea what woods any of my other acoustics (or indeed electrics) are made from, front, back, or sides. Bad Del ! Very wise to ignore it and to just get what you like the sound of. That's how I got my first Tanglewood - tried several guitars and it stood head and shoulders above the others. I had no idea what they were made of. Found out later it was cedar top. Similar when I got my second Tanglewood - tried a fair few in what is now my favourite guitar shop - I was now more aware what they were made of but was open minded and was trying everything in "my size". The TW73 was the best one by far. It was cedar top again. Then when I was trying more expensive guitars last year in my initial search in Edinburgh for the "special one" the one that was the best of the bunch (and it wasn't Martin or Taylor) had ... a cedar top. I've bought 3 guitars in the last year on line on special deals. One survived .. cedar top. Two didn't - one cedar and one spruce. So cedat doesn't always work. Seems to be just a better hit rate though. Mark, I'd just be happy that your ears let you easily distinguish between what you like and what you don't. Some of us don't have that power of discernment As far as mahogany goes....I've only ever found it worked for me in one case - a Martin 000-15M. Other mahogany guitars (including Martins) sounded a bit lifeless. I don't know about discernment - mare like me being too picky! The second best in last years Edinburgh search was a "used" Martin 000-15M. It was better than a new one I also tried by some margin. Interesting that it's one that worked for grayn too. But an 000 is too big a body for what I'm now looking for. There are 0-15Ms and 00-15Ms of course. Most mahogany top guitars I've tried haven't worked for me though, so this may be a wild goose chase, in which case I revert to trying anything again. The Guild M-140 W which is the same as the M-120 but with a spruce top, which was a heavier guitar and far less responsive than the M-120 W, which is a really lightly braced and built guitar and can be bought for around £460-480 or so, and I recommend checking it out if you can. The Guild M120 is currently listed as in stock in my favourite guitar shop. Hopefully still there on Friday when I can next get there. I noticed they do also have the M-140 (Sitka spruce) and I thought it would be useful to try that too as a contrast. Mark
|
|
|
Post by vikingblues on Nov 30, 2015 23:18:28 GMT
I guess knowing what type of wood sounds good to your ears is a good thing when you're buying guitars, but surely, once you've chosen one it doesn't make a blind bit of difference, does it? Also, there seems more to the dark art of guitar making that has a bearing on the sound than just the choice of wood. I read an interesting article about Taylor guitars relatively recently where Bob Taylor was explaining that they were processing maple to make it sound less brittle than the norm. Now, I realise I'm referring to back and sides here, and not tops, but I don't even think about the woods, top or back and sides (and certainly not necks), when I'm trying a guitar and deciding whether I like it or not. I'm not suggesting there's anything wrong with analysis. It's probably a good way of minimising errors, but it's not for me when it comes to guitars (washing machines, irons and utility companies, yes). But it does concern me that over analysis may lead to prejudice, and that can lead to missed opportunity. I guess what I'm saying is, I like to try as many different guitars as I can reasonably lay my hands on. And I've liked many guitars with different tops, different back and sides (I'm not even prejudiced against laminates) and many different designs. On reviewing it, I can see mine is a pretty pointless post. But I've typed it now, so.... Not pointless at all! I think I saw that article with Bob Taylor. The Brook Clyst I tried at Celtic Chords had maple back and side and a spruce top. I thought it would sound rather shrill because of that - and it wasn't. I believe that quality makersm where a lot is done by hand and where the builders use their judgementm can influence the sound hugely in their design and that can make body woods themselves have less influence. I don't think the factory production route allows anything like as much influence to be brought to bear like this though so I do feel the top tonewood remains a big influence for those - which is what I'll be looking at. It's a good point about being too set on parameters in advance and missing possibilities. At least on the plus side my restriction on guitar size (which is a strictly not negotiable restriction) means my choice is so limited I will be able to spread the net wider than just mahogany if needed without spending my whole life in making the search. No issues with spruce, but lots of issues with cedar. It must be my heavy handed playing style, as cedar seems to turn to mush when I play it. I like spruce, and the stiffer the better. Adirondack is my favourite, followed by German/Alpine spruce. Sitka is somewhat further down the list. That's good to hear. It makes sense to me that the way two players can play in such different ways can mean one players nemesis is cedar and the others is spruce. It makes me feel that it's maybe not my fault that I can't get spruce to work for me. I can make any combination sound bad. We are in the same club. Mark
|
|