|
Post by chaucer on May 29, 2016 9:55:05 GMT
Certain manufacturers and certain tone woods. This may already exist somewhere I didn't find. i'm wanting brief notes giving a brief oversight and flavour ... if such a thing is possible. I am a long time guitarist but know vastly more about electrics than I do acoustics. I have had my trusty Yamaha FG 332 for many many years. i am thinking of treating myself to a new (or 2nd hand) acoustic budget approximately £600 at the upper limit. For example ...
Taylor guitars are renowned for ... Faith guitars are known to be ...
Sitka spruce has a ... sound. Mahogany is ... in tone.
Many thanks.
|
|
R the F
Luthier / Guitar Maker
Posts: 1,135
My main instrument is: bandsaw
|
Post by R the F on May 29, 2016 11:34:33 GMT
I'm not really the person to answer this since I'm a firm believer in the evidence of something called the Leonardo Project, which seems to be showing that it doesn't actually make any difference what you use to make a guitar (simplistic summary!), but I have previously been pointed to the Taylor Guitars magazine from Fall 2008, where you will find their take on all the tonewoods known to man (or Taylor, at least). Here's the link to the site but it doens't seem to go back that far. If you can't find it, I have a pdf of it but I'm not sure how to put a pdf on here. Hope this helps and welcome to the forum. May I be the first to suggest you introduce yourself in the Introductions section so that we know what to talk to you about!
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 34,009
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
Member is Online
|
Post by ocarolan on May 29, 2016 12:11:22 GMT
Hi chaucer, and welcome to the Forum! Good to hear you're becoming more acoustic, and for £600 you can certainly obtain a remarkably good acoustic guitar. I'd put aside all generalisations, reviews and opinions/preconceptions/prejudices held by others if I were you. Concentrate on which ones feel right when you play them, and most importantly, which ones sound the way you want them to sound when you are playing them. In short, make a nuisance of yourself in as many guitar shops as you can - this is really fun! Generalising by make/size/construction of guitars is very misleading - there will always be exceptions to whatever you believe/have been told. Obsessing over woods can also be very misleading - it's more important who made the wood into a guitar - that has a far greater bearing on what the final sound will be. Don't rely on internet samples of guitars - there are far too many other factors muddying any comparisons here. And of course the player is also a big variable - not just their likes and dislikes, but actually how they play - the same guitar that sounded great when your mate played it might sound less good in your hands, and vice versa. So, sorry to not answer your questions - get out there and do some personal research in shops and by playing other peoples guitars. It will give you a good idea of what you do like, and don't like. Don't attribute a particular type of sound to any one particular feature or component of the guitar - it's the whole package that matters. We're all different, my favourite guitar might very well leave you cold, though you might really like one for which I care little. What matters most is what YOU think, not what others believe/tell you. Scary isn't it? You would do well to think how you plan to use this instrument - solo? band? plugged in? totally acoustic? It may have a bearing on what would be best suited to your needs. Good luck with your search - and keep us up to speed with what you've tried, and how you're getting on - we love a good guitar hunt! Keith
|
|
|
Post by fatfingerjohn on May 29, 2016 12:59:48 GMT
I can only echo Keith's (Ocarolan) comment.
There is a thread on the site where members were encouraged to list the guitars they owned. If you work on the basis that there is a vast array of capabilities and styles on the forum as well as ability, the only noticeable result of this thread was that the list shows a massively wide selection of guitars, both maker, size, shape, wood, nut width, cutaway, etc which, whilst not covering every acoustic known to mankind, does a pretty good job of it. And most people like the one they have got; so there just can't be a 'right' answer. No doubt if you fish in the £2000 plus pool the selection is narrower and also you might be good enough to appreciate the subtleties and qualities.
At most price levels there are makers where say £600 is near the top of their range and others where it's near the bottom of theirs. Does it make any difference; possibly not. People will also come up with generalisations e.g. 'Dreadnoughts make great strummers'; something else is 'best for fingerstyle'. May be GENERALLY true to a degree but at my level I play largely fingerstyle and LOVE my dread.
About the only recommendation is try to avoid the bling. Unless you have a bottomless fund why pay for best quality inlays and decoration when good quality tuners and an action which suits your style will give you greater value. (My son confesses to be a 'magpie' and his first consideration is 'do I like the look of it and I don't like plain ones! Nothing wrong with that though). The action and playability is all-important and in the price range you're looking at there will be variations from one guitar to another in exactly the same spec.
