Rosewood Versus Cypress (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - Rosewood Versus Cypress: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=71157



Message

chapman_g -> Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 6 2007 14:15:37)

Okay so it is said that rosewood gives that darker, deeper, fuller, warmer sound. Whereas cypress is more brilliant, bright, clearer sound. I see most of this, but I also see it said that rosewood projects better in the concert hall and generally more volume with a bigger more powerful sound, more projection and sustain than cypress. Is this true? To the luthiers on this list tone aside do you feel you are able to get the same level of power, volume, projection with cypress as with rosewood back and sides?



jshelton5040 -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 7 2007 0:21:30)

Type of wood used on the back and sides has little effect on the voice. It's the top that makes the sound. You can make a syrupy bassy booming voice with cypress and a brilliant, metallic voice with rosewood just by varying the thickness, bracing and taper of the top wood. I know everyone will disagree but after building hundreds of guitars that's the opinion I've come to.



JBASHORUN -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 7 2007 1:58:28)

quote:

Type of wood used on the back and sides has little effect on the voice. It's the top that makes the sound. You can make a syrupy bassy booming voice with cypress and a brilliant, metallic voice with rosewood just by varying the thickness, bracing and taper of the top wood. I know everyone will disagree but after building hundreds of guitars that's the opinion I've come to.


The great Luthier Torres once built a guitar with back and sides made from papier-mache, just to proove that it didn't make any difference what the back and sides were made from, as the soundboard was the important thing. Another member kindly posted a recording of what it sounded like a while back. I was also taught that the soundboard is the key thing, but I know that Anders disputes all this, so I guess opinion is divided.

Jb



wiseguy493 -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 7 2007 14:27:01)

Jbashorun is right about Torres and there is a reason that there are two different very qualified opinions on this topic: Flamenco afficionados believe the entire guitar is resophonic. The initial principles of guitar building were based on other instruments such as violin where the notes were bowed and this made the whole body resonate. The guitar is plucked so the sustain is greatly decreased and any further resonation is minimal. But flamenco guitars are still built on the idea of the entire body resonating (while most classicals are not built by the same principles, see the dovetail neck joint)

Both ideas have some degree of correctness. A flamenco design creates a pattern of phase cancellation in how the frequencies are projected and this gives flamenco some of that "flamenco sound" that players love (just as how a rock player loves the gritty 60 cycle hum of his pickups). While a classical player's priority is clarity, so everything in a classical is done to reduce this phase cancellation, all the way down to the ribs and braces, and cutaway also helps to decrease phase cancellation.



wiseguy493 -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 7 2007 14:30:39)

And P.S., I think walnut makes an excellent wood for backs and sides, whether your guitar is designed to be resophonic or if the back and sides are just there for structure



Ricardo -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 7 2007 18:24:41)

I agree that the wood on back and sides has "little effect on the voice". You can prove this by doing blind listening tests. But, to a player, with the instrument in hand, these "little effects" actually matter GREATLY, and describing these little differences will differ from player to player. Words are not the best way to describe these differences, so the generalizations about "darker, brighter, louder, projection, percussive, cuts through" are not helpful at all. For sure using certain wood on the back of a guitar affects the overall sound and playability greatly.

Comparisons are best made with ONE maker at a time, and it may be that maker X does not make a loud blanca, or perhaps a negra flamenca that is too "classical" sounding. Etc, but the "problems" dont' make an easy test to determine truely which wood is better for "projection". As Anders always simply puts, it is a combo of all the factors together that makes the guitar sound like it will in the end. For sure a Paper mache Conde won't sound or respond the same as the Conde A26 blanca.

Ricardo



jshelton5040 -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 8 2007 0:18:14)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricardo

I agree that the wood on back and sides has "little effect on the voice". You can prove this by doing blind listening tests. But, to a player, with the instrument in hand, these "little effects" actually matter GREATLY, and describing these little differences will differ from player to player. Words are not the best way to describe these differences, so the generalizations about "darker, brighter, louder, projection, percussive, cuts through" are not helpful at all. For sure using certain wood on the back of a guitar affects the overall sound and playability greatly.


