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.
|
|
|
RE: Guitar sound
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
  
KMMI77
Posts: 1821
Joined: Jul. 26 2009
From: The land down under
|
 RE: Guitar sound (in reply to Sr. Martins)
|
|
|
quote:
you dont understand the variables of sound and you're being mean to some people here who are trying to explain you things.
What you don't understand is that you and others are being presumptuous regarding what knowledge i have of guitars or sound. You made a comment as a joke, and in a patronizing way. You failed to see that, and now you suddenly notice and feel upset when i directed the same type of crap back at you.
If you want respect from me, then first show it yourself.
quote:
Anyway I asked about that certain vocal accent guitar tops have and if it is considered ideal or a building error, I can't remeber who but some luthier in the luthier section knew exactly what I refered to and said that when tuning the top, this vocal issue of pronounced or accented hollow tones is intended to be avoided.
Thanks for your input Ricardo. Did he mention what the cause of it was? Any particular aspects of the construction?
quote:
that paco heredia vid reminded me of this
Yes i know what you mean Deniz. Those conde guitars do contain some similarities but imo, those two condes are much thicker, slower responding and not as clean, smooth and bouncy overall. Just my opinion.
quote:
Ironically, I have a negra in my shop right now that if it were played on stage by a monster player like Tuto it would sound similar. It's about 7 months old now and it did not sound as good when I first made it, but it opened up into a fast beast. It got passed over by the person who had me build it and nobody here on the Foro wanted it ( I got laughed at actually) so I sold it to a folk guitarist who will never do it justice. It's lost a guitar and it's a mother. I'll likely never hear it played properly, which makes me sad after all the work I put into it.
Am I bitter? No. Just dismayed that I'll never hear what it really has inside. The stigma of a guitar that gets passed over can be stinging. But if you look for them you might find someone else's trash is your treasure.
laters...
I sympathize with luthiers. When you have to demonstrate your own guitars and they don't get the showing they deserve. It's kind of like someone designing a ferrari, and then having someone like me demonstrate it. I can drive a bit but the professional race driver will say, How am i supposed to know what the car is capable of after watching that video of a guy not even pushing it?
Likewise your also in the awkward position of having to talk up guitars and sell them no matter what.
I AM NOT DIRECTING THIS PERSONALLY AT ANYONE IN PARTICULAR> How often does a luthier come on here and say, I just finished a guitar but to be honest, it's not that good? or the response is a bit slow, or the trebles are a bit dead, or the balance over the guitar is not perfect, or all notes in the chords don't ring out crisp and clean, or you will have trouble doing fast rasgueados on this one. It would be bad for business.
It's normally the good old, It's got potent trebles, raspy bases, excellent pulsation and easy to play etc... I have played guitars with all these individual qualities but when combined, they don't work well, leaving a guitar that is frustrating to play. Or simply sounds boring and doesn't provide an inspiring background for a story. I know this is subjective but I'm just giving my opinion.
Anyway, I apologize to you Anders for labeling your comments as sooky, I found your reply patronizing, suggestive and dismissive. That is why i wrote what i did. It was not the best way to respond so sorry.
I actually thought we could all have an intelligent conversation about some of these cool sounding guitars. A chance for guitarists and luthiers to potentially learn something. These are hard core flamencos we are watching.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Jun. 18 2012 4:46:33
 |
|
KMMI77
Posts: 1821
Joined: Jul. 26 2009
From: The land down under
|
|
RE: Guitar sound (in reply to Anders Eliasson)
|
|
|
quote:
KMMI77
? What is it you´re looking for? I still dont get it. A recipe for making a guitar that sounds like in those videos? I doesnt exist IMHO.
Thanks for asking.I was just sharing some thoughts and an opinion on a guitar that inspired me. I was looking to get some discussion going. I was keen to hear other peoples opinions and was ready to share my own. That was my intention. Not to insult luthiers. Actually i hoped to possibly inspire a luthier or two.
I was interested to hear luthiers perspectives, insights and thoughts on the sound of the guitar in the video. I didn't think i had to explain that the sound was processed and different to it's acoustic sound. I thought that was obvious and that everyone would assume that i already knew that. I anticipated that people here would listen beyond that to the although altered, but still present "bark" and other characteristics that the guitar has. And perhaps even talk about the way the guitarists was using it to create some very cool sounds. Sure the processed sound is a barrier but i thought there was still some interesting and audible stuff going on.
When listening to a 10 min video like this one, the sound is defined in the beginning. With all the effects and processing. Then you have 10 minutes ( or 1 hr 48 mins if you watch the whole show) to hear how the guitar is manipulating the defined sound. That is what i am listening to. The way the guitar is manipulating the sound is more of a focal point to me then the guitars sound itself. If that makes sense?
My point is, that these guitars are capable of the same amount of sound manipulation regardless of the base sound. Be it acoustic or heavily processed. The level of manipulation would remain the same.That's what I was hoping others would recognize.
quote:
Guitarbuilding is not like that. You cannotanalyze things down to details like that.
