Forget playability, it's all about "toneability"....

[d03nut]

Don't know about you guys but the more I play/try different acoustics the more I find that those that sound good to begin with just happen to end up being easier to play as well. I realize it's probably the opposite for a lot of people but it seems to be true in my case.

 

In other words, I don't necessarily get a better tone out of the guitars that I'm comfortable with playing. But guitars that are "sensitive to the touch" -i.e. where I don't need to press my fingers down too hard on the board- seem to "ooze" out notes- without much effort on my part. The lighter touch needed has other advantages as well: less squeaks, fret buzz, string noise, less finger/wrist fatigue and so on.

 

Or maybe it's just one of those "chicken or egg" conundrums....

[d03nut]

Ok, let me be the first to say that having just re-read my thread, I just realized that maybe those guitars that sound good to me are already more playable thus leading me to believe that the good-sounding guitars are also more playable....

 

You see(hear) what I'm saying?..........

[Queequeg]

after reading a couple of current threads and countless archived threads on this subject, I think there's an elephant in the room with respect to the topic of *tone*. My guitars don't make any sound @ all until I pick them up (or knock them over).

Its a marriage of the guitar & the player. I can't make an uncomfortable guitar sound good. If its not eminently "playable" I can't play it. Tone is to a greater degree a function of the hands of the player than the box. IMO guitars sound to the largest extent like the player holding it. I'm not saying the guitar has no personality or brightness, color, warmth. And yes, I know that a Taylor does not sound like a Martin. But when I read about guys talking about engelmann vs sitka vs adirondack or... EI rosewood vs brazilian rosewood, or... when somebody says they played all the D28s and found the good one, let's just say I would flunk the taste test, and I believe I might have some company.

[guit30]

I agree, a players fingers and loving what he plays makes the chops sound good

Jim

[markwayne]

 

Its a marriage of the guitar & the player. I can't make an uncomfortable guitar sound good. If its not eminently "playable" I can't play it.

 

 

Very, very true. I was looking at a Martin dc-16re just yesterday in a local shop and after spending a fair amount of time basking in the tone, I handed it back to the sales guy who riffs on some electric, blues cliche lick and makes this rosewood Martin sound horrible. It's like the guitar wilted in his hands. It even seemed to drop out of tune. I just stared. I could see that it was the same guitar but the sound was so different I had to go back in and play it later to make sure I had not been dreaming.

[guit30]

Don't Salesmen guitar showoffs drive you nuts

Jim

[dadgad7]

 

Originally posted by guit30 Don't Salesmen guitar showoffs drive you nuts Jim

YES !!!!

 

and thanks for asking

[Hudman]

Both factors are important (tone and playability). A proper set up guitar will make a guitar play easier, however, it will NOT improve the tone (I love the way most stock Taylor guitars play, but don't care for their tone). On the other hand, a guitar can sound great and be difficult to play (Martin tends to have higher action than I like from the factory).

 

Playability deals with comfort in my opinion, not tone. However, you will play better if you feel comfortable when you play.

[Queequeg]

 

Originally posted by Hudman Both factors are important (tone and playability). Playability deals with comfort in my opinion, not tone. However, you will play better if you feel comfortable when you play.

 

Trying to wrap my head around and reconcile your last 2 sentences, Hud. If that neck is uncomfortable, I'm not going to be able to finesse the kind of touch and attack, vibrato and string bending I otherwise would. These help to define the instrument's tone to a large extent IMHO. Instead, I will struggle with it, and the instrument will sound limp and lifeless, as it is all I can do just to get the notes out.

Most electric players will relate to the concept of having to turn up the volume on an amplifier to a point where the personality of the guitar and/or amp can distinguish itself. In much the same way, how an acoustic is played will determine the output of tone.

[Hudman]

 

Originally posted by Queequeg Trying to wrap my head around and reconcile your last 2 sentences, Hud. If that neck is uncomfortable, I'm not going to be able to finesse the kind of touch and attack, vibrato and string bending I otherwise would. These help to define the instrument's tone to a large extent IMHO. Instead, I will struggle with it, and the instrument will sound limp and lifeless, as it is all I can do just to get the notes out. Most electric players will relate to the concept of having to turn up the volume on an amplifier to a point where the personality of the guitar and/or amp can distinguish itself. In much the same way, how an acoustic is played will determine the output of tone.

 

 

Neck shape, scale length and body shape / design could make a guitar unplayable for some people. I consider that to be the extreme. There is nothing you can do about that. In that case I agree with you guys.

 

Otherwise, playability to me (assuming you are comparing similiar guitars) has little to do with tone. Again, I refer you to my Taylor / Martin comparison.

[Blackwatch]

 

I just realized that maybe those guitars that sound good to me are already more playable thus leading me to believe that the good-sounding guitars are also more playable....

 

 

I'd have to respectfully disagree. I just bought a pretty cheap Hohner guitar for my daughter to learn on (She liked the 'color') and it played terribly but the tone was surprisingly good for a cheap guitar. After a few hours of work taking the action down, it sounded the same but played much easier.

This might be that you percieve the easy playing guitars sound better. I don't know, but I do know that there is a huge chunck of personal preference in "tone".

[Hudman]

Originally posted by Blackwatch I'd have to respectfully disagree. I just bought a pretty cheap Hohner guitar for my daughter to learn on (She liked the 'color') and it played terribly but the tone was surprisingly good for a cheap guitar. After a few hours of work taking the action down, it sounded the same but played much easier. This might be that you percieve the easy playing guitars sound better. I don't know, but I do know that there is a huge chunck of personal preference in "tone".

 

 

I agree 100%. Ovations are known for their great playability, but they sound funny to me unplugged.

[Queequeg]

I dont think there's much disagreement here.

nobody is saying an ovation or a taylor sounds like a martin, and most forumites recognize the impact of an accomplished player with a distinctive style on the sound of a guitar.

there's more involved in a player's style than speed and accuracy. How he conjures up that flavor and coaxes a definitive sweetness or growl out of his instrument is unquestionably tonal.

[d03nut]

So let me get this straight. Are you guys sort of implying that there's no such thing as an "independently (of player) good-sounding guitar" out there?

 

Sure, different players will lead to different tonal colors but that doesn't take away from the qualities of a good guitar. And by good I mean one that is dynamic, "super-responsive" to attack and variations thereof, among other attributes.

 

If we agree that such a guitar exists, my "theory" (which I realize may only apply to me) is that this guitar can "will" playbility out of me precisely because it gives me something back at the slightest touch.

 

For example, when you've got fresh strings on, don't you play with a little more ease? In such a scenario, isn't tone "driving" playability, irrespective of what the underlying causes of that perception may be (psychological or otherwise)?

[JasmineTea]

You guys have a way of tying a simple question into jumbled knot.

 

A good sounding (responsive), good playing (comfortable) guitar does inspire a player to play better. Somewhere Knockwood posted of the connection between the player and the instrument he chooses, unfortunatly I can't recall how he said it...

[Queequeg]

JT back up your computer.

d03nut, ever heard a beginner fiddle player screech?

ever heard an inexperienced clarinet player squeak?

All I'm saying is it takes both halves to make the whole.

Take two great guitar players trading off on the self-same guitar.

One plays with his right hand close to the bridge, the other is more comfortable playing with his right hand up near the neck and a very heavy left hand on the fingerboard. Sound the same? No way. Not even if they played the same tune and the same arrangement. Is that tone? I think so.

I give these extreme examples only to make the point. But all the subtleties apply.

I'm not discounting the tonal qualities of a fine guitar or a seasoned luthier.

Its just so subjective that it becomes ludicrous. When somebody writes here that they played all the whatevers (Hummingbirds, for arguments' sake) in GC on Saturday and they all sounded terrible.

Really? well, what if somebody else played them?

[d03nut]

JT back up your computer.......

 

Queequeg, it's funny that you should say that you can't make an uncomfortable guitar sound good, whereas I said that I can't necessarily get good tone out of a "comfortable" guitar. Huh?

 

Ok, do those two statements kind of lead to the same conclusion? Or are they opposites? Anyone with a background in logic out there?

 

I'm confused. Someone's gotta untie this "jumbled knot".....

[Queequeg]

 

Originally posted by d03nut Queequeg, it's funny that you should say that you can't make an uncomfortable guitar sound good, whereas I said that I can't necessarily get good tone out of a "comfortable" guitar.

 

I certainly accept your statement that it is possible; in fact *easy* to build a comfortable guitar that doesn't sound good at all, irrespective of who is playing it.

I'm really not trying to argue with you or anyone about this. I believe were *almost* saying the same thing, just approaching it from opposite ends.

[d03nut]

Ok, Quee-g, as long as we're approaching "opposite ends", then I'll take the saddle, since I switched to bone I like......you take the nut end......haha......ok not at all funny.....I'll take it back......ahah.......

 

Gotta remember: tone & playability, tone & playability......

 

You know when I started this thread I wasn't so PUI. I appologize......

[EvilTwin]

I'm not so sure.

 

I remember playing a Taylor at Make 'n Music in Frederick, MD, and it was the easiest playing acoustic I've ever picked up. You could think of a note and that guitar would play it.

 

But it sounded like ass to me.

 

OTOH, this past weekend I went to GC and played a used Martin D-35. The action was higher than I'm used to, and the nut width was narrower. So I was struggling to get used to it. But DAMN what a sound. It blew everything else away in the room (the only thing that was close was a Larrivee L-10).

 

I could physically do more on the Taylor, but I was more inclined to try more on the Martin.

 

If it came down to buying either, I'd definitely get that D-35, but I'd whittle that saddle down.

 

But y'know, ask me again tomorrow, and it might be the L-10 over both of 'em. It sounded great and played great.

[Hudman]

 

Originally posted by Queequeg Its just so subjective that it becomes ludicrous. When somebody writes here that they played all the whatevers (Hummingbirds, for arguments' sake) in GC on Saturday and they all sounded terrible. Really? well, what if somebody else played them?

 

 

You said it, it's subjective. I could play every guitar in GC while you listen. We probably wouldn't agree on which ones sound the best. You may like one that I think sounds terrible.

 

The player effects the tone of a guitar to a point. The problem is we hear things different from each other and we have our own thoughts on what "good" tone is.

 

Subjective.

[MyM.O.]

 

Originally posted by Queequeg If that neck is uncomfortable, I'm not going to be able to finesse the kind of touch and attack, vibrato and string bending I otherwise would. These help to define the instrument's tone to a large extent IMHO. Instead, I will struggle with it, and the instrument will sound limp and lifeless, as it is all I can do just to get the notes out.

 

 

What it sounds like you're saying is that a player's technique can affect tone (or at least the tone that's emitted) and I think that's true. One person can bring out the good qualities of a guitar while another player cannot. The good qualities are there, just not being taken advantage of. Yet that second person may play something else that is more suited to their style and a "better tone" is produced. Both guitars may have good tone, but different players might not necessarily be able to utilize it.

 

For example, a guitar teacher in my son's music school was playing two inexpensive guitars that his students owned (one was an Alvarez, the other an Esteban POS). In his hands he was able to make them both sound really good, even the Esteban ( which we will admit has NO tonal qualities). The students were amazed that their guitars could sound like that as they never heard it. The tone that was inherent in the guitars was always there, it was just not emitting the same from two different players.

[Cldplytkmn]

i prefer a guitar that sounds good and plays good... but if it sounds good and plays just 'ok' then i'll do my part and adapt to it...

 

if it sounds good enough, i will make it easy to play... and i'm not talking about setting it up

[markwayne]

 

The students were amazed that their guitars could sound like that as they never heard it.

 

 

This is my point exactly. A good player with many, many years of experience on a a variety of instruments will quickly adapt her or his technique to even the worst instrument in order to bring whatever tone is available out of said box.

 

When I was still teaching, I frequently had students who would want to try out one of my guitars on the silly assumption that it was their instrument and not their lack of practice and/or talent that was holding them back.

 

I would first take their guitar and play the day's lesson. While the tone might not be quite as complex as my own guitar, it was often very close and you could see the surprise in their eyes. If they still wanted to hear how they sounded on a "good" guitar, I would hand mine over. These students would typically sound even worse on my guitar than they did on their own instrument. They would then sheepishly hand me back my guitar with a very puzzled look on their face.

 

In that look was often a personal turning point. Either I lost a poor student or I gained a really good student who practiced in earnest daily and did not question my techinical suggestions any longer.

 

Wayne

[JasmineTea]

IMO, it does'nt matter how good the player is. If it's a {censored}ty sounding guitar, it's a {censored}ty sounding guitar.

 

As for "good players having the ability to bring out the good tonal character of any guitar", I think that's a load too. What you're hearing is still a {censored}ty guitar, just happens to be a good player playing it.