Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 51 to 76 of 76
  1. #51

    User Info Menu

    The other thing is beyond a point action definitely affects volume. But - this will be moot point I think with most players here who don’t want to play acoustic early jazz, and who use a standard right hand technique.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #52

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Peter plays with such clarity of purpose doesn’t he? That instrument has a beautiful well balanced voice if not super loud in the room per se. But Peter’s projection goes beyond mere acoustics.

    You probably know the story about him studying with Jim Hall where Jim would make him project his playing to him while he went into the other room to make a coffee.

    Also lovely playing yourself! Apologies if you posted this info above, but what’s your axe?
    It's not me playing on the video... :P
    About everything else: You are spot on. I've been playing a GB200 as an eletric guitar and a Peerless Imperial as an acoustic to study/reherse a duo. Both with 13 Rounds. The guy on the duo uses a nylon string classical guitar.

    Quote Originally Posted by JazzNote View Post
    Imho the acoustic properties of the instrument are much more important for the acoustic sound than the string height. I have a 18" Elferink Excalibur which was built by Frans with the specific purpose to be loud. I've equipped it with a TI Bebop set .014 to .055 and i play it with an action of 1.2mm @ 12th fret. It's clarity and projection is incredible, it's much louder than any of my other guitars and has a similar voice to Peter's guitar on the clip (which i can't figure out what it is).
    JazzNote, man I've became very curious about those Elferink Excalibur guitars for the past year as I've started to see some people playing them. That is exactly the kind of guitar/sound I've been looking for. I've used Thomastiks in the past, the strings were really good but sometimes bass was too thin and later I switched to the "usual" 12/52 and later 13/56 because many diferent brands make sets with the same gauges.

    I know the guitars play a big role on the sound, sometimes I'm afraid of killing my guitars voice with strings too low.

    I used to have 1,2mm... 1,4mm... somehow now when I pickup any guitar like that it's "too low" for me.

    Some guys around me said "as low as possible it's perfect, amp does the work"... others are like "the guitar must sound amazing acoustically" (like you should be able to record it without an amp like mighty Joe...)

    After noticing it's easier to dig in or to do certain legatto stuff with a bit more height, I started trying to push it higher and higher and got lost with it... I believe my Peerless is almost at 3mm atm... wich somehow let's spend a lot more energy hitting the strings and I don't even get that "slap" sound agaisn't the frets unless it's an insanely powerfull attack.
    Last edited by Carloscepinha; 10-13-2019 at 12:39 PM.

  4. #53

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Carloscepinha View Post
    It's not me playing on the video... :P About everything else: You are spot on. I've been playing a GB200 as an eletric guitar and a Peerless Imperial as an acoustic to study/reherse a duo. Both with 13 Rounds. The guy on the duo uses a nylon string classical guitar. JazzNote, man I've became very curious about those Elferink Excalibur guitars for the past year as I've started to see some people playing them. That is exactly the kind of guitar/sound I've been looking for. I've used Thomastiks in the past, the strings were really good but sometimes bass was too thin and later I switched to the "usual" 12/52 and later 13/56 because many diferent brands make sets with the same gauges. I know the guitars play a big role on the sound, sometimes I'm afraid of killing my guitars voice with strings too low. I used to have 1,2mm... 1,4mm... somehow now when I pickup any guitar like that it's "too low" for me. Some guys around me said "as low as possible it's perfect, amp does the work"... others are like "the guitar must sound amazing acoustically" (like you should be able to record it without an amp like mighty Joe...) After noticing it's easier to dig in or to do certain legatto stuff with a bit more height, I started trying to push it higher and higher and got lost with it... I believe my Peerless is almost at 3mm atm... wich somehow let's spend a lot more energy hitting the strings and I don't even get that "slap" sound agaisn't the frets unless it's an insanely powerfull attack.
    I have about 2mm on my (60s) Es175, I think am using 12's ATM. Just depends what I am used to. Everyone thinks I'm a wimp, but I've been there and done that with the heavy strings acoustic thing. That guitar is quite resonant acoustically, but it wants flats. I used to have a .15 top on a 12 set for my Loar. Now I'm more interested in a balanced amplified tone. I still play Macaferri for the acoustic stuff. I think your Imperial would be louder, but the 175 has a tone. I can see how Joe was able to mike his. Again modern Gibsons (AFAIK) are built heavy. They are different animals, constructed with amplified tone in mind. Again, I remember playing a Peerless (cheaper one) and being quite impressed by the acoustic voice. The Eastmans are also generally very acoustically lively instruments, which can make them a bit woolly amped. Their 175 clone (can't remember the name) has a perfectly acceptable acoustic voice, and it's a laminate!All told, I think it depends on what gigs you are playing. I am honestly quite baffled by anyone who buys an 18" carved archtop who is not seriously doing the Freddie Green thing. But carved guitars in general (I think) suit brush drums, soft amping and intimate venues. If you play lots of nice restaurant gigs and the jazz clubs in duos and trios this kind of guitar is just the thing, and you will tend to play it as an amplified acoustic. OTOH if you are playing with horns and drums a lot, the acoustic thing doesn't really work so well... You have to get into practicing amped so you get used to it. Been through both ends. I think I can do both. Would love a nice carved guitar..... Sometime in the future :-)Now Peter - I think he has found a way to do both. His technique is quite 'mutey' not floating hand, so that takes care of playing at organ trio levels, but he still gets a strong acoustic sound.

