Official Luthiers Forum!

I"ve just strung up my latest - the first I've built with Rosewood. A 000 sized Amazon Rosewood, Sitka top.

My impressoins on sound are: Individual notes are clear with loads of sustain, and a 'chimey' sound that borders on metallic. It's early days yet, setup and tuning of the saddle and nut (and time) will change some of the character of the sound, but it's got me thinking....always dangerous.

There's loads of sustain, and the "chime" is quite impressive in single notes, but for chords, frankly, it sounds like a bunch of ball bearings in a coffee can. Sounds like the sounds are all crowding each other out. Muddy isn't quite how I'd describe it more like "overly resonant" - sort of like having your head inside a piano.

What are your thougts on this? Is this an occupational hazard to building with Rosewood? What can I expect as this guitar plays in a bit? Apologies if this is a bit vague - I'm struggling to explain what I'm hearing.

Thanks.

Corky-
I'm not sure, but I think this has to do with what folks call 'headroom'...
Also, not sure the back wood has a lot to do with it.

What did you use for top wood (species and thickness) and bracing?

Interesting topic-thanks for posting- I'll be watching the replies you get.

Cheers
John

Thanks John -

I had interepreted "headroom" to mean the ability for a guitar to stand up to heavy playing - e.g. to continue to produce more sound without breaking up - perhaps I'm wrong. In this case I'm not banging the chords out - but simply strumming at moderate volume.

The top is Sitka Spruce - it's braced a bit unusually - laminated sitka- rosewood-sitka braces, my take on a Larson Brothers approach. The bracing pattern is a modified x --brace pattern.

Well see how she sounds when my setup (and any necessary intonation adjustments on the saddle) is complete.

Hi Corky,
I see a lot of confusion on this subject. Sustain will not cause the notes to become are "jumbled" together. In my opinion, the issue of tonal clarity and note separation are different aspects of the sound. However, all tonal qualities do is some way tie in together.

For example, the guitars I am building now have every bit as much sustain as my previous instruments but the sound is noticeably clearer and more articulate. I am thinking that clarity is somehow tied in with projection. I think guitars that tend to project well will often have good "focus". Of course, I could be way off my rocker -- wouldn't be the first time.

When it comes to tone, there really is no ideal sound -- you need to go for what you want to hear. For me, that took years before I realized I wanted my instruments to have more focus and much less of the "airy" / Lowdenesque sound that I had previously been going for.

I will say this -- my tonal goals are the following:

1) Vibrancy - the guitar should feel alive
2) Responsiveness -- I like guitars that are very responsive
3) Balanced bass, mids, trebles
4) Excellent Volume
5) Good projection and good feedback for the player
6) Note Separation and Clarity -- this is a quality that I have REALLY come to appreciate

I'm curious, is your back thin or "loose" and responsive?

_________________
Formerly known as Adaboy.......

Did you check the 'tap tones' or Chladni patterns of the top? I find that when I have more and clearer patterns (or more and better-defined tap tones) the sound tends to be 'clearer' with more 'separation'. In terms of the spectral response I associate separation with a 'peakier' spectrum; in the sense that the peak-to-dip height ratio is greater (up to a point). All of this does tend to go along with better 'projection', IMO.

What Guage strings?
Can make a huge difference i found

That's what I was thinking as well.
Light strings tend to be more 'jangly' in my experience.

Cheers
John

A couple nights ago I read the "Sustain" chapter of Somogyi's book. If I remember correctly, he attributes a "metallic" long-sustain sound to being over-built. I wonder (in my very limited experience) if those laminated braces are the culprit and would benefit from some shaving? He also differentiates between two types of sustain, the metallic one that sounds like what you describe, a different more controlled sustain that gives a more defined shape (rise-peak-decay) to the notes.

Simon, your comments about getting away from the "Lowdenesque" sound in your own building and making clarity and note-separation a high priority were interesting to me. I had a Lowden made a few years ago, an S body with rosewood and an LS redwood top. I purposely wanted a guitar that was distinctly different from the guitars I already own. I'm used to my maple Larrivee OM "Pete Anderson" and my 50's Martin 00-18 14-fret, both of which are fantastic for banging out chords, for lack of a better phrase.

The Lowden sounds absolutely fantastic when either fingerpicking or sustained chords with single note picking mixed in. But if I try to do very much vigorous strumming (like when I lead music at church, which is where I do most of my playing these days), it can start to sound muddy and/or will start to sound harsh as I hit the headroom limits. If I change my style a bit, ease up on the attack and let the chords ring out a bit more, it can sound really nice for strumming. Spending time with this guitar has been the best education for getting my brain to wrap around what some of these terms really mean (i.e. note separation, clarity, rich, muddy, sweet, fundamentals, etc).

_________________
______________________________
Jonathan Kendall, Siloam Springs AR

Some say too much sustain mumbojumbos up the notes. While others say 'Too much is just enough."

After messing with the set up, and trying different strings, if that don''t work, try leaving it on the bench over night with a glass of milk and some cookies. Ya never know.

"like a bunch of ball bearings in a coffee can." eh? ...oh well shift happens.

Oft it on to some trucker and go build another one...only remember to grease up the balls bearings this time. Oh and ya might wanna lay of the coffee a bit.


peace and carrots


Padma

_________________
.

Audiences and dispensations on Thursdays ~ by appointment only.


.

My experience with Lowdens and also with my own guitars is that the "airy" quality can sound absolutely wonderful for fingerstyle. It can add a very haunting quality to the notes and works particularly well with very lyrical pieces. But what I have noticed as I have added more note separation and clarity to my instruments is that they mostly sound just as good with the very lyrical pieces and sound almost always better with all other styles of music. I have lost a little bit of that "chorus" quality but the sound is still very rich and complex. I also feel like the clarity is a big benefit to better, more skilled players because it can reveal their technique and the resulting sound seems more nuanced to me. It is for this reason, that I feel clarity and note separation are so very valuable to us builders in achieving a really good sound.

Also, I think finding a good middle ground is important within your own signature sound. You will always have the option of using cedar, redwood, or engelmann for increased tonal complexity as well as restraining the complexity by using going with woods like Adirondack with Mahogany. As a builder, I have improved enormously by having people from many different playing styles evaluate my instruments.

And a quick word of advice to anyone starting out -- no one will give you an honest opinion (exceptions are very rare). You need to downplay your own skills to make people feel at ease about offering any sort of critique. Also, if your guitar is loud, responsive, and has good bass most inexperienced players will think your guitar is really, really good -- when just the opposite may be the case. In other words, you have to aggressively seek out critique or else you will not receive it. Never overestimate your abilities and always stay humble -- a big ego will only get in the way.

Blessings,
Simon

Simon my friend your ability to describe tone with your writing rivals Hemingway's ability to describe a northern Michigan trout stream! Very impressive!

Also sage advice regarding staying humble - it's WAY too easy to start breathing one's own air after a few successes....

Simon F wrote: And a quick word of advice to anyone starting out -- no one will give you an honest opinion (exceptions are very rare). .... In other words, you have to aggressively seek out critique or else you will not receive it.


That is SO true, Simon! I tried forever to get a dose of honest, useful feedback, and finally after asking several builders, one finally did. He had an incredible eye, and knew all of the 'usual suspect' areas. It was the most useful info, and I really appreciated hearing it!

I think most people are reluctant to give feedback out of respect and are just being humble about their knowledge. You're right, you have to seek it somewhat 'aggressively', as you say!

_________________
Ken Mitchell
Durham, NC

Might not apply here, but I found in some of my other hobbies that the experts were not able to analyze my failures and offer advice, because they did not have the problems I did, so they did not have relevant experience.

Corky, I do a lot of laminated bracing with RW and spruce...do you have thicknesses of the lams? My braces end up very triangular, narrow and tall.

Jonathon Kendall wrote:
"A couple nights ago I read the "Sustain" chapter of Somogyi's book. If I remember correctly, he attributes a "metallic" long-sustain sound to being over-built. "

There are actually three kinds of sustain I can think of: what you could call 'Les Paul' style, 'Prius' style, and 'Banjo' style. They each sound different, of course.

A solid body guitar gets sustain by keeping the energy in the string. The bridge is massive, and the body is heavy, so the 'impedance' of the thing is very high relative to that of the strings, and the energy just can't get out of the strings to produce much acoustic sound. That's the kind of sustain you remember Somogyi writing about. Usually an overbuilt guitar like that is quiet, and may lack fundamental in the tone.

The Prius goes along way on a gallon of gas by being efficient, so 'Prius' sustain comes from having low losses and converting string energy to sound effectively. Usually a guitar like that, with, say, a really nice Red spruce or Cedar top and BRW B&S, will have a complex tone, and be reasonably loud, along with sustaining well.

Banjos sustain pretty well because the light top allows them to stay above your threshold of hearing on only a little bit of energy. When you pluck the string the sound ramps up fast, and dies off quickly, but it reaches such a high peak that it actually stays audible for a fairly long time. We all know what that sounds like.

Banjo style sustain usually gives good separation to _successive_ notes, but not usually to notes within a chord. Les Paul style sustain tends, IMO, to be muddy simply because you can't really hear _anything_ very well. The type of sustain that doesn't seem to effect seperation, then, is 'Prius' style, where you keep the losses down and squeeze the most mileage out of your string sound.

Jonathon Kendall wrote:

There are actually three kinds of sustain I can think of: what you could call 'Les Paul' style, 'Prius' style, and 'Banjo' style. They each sound different, of course.

The type of sustain that doesn't seem to effect seperation, then, is 'Prius' style, where you keep the losses down and squeeze the most mileage out of your string sound.[/quote]

Aren't those guitars prone to runaway acceleration?

You know, they actually do have worse feedback troubles when amped

But if the guitar in question is having a more Les Paul style sustain, and that means overbuilt, then maybe it's time to take a finger plane in there and try out that old theory that scalloped bracing originated from post-completion brace shaving?

Wow - Great replies all. Thanks for all the thought provoking ideas.

Darryl - The back is relatively thin. Get a pretty nice responsive sound from tapping it. Although complicating the issue is the fact that I laminated the back braces as well. Haans, by the way, the measurement on the laminations is about 80 thousandths each for Spruce, EIR, Spruce, adding up to almost a quarter inch wide. I think I read in another post (perhaps yours) that triangular laminated braces optimize the stiffness and reduce the unnecesary weight. I tried to make them triangular

Alan - I hadn't bought your CD yet - which I'm enjoying by the way - so I didn't do the Chladni patterns. I will on the next one. I tried to voice the braced top in a very unscientific way - trying to coax various tap tones out of the various points on the top. My attempt to do what I've read Dana Bourgeois' approach is.

Steve - Light strings

Padma - Milk and Cookies, eh? How about Bourbon and Beef Jerky? That would undoubtedly result in a very different sound.

Simon - Humility - I hear you. After my first guitar I was so over the top having completed it that I mistook euphoria for good tonal qualities. I think I'm over that now, and if anything am pretty crtical of my own guitars, which is a good thing, I think.

I'll let you all know how it matures....if anyone is at Newport - I'll see you there, and this guitar will be there too...

Note the separation Todd places between himself and Prius owners with his snarky comment.


from my experience, I agree that guitars that project better tend to also have better separation and clarity. What I am looking at more and more is the level of treble involved in that clarity. I tend to think of good separation and a large but clean sound as being treble balanced slightly but I want to maintain the power and crispness while also bringing up the warmth in the sound. I have not been able to consistently do this in a new guitar but it is one of my goals at the moment. This is one of the aspects playing in brings to a guitar in my opinion. Some of the old Martins I have been lucky enough to play have this exact thing, good separation and clarity but a beautiful round warm sound to the notes. I am trying to work towards that and keep it going all the way up the neck.

_________________
Burton
http://www.legeytinstruments.com
Brookline, MA.

I would look to compensation and intonation if the sounds / notes are becoming muddied as you say.

From what you’ve said I’d guess you’re not new to building and therefore, have likely not under or over built the instrument. If the strings are staying in tune try an open tuning and strum away. If you continue to get a muddy sound, which I doubt will be the case, then either something other then your strings is moving. A thin neck or the bridge is pulling up, you scale length is changing. Pure notes don’t get muddy when they are part of a chord no matter how loud or soft you play them. Think of a piano here. I’m guessing the chorded notes are not pure and what are played are sharps and flats of the true chord notes due to string compensation. You may also want to check intonation along each fret and that the fret placement is correct for the scale length.

Regard,

_________________
Michael Lloyd

“I was born to ignorance, yes, and lesser poverties ...
I was born to privilege that I did not see ... I didn’t know it, but my way was paved” – John Gorka

The guitar may improve after it has some time to settle in.

_________________
Steve Smith
"Music is what feelings sound like"

I hear you Burton - that's exactly what I'm trying to acheive, and realize that the road may yet be pretty long.

Michael - I am pretty new to building - this is number 7 - so there's some treaking that remains for sure. That being said - I dont' think it's overbuilt. What I may have is a little of the "light top, stiff braces" scenario - the braces are laminated spruce with EIR in the middle - which may have added a lot of mass to the braces. First time trying it.

Update - Indeed, the guitar is sounding better (as they all do) as it gets used to the tension. I have a bit of intonation to tweak in the saddle, as some of the strings are noticably sharp on some of the chords. Need to dial it in just a bit.

I'm also not quite to end of job with string action - as it's a bit high in places, that may be sharpening some of the notes when I fret those strings.

I'll keep you posted.

IME laminated braces tend to produce an instrument with increased output and bass response, all other things being equal (they never are…). I'd say that EIR would probably not be my 1st choice as a centre laminate. A thicker plate with shorter bracing will go some way towards your goal. Pre-war OMs that have been carefully measured had tops in the .115"-.118" thickness range, and 9/16" high bracing at the apex of the X. Most of the weight is in the top, the bracing represents almost nothing. Weight your top before and after bracing (when carving and sanding are done) and you'll see. More mass is not always bad, and actually can be good to achieve some goals. I never liked the tone produced by very thin tops and tall bracing, it always seems to lack definition and masculinity.

_________________
Laurent Brondel
West Paris, Maine - USA
http://www.laurentbrondel.com/

Doesn't bridge wood choice make a difference in clarity? Rosewood for clarity, ebony for sustain? Something like that.