-
I have a 1958 Hoyer Special archtop acoustic. It has a 2 PU floater on it too. A lighter customized version of the one it came with)
When I bought it it had a loose neck and various non life threatening problems that needed to be attended to and I took care of them resulting in a cool unique and playable guitar. The interesting thing is that I'm not entirely sure what they should sound like other than having been told. I do know that it had likely sat dormant for many many years as I bought it off a collector and I got the impression it had been need of repair for years. Prior to that there are indications that it was played a lot.
These are hand-carved solid wood instruments, some say roughly equivalent to an L-5 or a Super 400 in build quality or better. They have REALLY high neck angles and are built like tanks, with a REALLY thick top and back but supposedly thinner 'recurves' (around the edges where the top curves up to the edge) Parallel braced.
I've check some stuff on line and there's a couple clips of one being played acoustically, one clip seems to be more professionally recorded as it's a sale demo I think.
I've read they're are bright and mine certainly is, but it also has good mids and bottom and volume (when one doesn't mute the back) I get the feeling though it could have more potential. I'm curious if I cant get a bigger and slightly louder sound out of it if I make a point of trying to break it/play it in a little
What do people think about needing to play in/break in guitars that have sat dormant for many many years?
Or even new guitars?
I wouldn't resort to devices to break a guitar in. Today for example I spent some time strumming it very very loudly and moving through various chords in various positions. It's currently strung with round wound 13-56 steel string strings (for the floater) and currently has a one piece ebony bridge(not pictured)
Here's a picture of it wearing it's stock acoustic outfit... lest the purists reel at the sight of it in it's electric party suit.(NO tops were harmed) Thanks!
-
09-13-2020 03:09 AM
-
I can't see a way to tell.
Can you remember how it sounded before you broke it in?
If you recorded it, can you guarantee that you played it with the same feel? Strings are the same age, or whatever other variable might matter?
-
Supposedly? Why, I oughtta ...
Originally Posted by What now?
-
utter nonsense. Originally Posted by What now?
-
First off, I don't know what the hell that thing is, but it looks damn cool. Is it German? Feels that way to me.
Second, I've heard that this is the case with certain woods, specifically Adirondack/red spruce. In what I've noticed from my red spruce acoustic, it does seem to open and close with time. But that's just my experience.
-
Congrats for a resurrected beauty!
Some players think that break-in of a guitar (or a speaker) is utter nonsense but then there is lots of players who believe in it.
I have not enough experience with different aged guitars to say this or that about the question but once I had a stiff feeling newish Gibson semiacoustic.
I loaned a Tone-Rite vibrator from a pal and treated the guitar over a week with it. I thought that difference was clear, the guitar felt livelier after about a 200 hours of vibration.
But was it really? This is impossible to measure scientifically. I treated some other guitars with it too but they didn’t feel different.
So I encourage You to play a lot with Your guitar! Maybe the guitar won’t change but Your ears will get used to it’s sound and You like it better all the time!
-
Really? Originally Posted by Herbie
-
Certainly is the case on spruce-topped classical guitars: they develop over the first year or two of playing, but will close up a bit if left alone for a few months or more, only to open up with a few days of playing. Ne reason to think that arch tops would behave differently.
-
developing guitars. guitars opening up? i don't know. mumbo jumbo.
-
If you think it’s “mumbo jumbo”, I’m going to suggest you just haven’t played enough guitars that were new or have sat unplayed for long periods. It can vary considerably from guitar to guitar, likely depending on a number of factors including the woods used, the way the wood was cut, the atmospheric conditions, and the construction of the guitar, but it is without a doubt a real thing. I have heard it many times. My 1946 Epiphone Emperor is a prime example. It had sat nearly untouched for over 30 years. The first time I hit a chord on it the sound was dead and lifeless with very little bass response and little volume. I played that guitar daily and would notice it changing on an almost daily basis. It took almost 3 months of this daily play before it came back into its full potential. It’s now full and robust and has plenty of volume. It doesn’t seem like it could even be the same guitar. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
And now within the last month I’ve been going through a very similar process with a gorgeous Lacey archtop. It was ordered as a custom build by a collector and barely played. When I got it, it was quiet and almost tinny sounding. Now a month in, the bass and mid response is blooming and sounds noticeably far louder.
I have a ToneRite on the Lacey right now and it definitely helps, but playing at least an hour a day does more than anything in my opinion.
The one thing these two guitars have in common is that they both have Adirondack spruce tops, and it seems to me like Adirondack is especially in need of opening up and more prone to close up. Once opened up though, almost nothing can beat Adirondack as a soundboard wood.Last edited by ThatRhythmMan; 09-15-2020 at 09:15 AM.
-
If it is without a doubt, it should not be difficult to substantiate your claim with a clip. Or with a physical change to the guitar.
If this was a real thing, it should be most noticable with acoustic guitars. I played acoustic guitars my whole live and never noticed this phenomenon. I'm not even sure how i would notice it. If i pick up a guitar and play it again tomorrow, what am i noticing? What am i comparing it to? My memorie of how this guitar sounded yesterday?
Again . . . mumbo jumbo.
-
Fair enough, maybe its a phenomenon that doesn’t exist for you. I was actually skeptical years ago, but it is now undoubtable to me. I’ve played hundreds of acoustic archtops at this point in a private setting and while I’ve observed it in less than 10% of guitars, it definitely happens. Even if I were to make recording which I and many others thought clearly showed this, it doesn’t mean that you would observe a difference. It would be a subjective test. I’m sure it could be scientifically measured, but I certainly do not have equipment or the proper space to do a scientifically valid experiment.
I think it worth noting that George Gruhn, someone who has possibly played more acoustic guitars than anyone on the planet, is in agreement with me. Admittedly, this is his subjective impression as well.
-
Yeah I'm not sure why I used that particular word. 'Supposedly" Maybe it's because I've measured the top thickness but not the thickness near the recurves and didn't want to say for sure something I hadn't checked myself. mea culpa etc etc.
Also I didn't intend to open a can of worms.
Regarding 'measuring' differences :
One would have to make meticulous before and after recordings. Maybe If one standardized mike placement and distance and did a few samples from each time playing the same thing (to even out variances in playing style etc.), with all else being the same you'd probably get a good approximate of a accurate test that you could listen to with more objectivity.
I too am wary of an claims that can't be substantiated, things like magical capacitors , tubes, cloth wire etc. etc. (I build my own amps and I used to sell vintage tubes and capacitors)
Regarding guitar tops though, I remember I took a guitar building course 30 years ago from a local Luthier of long standing reputation and he was keen on using old piano soundboards as top material as it had been vibrating to music for years already.
It seemed to make sense when he said it.
-
Really, hundreds of guitars? How did that work? All new guitars that you personally broke in? What number are we talking about? 600? 700?
-
It's absolutely a thing.
I have an old L-5 that sounds good but kind of muted if I don't play it for a while. But w only a couple hours of play after sitting for a while it sounds superb, a very noticeable difference. .
It seems it's not the case w every guitar, some sound about the same all the time, others I'll notice a big difference after "waking up"
-
I’m sorry I’ve contributed to the hijacking of this thread. This will be the last I contribute to this discussion. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
My experience is mainly playing vintage guitars, mainly Epiphone and Gibson. It would be exceedingly hard to play that many new archtops in this era without being a dealer of lower end models (Loar, Eastman). I’ve played more than enough to have developed an ear that can tell me which ones are “tight” most of the time right away. Much like noticing the way flavors develop in a fine wine, some can detect the changes in the palette and others cannot. I know there are many who have a much better sense of smell and taste than I do. That I cannot detect subtleties that they can does not invalidate their experience. Your experience does not invalidate mine.
-
In my experience the earth is flat. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
If you pick up a guitar, it sounds like it does. There is not really a way to know if it is tight, loose, or whatever.
If you play it for a few hours, there is no way you can objectively make a judgement about it 'opening up'. It's just not possible.
Your argument would have been better if you had the one guitar that you know very well.
Another thing that strikes me with these type of claims: the sound allway improves. You need to break it in, because it will bring you heaven!Last edited by Marcel_A; 09-14-2020 at 01:53 AM.
-
you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it believe the earth is round
-
Okay, since I reread the OP one more time and was reminded that there was specifically a question concerning the topic I’ll bite again. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
I don’t know what the flat earther comment has to do with anything. It’s not analogous in any way.
If you pick up a guitar and play it, each note is the way it sounds in that moment. I could change many things about the way I play that just that note alone and change the way the guitar sounds. Two different players can bring out different qualities in the same guitar. What exactly is your argument here.
I did give you anecdotal evidence of one guitar I know very well, the Epiphone Emperor. That’s just what that is though, an anecdotal example. An n of one is the least scientifical example of all.