  5. #54

    User Info Menu

    Sorry about the lack of para breaks.

  6. #55

    User Info Menu

    To fix the formatting, you have to use Firefox or perhaps something else. The forum software is at least partially broken with Chrome. I know of a few other sites with the same sort of problems. I've mostly abandoned Chrome.

  7. #56

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I am honestly quite baffled by anyone who buys an 18" carved archtop who is not seriously doing the Freddie Green thing.
    The initial reason for me to order a "loud 18inch guitar" was to be able to perform without an amp in duo/trio settings as there are some venues here which don't allow amps to be used. Fortunately i still had Frans mounting a floater, a lucky decision, because the guitar sounds also great when slightly amplified.
    Initially i intended to play it with a higher action, but kept it low in order to avoid physical left hand problems which occurred to colleagues who overstrained there muscles by combining heavy strings with high action. As it turns out, the heavy string gauge works well with a low action and so i intend to leave it that way.
    _________
    JazzNote

  8. #57

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by sgosnell View Post
    To fix the formatting, you have to use Firefox or perhaps something else. The forum software is at least partially broken with Chrome. I know of a few other sites with the same sort of problems. I've mostly abandoned Chrome.
    Chrome sends out more information than any other browser i know, therefore i also stopped using it.
    _________
    JazzNote

  9. #58

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JazzNote View Post
    The initial reason for me to order a "loud 18inch guitar" was to be able to perform without an amp in duo/trio settings as there are some venues here which don't allow amps to be used. Fortunately i still had Frans mounting a floater, a lucky decision, because the guitar sounds also great when slightly amplified. Initially i intended to play it with a higher action, but kept it low in order to avoid physical left hand problems which occurred to colleagues who overstrained there muscles by combining heavy strings with high action. As it turns out, the heavy string gauge works well with a low action and so i intend to leave it that way.
    Sure. I think that should be possible with most archtops with a strong acoustic voice... I think a carved Eastman would do that. My Loar handles that stuff pretty well. I've even heard it done, and done it on a nylon string.... My experience has generally been that an acoustic guitar is an acoustic guitar. If you are in a noisy venue, or with poor acoustics, acoustic playing is impossible regardless of the instrument. (OTOH if you set up in a nice spot with a quiet, respectful crowd, it's a delight.) But there are no show stoppers. You might get double the volume out of an archtop compared to a flat-top guitar, perhaps a bit more again with a big 18" cannon, and squeeze a bit more again by having heavy strings and or a bigger action, but the sound you get out of the guitar still scales to how much energy you put into it - so more volume means more chordal playing and a lot more right hand attack, which takes you out of the fluid modern jazz lines things right away.... So beyond a certain point, it's almost like you get more *headroom* not more *volume*, if that makes sense. Furthermore the head**** is that you don't hear the sound of your own guitar. F holes have a tight 'beam' that goes to the back of the room (or Peter Bernstein's lughole), so you always think you are quieter than you are. Acoustics change this... Also drums... That's a can of worms. Still acoustic playing is a nice idea!
    Last edited by christianm77; 10-13-2019 at 04:54 PM.