I agree. That is why i don't believe it is a wise idea to order a guitar to be built by a luthier unless they are happy for the buyer to say i don't like it when it's finished. If that is the case.
quote:
Besides that, you´re not being very constructive yourself. You turned hotheaded very fast and didnt listen to some things that were said by various posters. and you continue to kind of indirectly critize those you that want help from:
"How often does a luthier come on here and say, I just finished a guitar but to be honest, it's not that good?" Thats an absurd comment and just turns me away from anything interesting you might say.
I agree, the comment is absurd, but not due to the comment itself, but due to the nature of our society which doesn't really encourage people to be honest and grow. Walking around on tippy toes trying not to offend oneself or anyone else has its price when it comes to progress and development. Like guitarists, Great guitars don't come along ever day unfortunately. Nothing wrong with that.
Regarding me being hotheaded, After reading your posts, I felt like you decided that my intention was to post the videos with the intent of insulting luthiers on the foro. When i actually just liked the guitar and identified it as having a different sound to those i have heard from makers here. Was saying that untrue?
I also felt unjustly accused by you. My response would have been better if you had simply asked me questions like , do you think luthiers here couldn't make a guitar that sounds like that? Or do you find this sound preferable to such and such a guitar? If so why? That would have been preferable to just accusing me of saying things. And you could have verified what i believed and checked your perception at the same time. Can you see the difference? I should have done the same thing with you but at the time i felt annoyed.
You responded with a short comment about reverb and a  . This made me feel as though you were addressing me as a 10 year old. I felt it showed little to no consideration to my knowledge or me as a guitarist. Also since you did not ask any questions, i felt you had little interest in my thoughts.
Did i take your comment the wrong way? If you had questions about what i was thinking you could have asked me.
quote:
So just two things I think you should take serious if you are really interested in learning something and not just interested in being angry.
I have been on this foro a while and I don't think i am an angry person. But if people want to be rude and inconsiderate. I will give it back no problem.
Yes, i am interested in learning something. I have thought about all the responses i get from people on here and will continue to do so.
quote:
* Recordings change sound and the equipment you use when listening changes sound.
* The huge majority of guitars that you hear on this site, made by lutiers frequenting this site are recorded in a very simple way AND besides, they are very often brand new guitars meaning they still need to be played a lot in order to devellop their potential. What they devellop the most is the trebles.
I'm surprised you think that i am not aware of any of this. I have been aware of all you say above for many years.
I guess the majority opinion is that the effects and processing added to the sound of these guitars makes it impossible to judge what the guitars actually sounds like. And that there are to many variables to make discussion worth while. I'm cool with that  But like i say above, listening to the guitars within the defined sound is an option.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Jun. 18 2012 8:51:14
|
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14824
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: Guitar sound (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
Ricardo,
I'm curious what you're referring to when you say the top is tuned. Are you maybe talking about the main air resonance of the box? A couple things, the main air resonance does have an effect on this, but it's never a sure thing. There's a great video of Romanillos talking about this and brace tuning things he does not do.
Really? Well, it's this very pronounced almost nasally accent some guitars have that others don't that is pretty much the note the guitar is tuned to, but it stands out on the trebles for some reason, more so on middle treble note than high up on first string. The effect is lost when the capo or key is changed and you play the same music, or rather it shifts to other notes. When you close mic a guitar like stick it right in the hole, and you get this strong note and notch it out, the overall voice of the guitar changes alot. Anyway, it adds a super strong character to the overall voice of the guitar and gives the treble strings a certain "hollow" sound that I think Kris was refering to.
I have heard this effect with only a few different makers and not sure if it was deliberate or not. EVerybodies favorite luthier on foro Mr. Blackshear told me this was a "mistake" but builders work through it with fine tuning....or something like that.
Examples are Nino Ricardo's guitar, PDL's Fabulosa (as opposed to Fantasia which the guitar does not have it, but the live Festival flamenco gitano 1 is the same guitar as Fabulosa so the same pieces to compare), Tomatito's first album vs any of his others, Jesus del Rosario's, many others. As for cheaper guitars the Sanchis Lopez "Solea" seems to have it in an exaggerated way, as I have noticed on at least 3 different instruments of the same make....the other models don't have it to the same degree. I also noticed it on a sigurdson sitka spruce lower end negra. It is so striking and obvious I assumed it is a deliberate part of tuning the top but perhaps a property of the wood itself?
Anyway I could be wrong about what kris is on about but I assumed by his descriptions and examples this was the thing. Most guitars don't have this pronounced accent on the trebles...rather the basses reveal stronger tones as per the tuned top (as discussed in past about F#-A or Bb range, it really jumps out as an issue on those bass notes when close miking or recording for example).
People arguing about affects of eq etc...again the voice doesn't change so much ... cancelling the specific frequency in my experience makes the entire guitar sound anemic so in order to have a normal sounding guitar loud and full this frequency remains and overall eq is used to balance for feedback....this does not change the prounounced accent in the trebels after all. Its not a question of brightness compression reverbe or even balance. Hard to describe verbally but my ears know it.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Jun. 18 2012 20:26:43
|
|
 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.
|
Printable Version
