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.
|
|
|
volume of a guitar
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
estebanana
Posts: 9351
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
 RE: volume of a guitar (in reply to tele)
|
|
|
Loudness does not mean anything. Want volume, go get an amplifier.
Thin tops make loud gutiars, but they often lack real projection and voice, the trick is to have a projecting guitar with a voice. Most guitarists are not in a position to really understand that because they don't play in large halls full of bodies ( hopefully ones they did not kill with a loud guitar)
To understand what projection and loudness mean together don't ask a luthier, get several guitars together and several friends with good ears who play well and go to an auditorium. put all the guitars on stage an take turns playing them to each other. Listen for the ones with a core voice that projects in the most frequency ranges.
Anyone can say oh this guitar is louder than that guitar, but that actually means nothing, it may in fact be louder, but in also may sound like crap in a room or a big hall. The thing with flamenco guitars is that it does not matter how _loud_ they are in a performance situation on stage they will almost always be amplified, it matters how they play and what the voice sounds like.
Sure everyone wants a guitar with a big sound, but until you go do a big auditorium audition of many guitars with several people you don't get a clear picture of the difference between projection and mere loudness. Take the time to go do the listening, then ask the question of yourself. Play the guitar on stage and get your bearings on the sound level. Then listen back to that guitar being played by others. Keep notes if you have to. Then you will understand what loudness means in relation to voice and projection.
Classical guitarists are the ones who characteristically don't use the mic on stage, the projection vs. loudness issue applies more to classical guitars. And the thing is a guitar that you don't think has volume under your ear as a player might hit the back wall of the auditorium, while a guitar you perceive as LOUD might poop out after ten feet.
Here's a hint:
Go to a construction site and see if anyone is still using a hammer. ( instead of a nail gun) Listen to the blows of the hammer setting a big nail. From close range you feel the impact of the hammer and the fundamental smash of wood and the low frequency waves that those hammer hits create.
That is your LOUD guitar.
Move down the block and feel how the perception changes. You'll get less hammer blow smashing loudness and more projection of the voice of the hammer, the wood and the nail. If you get farther out you will only hear the pure voice of the hammer and nail and probably the higher partials, the overtones of the nail and hammer hitting each other.
That is the guitar that projects and hits that back wall.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 5 2014 23:31:51
 |
|
Ruphus
Posts: 3782
Joined: Nov. 18 2010
|
|
RE: volume of a guitar (in reply to tele)
|
|
|
Lots of remarkable observations and interesting bits like the point about lining, which sounds plausible to my imagination.
I think this thread to be very useful; especially for beginners who like to learn about guitar performance / characteristics.
-
Personally, similar to audio matters, as beginner I used to be impressed by guitars loudness, - which should not surprise when you mainly come from entry level instruments, which usually bear the problem of being muffled.
Now it is that highly responsive guitars tend to bring in volume in the same time, however me focussing on sound quality / not giving much about loudness / sometimes even prefering if it be softer.
Besides, I must be the only one in the foro who likes strong basses. However, only crisp and highly defined ones that won´t mud and may shake your diaphragm, like that one certain guitar that hunts me through the ages and of which I don´t know whether it was a Hermanos C., or a Hernandez or what ever it was.
Ruphus
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 6 2014 17:25:50
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: volume of a guitar (in reply to Ricardo)
|
|
|
Different strokes for different folks.
My favorite flamenco is the loudest (for the player) flamenco I have ever played. It is percussive and brilliant, but has a solid tone, ringing but not excessive basses. Arcangel Fernandez, the builder was a pro flamenco player before he became a guitar maker, but it was pretty much in the pre-amplification days of the Madrid tablaos. I don't know how it sounds in a big hall. When I had Richard Brune appraise it, he commented on how thin the top was. He also said he had played it a few hours, and "I really like this guitar."
The classical I play most, by the world class Mexican Abel Garcia, is also loud to the player, very brilliant in the treble, as well as strong in the basses. I like the tonal variety you can get out of it. I haven't played it in a really big room. My Contreras Sr. doble tapa is also loud, lots of treble and bass, strong in the upper midrange. The tone seems a little cold to me, compared to the Garcia, but it projects well in a big room.
My '73 Romanillos has a thick top. It takes a little more force to get it going. When I pick it up after the Garcia, I am sometimes a little disappointed, but that goes away after ten or fifteen minutes, as I settle back into the appropriate right hand technique. It is missing the very highest overtone frequencies of the Garcia, but nail noise simply disappears. When I had it less than a year, I thought the 3rd string was a little weak. After I moved for six months to a condo in Honolulu with a glass wall in the 18-foot living/dining room, I was astonished at the sound that came back at me from the wall, and the 3rd string was perfectly balanced with the rest.
The Romanillos has the plantilla and bracing pattern of a 1950 Hauser, but to me it has that distinctive Romanillos tone. It projects like a bandit, though it isn't any louder to the player than the Garcia or the Contreras. Maybe that's why Bream didn't buy his famous '73 Romanillos until John Williams told him how he sounded on it.
After I have played the Romanillos for a few days, I sound better on both the Garcia and the Contreras than I did before. The Arcangel just blows me away.
But for a different player, with different technique and different requirements, it might stack up completely differently.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 7 2014 2:43:26
|
|
tri7/5
Posts: 570
Joined: May 5 2012
|
|
RE: volume of a guitar (in reply to el carbonero)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: el carbonero
" Might a hundred granada guitar-makers trample your bedroom (and your guitar)! "
i tried 2 carmona,2 pepe bellido,1 manuel bellido,1 ferrer padre,1 duran ferrer ,1 marin
in the same room class of baile.
This luthier are the top of granada .
I can guarantee the pedro de miguel and various conde are much much better in volume .
It's a fact.
The problem with the granada guitars,is with the foot dance ,it's became a porridge of sound .
The conde have sound much clear so ,we can ear the notes clearly with 20 student zapateados without amplification.
Sorry i cant explain exaclty my opinion because ,i speak english so bad.
Just wait till you get to play an Aaron Green guitar, your opinion will change on Granada style builds.
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 7 2014 12:31:35
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3430
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: volume of a guitar (in reply to Tom Blackshear)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tom Blackshear
Arcangel has had a long running reputation for building good flamenco guitars, and his pattern was very close to the Ramirez models. But I have found that Reyes has an edge with his design and this is an important factor for flamenco players.
I have pulled more volume and character from a Reyes style build than any other style I've built during my 53 years, and I have built many different styles of the masters.
But there is no doubt that Fernandez is a excellent collectible for any guitar enthusiast.
As I said, different strokes for different folks. The only Reyes I have played very much is a 1975 that I'm sure you are familiar with, though I have played a few others. I liked both my '67 Ramirez and a different friend's '73 Conde better. For me the pulsation of the Reyes was too soft, by a fair margin. But for our mutual friend, that Reyes was the greatest. Was Jerry's 1975 Reyes typical? Has Reyes' style changed much since 1975?
On the other hand, I'm sure my playing has changed, at least somewhat, since 1975.
The pulsation of the Arcangel is a little stiffer than the Ramirez, as was the '73 Conde's, which for me is a good thing. It might not be for someone else.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Feb. 7 2014 15:14:46
|
|
 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 |
0.078125 secs.
|
Printable Version
