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: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions?
|
You are logged in as Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic: none
|
|
Login  | |
|
   
estebanana
Posts: 9357
Joined: Oct. 16 2009
|
 RE: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions? (in reply to Ricardo)
|
|
|
Ricardo- F# frequency 92.50 - second fret on bass E string. You arrive at this by using a program like ( I think it’s called Spectrum Analyzer ) you hold the guitar with the strings damped and tap on it in front of the mic. Then you take a sample and the program shows you the peak resonances and gives the frequency. It’s easy to identify the main body resonance because it shows as a peak is a fairly predictable area on the frequency graph. The main air resonance of a regular sized classical of flamenco is in the range of F to G# and occasionally A ( which is dangerously high)
The median is F# to G and ideally probably about halfway in between because then the main air res isn’t sitting on a note in the scale.
The Feedback frequency you’re talking about shows up as a back frequency- not quite as important, but the basic idea is that there’s a main air body resonance, a separate top resonance and a back resonance. You don’t want the back, top or main body resonances to be the same because then they set each other off sympathetically, which is messy.
The other way to understand this is to hold the guitar upside down and pinch the transverse brace through the sound hole and cover the sound hole with your fist. Easier with strings off. Then crisply tap on the tie block of the bridge and hear the note. That’s the main body / air resonance frequency. It’s probably close to F# or G typically. Put capo on one of your guitars and pluck the F# then tap on a different guitar while blocking the sound hole and pinching the transverse brace ( the sound be close to the sound hole)
This means that guitar makers in 1920 could understand the body resonance without having a computer program to look at frequencies. Then they also knew that they wanted the back to have a higher pitched ‘tap tone’ than the top and body res - it’s pretty easy to hear if the back is the same pitch as the top you’ll get pitch coupling, but the rub is that attack and decay will happen at different rates between the back and top, which sets up a clash of secondary and terciary partials, not to mention higher partials which are super complex and messy sounding.
So the clarity in a guitar comes from a judicious separation of these natural resonances created from air volume in the guitar and the flex of the back and top. This is ridiculously complicated stuff and the old guys solved it by thinking the back being pitched higher than the top.
Today there is a lot of chatter about main air resonance among people who want to chatter about the guitar as a piece of acoustic equipment, and some of these blokes make vague generalizations about guitars based on the main air resonance by saying oddball things like “ I only prefer guitars with a G resonance, and I tell dealers not to show me guitars with other resonances.”
Yes people are that bizarre.
So the point to remember is raising the action emphasizes the partials a little bit more, but often breaks down the haptic response to doing rasgeuado that would satisfy a flamenco player. And vice versa lowering de-emphasizes the partials and generally makes the guitar more rageo friendly.
So back to the OP original question: I want a cypress guitar that would be better for a blend of classical and flamenco, what do I do?
And you said it’s the Goldilocks guitar that is rare or doesn’t exist, which is more or less true. But you can get close to this ideal blend by simply raising the action set up of a cypress flamenco to classical set up. If you select the cypress guitar carefully you may get a good balance of both worlds.
_____________________________
https://www.stephenfaulkguitars.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 22 2024 1:41:36
 |
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14825
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions? (in reply to Echi)
|
|
|
quote:
There's not a clear way to reach that result and many guitars just don't have it.
Segovia used this guitar and said plainly, Bach “polyphony”, the voices came out clear. All it is, is as I said, he pulled the bridge WAY the hell back compared to other makers, so the melody above is a hair flat above the bass, and better lines up with true harmonics of a single bass note, so sounds sweeter being flat of equal tempered (unless like me you insist on yanking the string hard toward the nut to keep it in REAL tune). This sounds cool for Baroque shyte because it sounds like exotic, or “well tempered” or something. I did not know this until I measured it. The conde 1973 has zero compensation, 12 is exactly in the middle. Hauser is like 3+mm LONGER 12 to bridge.
If players knew this, and then mess with with vibrato and HEAR the concept of the overtone harmonics being FLAT compared to Equal tempered tuning, then they might understand what is going on there. If you check the compensation with other makers that supposedly have the “same quality as the Hauser”, I would not be surprised if it exactly this.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 22 2024 10:55:44
|
|
Ricardo
Posts: 14825
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
|
|
RE: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions? (in reply to estebanana)
|
|
|
quote:
It’s an interesting observation and Ricardo has excellent ears.
I have only made the observation of one type of guitar (Hauser 2). My real point was I was making a conjecture that could be systematically RULED OUT, by simple measurement taking (to save time, someone please measure the difference of string to 12, and 12 to bridge of a ROMANILLOS, since that was the only instrument mentioned that is “like a Hauser”). That is a starting place. The other thing, maybe you guys missed it that might go with that situation is the finish of the TOP vs the sides and back, is unusually THIN by comparison. Maybe for you guys that is “standard” in some cases with no special results, however, I found IT, like the EXTRA compensation, to be a unique feature of the instruments I have handled named “Hauser” (all Hauser 2 by the way, i have not tried Hauser 1). All other guitars I have handled have essentially the same thickness and type of finish on the back and sides as the tops, regardless if FP shellac, lacquer, nitro, poly urethane, etc. Also, I don’t believe Hauser 2 is FP shellac.
_____________________________
CD's and transcriptions available here:
www.ricardomarlow.com
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 26 2024 12:15:16
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3431
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions? (in reply to Ricardo)
|
|
|
1973 Romanillos #407 is 325mm from 12th fret to bridge saddle, 323mm from 12th fret to nut, on both 1st and 6th strings. The strings on it now are true. The 12th fret harmonic is an octave above the open string, according both to my ear and to a cheap D'Addario headstock tuner. The tuner is supposed to be accurate to one cent, but I have no means to check it.
Furthermore, the 1st string fretted at the 12th is equal to the harmonic, both to my ear and to the tuner. The 6th may be very slightly flat fretted at the 12th, but not obviously so.
My understanding has been that the setback of the bridge is meant to compensate for the increase in fretted string tension as you go up the fretboard. The first string is only a fraction of a millimeter above the first fret, but it's 3mm above the 12th on the Romanillos. So the string is stretched more at the higher frets than it is at the lower ones, tending to raise the pitch. The setback is a greater fraction of the sounding string length at the higher frets, tending to lower the pitch, so the two effects are supposed to cancel out. They do on the Romanillos, at least at the twelfth fret.
#407 is not the 407th guitar Romanillos made. It is the 7th one of the 4th design iteration. He changed designs soon after #407, on Bream's famous #501, maybe even the very next one according to a couple of expert sources.
#407 is "modeled on" a 1950 Hauser. #501 was made from drawings of an earlier Hauser which belonged to Sergio Abreu. The top of #407 is flat. Romanillos remarked that the top on #501 was domed. He "wanted to get more tension into the guitar."
I haven't played any other Romanillos, but I have heard #501 up close, played by Bream in a hotel room. Allowing for Bream's superior tone quality, they seemed similar to me.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 27 2024 1:43:16
|
|
Richard Jernigan
Posts: 3431
Joined: Jan. 20 2004
From: Austin, Texas USA
|
|
RE: Cypress Classical - Any Suggestions? (in reply to Echi)
|
|
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Echi
Your guitar should have a slight dome too though as some Hauser II made in the fifties.
Looking both perpendicular to the strings and parallel to them, the Romanillos top appears perfectly flat on the string side of the bridge. Applying a straightedge on the other side of the bridge, the top slopes slightly downward toward the heel, though it is not especially noticeable when just looking. Also behind the bridge, the center seam is very slightly higher, rising in a gentle curve above the treble and bass edges.
Out of curiosity I measured the compensation of the 2009 Abel Garcia. It's 325.5mm from the nut to the 12th fret, 328.5mm from the 12th fret to the bridge saddle. It is a very nice guitar, but it sounds nothing like the Romanillos. It has a far more complex bracing system. The box sizes of both instruments are slightly smaller than, for example, Ramirez classicals, but they are about the same as Hausers.
I measured the resonant frequencies of all my guitars a few years back, both classical and flamenco. I can't find the results at the moment, but the only one that falls outside the F#-G range is a 1991 Manuel Contreras Sr. spruce/Brazilian "doble tapa" which is somewhere between G and A. It's bass is a little weaker than the other classicals.
RNJ
|
|
|
|
REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE |
Date Mar. 29 2024 19:29:59
|
|
 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
