Acoustic analysis?

[Westerly Wood]

buying another Guild can usually fix the problem.

 

[Nuuska]

Ovation used a vibrometer in the 70s which was a device they borrowed from helicopter manufacturing where it was used to analyze vibrations of rotor blades. They used the vibrometer plots to fine tune the carbon tops of their Adamas guitars, and I think the guitars actually included the plots as well.

I remember Ovation using that measurement info on their advertizing in early -70:s - Adamas came about 1976

 

[walrus]

You know, years ago, I was going to buy a vibrometer for my - oh wait! Never mind...

walrus

 

[Br1ck]

That's even cheaper than installing hardwood floors!

Having a room with hardood flores and no furniture will make any acoustic sound better. I knew a guy once that had that. One small table, two hardwood chairs and a curtained window. Beautiful guitar sound.

 

[Guildedagain]

The top on my '93 F30 CE seemed unusually resonant through the intake cleaning period, so I analyzed the freq and was impressed.

I'd call that an A top ;]

 

[jp]

So are there any devices to analyze an acoustic guitar, based upon certain criteria? His, Los, Mids, which guitar rings the most bells?

I imagine you can get a simple digital recording of each guitar, and then download free spectrum/frequency analysis software to compare differences. Even the older Windows Media Player had a frequency analyzer skin.

Of course, it's up to you how scientific you want to make it, i.e., research, mics, variables, conditions, samples, criteria, etc. That can be a deep rabbit hole if you choose that path.

 

[Nuuska]

Also worth of consideration : same guitar - same room - two players = two different sounds.

i.e. me & Leo . . . .

 

[Rocky]

Breedlove tunes their tops using frequency analyzer thingies .

Is that before or after they install the Bridge Doctor?

I own a Breedlove 12-string and it sounds great. What I hate about it is trying to thread the tiny strings through the pinless bridge.

 

[Rayk]

Is that before or after they install the Bridge Doctor?

I own a Breedlove 12-string and it sounds great. What I hate about it is trying to thread the tiny strings through the pinless bridge.

Well hmmm is it a bridge doctor ? Like what came first the chicken or the egg ? Lol my BL has one but I can’t how the attached it though it’s 22 years old . Lol

Is it exactly the same thing? Anyway I don’t think they use them anymore or if they do only on certain models . My model does not have forward shifted bracing which in my case plays a factor I believe . I’m not trying to say that’s the reason for the bridge doctor thingy but trying to get the most tone out of a top by reducing it’s weight means more weakness so enter some support thingy . Lol
Anywho

 

[Rocky]

Yeah, I can't speak to what it does for the sound. They are braced with the additional brace in mind, though, so thinner, lighter bracing directly on the top. It sounds good enough for me.

 

[kostask]

I think this hasn't been done, because you are trying to measure what is essentially a subjective quality. You can go a very long way towards reducing the variability of the test method, but what you can't do is account for individual taste, or more accurately, individual hearing differences and preferences.

In the past, we have gone on ad nauseum (I contributed to that, no doubt) regarding the adjustable bridges used in the 1960s Gibson J-45. I was very much against them, not liking the metallic quality that was produced from what is one of my favourite guitar types. Others professed to like that sound. I firmly believe that neither opinion was being argumentative, we just based our opinions on what we PERCEIVED to be a "good" sounding guitar. Not only did we individually hear the sound differently, our own biases in what is a "good" vs "bad" sounding guitar entered into it as well. In the end, no matter what the instruments, as carefully as they may be set up to remove as much variability as possible, say, they cannot be made to hear a guitar the way a player or buyer hears it. We don't even need to get into the guitar variability, where a guitar is said to be a "holy grail" by some, yet the next guitar of the same model, even only one serial number, or the next guitar produced on the same production line, with the same materials, maybe only an hour apart sounds "dead" or "muffled" or "is lifeless".

P.S. If one were to try to objectively analyze the sound of an acoustic guitar, it wouldn't just be an acoustic spectrum analyser that would be required. The spectrum analyser would be able to show the relative strengths of the various frequencies, but won't do anything to show attack, sustain, and decay, the rate at which the various harmonics rise and fall in relation to each other, and other time related phenomena (say, how long after the string is struck/plucked does the fundamental note reach its peak volume). It is possible that much of this can be derived from the acoustic spectrum analyser data, but it would take a significant amount of number crunching to come out with numbers like that, and the relationship with such numbers to what is "good" sound (see the paragraph above for what I believe in that regard) is going to be very difficult to establish. It is just so much easier to pick up a guitar, play it, and then see if you like the sound.