Get into as many shops as you can. Just try loads. Narrow it down. Try them again. Then you've got a chance of getting the one that's right for you.
Good luck and enjoy your search.
FFJ
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 29, 2016 13:53:51 GMT
Hope this helps and welcome to the forum. May I be the first to suggest you introduce yourself in the Introductions section so that we know what to talk to you about! Thanks. I gave also done an intro here: acousticsoundboard.co.uk/thread/6324/hello
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 29, 2016 13:59:17 GMT
Concentrate on which ones feel right when you play them, and most importantly, which ones sound the way you want them to sound when you are playing them. And of course the player is also a big variable - actually how they play You would do well to think how you plan to use this instrument - solo? band? plugged in? totally acoustic? It may have a bearing on what would be best suited to your needs. Thanks Keith. I play strumming rhythm and fingerpicking too. At the moment all unplugged. I want in the near future to plug in, but not necessarily with on-board electrics. A great acoustic is the priority. I'd rather have an after-market pickup than on-board pre-amp etc.
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 29, 2016 14:02:30 GMT
About the only recommendation is try to avoid the bling. Unless you have a bottomless fund why pay for best quality inlays and decoration when good quality tuners and an action which suits your style will give you greater value.
I agree. Good quality inherent in the build us more important to me than fancy frills on the aesthetics.
|
|
|
Post by scorpiodog on May 29, 2016 14:37:51 GMT
Hi, Chaucer. Welcome to this community.
Sadly, I don't think anybody is going to answer your question in the way that you've framed it. There's just far too much going on with acoustic guitars to answer in that way.
I guess with your experience of electrics you'll have found variations in quality even within a single model built in the same year. It's the same with acoustics but on steroids. Because, with acoustic guitars there's no variation in pickups or wiring systems or amps or pedals when they're played acoustically.
I echo everything said so far, but one thing I don't think has been mentioned is that batch built guitars (and I think your budget will achieve a batch built guitar rather than a single luthier crafted instrument) vary even within the batch. That's because wood varies so widely in structure even when one board comes from the same tree as another. So modern production methods can standardise the manufacturing process, but still end up with variations in sound and feel.
I think it's fair to say that most manufacturers have QA standards that eliminate the worst examples, but the variations mean that you really should buy the actual guitar that you find is to your taste, and not just the same model.
So, again, I recommend that you try as many different guitars as you can. The right one will be obvious when you find it. Don't be in too much of a hurry. But play as many guitars as you are allowed to, even if they're not available for sale. You'll probably find that most acoustic guitar owners are happy for you to have a try if you ask. So if you go to open mic nights or folk clubs and engage people in conversation you'll be able to try a wide variety of guitars and this will help you form your own opinions.
In fact, this forum has the odd get together (including a very well attended meeting in Halifax each September) where you could go and try out some cracking instruments. If you're anywhere on the South Coast I'm hosting a little event on the 18th June in Wimborne in Dorset where you'd be very welcome.
I wish you the very best of fortune in your search. I'm sure it will be a lot of fun. Let us all know how you're getting on and please post what you eventually decide on. We all love a New Guitar Day here.
|
|
|
Post by vikingblues on May 29, 2016 15:36:01 GMT
An acoustic guitar is way too complicated for the different types of features to be handily put into pigeonholes!
Every time I have tried to develop a set of rules and guidelines to help me in the process of choosing an acoustic guitar I find something that shows there is a flaw in one of those assumptions (even if sometimes only for one guitar).
Having said that I have found (in my admittedly limited time of 2 1/2 years playing / collecting acoustic guitars since I deserted the electric instrument) that I seem to have an aversion to something in nearly all sitka spruce top acoustic guitars and find my choice in a shoot-out in shops of different possible guitars most often gears towards cedar tops. So there may be an essential attribute of these woods that causes this. Quite possibly down to my lightness of touch where I am given to believe the lack of strong overtones in sitka makes sound a bit thin when played lightly, but cedars quick response and stronger overtones suits. No hard and fast rules though - for example I've heard all mahogany guitars when I've played them that have sounded overly warm and thick, but also tried ones with a very thin trebly sound.
The fact that two guitars of the exact same make and model can sound very different and indeed be segregated even on the grounds of one being good and one being no use at all is a fundamental flaw in making any definite statements on these things. I have heard it said by an eminent builder that what is done with the bracing can have as much effect on the tone as the species of wood used for the top.
As Paul said above batch built guitars can vary even within the batch due to the variability inherent in the raw material. There is a distinct conflict between the idea of a controlled batch production process in a factory where strict unbending measurements are law but a very variable material is used. Two identically thicknessed guitar tops can vary by as much as 100% in density and 200% in longitudinal stiffness and 300% in lateral stiffness according to Ervin Somogyi - there are very interesting articles by him on-line about the whole acoustic guitar making process.
A factory build does not try and compensate for the different density by adjusting the thickness to optimise response. The factory wants to minimise returns so they err on the side of safety and set the standard thickness of tops at a higher amount to avoid structural collapse risks. So as in any bell distribution curve they end up with a few examples of very responsive guitars, a lot of in essence overbuilt but decent sounding guitars, and a few that would be better off having been made into park benches. This is why you are being sensible if at all possible to try acoustic guitars and not order on-line unless you're prepared to use the returns rights under distance selling.
I do recall the electric guitar side of things being much more straightforward in this regard!
Mark
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 30, 2016 6:41:32 GMT
I guess with your experience of electrics you'll have found variations in quality even within a single model built in the same year. Thanks. Yes, though certain electric manufacturers are known to have consistent quality control, others much less reliable. Also, with electrics, it is possible to generalise ... for example between the scale length of Fender & Gibson, between humbucker and single coil pickups, between fixed bridge & tremolo etc. There are accepted standard bearers for 'quality'. There are certain types of guitar that are assuredly geared towards certain genres, sounds etc (with the caveat you can play anything on anything). I was wondering if such a pocket-guide existed for the more general / common acoustics. It seems perhaps not. ps I'm in the North-East ... Teesside.
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 30, 2016 7:06:48 GMT
An acoustic guitar is way too complicated for the different types of features to be handily put into pigeonholes! Every time I have tried to develop a set of rules and guidelines to help me in the process of choosing an acoustic guitar I find something that shows there is a flaw in one of those assumptions (even if sometimes only for one guitar). I do recall the electric guitar side of things being much more straightforward in this regard! Mark Thanks. Interesting info on the batch built guitars.
|
|
|
Post by chaucer on May 30, 2016 7:18:45 GMT
Okay ... given that I've asked the wrong / impossible question (at any price point, not just my low-to-medium budget upto £600 price point).
Let's take the 'tone wood' part out of my OP. Just focusing on a general description of the more well-known makes ...
Could I possibly get responses such as ....
brand xxxx ... variable quality, known for wide nuts and chunky necks with a pronounced bottom end
brand yyyy ... much bang for your buck, generally consistent with a focus on quality build ... avoid the electro versions though due to reliability issues
brand zzzz ... don't pay for the name on the headstock, at this price point no more than another far-east batch build which others do better for less money
Or is that still too much of a big ask given the variables involved. I guess what I'm saying is, it's a minefield, help me narrow it down somewhat. Do I look for a £500-600 Taylor 2nd hand or a new upper-range Tanglewood etc? Where do I even begin to research / homework in advance of going to the few local shops I have and picking them up?
|
|
|
Post by scorpiodog on May 30, 2016 7:25:46 GMT
. Also, with electrics, it is possible to generalise ... for example between the scale length of Fender & Gibson, between humbucker and single coil pickups, between fixed bridge & tremolo etc. There are accepted standard bearers for 'quality'. There are certain types of guitar that are assuredly geared towards certain genres, sounds etc (with the caveat you can play anything on anything). That's exactly my point. And, of course, scale length is important in an acoustic guitar as well. I think I'm right in saying that most acoustic guitarists will refer to "feel" or "playability" or "comfort" when describing things that are a function of scale length, nut width, neck profile and similar aspects. But it's sound that's difficult to describe. There's a load of tosh talked about the characteristics of various makes of acoustic guitars. And, to a degree, about the woods that they're made from. But as ocarolan says above, the interaction between the wood type and the characteristics of the build can give you a guide. So, for example, when I was looking for a heavy strummer for live performance, I looked for a dreadnought and found what I was looking for with a Martin D28. I'm very heavy handed and my role in my duo is to provide a constant rhythm and a characteristic that contrasts with and complements the high frequency widdling that the other member excels at. But the Martin stays in its case between gigs or practice nights. But now I'm looking for something even more bassy and strident, so I'm looking at Gibson J200's. I've played loads and can't find the right one. But I know they're out there. So I'll carry on looking. For my everyday playing, I choose a small bodied guitar that responds well to finger style playing, has a tightly focussed sound with even response across the strings and lots of harmonic response and complexity. I have it now. It's a Brook. But it took me years to find it. I have played several other examples of the same model, and I can't find one I like as much. But as a strummer, it sucks. That harmonic complexity makes the strings played together mushy and generally horrible. Both the Martin and the Brook are spruce over rosewood and there's little similarity between them, and this (in a rather rambling and long winded way) is the problem with categorising acoustic guitars. All my guitars are different and each excels in a certain way, but I chose them separately and pretty much without reference to make or material (when I bought the Brook I was shopping for a Lowden!). And I'm afraid that's the problem you're facing. But if you like your Yamaha but you want a bit more quality, you might start by looking at guitars of a similar size but of solid wood and see how that goes. But whatever you do, keep an open mind. You might find what you're looking for in a dreadnought, or a smaller bodied guitar, and you might like a mahogany b&s, or maple or rosewood, but it's all subjective and hard to categorise. I'm sorry, Chaucer, I've rambled on and repeated myself. I do hope you find what you're looking for. It's a lovely pastime finding the right guitar, and a lot of us here are passionate about doing just that. But it isn't easy or quick.
|
|
|
Post by scorpiodog on May 30, 2016 7:33:25 GMT
Okay ... given that I've asked the wrong / impossible question (at any price point, not just my low-to-medium budget upto £600 price point). Let's take the 'tone wood' part out of my OP. Just focusing on a general description of the more well-known makes ... Could I possibly get responses such as .... brand xxxx ... variable quality, known for wide nuts and chunky necks with a pronounced bottom end brand yyyy ... much bang for your buck, generally consistent with a focus on quality build ... avoid the electro versions though due to reliability issues brand zzzz ... don't pay for the name on the headstock, at this price point no more than another far-east batch build which others do better for less money Or is that still too much of a big ask given the variables involved. I guess what I'm saying is, it's a minefield, help me narrow it down somewhat. Do I look for a £500-600 Taylor 2nd hand or a new upper-range Tanglewood etc? Where do I even begin to research / homework in advance of going to the few local shops I have and picking them up? Martin and Taylor appear to have better quality control than Gibson. Most of the Far Eastern built guitars have reasonable quality control that catches the real dogs, but there's still inconsistency and it's hard to find the stars. You'll always get more bang for your buck buying second hand, but it's a harder process and involves risk if you buy without playing. Don't look at the name on the headstock. The best advice I can give you if you want to narrow your search is to start with something similar to what you already have and work out from there.
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 34,009
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
Member is Online
|
Post by ocarolan on May 30, 2016 8:21:04 GMT
.................................... Or is that still too much of a big ask given the variables involved. I guess what I'm saying is, it's a minefield, help me narrow it down somewhat. Do I look for a £500-600 Taylor 2nd hand or a new upper-range Tanglewood etc? Where do I even begin to research / homework in advance of going to the few local shops I have and picking them up? It's not a minefield - it's a sweetshop! Don't narrow your sights at this stage by only tasting mints, try some treacle toffee and some sherbet lemons. And if you've always though you didn't like liquorice allsorts, try them too - you may well have a pleasant surprise. You do need to get out and try loads of guitars - having fewer preconceptions/prejudices at this stage is a good thing. If you don't know what body size suits you, you'll only find out by trying lots for comfort, sitting and standing. If you don't know which guitars will sound good to you you'll only find out by playing lots. etc., etc.! Sorry if we seem to be being unhelpful chaucer, but guitars are such personal things - you wouldn't want me to chose your underpants for you would you? Well I hope not anyway. Ther are elements of practicality and personal preference in both articles, and, in the unlikely event of you never having worn underpants you'd just have to try different ones to obtain an idea of what is good for you. I could go out with £600 and buy underpants a guitar that I thought was the bees knees - you'd probably think it just about OK, or not like it at all. So, try lots of sweets underpants guitars with an open mind, with an eye to their intended use, and with no plan to buy in a hurry. Keith - actually your present acoustic guitar is probably pretty good sounding and easy playing. Think what you like/dislike about it and look for things that genuinely improve on it. There will be loads of guitars that sound/feel different, but that doesn't necessarily mean better.
|
|