I’m in a fortunate situation to be able to compare an example of a stable guitar to one that is opening up, played back to back. That’s a fairly objective way to listen to them. I have done this and experienced this change. I’ve also had others around me notice the change and comment on the change unsolicitedly. My wife who is also a musician will consistently notice the change in the same guitars that I do and can also identify a tight archtop. That’s as objective as I care to be. Maybe if I made a living as an acoustical engineer I would consider undertaking a study. I don’t think you would believe the data even if it backed me though.
-
Is there anything keeping you from playing it yourself to see? No one here knows; only you have that guitar.What do people think about needing to play in/break in guitars that have sat dormant for many many years?
-
While I don’t discount the possibility that extended playing time might alter the physical structure of the instrument resulting in a “more open” sound, it seems to me that a more significant factor would be the player’s experience. The more we play a particular guitar, and the more attentive we are, the better we learn how to bring out its unique voice by varying small aspects of technique.
-
It's a continuous benign feed back loop. The guitar "opens up" and the player refines/adapts his/her technique to the instrument to get closer to the tone in his/her head.
In my opinion.
-
What a strange comment. Originally Posted by ThatRhythmMan
I would. That's just it, isn't it? You don't have the data, because the data does not exist to my knowledge.
-
BB: Just funnin' :^) I need to get one of those measurement gauges... Originally Posted by What now?
-
Well, you have my apologies then if you are open to the possibility. I may have misread you. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
I’m quite sure no one has done a scientifically valid study on this. Why would anyone? It would require a very vigorous analysis of the tonal spectrum. People who hear it are convinced that it happens and what good would it do to prove it scientifically? What would it change?
I enjoy hearing a guitar open up and reach its potential. I not only hear it, but can feel it vibrate differently against my chest. At first they may behave more like a solid body guitar player unplugged. In the unusual guitar, it’s nothing short of remarkable. Admittedly, most always sound the same. I would argue though, that the very best usually require some opening up.
-
I always say, on these matters of tone, and "hearing a diff.": "Some will hear it, some can't, and some don't care to".
IME, yes, guitars made of wood, will respond to playing them, or them being played. Even my old Stratocaster needed to be "woke" up! After a half hour of playing on it, (because I didn't play it that often) it would respond sweetly.
Maybe it was the strings loosening up?
I do allow for my physical and psycho-acoustical responding to guitars, but damn, if you can't hear it or feel it, maybe you should be playing a Steinway.
-
Oh I know, I wasn't offended. i thought a bit of comic grovelling was in order. Originally Posted by Hammertone
To those above, personally I don't into many of the guitar and amplifier myths/voodoo.
However guitar tops vibrate in certain ways for certain notes, to produce the instruments sound.
Couldn't there possibly be some truth to having the top vibrating better in certain ways simply from having done so so much?
This is an organic material we're talking about here.
If there was nothing special about wood we might as well make plywood guitars...ooops we do, and they usually sound like it.
In fact we use quartersawn tight grained slow growth spruce that's grown high on mountain sides, why? Because those who have vast experience claim it sounds better.
-
Very German. Made by the Arnold Hoyer Company. Originally Posted by feet
-
I set up for a gig and the gears sounds awful. I suffer through the start of the first set.
By the middle of the second set, it sounds fine and nothing has changed but my perception.
Clearly, I'm not qualified to judge whether a guitar has "opened up" over a period of years. Or hours.
-
Originally Posted by feet
I'd go with "roughly equivalent to an L-5 or a Super 400 in build quality" myself. Arnold did make some rather silly-looking presentation models with more inlaid plastic and nacre, along with other odd appointments, based on the same chassis. The Special is his bang-on pro-level instrument, one of the four or five distinct, high-end, all-carved German archtop designs developed by the best German builders beween the late '40s and the late '60s. Great guitars, IMO. Originally Posted by What now?
As far as guitars "opening up" or not, psycho-acoustic effects and so forth, it's an easy enough experiment to conduct if one has the time and resources. I've never come across any properly conducted studies, but I haven't looked, either.Last edited by Hammertone; 09-14-2020 at 02:14 AM.
-
Found this,
Maury's Blog - Maury's Music
-
Bought a Taylor 814 first of May. My other flat top is a big ol’ Martin. Curbside pickup first play at home - where’s the bass? 4 months of daily play later the even smooth richness of this box is wonderful. I’ve learned what to listen for and how to get it. Don’t believe the guitar has changed at all.
-
Fair enough.
