Members spruce goose Posted September 20, 2007 Members Posted September 20, 2007 In biology, people often speak of structure/function (e.g. how the structure of a protein determines its function, and how during evolution, the function of a protein determined its ultimate structure). This is a guitar forum, though. This is where you would post everything you know (and are willing to share) about why guitars (acoustic and/or electric) are structured the way they are. No detail would be too small, no hypothesis too outrageous. Hit me with it.
Members EvilTwin Posted September 20, 2007 Members Posted September 20, 2007 The funniest thing I always hear about "fuction" for an acoustic is when someone says "my guitar doesn't cut through at a acoustic jam session; it's not loud enough." 9 times out of 10 they'll be talking about playing lead on a dreadnought. Well, look at what a dread was designed for -- it's function was to help drive a rhythm section. If you want to cut though, you need some type of archtop, which were designed to stand out a bit more. Nothing stands out (frequency-wise plus volume) more than a Selmer-style archtop. Pure volume, but you sacrifice the "warm" tone of flat-tops. That's the tradeoff. (Other people more informed than me can get into the actual "structure" of the guitars, like how a glued on bridge pulls/drives a guitar top in a more complex way than a floating archtop bridge.)
Members garthman Posted September 20, 2007 Members Posted September 20, 2007 I'm going home now - I'll have a go tomorrow (unless some-one else says what I would say).
Members Freeman Keller Posted September 20, 2007 Members Posted September 20, 2007 Both guitars and proteins have been slowly changing over a lot of years (proteins slightly longer). Good changes seem to stick around, bad ones seem to go away. Its called evolution.
Members Michael Martin Posted September 20, 2007 Members Posted September 20, 2007 This is where you would post everything you know (and are willing to share) about why guitars (acoustic and/or electric) are structured the way they are. No detail would be too small, no hypothesis too outrageous. Hit me with it. Well, speaking of biology, guitars are shaped like women. I don't think that's just a coincidence. It would certainly help explain my relationship with guitars.
Members spruce goose Posted September 30, 2007 Author Members Posted September 30, 2007 I really hate to derail this lively and stimulating debate on the origins of life and guitar, but as it were, life has intervened.. I just sold my Taylor, and am now on the lookout for another acoustic. So, arhm.. structurally speaking.. what guitar should I get? (price range 500-2000; you guys realize that by "structurally" I am referring to the structure of the logo/model name, right..?) Thx
Members Stackabones Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 So ... you have hijacked your own thread?
Members spruce goose Posted September 30, 2007 Author Members Posted September 30, 2007 So ... you have hijacked your own thread? Time will tell if this was a hijacking or merely a thinly veiled bump.
Members Cripes Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 So ... you have hijacked your own thread? I think he very smartly took the fork in the road away from natural selection, not that there's anything wrong with that, but it's OJ stuff.
Members riffmeister Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 A lot of experimentation these days in the classical guitar area. The latest rage is sound ports in the sides, ultra-light carbon fiber lattice bracing, and double top guitars (two very thin pieces of topwood with a honeycomb Nomex sandwich holding them together). .
Members Cripes Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 ...and double top guitars (two very thin pieces of topwood with a honeycomb Nomex sandwich holding them together). . AKA, floor boards in commercial jet aircraft.
Members riffmeister Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 AKA, floor boards in commercial jet aircraft. Good for that foot-stompin' music!!! .
Members GreenAsJade Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 Well, speaking of biology, guitars are shaped like women. I don't think that's just a coincidence. It would certainly help explain my relationship with guitars.I don't recall seeing tits on a guitar !?
Members Cripes Posted September 30, 2007 Members Posted September 30, 2007 I don't recall seeing tits on a guitar !? That's right!! Hang in there. I'm sure Martin will market it sooner or later.OOOO am I gonna hear it now...
Members T.B. Posted October 1, 2007 Members Posted October 1, 2007 I don't recall seeing tits on a guitar !? Trina
Members JasmineTea Posted October 1, 2007 Members Posted October 1, 2007 Time will tell if this was a hijacking or merely a thinly veiled bump.Selling a Taylor is always a good idea. Not buying one in the first place, even better. Lots of good guitars in the 500-2000 range. Try Larrivee or Martin.
Members EvilTwin Posted October 1, 2007 Members Posted October 1, 2007 Well, speaking of biology, guitars are shaped like women. I don't think that's just a coincidence. It would certainly help explain my relationship with guitars.You can love your guitar, just don't love your guitar.
Members T.B. Posted October 1, 2007 Members Posted October 1, 2007 You can love your guitar, just don't love your guitar. Will Young said sometimes you gotta, "Love The One You're With." :poke:Kurt Rodarmer pondering, "What is this hole suppose to do exactly"? Trina
Members Sparhawk Posted October 2, 2007 Members Posted October 2, 2007 Well, speaking of biology, guitars are shaped like women. I don't think that's just a coincidence. It would certainly help explain my relationship with guitars.It danged sure explains the PRICE tag! :cry:
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.