Sorry Ricardo but this doesn't make sense to me. If the difference is so subtle and nebulous how can you be certain it's the wood on the back and sides and not some other factor that makes the guitar sound a certain way? Do you really think that the wood on the back and sides can affect the playability?

quote:


Comparisons are best made with ONE maker at a time, and it may be that maker X does not make a loud blanca, or perhaps a negra flamenca that is too "classical" sounding. Etc, but the "problems" dont' make an easy test to determine truely which wood is better for "projection". As Anders always simply puts, it is a combo of all the factors together that makes the guitar sound like it will in the end. For sure a Paper mache Conde won't sound or respond the same as the Conde A26 blanca.

Ricardo


For sure, most of the negras I see nowadays would better be described as classics with low action and a golpeador. The bodies are too deep and the voices too round (strictly my opinion you understand). I think the luthiers are intentionally making them with that kind of voice because that's what the players want. It has little to do with the wood on the back and sides. By the way, I suspect a paper mache Conde with a great piece of topwood would undoubtedly sound better than an A26 with lousy topwood.



wiseguy493 -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 8 2007 0:57:05)

Heh, this is a topic I've argued time after time with many fellow luthiers. The acceptable truth of it all is that traditional flamenco guitars are designed with the intention of full body resonation while other guitars since Torres set the standard have been designed around maximum projection via the soundboard and minimalizing the phase cancellation caused by undesired resonation inside the guitar. So if you're talking about a guitar that is made to the modern standard, the back and sides don't matter at all. This applies to MOST flamenco guitars on the market today since most makers have gradually shifted away from the traditional flamenco designs. An independent luthier is a different story and may be doing something VERY different, maybe original or maybe the traditional.

It doesn't matter how well you make the back and sides of a guitar, they contribute very little to the tone of the guitar and even less to the actual projection of the guitar (what you hear when you're not holding it) because all of the projection happens at the soundboard.

Regardless of the type of wood used in the back and sides, it should resonate very nicely when held, but as to what the listener will actually hear, I don't think any of that sound is making it more than 6 inches from your guitar



Ricardo -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 8 2007 6:00:10)

quote:

If the difference is so subtle and nebulous how can you be certain it's the wood on the back and sides and not some other factor that makes the guitar sound a certain way? Do you really think that the wood on the back and sides can affect the playability?


To the outside observer, the difference is not so clear. So hearing the guitar without seeing it, some one guessing if it is a blanca or negra or maple back guitar, might not be able to tell. But for the player, part of "playability" is the way the guitar responds. All other things considered equal (maker, top wood is good and same type, etc) a player can tell the difference between a negra or blanca, even blind folded. Wish we could do a test like this of some sort, it would be very interesting. Anyway, I have not yet played a negra that responded "like a blanca", though I have played some low end blancas that were more "classical" sounding.

I will test myself with my friends help when I get a chance, and then test some students. Anyway, there is a reason for example players prefer a certain details about a guitar, and I feel the wood on the back and sides is more than asthetics.

Ricardo

Edit also about the 6 inches from the hole issue of sound, I will say I have different ways to eq the live sound of various guitars depending on if they are negra or blanca etc. Perhaps the differences seem small to some but to me, they are really significant. The difference between having your guitar sound clear and full, or like a tin can, or like mud.



RobJe -> RE: Rosewood Versus Cypress (Aug. 8 2007 11:06:44)

Blind testing could be very revealing. In the case of wine, some experiments have suggested that a lot of people can’t tell the difference between red and white wines in blind tasting and that perception of quality is not related to how much the wine cost.

Judging by some of the comments people make about the qualities of their own flamenco guitars I would guess that the position is similar to wine. I have heard guitars praised as having ‘fantastic sustain’ and ‘no sustain’ – sound like lousy guitars to me! But then, ‘owner hype’ can have more to do with an attempt to justify (to self and loved ones) the amount of money spent on a new guitar rather than with objective evaluation.

I did a blindfold test many years ago at the Ramirez shop in Madrid to see if I could spot which was the 2a (as opposed to 1a) in a bunch of guitars – I couldn’t, but the only difference in construction was the use of materials with blemishes so it is not surprising.

I would however back myself to tell the difference between cedar and spruce tops in blind testing (playing, but not so sure about listening). Negra and blanca might be more difficult.

Rob



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET