How big a factor is resonance in what makes a good electric?

WezV

thegummy said:

Mattharrier said:

I don't have enough experience with different guitars to really say, but my gut feeling, and logic, says that the pickup, pedals, amp and speaker will have far more impact on a guitar's sound than the wood it's made of, when talking about solid body electrics.

I don't know if there are people who think the wood makes as big a difference as pickups/pedals/amps (or almost as big a difference) but if there are I think it's a bit far fetched personally.

I thought the ol' tonewood debate was "it makes a subtle difference" vs. "it makes zero difference" but maybe some people take it further than that.

Anyone who says body resonance is the number one contributing factor to the tone you hear is clearly an idiot, probably looking to troll a forum  

Resonance of the structure and its affect on the vibrating string is still worthy of discussion, especially if talking about guitar design and builds,  but its definitely the thin end of the wedge.

JezWynd

Cirrus said:

Finally, and perhaps most controversially, I think solid bodies can break in to a small degree through being played regularly - vibration is physical deformation of a material, and if you deform most material again and again, there comes a point where it gets easier to do.

You've described, very elegantly, what I've found playing older guitars - that the various pieces of wood learn to 'play nice' together.

Offset

I have two guitars that are diametrically opposed when it comes to acoustic resonance.  My Y2K American Standard Tele (currently being refinished - yay!) is the loudest and fattest-sounding unplugged guitar I have, and it also happens to sound fab plugged in.  At the other end of the scale is my 2013 Firebird V, which is very quiet and thin-sounding unplugged (and I'm being generous here).  Although it sounds... well, like a Firebird when plugged in, I really struggle with a guitar which has such a weak unplugged output although I know in truth that's rather irrational.  To that end I'm changing the stop bar studs and TOM bridge to locking TonePros units - mainly to stop the buggers from dropping off when re-stringing, which I seriously detest, but also to see if it makes any difference to the sound of the guitar.  This following some advice from the pages of this forum.

thegummy

Can't help wondering why people are playing their electric guitars unplugged anyway... 

Offset

thegummy said:

Can't help wondering why people are playing their electric guitars unplugged anyway... 

Spur-of-the-moment stuff, although I have a Boss Katana Air to hand so I don't really have much of an excuse :-)

TeleMaster

I always think of the silly tonewood debate when listening to Prince play that plastic see through symbol guitar of his. He always sounds immense, and it just puts the whole thing into perspective for me. 

thegummy

TeleMaster said:

I always think of the silly tonewood debate when listening to Prince play that plastic see through symbol guitar of his. He always sounds immense, and it just puts the whole thing into perspective for me. 

It's all relative.

One of my favourite pieces of music of all time is a recording that I downloaded from Youtube years ago (before the codecs got high quality) and seems to be captured from a very poor condition VHS recording off 70s Turkish TV.

On the other hand, when I listen to something with high production like Pink Floyd or John Mayer, I do get extra pleasure from the subtleties of the tone.

So really if anyone is worried that their music will suffer if they don't get themselves in to debt for a fancy guitar, they shouldn't and should just get one they can afford but at the same time if someone has plenty of money to spare, I don't think being specific about tone is wasted time.

Cirrus

thegummy said:

Can't help wondering why people are playing their electric guitars unplugged anyway... 

If I might be forgiven for making this observation, you've posted 7 times in this thread and other than this it's all been variations of "I don't know", "Nobody knows" and "Unless you do double blind tests, nothing you sense or experience can be trusted".

And... that's fine, and I'm only speaking for myself here but I think I understood your position the first time you said it. I also think there's a culture of scepticism in what, I think for many, is far more of a practical and artistic endeavor than an objective, scientific one. On occasion that gets in the way of just accepting obvious things that are easy to hear. I've given a real world example, I note it's been ignored. But I've put my money where my mouth is by posting an audio example.

Maybe my perspective on critical listening is a bit different, having done plenty of double blind tests and also tests on myself and in shootouts while producing/ mixing music - I think it's perfectly possible to listen and evaluate sounds outside of a strictly controlled double blind setup, people do it all the time.

thegummy

Cirrus said:

thegummy said:

Can't help wondering why people are playing their electric guitars unplugged anyway... 

If I might be forgiven for making this observation, you've posted 7 times in this thread and other than this it's all been variations of "I don't know", "Nobody knows" and "Unless you do double blind tests, nothing you sense or experience can be trusted".

And... that's fine, and I'm only speaking for myself here but I think I understood your position the first time you said it. I also think there's a culture of scepticism in what, I think for many, is far more of a practical and artistic endeavor than an objective, scientific one. On occasion that gets in the way of just accepting obvious things that are easy to hear. I've given a real world example, I note it's been ignored. But I've put my money where my mouth is by posting an audio example.

Maybe my perspective on critical listening is a bit different, having done plenty of double blind tests and also tests on myself and in shootouts while producing/ mixing music - I think it's perfectly possible to listen and evaluate sounds outside of a strictly controlled double blind setup, people do it all the time.

You only think things can be obvious to hear because you're ignorant of how perception works. Maybe your time would be better spent learning about that than counting my posts in threads.

I already alluded to the fact that some people don't like the idea that what they think they can hear isn't necessarily what's there but there's no need to attack me over it - it's not my fault your wish isn't true.

Offset

TeleMaster said:

I always think of the silly tonewood debate when listening to Prince play that plastic see through symbol guitar of his. He always sounds immense, and it just puts the whole thing into perspective for me. 

Bang on the money.

Cirrus

Not an attack, just an observation* - it's hard to imagine someone making the same point  so many times (now 8 posts) without being very emotionally invested in how right they are - which is ironic, given the point you're trying to make.

 *being called ignorant does however feel a bit like an attack...

thegummy

Cirrus said:

Not an attack, just an observation* - it's hard to imagine someone making the same point  so many times (now 8 posts) without being very emotionally invested in how right they are - which is ironic, given the point you're trying to make.

 *being called ignorant does however feel a bit like an attack...

I fully admit to counter attacking you, don't be all slimey and pretend yours wasn't an attack.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, if your view isn't based entirely on ignorance - let's see some of the evidence you have for thinking that people really do perceive things correctly. I've read a lot on the topic and every single bit of evidence points to the opposite so it'll be enlightening to read yours.

Cirrus

thegummy said:

Cirrus said:

Not an attack, just an observation* - it's hard to imagine someone making the same point  so many times (now 8 posts) without being very emotionally invested in how right they are - which is ironic, given the point you're trying to make.

 *being called ignorant does however feel a bit like an attack...

I fully admit to counter attacking you, don't be all slimey and pretend yours wasn't an attack.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though, if your view isn't based entirely on ignorance - let's see some of the evidence you have for thinking that people really do perceive things correctly. I've read a lot on the topic and every single bit of evidence points to the opposite so it'll be enlightening to read yours.

And now you're calling me "slimey".

It really wasn't an attack. It was an observation - you've made the same point numerous times. It could have been a moment of self reflection, but your ego has got in the way, and now the thread is about you. You can take THAT as an attack if you wish. But since you posted the same idea multiple times on every page, that's clearly what you wanted to start with, so well done.

I won't endeavour to prove that "people really do perceive things correctly" because that's so open ended and ill defined that it's meaningless. If you meant to ask me to prove that perception and biases don't influence and cloud our objectivity, I won't, because I agree with you that they do. I just also believe that not every experience or opinion needs to be blind tested and peer reviewed to have value - especially when (as I've already gone through in my first post in this thread) there are clear mechanisms that explain the observation.

I'm not even sure if you have a point, now - I just think you wanted to prove how clever you are by dropping the phrase "controlled double blind test" into what was until now an interesting discussion.

thegummy

Cirrus said:

And now you're calling me "slimey".

It really wasn't an attack. It was an observation - you've made the same point numerous times. It could have been a moment of self reflection, but your ego has got in the way, and now the thread is about you. You can take THAT as an attack if you wish. But since you posted the same idea multiple times on every page, that's clearly what you wanted to start with, so well done.

I won't endeavour to prove that "people really do perceive things correctly" because that's so open ended and ill defined that it's meaningless. If you meant to ask me to prove that perception and biases don't influence and cloud our objectivity, I won't, because I agree with you that they do. I just also believe that not every experience or opinion needs to be blind tested and peer reviewed to have value - especially when (as I've already gone through in my first post in this thread) there are clear mechanisms that explain the observation.

I'm not even sure if you have a point, now - I just think you wanted to prove how clever you are by dropping the phrase "controlled double blind test" into what was until now an interesting discussion.

"You have an ugly face, that's just an observation."

Look mate, you were the one who brought me in to it, everything I'd said in the thread before that was about guitars.

This will be the last time I reply to you, if you don't like what I say, ignore it or use the ignore function if you're unable to.

Seziertisch

thegummy said:

Can't help wondering why people are playing their electric guitars unplugged anyway... 

The experience of playing electric guitar is not just about what it sounds like coming out of the amp.

There is a tactile element encompassing strings, action, radius, fret size, neck size, ergonomics of the instrument relative to the player’s physical attributes (how tall the player is, arm length, hand size, finger length etc.) neck finish (glossy or satin, poly or nitro, worn or not etc.), and I would say body resonance. I have played some guitars which have been particularly resonant and  I have found this to increase my enjoyment of the overall playing experience.

Going beyond that there is also arguably a visual element which definitely has no impact on the sound i.e. colour, reliced, unreliced etc, but which similarly contributes to the experience.

TeleMaster

Offset said:

TeleMaster said:

I always think of the silly tonewood debate when listening to Prince play that plastic see through symbol guitar of his. He always sounds immense, and it just puts the whole thing into perspective for me. 

Bang on the money.

 

thegummy

Seziertisch said:

The experience of playing electric guitar is not just about what it sounds like coming out of the amp.

There is a tactile element encompassing strings, action, radius, fret size, neck size, ergonomics of the instrument relative to the player’s physical attributes (how tall the player is, arm length, hand size, finger length etc.) neck finish (glossy or satin, poly or nitro, worn or not etc.), and I would say body resonance. I have played some guitars which have been particularly resonant and  I have found this to increase my enjoyment of the overall playing experience.

Going beyond that there is also arguably a visual element which definitely has no impact on the sound i.e. colour, reliced, unreliced etc, but which similarly contributes to the experience.

I wasn't meaning in shops or to test one out, I just meant when playing your own guitars. Was really just a lighthearted response to Offset's comment.

When I'm in a shop it's the things you mentioned I'm way more concerned about anyway, more than how it sounds through an alien amp played relatively quietly in a large shop.

Seziertisch

thegummy said:

Seziertisch said:

The experience of playing electric guitar is not just about what it sounds like coming out of the amp.

There is a tactile element encompassing strings, action, radius, fret size, neck size, ergonomics of the instrument relative to the player’s physical attributes (how tall the player is, arm length, hand size, finger length etc.) neck finish (glossy or satin, poly or nitro, worn or not etc.), and I would say body resonance. I have played some guitars which have been particularly resonant and  I have found this to increase my enjoyment of the overall playing experience.

Going beyond that there is also arguably a visual element which definitely has no impact on the sound i.e. colour, reliced, unreliced etc, but which similarly contributes to the experience.

I wasn't meaning in shops or to test one out, I just meant when playing your own guitars. Was really just a lighthearted response to Offset's comment.

When I'm in a shop it's the things you mentioned I'm way more concerned about anyway, more than how it sounds through an alien amp played relatively quietly in a large shop.

I don’t think these non-sound-related considerations cease to matter once you get a guitar home or can plug in and play at sufficient volume. 

Collectively they are at least as significant to the question of to what extent a player “bonds” with any given instrument.

thegummy

Seziertisch said:

I don’t think these non-sound-related considerations cease to matter once you get a guitar home or can plug in and play at sufficient volume. 

Collectively they are at least as significant to the question of to what extent a player “bonds” with any given instrument.

That's because you still experience them when the guitar is plugged in, isn't it?

WezV

TeleMaster said:

Offset said:

TeleMaster said:

I always think of the silly tonewood debate when listening to Prince play that plastic see through symbol guitar of his. He always sounds immense, and it just puts the whole thing into perspective for me. 

Bang on the money.

 

That all depends on what you consider  the "tonewood debate" to be about.

if its "guitars must be wood, certain types of wood... everything else is bad", then yes, you are bang on the money.

If its "choice of material has some affect on resonance and tone", then no, you are not bang on the money.

Guitars can be built from many many things other than wood.  those materials will have there own characteristics which can influence the sound in some way and will form part of the design decision


here is a comparison of a wood and aluminum guitar neck as one example that disproves the first statement, but supports the second.  Slight, but definite differences.