  10. #59

    User Info Menu

    If you really want to project, get a SelMac, and ignore archtops. More bang for buck. Better for single notes IME. You can play with a gauge .10 top... OTOH that's a whole can of worms stylistically haha, because literally everything you play will now sound like Django whether you want it to or not. Prepare to spend the rest of your life saying 'now, I'm not really a Gypsy Jazz guitarist....'

  11. #60

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Furthermore the head**** is that you don't hear the sound of your own guitar. F holes have a tight 'beam' that goes to the back of the room (or Peter Bernstein's lughole), so you always think you are quieter than you are.
    I found a way "to ease" this problem by having Frans building it with a soundport in the upper bout which turns out to work well. And yes, i believe playing a SelMac would mess too much with the way i perceive my own playing and i'm too much of a coward to take the risk of loosing my musical identity ;-).
    _________
    JazzNote

  12. #61

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    If you really want to project, get a SelMac, and ignore archtops. More bang for buck. Better for single notes IME. You can play with a gauge .10 top... OTOH that's a whole can of worms stylistically haha, because literally everything you play will now sound like Django whether you want it to or not. Prepare to spend the rest of your life saying 'now, I'm not really a Gypsy Jazz guitarist....'
    I'm hell bent on cracking this image...i play anything on mine.Problem is, its REALLY FUN to play Django licks.But I love the short scale D hole SelMac. For me, even a cheap copy, like i have, is a perfect acoustic guitar. Its completely ruined dreadnaughts and other flat tops for me. Which is fine, really...
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  13. #62

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JazzNote View Post
    I found a way "to ease" this problem by having Frans building it with a soundport in the upper bout which turns out to work well. And yes, i believe playing a SelMac would mess too much with the way i perceive my own playing and i'm too much of a coward to take the risk of loosing my musical identity ;-).
    I've never tried a sound port guitar, and would kind of love to, but also don't want to as I couldn't afford one haha. The SelMac thing is SUPER WEIRD. It's like you lose the personality of your own playing a little. On a 175, Tele whatever - the clean electric thing is a transparent, simple sound.... I sound like me, but the SelMac thing is so ... reified... it's like playing the banjo. Suddenly it's the instrumental colour that you get booked for, as much as your playing. It's really hard for me to articulate why I get so grumpy about it, but I think that's it... all my friends who play instruments like violin, cello and accordion are like - so what? Welcome to our world.... OTOH since you can play literally anything and sound like Django, so now my approach is more like... what if I play much more contemporary stuff on that guitar with that very specific sound? You can get away with it, there's a couple of tunes on a record I'm putting out next year. I quite like this idea, a bit subversive.This is quite hard, as there's something that kicks in on the gig where I just start going into muscle memory and playing all the standard gypsy licks everyone plays.... But I'm starting to get there... Like I say SUPER WEIRD. Totally get your desire to avoid that ...

  14. #63

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont View Post
    I'm hell bent on cracking this image...i play anything on mine.Problem is, its REALLY FUN to play Django licks.But I love the short scale D hole SelMac. For me, even a cheap copy, like i have, is a perfect acoustic guitar. Its completely ruined dreadnaughts and other flat tops for me. Which is fine, really...
    Yeah jinx haha. I don't know, I rather crave a nice dread. It's a different thing.

  15. #64

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Yeah jinx haha. I don't know, I rather crave a nice dread. It's a different thing.
    The plinky trebles will have you back on the dark side quickly.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  16. #65

    User Info Menu

    It's hard to beat even a cheaper Selmer style guitar for sheer volume
    I have an oval hole Gitane DG300, I don't really love the tone of it honestly, but it's great if I'm in an acoustic situation where I need to be heard. I also have a 1958 Hofner Senator that projects like crazy, that gets used for similar situations too.

    I guess that's where a nice carved top acoustic is great - they don't always have the sheer volume of a gypsy guitar but have a much more sophisticated sound.

    After years of playing archtops, I really don't like flat tops much, particularly dreadnoughts. As said above, the trebles are really thin, and the bass can be boomy and indistinct....

  17. #66

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I have about 2mm on my (60s) Es175, I think am using 12's ATM. Just depends what I am used to. Everyone thinks I'm a wimp, but I've been there and done that with the heavy strings acoustic thing. That guitar is quite resonant acoustically, but it wants flats. I used to have a .15 top on a 12 set for my Loar. Now I'm more interested in a balanced amplified tone. I still play Macaferri for the acoustic stuff. I think your Imperial would be louder, but the 175 has a tone. I can see how Joe was able to mike his. Again modern Gibsons (AFAIK) are built heavy. They are different animals, constructed with amplified tone in mind. Again, I remember playing a Peerless (cheaper one) and being quite impressed by the acoustic voice. The Eastmans are also generally very acoustically lively instruments, which can make them a bit woolly amped. Their 175 clone (can't remember the name) has a perfectly acceptable acoustic voice, and it's a laminate!All told, I think it depends on what gigs you are playing. I am honestly quite baffled by anyone who buys an 18" carved archtop who is not seriously doing the Freddie Green thing. But carved guitars in general (I think) suit brush drums, soft amping and intimate venues. If you play lots of nice restaurant gigs and the jazz clubs in duos and trios this kind of guitar is just the thing, and you will tend to play it as an amplified acoustic. OTOH if you are playing with horns and drums a lot, the acoustic thing doesn't really work so well... You have to get into practicing amped so you get used to it. Been through both ends. I think I can do both. Would love a nice carved guitar..... Sometime in the future :-)Now Peter - I think he has found a way to do both. His technique is quite 'mutey' not floating hand, so that takes care of playing at organ trio levels, but he still gets a strong acoustic sound.
    2mm That seems about right regarding nice playability and string vibration for sound.

    About the balanced tone, I've been noticing that each guitar has it's own voice, but when plugging to an amp, the pickup and pots also play a good role and that is something to consider. Sometimes when amped things won't sound as we would expect.
    I've played several Gibson ES-175 that confirm exactly what you've said, I've had a Japanese ES-175 copy that was like a "VOS" copy, and with the lighter top it was a bit more resonant acoustically even with lighter strings. The Imperial surprised me when I noticed it also had a heavier build in terms of top thickness (around 4,5mm 5mm), neck is also built in the same fashion. Surprisingly confortable for it's size.
    The Eastmans I wanted to try some but never had the chance (it's really hard to find any of those expensive 800s 900s models to try around here)
    I've heard some ocasional feedback in some videos of Peter, wich I found surprising. He was able to manage through that with his playing unaffected like it was nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by JazzNote View Post
    Initially i intended to play it with a higher action, but kept it low in order to avoid physical left hand problems which occurred to colleagues who overstrained there muscles by combining heavy strings with high action.
    This was the reason I ressurected this topic. Some friends warned me they had experienced pain with heavier gauges or higher action. While others said to not put the strings too low.

    Quote Originally Posted by Everyone
    [...........]
    I totally get it that the carved archtops we play aren't exactly designed to be played like Nylon string guitars or Gipsy Jazz guitars. There might me very few contexts where exceptions can be made. (btw there this clip... ehehe


    When trying some Selmer or Gitane, I've noticed they produce very strong treble frequencies on every note. Wich is something that can fool the human ear into thinking it's hearing more volume. Of course these are designed to be loud for soloing. We can also compare volume on chords and lower notes aswell. etc...

    I've experienced some trouble trying to "play too loud for a certain guitar" but ended up looking at it as my fault, as I had never prepared for that kind of volume. We as guitar players do not think of rehersal places like studio rooms as ofter as drummers for example. Recently I've been able to put a Twin Reverb on 7 with the Imperial with barely any feedback. It really depends on context. About the acoustics as Christian said, I had forgot about some guy I've seen running a parametric EQ with great shape control to fix the feedbacking frequencies there.

    It's really amazing how much new information and new stuff to think about I got with some of your posts guys. I was messing around thinking, should I go up a bit more, a bit more, get more headroom? Do I get more overall volume? (depending on average right hand attack) (how will it scale up with the legatto stuff? etc...).

    Of course this all started with the string action height becase there should be some scientific "textbook" guideline with all the "maths" done, regarding where one should look for the best energy efficiency. The most "average, normal and simple" setup guideline.
    Maybe someday hahaha...
    Last edited by Carloscepinha; 10-15-2019 at 08:36 AM.

  18. #67

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Carloscepinha View Post
    When trying some Selmer or Gitane, I've noticed they produce very strong treble frequencies on every note. Wich is something that can fool the human ear into thinking it's hearing more volume. Of course these are designed to be loud for soloing. We can also compare volume on chords and lower notes aswell. etc...
    Well yes, you canna change the laws of physics...

    But I wouldn't say treble, I would say (to my ears) the upper mid range 400-800 Hz (I suppose I could check it on my DAW). This is 'cut', so to speak... Once the strings are settled in on a SelMac you shouldn't get too much top end, but you get a lot of 'nose.'

    Back in my classical singing days we used to talk about 'blade' in the voice. Blade is a certain formant or frequency in the voice. You aren't producing more sound necessarily than a competent amateur singer, but you are focussing it. This is what you need to sing Wagner, Verdi, heavy opera. Bladey singing while impressive, is quite horrible to be next to, but cuts through in a massive opera house over an orchestra.

    Often there's not much richness of tone, depth to it - it just fizzes and rings. On stage, it doesn't need to have depth. That's what the orchestra is for, right? This idea would make sense to an experienced record engineer or producer, too.

    Musical Theatre singers do something similar in a different way, using 'belt' or what Jo Estill calls vocal 'twang' IIRC. It's basically weaponising the American accent. Think Ethel Merman, back in the days before mics became standard in theatres.

    Think also of the changes in jazz vocal style, from the early days of bluesy belters to the revolutionary mic-focussed style of Nat Cole and Frank Sinatra. You don't make the same noise if you need to sing some nice lieder or lute songs. Or to croon standards on a mic. Then you want less overtones and more fundamental.

    The equivalent on guitar to adding more 'blade' or 'twang' (lol) is simply playing nearer the bridge. That creates more upper harmonics, right? Physics. Macaferri's are particularly good at creating this sound. They are not necessarily pleasant to listen to in isolation, but they cut through. Django's style was focussed on a certain range. too.

    The rhythm guitars in the Hot Club lived in a different place spectrally, which is why I think it is better to play rhythm more towards the sound hole, give the soloist a chance to cut through....

    The extreme of this type of sound is, of course, the banjo. Anyway, archtops don't seem to do this job as well, at least the one's I've tried. Modern ones aim for a balanced sound, early ones really live for chordal playing. Perhaps you've had different experiences? On archtop you often seem to want to play over the neck almost.

    Hopefully you can also see why drums are key. Drums are a whole panoply of different instruments with their own spectral characteristics.

  19. #68

    User Info Menu

    Wow that's a lot of depth into this topic, wich I thank you for. Some stuff I've never really explored much.

    Well I didn't say the guitar wasn't loud, but that the tone it produced made it seem even louder than it could actually be... Looking at the low E string, wich on other guitars like an archtop you might not get that overwhelming cut but the bass and lower frequencies can be heard with more prominence, the richer sound you describe.

    Your description seems more acurate than mine. My friend was very displeased with the guitar sometimes, he complained it sounded too harsh... I replied the guitar was sounding exactly as it was suposed to, and to comp with it could be hard, specially without double bass.

    On that video I was impressed that sound somewhat worked out and the AJL archtop surprised me because I expected it to have a less powerfull sound, but it was a very informal context ofc it's hard to really judge. I thought that some archtops could be almost as loud as a gypsy jazz guitar, while keeping some of that tone they are known for.

    It's the very first time I've heard about "blade" but it makes a lot of sense.
    I've met a guy came to jam in a bar with a friend that had his digital piano and a quality PA in his bar (room for 50 to 70 ppl?) and when the guy starting singing Georgia on my mind without microphone while playing his own arrangement, he could sing over the PA. I was totally floored with it. It sounded really good and I was impressed by his tecnique.

  20. #69

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Carloscepinha View Post
    Wow that's a lot of depth into this topic, wich I thank you for. Some stuff I've never really explored much. Well I didn't say the guitar wasn't loud, but that the tone it produced made it seem even louder than it could actually be... Looking at the low E string, wich on other guitars like an archtop you might not get that overwhelming cut but the bass and lower frequencies can be heard with more prominence, the richer sound you describe.Your description seems more acurate than mine. My friend was very displeased with the guitar sometimes, he complained it sounded too harsh... I replied the guitar was sounding exactly as it was suposed to, and to comp with it could be hard, specially without double bass.On that video I was impressed that sound somewhat worked out and the AJL archtop surprised me because I expected it to have a less powerfull sound, but it was a very informal context ofc it's hard to really judge. I thought that some archtops could be almost as loud as a gypsy jazz guitar, while keeping some of that tone they are known for. It's the very first time I've heard about "blade" but it makes a lot of sense. I've met a guy came to jam in a bar with a friend that had his digital piano and a quality PA in his bar (room for 50 to 70 ppl?) and when the guy starting singing Georgia on my mind without microphone while playing his own arrangement, he could sing over the PA. I was totally floored with it. It sounded really good and I was impressed by his tecnique.
    Well bear in mind I'm speaking from personal experience. But I thought I'd give you two clips that might be helpful. So the first is me playing chords (and a chord solo) on the Macaferri with drums. Notice it's just brushes with hi hat and the guitar sits unifies with the level of the drums. When I play the chord solo it is easy to raise it just over the level of the drums, but it's not a dominating sound...

  21. #70

    User Info Menu

    This is a recording of me playing the Loar (unplugged) with bass and vocals with more of a single note solo. I think it sounds a good level, but bear in mind I am playing heavy right hand and the sound is somewhat 'django.' I wish I had a recording of me doing something a little more modern with this set up, but my right hand always creeps back to try and get more cut in these situations. Anyway, I think any decent archtop with an acoustic sound would work well here, but I think basically I am trying to play the guitar somwhat like a Maccaferri and that type of guitar would do the same job better....

  22. #71

    User Info Menu

    For comparison, here is the Loar plugged. My perception is it has a more modern tone (obviously) but it still has a brightness and 'nasalness' that comes through the pickup.... It doesn't sound like Jim Hall or Jimmy Raney's tone even though I'm using an Atilla Zoller pickup. I think this might have something with bracing etc. More modern archtops are aiming for a mellow amplified sound.

  23. #72

    User Info Menu

    Is that Nat Steele on vibes? I saw him last week playing with pianist Alan Broadbent.

  24. #73

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop View Post
    Is that Nat Steele on vibes? I saw him last week playing with pianist Alan Broadbent.
    Yes

  25. #74

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by citizenk74 View Post
    For me, archtop setup issues come down to "sweet spot" thinking. A higher action may excite the top more with a given string gauge. I find that lighter strings nay work with a higher action, whereas heavier strings generally call for lower action. What works well in the humidity of summer might not fly in the dry winter season. Howard Roberts spoke of adjusting his action on an as-needed basis.
    Variety is the spice of life. Some days I may prefer a stiffer action, and later that same day I may gravitate to something less athletic. It helps to have multiple guitars. At least that's what I tell Mrs. k.

    I agree with this.

    For me I like to straighten the neck so it’s nearly dead straight. It makes the guitar sound and feel better. It forces you to raise the bridge because the action is lower at the 12’th fret. In order to have at least the same action you had at 12 fr when the guitar had relief, you have to raise the bridge. I think raising the bridge will actually put more pressure on the top, so the guitar will have a snappier tone. I also find that with too much relief the guitar sounds too dark and muddy when plugged in. For me the secret setting is little or no relief and 4/64 low e action and 3/64 high e


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  26. #75

    User Info Menu

    I actually like the tone in T-4-2. And the Loar does sound like a Macaferri, and the Macaferri sounds like an archtop. Technique does make a difference, as does bracing. The difference between X and parallel bracing can be dramatic.

  27. #76

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by kris View Post
    every guitar is differenet...
    I put 11's Ernie Ball last night on my arch-top and I think it's sound much better than ON 13's CHROMES...
    I play with Ernie Ball 11`s rounds in D`Angelico Excel, but with D`Addario 12`s roundwounds too in Epi De Luxe Masterbilt.
    I play acoustically, with DeLuxe, with Excel about fifty-fifty as electric/acoustic. I happen to like my Excel as acoustic quite much.