Official Luthiers Forum!

I'd be interested in peoples opinions on this
http://www.hanalei-moon.com/id18.html

Happy Easter!

_________________
We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at guitars.

I would need to hear it...

There's some guy having Larrivee build guitars for him with a similar such design, though the sous hole remains normal...

I don't see how distorting the soundboard even more solves any "sound production limitation" problems.

What exactly ARE those problems, anyway?

I think a nicely built standard acoustic guitar sounds great!

Full, balanced sweet tones and good intonation can be achieved with standard construction.

So I don't know what is meant when it is stated at the beginning of the article that the industry is "Stuck with the same paradigms for so long". Seems to me that there's been a LOT of experimentation, but nothing has truly surpassed the standard models in such a way that a paradigm shift is initiated. If anything, it highlights how for every radical "new" design that sounds good, a standard design can be found that sounds as good or better. Likewise not every guitar produced using new designs all sound good within their production range.

Maybe the problem with factory guitars are the production methods and specs, and not the specifically the design? Maybe that's why he paradigm has been so stable.

So my conclusion, considering that this article was published in 2011 and hasn't gained considerable traction or even generated much of a buzz, is that the author is trying to create the impression of a problem, and then engineer a solution.

Kinda like those infomercial adverts you see on TV all the time and ignore.

_________________
Old growth, shmold growth!

Interesting to say the least.
I will say the first half of the guy's blather about waves could be dispensed with.
The last bit is the crux of the biscuit.

_________________
"Act your age, not your shoe size" - Prince

This design will definitely cut down on the number of picks that slip out of my fingers, and go through the sound hole. Won't have to use a shop vac with the custom nozzle to get them out anymore.
Like theguitarwhisper said, if this bird hasn't hatched and flown the coop after three years....

Alex

_________________
"Indecision is the key to flexibility" .... Bumper sticker

I agree and then we could comment constructively.
Tom

_________________
A person who has never made a mistake has never made anything!!!

While I've seen 12 strings with 6 on bridge pins and 6 on a trapeze work, I doubt I would stick the soundhole in the middle of the prime vibrating area. Never found that lightening the bracing (6 or 12) from the soundhole forward made much difference, except to weaken the whole area/make it prone to neck block rotation. Really don't think the prime tonal area is forward of the LTB or soundhole...and adding the soundhole in that area plus a second bridge mass just doesn't make sense to me. But then again, I'm a traditionalist...

A similar idea, but with the soundhole in the usual location was discussed on the AG forum about a year ago.
http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=279416&highlight=intension+bridge
I can't see how either approach would be helpful.

_________________
Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right - Robert Hunter

The one thing that I did not read is that his objective goal was met and that is a louder guitar. He talked about a grand piano being loud and how a violin was louder and why a guitar couldn't produce that same projected volume. All the said was it sounds fabulous but I contend that "sounds fabulous" is subjective and not a measurable data point.

I would still reserve judgment on it being a good idea until after I heard it.

Bob

Interesting replies.
Of course,the lack of sound recording just makes the whole article dubious. I agree with guitarwhisperer-the guitar already sounds wonderful, there is no failing. Some people would try to improve a bamboo flute by making it from PVC!
I'm always interested in reading ideas like these as it as adds to my approach to guitar design, I'm just not qualified to talked about the validity..The design linked by J De Rocher looks much better, thanks for that.
Good to keep an open mind!

_________________
We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at guitars.

I think we are being too kind. What do we really think? If this was posted closer to the first of this month I could understand it.

I am always dubious of “new” guitar designs. A new design would have to blow my socks off for me to consider any change in building…show me the money! Thx, Tony

_________________
**************
Tony Flippo

Omg, it just looks so wrong!!

_________________
http://www.bobmatthewsguitars.co.uk

I think the article had a lot of words and I did not read them all.
Also, the reason a violin is louder than a guitar is because you are not plucking the strings, you are constantly driving them with the bow. When you pluck the strings on a violin, it is not nearly as loud and there is very little sustain. I don't want my guitars to sound like violins anyway.

_________________
http://www.CostaGuitars.com
PMoMC

And it's not necessarily a good louder! However, being a man of the sea myself, I find the Tidal Air Velocity thing to be quite intriguing.

It is obvious to me that the designer gave little to no consideration for the player.

Extending the neck creates an almost impossible reach if the player were to hold the instrument in its typical fashion.
It would be even worse for the classical position.

The sound I think would be piano like especially in the higher register.

A serious redesign should be considered.

_________________
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

imo, innovation has to have a solid reason and a relevant practicality behind it to be of real world, functional use -rather then just a primal urge to be different and a desire to reorganize and rename terminology in an attempt to validate that urge. for me, i'm not interested in putting bridge and saddle stress/torque near an open hole. sorry, but as adhesion to tradition plays a significant role in the acoustic guitar world, i suspect buyers won't be lining up for one of those things in any meaningful numbers. it seems like the vibrating real estate has been reduced to the waist and upper bout area and possibly not the best area for sound production. imo, i also think that dumping the air out of the box so rapidly may contribute to a decrease in the string energy needed, for lack of a better phrase, for "mature tonal production" .

still i think that they're trying something novel and that's cool. have at it.

Plus your arm would block the sound hole. Still.....hearing the results is everything. If it sounds great, maybe a re-shaped body would fix the ergonomic issues