It looks like some people's opinion is that there is a break in /play in period with guitars and some people's opinion is that there isn't. Neither opinion has any hard science to back up it up. It is all subjective.
It seems luthiers and builders often feel there is a break in/play in time and I suspect this is something which has existed since quality stringed instruments started being made and played. A Marketing ploy? Or a real insight from people which are very close to instruments conception?
Interesting
-
That's not how it works. If i state that something is true, i have to prove it. It's not the other way around. Originally Posted by What now?
If a doctor provides you with medication stating 'nobody proved it doesn't work, so good luck', i think you would look someplace else for medical advise.
-
Looks like the people at ToneRite: A Sound Decision believe enough in the 'play in process' to have developed a device to simulate and accelerate it.
Don't see links on their web site to any scientific studies backing up the effectiveness of the device, but I have seen it in use in stores selling high-end acoustics.
Does anyone have first hand experience with this device?
-
I never stated anything was true
And there is rarely ONE way all things work, except in some people's minds
I think if you state something is not true you have an equal obligation to prove it is so
By the way, that's 'advice' not advise
Your opinion is so secure in your own mind that you feel you should share it as fact with others and even heap scorn on their views. Personally I haven't come down one way or another.
I'm curious how you back your claims other than with negative comments.
Show me YOUR evidence and not just the lack of it.
-
But comparing this to medicine is not really valid either. Claims about the nature of a musical instrument over time is not the same as suggesting someone ingest a random chemical with the hope that it will treat a specific condition. If you want to compare it to things that are ingested though, look at all the foods we know are safe to eat. People learned that tomatoes are safe to eat because people ate them and were fine. It was through experience, not scientific study. It would be silly to perform a valid study on the safety of ingesting tomatoes. We know it’s safe. This would be a study with no practical benefit to anyone, and very difficult to perform in any valid way. Either you hear it or you don’t. You may be able to develop an ear for the nuances or you may not, just as some can develop highly refined pitch discrimination and others cannot. Either is okay. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
I could make a video of me playing the same guitar over a period of months. I may, as a player, hear the evolution in the sound of the guitar, but that may or may not translate into a video. I could I the same with me playing the guitar twice in the same hour and change any number of things pre-production, during, or post-production and give the impression that its tonal qualities have changed. Something as simple as a slight change in mic placement could cause a significant change. It could even be argued that a change in humidity or atmospheric pressure could cause changes in the frequency response. To make a valid study, all of the tiniest details would have to be controlled. It’s not going to happen and I wouldn’t believe it was proof even if it supported what I believe.
It’s summer and I’m eating tomatoes every day. They all have subtle differences in flavor, and I’m loving them, no need for a study to back it up. You don’t have to notice the subtleties to enjoy them though.
-
Stop being curious. I don't claim anything. Originally Posted by What now?
Again, that's not how it works. Some co-forummers claim there is an audible difference between guitars that are broken in and guitars that are not. Thay claim they hear it. If it's audible it shouldn't be difficult to prove. But there is no prove.
Untill i see any prove, the claim that a guitar should be broken in is false.
That's how it works . . . . .
-
When I pull a guitar out of the closet that I haven’t played for a while I often end up liking it more the more I play it, but I think it’s more likely that I’m “opening up” to the guitar than that the guitar’s characteristics are changing. Originally Posted by citizenk74
It's a continuous benign feed back loop. The guitar "opens up" and the player refines/adapts his/her technique to the instrument to get closer to the tone in his/her head.
In my opinion.
On the other hand, I can think of reasons why putting a stored guitar back into use might change its characteristics. If it’s been stored in an environment with a different temperature or humidity, the wood’s moisture content will take some time to find a new equilibrium, possibly affecting how it sounds. If played frequently, the heat of the body might affect the process of finding equilibrium. My archtops go sharp as they warm up, so it’s plausible the wood is adapting in other ways.
I’m very skeptical that a machine that plucks the strings would produce these effects, and I’m skeptical of anecdotal reports. I doubt the issue will ever be settled until someone can think of a way to do a definitive test. Conceptually, one could do a double-blind experiment with two identical guitars, one which has been in storage and the other that has been “broken in” by a plucking device. But there would be so many variables to control (including trying to construct two archtops that are truly identical!) it’s unlikely we’ll ever have that data. Until we do, I’ll continue to be skeptical and will just enjoy the process of enjoying a guitar the more I play it.
-
I wish I knew how a guitar opens up. I have always heard about this but never put it to the test.
I hear that the wood fibers mechanically wear in and vibrate more readily. Maybe this can happen in an acoustic. I can see that. But I've heard people claim their Teles and LPs have opened up. Either they have dog ears or its due to improved skill, changes in the strings, or perhaps the speaker.
-
Hi Kirk, Originally Posted by KirkP
Love your non-crazy posts.
I would maybe take out the need for a double-blind test. An objective measurement of a consistently plucked string can include the awareness of the guitar and the person running the test (but not plucking the string of course) with no fear of an effect of the result.
If you check the pressure on your car tires, you do not need a double-blind test. Both the tire and the tester can be aware of the test with no change in the result.
****
I completely understand the deep need of some to believe that some things matter, especially those things that they can control.
So go ahead and “play in” or “play back in” your guitars.
They need your attention to sound their best. (Which of course is absolutely true, just not in the way “playing in” is described to work.)
-
You claim "That's how it works" Originally Posted by Marcel_A
Show me the rules.
For future reference, it's 'proof', not 'prove'
For example: "difficult to prove. But there is no 'proof' "
-
Exactly. Originally Posted by What now?
-
You lost this one already. All you're proving is that you have no ears. Originally Posted by Marcel_A
-
The relevant words: "I don't know.". Originally Posted by Marcel_A
-
A search for 'Tonerite' in the forum, brings up this interesting thread from 2013 where a forum member attempted to measure improvements from using the device to 'play in' a new Eastman 604 acoustic archtop.
Measuring Sustain on a New Eastman 604 Before and After Tonerite Treatment
-
This exactly matches my experience with nylon string classical and flamenco guitars, at least with sensitive lightly-built guitars. Originally Posted by ronjazz
Its difficult to hear the development over a few years unless you have a recording.
Re the opening-up after a few days of playing after being left alone for a long time: the initial half to one hour of playing will get the guitar halfway to being “open”. The change in tone is subtle, but noticable over the space of an hour. But as ronjazz says, it will take a few days of playing to fully open.
I can’t comment on other types of guitars.
PS. I am an engineer by training and have a reasonable grasp of acoustics and how guitars produce sound, but the science behind this phenomena is a mystery to me.
-
This is not a new discussion here but one that has real significance to Classical and Jazz guitarists. Let me say that anything made from organic materials is susceptible to moisture and has the scientific ability on a micro and macro level to monitor these changes. A guitar with a high moisture content has a different sound than one with a moderate or low moisture content. Anyone who has played an acoustic guitar through varying humidities has experienced this phenomena and its real effects on the wood and sound.
Secondly, wood, unlike brass or silver instruments(saxes, trumpets, flutes, etc.), being an organic substance that is created by the addition of rings to a tree on a yearly basis, is not uniform on a molecular level since the absence or presence of heat, moisture, atmospheric conditions effects individual and multiple layers of growth. Therefore, all tonewoods that come from different areas and different trees sound DIFFERENT. Just ask any experienced luthier why tonewoods are graded just like olympic divers and their costs vary significantly. Ergo, why some handmade Classical guitars cost 20-30K and as little as 3-4K from the same luthier. Its the materials not just the build.
Also, for the sailors among us who have ever sailed a wooden sailboat, its characteristics and motion at sea are completely different from fiberglass, metal and ferrocement boats. They leak, they change structurally daily, yet have a motion at sea that that reflects their organic composition and is immediately recognizable among experienced sailors. They are truly malleable.
So, when we talk about guitars opening up acoustically or morphing when played over a period of time, we are not hallucinating but rather experiencing the vagaries and malleability of of an instrument made with living, breathing, organic materials. I count as my friends two world class luthiers and countless professional cellists, violinists and Classical guitarists who know this is true. Perhaps, we, as a group, are delusional . . . or perhaps, its really true. I belong to the second group and have experienced the good, bad, and the ugly among many individual guitars.
Guitars ,as all wooden instruments, experience change. Period.
Play live . . . Marinero
-
Nobody denies that a guitar is made of wood. It's very plausable that a guitar sounds different under different circumstances (that's what you say basically) and that a different piece of wood sounds slightly different.
Last edited by Marcel_A; 09-23-2020 at 02:41 PM.
-
Hi, M, Originally Posted by Marcel_A
And, that there are real quantifiable changes in its morphology that relate to an individual instrument's sound over time . . . Play live . . . Marinero
Reply With Quote
European Luthier - Ritch Van Gessel?
Today, 10:14 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos