-
I firmly believe in the importance of time passing (wood naturally drying) as well as playing regularly in opening up a guitar. I also believe tonerite is an effective device at opening up a guitar. The best thing you can do for a guitar’s sound is to play it hard and gig it every night. That might not be an option and you may not even get to play every day.
I also wonder if certain playing styles make a difference. Will it open up more if it’s been played by someone who drives the top more or will the result be equivalent of a softer player like the OP?
-
02-25-2024 05:31 PM
-
Based on my experience, I say an instrument opens up differently depending on how it's played. I believe this as a sure thing. Hard strumming will make for an instrument that has a more open feeling but in that process, if you were to A/B two identical guitars (I've done this with two guitars that Al Carruth and I collaborated on, matching the Chladni patterns and frequency signatures on a fast fourier analysis program) and how it's excited does contribute to the particular nodal patterns that are loosened, which determines the response of the vibrating system to input signals.
Originally Posted by omphalopsychos
If you drive it hard, it'll loosen up all 'round (like tone shaker device), if you play with a more specific (personal or individual play-in style) it retains certain "snappiness and tightness" and loosens up others. This translates to different things to different people, but to me, it winds up making me feel like "THIS guitar was made for ME" kind of feel.
I don't like giving non empirical impressions so I'll just say it does make a difference on the frequency peak and amplitude graphic. It's real.
-
mmmm—-this guitar WAS made for me Originally Posted by Jimmy blue note
-
Judging from the wood I find in my 116 year old house, wood loses (water and maybe other volatiles) mass as it dries yet seems to retain strength. This is going to affect tonal response. That might explain a lot of the notion of "opening up." Whether there are vibrational effects with this, I have no idea.
I've also read that poly finishes actually "breathe" better than nitro.
-
I had posted this somewhere on the forum before.
I'm also in the camp that playing a guitar, and well, usually opens it up. I've played many more pristine guitars that sounded "green" than those that were regularly played.
That said there was an article in Vintage Guitar many yrs ago about two consecutive serial numbered 1940s Martin D-28's that were acquired by a Midwest dealer. One was well played into oblivion, the other remained in near mint condition, but they both sounded nearly identical.
Go figure.....
-
To whom? It would have been interesting to have had the impressions by two strummers, two bluegrass players, two fingerpickers, two players who played a classical repertoire...or a bunch of people in these groups. Originally Posted by wintermoon
It's my experience that some players can feel changes in different ways. As a gross overstated example, take two guitars that are being compared by someone that doesn't really play, even a Taylor and a Martin, and have them played at a performance by an incredible player, one for the first set and one for the second. A lot of people in the audience won't hear what others do. Lots will say they can't hear a difference.
Too, I think breaking in has more to do with feel than sound. A broken in and seasoned guitar will play the same notes as a new one, and even new, a flat top like a D-28 will sparkle, but the feel of a personally played in guitar... well anyone who's been with one guitar over a lot of use will tell you that they find more music from it because it's inspiring. You can't quantify that but there are many aspects that change with use.
Just to make it even more nebulous, after about 40 years, one loses upper frequency hearing. If this was the opinion of a 50 year old shop owner, I'd smile and say "Can I have the used one for a discount because it's been worn out?"
Just sayin'
-
The change from green to seasoned in an archtop is VERY different from a flat top. Ask any archtop builder on this forum if they'd want their reputation to hinge on the sound of a newly strung hand built guitar. Originally Posted by wintermoon
-
Interesting. Never would have thought that. Originally Posted by Cunamara
' learn something new every day.
-
Thanks- the mix is about 70% from the pickup running into a clarus SLR and Raezers Edge S12 cab close miked with an audio Technica 8020 stereo mic. The mikenin the guitar is a Rode K2. Strings are Pyramid Classic Nickel .012 rounds. Originally Posted by Rickco
-
I'll quote Jack Z don't know if it was his or something he grabbed. "We think we know what we like, truth is we like what we know" I really think this is what I believe. Time on a new guitar and you "learn" how to coax the best out of it and make it sing. I also believe that wood has a great deal to do with sound so with time (lots of it) there is a change that can be heard. This would be difficult to prove though.
-
I don't know man, it was at least 20 yrs ago but iirc they also conducted blindfold tests among a bunch of players. I don't know if some were flatpickin' bluegrass dudes and others were speed metal cats. Originally Posted by Jimmy blue note
Just relating an article I saw.
-
Opened up guitar...
-
Now I regret tossing out all those old Vintage Guitar magazines. The big format on that newsprint paper. I blame that magazine for planting the seeds of high end archtop collecting. That rag was DANGEROUS, ha ha. Originally Posted by wintermoon
I don't know man, it was at least 20 yrs ago but iirc they also conducted blindfold tests among a bunch of players. I don't know if some were flatpickin' bluegrass dudes and others were speed metal cats.
Just relating an article I saw.
Like the old vintage Guitar Player magazines, the old editions had incredible articles on modding tube amps and stuff like that. Now I'm an old geezer looking back on those "good old days and their big printed magazines".
Time to practice! Thanks for that glimpse
-
I have played many minty guitars that sound fantastic, as well as fabulous sounding well- played ones. I'm mainly speaking of solid body and flat top guitars here. I own a '55 D28 in minty condition and it sounds great also, but I can't say whether a well-played one would be better or worse. I've played super a clean OM28 from the '30's, awesome, and a super clean '43 D28 that is probably the best overall that I have ever played. I do think there is an improvement in the feel of a guitar as it gets worn in. And I do think that the wood dries out, and the finish cures as well. Originally Posted by wintermoon
I don't know man, it was at least 20 yrs ago but iirc they also conducted blindfold tests among a bunch of players. I don't know if some were flatpickin' bluegrass dudes and others were speed metal cats.
Just relating an article I saw.
But I don't have much experience with minty archtop acoustics, most of them have been played quite a bit, not sure people often bought those to sit in a case, though I have seen severaL D'Angellicos like that.
I will say that the Campellone I bought about two years ago that I have played an hour or three a day seems to have warmed up quite a bit, the sustain seem better, overall it has blossomed, IMHO. But that doesn't really prove anything. I seem to remember D'Aquisto telling a customer to play the s**t out of it for the first year to get it to open up, but again, no real proof there. I am taking that to heart with the Campy, and so far it seems to be working- at least I am having a good time with the process!
-
I have to say that I'm skeptical about this.
I can understand that a guitar's sound might change over time, for a variety of reasons, including the joints loosening or the wood drying.
What makes me skeptical is that everybody reports improvement. Given that players liked the guitars well enough to buy them, shouldn't some of them, at least, get worse? Or, maybe if there's a real change, some players will like it and some won't?
And then, how can you be sure it's the top opening up? Even if you can accurately remember what the guitar sounded like a few years ago, how do you know the change isn't that you're playing it better, or it's got different strings or a change in other setup variables. How can you really be sure the top is opening up?
You'd have to record it, then wait a few years, and record it again, with the exact same setup, touch and recording environment.
-
I think part of the experience is specifically the player’s. If I put a ToneRite on a guitar that has little volume, and feel various areas of the guitar for vibrations at first the guitar invariably will responding far less than if the device is left on the guitar for a week. To my subjective experience l can definitely feel a difference in the response of the top plate to the vibrations. I’ve had a similar experience just playing a guitar day after day. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
One particular 1946 Epiphone Emperor always comes to mind for me. When it came to me it hadn’t been played for a few decades. Prior to that it had been heavily played. When I first tried it, it was one of the deadest archtops I’ve ever played. I mean sounding like a good semi-hollow guitar at best dead. That was the experience of not just me, but my wife (a pianist and classically trained vocalist with a superb ear). I kept playing that guitar daily for a few months, both hammering away at it and playing it with a wide dynamic range. By the end of that time it was a completely different guitar. It was both much louder and had a much wider tonal spectrum. It still wasn’t the loudest Emperor I’ve ever played, but it was at least average for one after starting out as one of the quietest archtops I’ve ever played. It also had more overtones that most Epiphones I’ve played. That’s one of the most dramatic examples I’ve ever experienced, but it’s far from alone.
Like I’ve said before though, other guitars simply are what they are, good or bad, they just don’t seem to change, most change a little, and some change dramatically. Some guitars seem to tighten back up if they aren’t played for an extended period and others don’t. There are no absolutes. Every instrument is different. The woods used, the carve, the bracing, the overall design, exposure to differing climate elements, I believe all of these things affect the response to vibrations over time.
Getting to the question of why they aren’t described as sounding worse. I think it comes down to what I described. They always sound better (if they change) because they resonate more in response to continued vibration or because of the materials or build they just don’t change. It would seem to me that there would haven’t be some structural failure for a guitar to sound worse. Instruments without issue don’t become less resonant. Wood (at least spruce top, maple bodied instruments) can retain its resonating capacity for a very long time as eveidence by heavily played violins that are hundreds of years old.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Somewhat related to this topic is Tommy Emmanuel’s insistence that constant use of the same strings will deaden a guitar over time. For that reason, he rotates between different string brands. I discussed this with him many years ago and since then I’ve noticed this effect to some extent on flattops, archtops and semis, in that order. I’ve not noticed it on solidbodies. The idea is that using the same strings will make a guitar resonate in the same way, with certain areas vibrating a lot and others less so. Using different strings might ensure that everything stays lively.
-
I believe guitars and other instruments do “open” up over time. How could wood not change over time? Yet there are many folks who believe this phenomenon to be untrue. I have also had some instruments “wake up” once played for awhile after laying dormant in a case.
I own one acoustic guitar that has a torrified (baked) top which purportedly speeds up the aging process. I’m not sure but it does sound great.
-
And don't forget to practice in all 12 keys.This"opens up" a guitar the most.
-
Excellent point Originally Posted by Jerzy
-
Tommy plays the guitar well but I think he is completely off based. The differences in strings nothing but I have no proof of this. Originally Posted by Oscar67
-
Yes, I am extremely skeptical about this. For one thing, strings change over time and essentially become "different" strings as they get older. Sounds like snake oil to me. Originally Posted by deacon Mark
A lot of this falls into the "belief" category and not the "science" category though! But I do "believe" that guitars get better with playing and as they cure. I have to believe that, it keeps me playing!
-
The experiments are difficult to do.
Some claims are true, even if science can't prove them.
OTOH, some people were insisting that a special power cable going from the wall outlet to the amp made an audible difference -- which I choose not to believe. Really keeps those electrons smoothed out on the last 6 feet of the miles-long journey from the generating plant to your amp. And, then there was that test where boutique speaker wire turned out to be no better than wire hangers twisted together.
Occasionally I pick up a guitar I haven't played in months. I don't notice any difference after I play it for a while.
Is it plausible that the wood joints/interfaces could loosen up (or something) with play? Sure, but hard to prove.Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 02-27-2024 at 07:20 PM.
-
Interesting theory! Originally Posted by deacon Mark
Tommy has played guitar thousand times more than I, and he is about thousand times better guitarist so who am I to argue.
….or then it is a way to get ALL of the string brands to sponsor him!
-
I also have to believe that guitarists get better with playing and as they cure, too. Although I'm not sure that I have any personal proof that this is really the case. Originally Posted by bluejaybill
Reply With Quote
dearmond 1100 reissue vs original which one is...
Today, 03:30 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos