Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
|
|
Question for Anders.. Guitar weight
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login | |
|
Guest
|
RE: Question for Anders.. Guitar weight (in reply to flamencoguru)
|
|
|
Hola amigos. I was away this weekend. This with weight is another one of these difficult, if not to say impossible questions. I think Pablus hits the nail very well when it comes to classical guitars, and when talking about a certain style of classical guitars that I personally don't care to much about. The big sustain classical guitar with a very soft attack. I find that this trend is to make the guitar sound as little as possible as a classical guitar, a sort of anti guitar. It's impossible to make a lot of sustain without sacrificing something else, and in this case the percussive part of the guitar. In classical guitars, I like the style of Torres, Hauser, Romanillos a lot more, a classical guitar with more balance between sustain and percussiveness. I also prefer the tonal quality of this type of guitar Flamenco guitars are another story. We want them to be fast, very responsive and with a great percussive capacity. I agree that very old Condes, Ramirez etc. are lighter than most guitars nowadays. There are a couple of reasons: Some of those were way to light and fragile. I've seen a few of them which were "dead" because of a to light construction, bend necks and sunken soundboards are a sign of a to light construction. Another thing is that playing style has changed a lot. Generally asking for a guitar with a bit more "body" and harmonics. Few players nowadays want one of these very dry guitars with absolutely no sustain. The art is to build light and to control the stifness of the guitar. My own guitars I will consider to be on the light side. A peghead only weighing some 80 - 100 grams more than an old Ramirez or Conde. The art is to know where you can skip weight. If you make the soundboard to thin, you loose definition and clarity and the basses will be to hard to control. The whole construction of the box with the harmonic bars will have to be strong enough to accept the tension of the strings. Remember that you can buy strings with a lot higher tension than 30 years ago. I will never accept to make a guitar without some kind of reinforcement in the neck. I look for stiff and stable reinforment material, and make the sticks high and slim, so that it's more the glue joint itself (principle of lamination) than the stifness of the stick that stabilises the neck. The electrical guitar is another story. Yes a Less Paul has a lot of beautifull and lon sustain. Mainly because of weight and the use of mahogany in the body. I've had 2 myself. But it's not a very good rytmical guitar. If you want to cut through without being to loud and distorted, a Fender Telecaster does the job a lot better. It's so sharp, bright and percussive, that you don't have to turn up the volume or distortion in order to be heard. A bit like a good flamenco guitar.
_____________________________
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 19 2005 16:17:08
|
|
Armando
Posts: 302
Joined: May 27 2005
From: Zürich, Switzerland
|
RE: Question for Anders.. Guitar weight (in reply to Thomas Whiteley)
|
|
|
quote:
In the case of a Gibson as well as any and all electric guitars the pickup and electronics play a very important role in sound reproduction. Play a Gibson Les Paul without any electronics (amplification). What do you hear? Not much. Hi Thomas I do not enirely agree with that statement. Bevore i started to dedicate myself to the construction of the flamenco guitars, i was building electric guitars. I own a Gibson Les Paul Custom and a Heritage Les Paul Standard. I have also built my own Les Paul Guitar. You may have a lock for it on http://www.buildyourguitar.com/guitars/yourguit/ruckli1.jpg Yes, an electric guitar has pickups and yes, they play a role, but the pickups can't deliver something to the amplifier, that is not being produced by the guitar. Therefor it matters a lot also on an electric guitar, how the guitar was built, with what kind of woods. A Les Paul guitar does not only have more sustain due to the heavier weight but also because the vibration of the strings passes more directly into the body. This is because there is no tremolo system which takes away a big part of the vibration. Another reason is the glued in neck construction, which adds sustain as well. My Heritage Les Paul is made of lighter maple and lighter mahogany than the Gibson Les Paul. The tone of the Heritage is incredibly loud when played unplugged in comparisson to the heavier Gibson. The Gibson in spite of it has not more sustain than the Heritage. This indicates, that a heavy guitar looses ability to vibrate, so you are basically right on this. Most cypress Flamenco Guitars are built to a weight in between 1100 and 1300 gramms. I have realized on my flamenco guitars, that the lighter one sounds more flamenco alike than the heavier. I keep care to build the flamenco guitar as light as possible but with a rather stiff soundboard. I also keep care to keep the wight of the headstock as light as possible. Armando
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 20 2005 6:55:30
|
|
Guest
|
RE: Question for Anders.. Guitar weight (in reply to flamencoguru)
|
|
|
Hi Phrygus. You are not the only one liking very light and short sustained guitars. The question is how light and short sustained do they need to be. I play a blanca with pegs of my own, and it's very short sustained. You can visit me and try it. It's my tribute to old style flamenco guitars, but it's not made to thin or light, and it does have at little bit of harmonies in the trebles and a very deep percussive growl in the basses. The problem with some, to lightly build guitars, is that in order to be light, they have compromised on physics. If you make the backseam reinforcement strip 1mm thick and 6mm wide, then you are building to light IMO. Even worse, If you build (like me) with only one upper harmonic bar, you have to make that strong enough to support the pressure from the neck, if not, the soundboard will sink with time. I build with a bigger neck foot (the piece you see inside the guitar), in order to make the pressure from the neck "stand" on a larger surface and so not distort the shape of the back. If you make the neck with a very light piece of cedar without reinfoercement, and use a very thin fingerboard, you have to accept that the neck might bend. If you make the bracing to light, the soundboard will distort and "dish" ETC I've seen all these things happen in a couple of old Condes and one Ramirez. And I say all in each of these guitars. Bend neck, distorted back, sunken harmonic bar and dished soundboard. Each of these guitars were 'dead'. But mostly the owners thought they had the best guitar in the world, because it featured a label with a certain name on it. This doesn't mean that all old Condes and Ramirez are like that, but take care, there are many of them.
_____________________________
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Dec. 20 2005 7:06:43
|
|
New Messages |
No New Messages |
Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
Locked w/ New Messages |
Locked w/o New Messages |
|
Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts
|
|
|
Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET |
0.09375 secs.
|