kostask, thanks for providing the link. It is the best explanation I've heard to date, however I wonder how he may have controlled the degree of impact of the hammer from one test to the next. It seems to me that a critical part of that test would be to make sure the impact was exactly the same for each test. I personally have never experienced or noticed any difference in sound in any of my guitars. Maybe becuause I'm not listening for it. They just always sound good right from the beginnin. Of course, they really "wake up" when I change strings: 8)
"waking up" a top
- Thread starter SugarMountain
- Start date
CurtO:
You'd have to speak to him directly, but if there is anybody who would properly conduct and experiment, it would be Al Carruth. He has performed a lot of different experiments, some of which he has written of on the Acoustic Guitar Central Gear forum, probably some that he has not written about.
I do know that at one time, he actually built two guitars, with woods as closely matched as he could get them, with the only difference being that one guitar used a standard X bracing system, the other one used a Double X bracing system (like Gibson tried at one time). While the Double X has long been discredited as being to heavy and stiff, leading to a lifeless sound, in his case, he found that people very much preferred the sound of the Double X braced guitar. In his experiments, at one of the shows, he did the experiment with the player being unaware of which guitar they were playing, and there was a wide variety of people who tried out the guitars, from fingerpickers and flatpickers, beginners, intermediates, and even a couple of nationally recognized pros, as well as other handbuilders. He was just proving to himself that there was nothing inhereintly wrong with the Double X bracing system, it was more the way that the original Gibsons were made (ie. execution vs. design). He has also done a lot of work with glitter patterns, and trying to equate what is being heard with measurements.
I have never even met the guy, but his postings sure are very enlightening, and I always end up learning something.
Kostas
You'd have to speak to him directly, but if there is anybody who would properly conduct and experiment, it would be Al Carruth. He has performed a lot of different experiments, some of which he has written of on the Acoustic Guitar Central Gear forum, probably some that he has not written about.
I do know that at one time, he actually built two guitars, with woods as closely matched as he could get them, with the only difference being that one guitar used a standard X bracing system, the other one used a Double X bracing system (like Gibson tried at one time). While the Double X has long been discredited as being to heavy and stiff, leading to a lifeless sound, in his case, he found that people very much preferred the sound of the Double X braced guitar. In his experiments, at one of the shows, he did the experiment with the player being unaware of which guitar they were playing, and there was a wide variety of people who tried out the guitars, from fingerpickers and flatpickers, beginners, intermediates, and even a couple of nationally recognized pros, as well as other handbuilders. He was just proving to himself that there was nothing inhereintly wrong with the Double X bracing system, it was more the way that the original Gibsons were made (ie. execution vs. design). He has also done a lot of work with glitter patterns, and trying to equate what is being heard with measurements.
I have never even met the guy, but his postings sure are very enlightening, and I always end up learning something.
Kostas
jp
Senior Member
I had a guitar teacher who always recommended that I put my acoustic guitar stand next to the stereo speakers, just for this purpose. I don't really know if I believe the Gruhn theory that it only progresses so far. I would tend to think it depends more on whether the guitar has loosened up as much as possible, more than how many years have passed. With that in mind it does make sense. I do know that it took my old cedar-topped Seagull S6 a good period of years to open up.
Having never NOT played my guitars for any length of time, I can neither confirm nor deny any of this information.
However, they do seem to wake right up whenever I treat them to a brand new set of D'Addarios
Personally, I think they like to be caressed. Honestly, I think mine sounds better after my body heat has reached a point of equilibrium with the guitar, including the neck and the fretboard. After I play for a little while, I seem to get in a groove with my guitar and stay there until I'm done. I caress it, it responds, I'm able to coax out the sounds that I want. Sometimes I feel like I and the acoustic guitar have become one entity. Does this sound weird or what?
However, they do seem to wake right up whenever I treat them to a brand new set of D'Addarios
Personally, I think they like to be caressed. Honestly, I think mine sounds better after my body heat has reached a point of equilibrium with the guitar, including the neck and the fretboard. After I play for a little while, I seem to get in a groove with my guitar and stay there until I'm done. I caress it, it responds, I'm able to coax out the sounds that I want. Sometimes I feel like I and the acoustic guitar have become one entity. Does this sound weird or what?
West R Lee
Venerated Member
Man, this is getting deep! :shock: How ya doin' Dredster?
West
West
dreadnut said:Having never NOT played my guitars for any length of time, I can neither confirm nor deny any of this information.
However, they do seem to wake right up whenever I treat them to a brand new set of D'Addarios
Personally, I think they like to be caressed. Honestly, I think mine sounds better after my body heat has reached a point of equilibrium with the guitar, including the neck and the fretboard. After I play for a little while, I seem to get in a groove with my guitar and stay there until I'm done. I caress it, it responds, I'm able to coax out the sounds that I want. Sometimes I feel like I and the acoustic guitar have become one entity. Does this sound weird or what?
Then maybe it is not the guitar that is woke up, and warmed up, it is US. We change with the moment.
West R Lee
Venerated Member
:lol:
West
West
john_kidder
Senior Member
Guildmark said:What a disappointment. I looked at the title of this thread too quickly and thought it said "waking up" on top.
Nevermind.
Heavens, mark, this is a truly lousy site to be trolling for that sort of thing.
Which is why I was so surprised to see it (or to think I saw it).john_kidder said:Guildmark said:What a disappointment. I looked at the title of this thread too quickly and thought it said "waking up" on top.
Nevermind.
Heavens, mark, this is a truly lousy site to be trolling for that sort of thing.
So, I wasn't really trolling, John. Heck, these days I'm happy to do any fishing at all.
JerryR
Enlightened Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
- Messages
- 7,645
- Reaction score
- 641
dreadnut said:
Now you see why CurtO's wife wishes she was one of his guitars
Women get jealous very easily when men pay attention to something other than them (isn't that true Carol?) :mrgreen:
JerryR
Enlightened Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
- Messages
- 7,645
- Reaction score
- 641
Carol said:
Is that why your avatar looks so miserable :mrgreen:
Dr Izza Plumber
Senior Member
I've kept My Guilds and Taylor guitars standing in front of the stereo speakers for most of this past week. They've been fed a diet of "smooth jazz" along with the sub-woofer set above normal on intensity.
My word! The D55 is now louder and stronger in the Bass dept than My GAD50. This is a complete reversal of both guitars tonal attributes, prior to the musical indoctrination.
The Taylor also, seems to be more responsive across the board, and it let Me know so by popping the high "G" string last night.
I play at least 4 of My acoustics axes everyday, but the stereo diet has simply surpassed what I could accomplish by playing the guitars.
I'm a believer!
My word! The D55 is now louder and stronger in the Bass dept than My GAD50. This is a complete reversal of both guitars tonal attributes, prior to the musical indoctrination.
The Taylor also, seems to be more responsive across the board, and it let Me know so by popping the high "G" string last night.
I play at least 4 of My acoustics axes everyday, but the stereo diet has simply surpassed what I could accomplish by playing the guitars.
I'm a believer!
JerryR
Enlightened Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2007
- Messages
- 7,645
- Reaction score
- 641
Guildmark said:Which is why I was so surprised to see it (or to think I saw it).john_kidder said:Guildmark said:What a disappointment. I looked at the title of this thread too quickly and thought it said "waking up" on top.
Nevermind.
Heavens, mark, this is a truly lousy site to be trolling for that sort of thing.
So, I wasn't really trolling, John. Heck, these days I'm happy to do any fishing at all.
I expect we get a lotta disappointed people - especially when you get topics like "Look closely at this Brazilian" :shock:
Dr Izza Plumber said:
Dr. Izza,
Let me ask you this: have you had these guitars a while, during such time you have played them on a regular basis, and assuming they had been "broken-in" by now, and now by giving them this "treatment", they are still sounding better than before?
If that is the case, then it would be safe to say that almost any solid top guitar, even after its "breaking-in" period has come and gone, when the wood has settled in, would get better if subjected to this bombardment of sound waves.
So there is one more level we can take our guitars to, in addition to just playing them, to break them in, and that is this treatment of sound waves, to wake up resins that have been locked up for years.
Anybody agree?
Disagree?
Metalman:
The same luthier, Al Carruth, whose theory on openin/waking up I have previously posted a link to, also had another posting relating to this, but I cannot find the link. I will do my best to accurately paraphrase here.
The opening/waking up of a top is basically the distribution of the resins/lignins in the wood being vibrated around to the least active parts of the top. allowing the top to vibrate as freely as possible. This is more prevalent in newer tops, as they have the greates amount of "liquid resins" due to the relatively higher humidity present in newer woods. Continuing to play the guitar provides the energy to move the resins along. It needs to be kept in mind that this is a very slow process, which explains why it can take a very good, but new, top a few years to develop, and why putting a guitar aside for a few days might not make a difference, but putting it aside for a few months can. Another thing to keep in mind, is that the resins are continually drying out, so after many years of playing, lets say 25 or so, the resins have both migrated to the optimal points, and have also significantly dried out to the point that they will not move around much, no matter how long the guitar has been put aside. Therefore, if a regularly played guitar, that has been played for a lot of years, there will be less of a change to its sound if it is put away for a period of time, as compared to a newer guitar.
I really wish I could find Al Carruth's posting, he explains all of this much better than my paraphrasing above could.
Kostas
The same luthier, Al Carruth, whose theory on openin/waking up I have previously posted a link to, also had another posting relating to this, but I cannot find the link. I will do my best to accurately paraphrase here.
The opening/waking up of a top is basically the distribution of the resins/lignins in the wood being vibrated around to the least active parts of the top. allowing the top to vibrate as freely as possible. This is more prevalent in newer tops, as they have the greates amount of "liquid resins" due to the relatively higher humidity present in newer woods. Continuing to play the guitar provides the energy to move the resins along. It needs to be kept in mind that this is a very slow process, which explains why it can take a very good, but new, top a few years to develop, and why putting a guitar aside for a few days might not make a difference, but putting it aside for a few months can. Another thing to keep in mind, is that the resins are continually drying out, so after many years of playing, lets say 25 or so, the resins have both migrated to the optimal points, and have also significantly dried out to the point that they will not move around much, no matter how long the guitar has been put aside. Therefore, if a regularly played guitar, that has been played for a lot of years, there will be less of a change to its sound if it is put away for a period of time, as compared to a newer guitar.
I really wish I could find Al Carruth's posting, he explains all of this much better than my paraphrasing above could.
Kostas
Bing k
Senior Member
Carol said:
Oh, I don't know. Remember you in Geezerville here :lol: