Members Emory Posted August 21, 2007 Members Posted August 21, 2007 I've been thinking about this for awhile. Seems that a most desirable quality in an acoustic guitar is that it is "all solid wood" construction. Less glue, uniformity of the material, etc. But then people pay x$ more to get fancy inlays, bindings, etc. It seems to me that all that adornment can only be detrimental to the sound that comes out. You want all solid and then pay to break that up with some glue and other material. It has got to effect the resonance capabilities of the insturment. Maybe not too much, but I am sure it can't help. I have read that the rosette is inlaid etc in order to strengthen the area around the sound hole, but it seems that it would have to be true that, in as far as sound goes, "less (adornment) is more. Anybody have anything to add to this?
Members drnihili Posted August 21, 2007 Members Posted August 21, 2007 Most of the bling is in areas that don't have a major impact on sound. I don't understand the whole rosette thing though. I can't see how an inlay could provide any extra strength, or why the sound hole would need it. Lots of guitars with oddly placed sound holes omit the rosette, though I can't think of any that leave it off a traditionally placed sound hole.
Members guitarist21 Posted August 21, 2007 Members Posted August 21, 2007 Maybe not too much... This is key. I'm sure it changes the sound a teeny tiny bit, but not much. Everything changes the sound at least a little. Add or subtract anything from the guitar equation and the sound probably changes in some way, but I sure can't detect a big change with inlays. The top of the guitar produces most of the sound. And inlays are mostly found on fretboards, headstocks, and sometimes backs and pickguards. Most folks don't get stuff inlaid directly into the top, and that might make a change in the sound, but I bet it still wouldn't be huge. Just my two cents. I don't love a ton of inlays on a guitar, but I played a really fancy Martin once that had inlays all over the place and it still sounded like a Martin. Leads me to think that well-done inlays don't change the sound hugely. Ellen
Members Emory Posted August 21, 2007 Author Members Posted August 21, 2007 My thinking is mostly just theory. Besides, I'm an old guy anyway and we can't hear all that well anyway. Just observations while waiting for the rain.
Members Freeman Keller Posted August 21, 2007 Members Posted August 21, 2007 I'm guessing that a rosette probably weakens the top. They are done a couple of different ways - with everying except a decal (used on very inexpensive guitars) inlayed into a channel routed into the top Classical guitar rosettes are like little tiles of end grain wood - dyed or colored and glued up to make a pattern. It is done by hand and is very much a work of art - often each builder would have his own pattern. If you were to hold a classical rosette uninstalled you would see that it is a very delicate structure - it takes the top to hold it together. Modern guitars with the black-white-black stripes are just little strips of plastic laminated together into the channel. I suppose it might strengthen spruce against splitting, but most top have three little braces just inside the soundhole to help with this. Other rosettes include inlays of wood or pearl and IMHO are merely decorative - they sometimes have b-w-b plastic borders, but again, I think they probably weaken the top more than help it. Body edge bindings serve a real purpose (actually two) - they cover up the ugly end grain of the top and bottom plates, and they provide a very protective edge - the end grain of the top would be easily damaged. Binding is often plastic strips but sometimes wood is used - it is always with the grain running around the edge. Adding herrinbone purfiling or abalone inlay doesn't contribute to the strength. There might be some arguement that the way the channel is routed into the kerfing might strengthen the glue joint. Fretboard binding probably protects it too, but you rarely see the sides of fretboards damaged and it sure makes fretting/refretting more difficult. Other bling - headstock, fretboard, and all the rest is just decorative. I don't think it hurts the sound at all, but sure doesn't add anything. But would you buy a Gibson mandolin without the pearl in the headstock - it just wouldn't look right.
Members J45dale Posted August 21, 2007 Members Posted August 21, 2007 IMHO, bling is fine , but its just for looks. Example, check out the rich tone and powerful volume of a Martin D28 Marquis, and you really can't get much plainer. Put the money into the wood and construction, for a great guitar.Dale.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.