Hey I thought some of you guys might find this video interesting, VLOG from a guitar maker (he's got other videos).
Last edited by a moderator:
What the guitar companies don't want you to know (video)
- Thread starter Plendakor
- Start date
I've seen his videos and while I still don't know if the physics explained there are accurate, it's right that it's on the best interest of the manufacturers to offer different woods and make a huge deal about it. Notice how fender, chapman, and others "proof" in tonewoods are zero cientific and none if them show you the difference in tone when distorted. I'm noy saying tonewoods don't exist, but I don't know what to believe. I'd had tons of different guitars with different woods here at my studio project and while they all have differences in like output, I can make them sound extremely similar with settings tweaking as long as they have pickups of similar tonality and output for example emg 81 vs sd distortions. I'm a high gain guy so I've no experience with mid to low gain tones though.
egan.
daylightdies.com
I posted this a while ago:
http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/bar/962734-interesting-article-guitar-wood.html
This guy comes off as sort of bitter and desperate to make a conspiracy. Of course tone woods are chosen on price, workability and appearance in addition to tone. Is that not obvious?
His assertion about there being no new guitar tech since the 50's is just patently false. People just love (buy) the classics. Off the top of my head we have carbon fiber necks, active electronics, fanned frets, headless guitars, piezos, modeling guitars and automatic tuners.
http://www.ultimatemetal.com/forum/bar/962734-interesting-article-guitar-wood.html
This guy comes off as sort of bitter and desperate to make a conspiracy. Of course tone woods are chosen on price, workability and appearance in addition to tone. Is that not obvious?
His assertion about there being no new guitar tech since the 50's is just patently false. People just love (buy) the classics. Off the top of my head we have carbon fiber necks, active electronics, fanned frets, headless guitars, piezos, modeling guitars and automatic tuners.
Clockwork
Bass playing guy.
So like don't buy overpriced wood from stewmac?? I feel like a lot of his points can just be distilled down into "there is a lot of marketing bullshit". It's not really a conspiracy, it's just business. Is it news that guitar companies own other guitar companies??? I mean people even know which companies have guitars made in the same factories now, this kind of thing isn't really a revelation. Like 6k guitars exist because there are people willing to pay for them.
I think the main concern about wood is the tone rather than aesthetics and else.
Strandberg should've posted DI's of
chords, chugs, leads and stuff
to check how much of the wood effect is applied using different settings.
I'm guessing the more distortion or effects the less of the wood affect the final sound.
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
He asked why bolt on/glue on.
Seems simple enough to me, if the fucking thing breaks you can toss a new neck on.
The brand name thing is pretty spot on though.
Also, oh noes Republicans will get rich if you shop at guitar center!
Also: I will be the first to admit that I did not feel that the $4k gibson custom was that much nicer than a standard paul. It feels like (to me personally) the gains you make after you hit the $1500 mark are almost negligible.
Seems simple enough to me, if the fucking thing breaks you can toss a new neck on.
The brand name thing is pretty spot on though.
Also, oh noes Republicans will get rich if you shop at guitar center!
Also: I will be the first to admit that I did not feel that the $4k gibson custom was that much nicer than a standard paul. It feels like (to me personally) the gains you make after you hit the $1500 mark are almost negligible.
egan.
daylightdies.com
I agree DIs would've been cool but the point is that they demonstrated a pretty clear, audible difference. Certainly gain and processing may hide some of these things but the reality remains.
The aesthetic and workability of wood are hugely important to buyers and builders respectively so I don't think you can set that aside.
The differences between a $3k and $10k PRS for example are often aesthetic alone (to Loren's point). That isn't a lie or a rip off if you understand you're buying looks and not tone.
Whats up with the prostitute at the beginning of the video?
Nice buzzfeed clickbait title, Plendakor
I'm not sure what she does for an occupation, but her appearance was certainly unexpected!
Loren Littlejohn
Lover of all boobage.
Mago
Austrian Blech Machine
The sound examples of sandberg basically where nothing else than DI's, as far as I understood.
Wouldn't have harmed to record playing as well I guess, but with the robot arm thingy picking the string it's overall a lot more accurate as a scientific test.
I actually just thought of this now (and I am serious about it...kinda):
If the wood does in fact not matter, do you even need a guitar body?
somebody just try building a thing where neck, pickup, bridge and tailstop are mounted on posts, see how that sounds.
Wouldn't have harmed to record playing as well I guess, but with the robot arm thingy picking the string it's overall a lot more accurate as a scientific test.
I actually just thought of this now (and I am serious about it...kinda):
If the wood does in fact not matter, do you even need a guitar body?
somebody just try building a thing where neck, pickup, bridge and tailstop are mounted on posts, see how that sounds.
Keregioz
Kimon Zeliotis
^ uhhh, what?
I admit I didn't watch the video but I don't think anyone claimed that having an actual body made of wood on a guitar doesn't matter, it's the type of wood that some people are arguing that it doesn't make that much of a difference.
I admit I didn't watch the video but I don't think anyone claimed that having an actual body made of wood on a guitar doesn't matter, it's the type of wood that some people are arguing that it doesn't make that much of a difference.
i watched it all the way through, but i am still scratching my head over this one.
He bashes basically every guitar company, accusing them of marking up too much. But doesn't he sell 3000 dollar guitars?
He criticizes companies'PR tactics but gives a 45 minute PR talk himself.
weird
He bashes basically every guitar company, accusing them of marking up too much. But doesn't he sell 3000 dollar guitars?
He criticizes companies'PR tactics but gives a 45 minute PR talk himself.
weird
Clockwork
Bass playing guy.
I agree, but they are still overrated.
PS Fuck wood, I can't wait for my new toilet seat guitar
Last edited by a moderator:
LeSedna
Mat or Mateo
I remember reading a study by the pianoteq guys in france (or someone in the same scientific field near them) with measurements which pretty much ended up saying the shape of an acoustic guitar hole does not matter so much, all that matter is basically the surface covered by the hole.
Maybe as far as the body goes on a guitar where there is no resonnance, maybe the density or weight is all that matters ?
Maybe as far as the body goes on a guitar where there is no resonnance, maybe the density or weight is all that matters ?
Clockwork
Bass playing guy.
Tonewood? Why not get rid of all wood! (I've always wanted to play one of these but don't know anyone sane enough to buy one)
http://gittlerinstruments.com/gittler-guitar
http://gittlerinstruments.com/gittler-guitar
"Tonewoods" certainly matter for the acoustic; hence the feel. So if it does not matter to the pick-up, but it vibrates better in your hands and you're more confortable, you'll play better. Now for the tonewoods vs pick-ups; if there's no difference with wood, I would guess that there would be one with a guitar made of rock, stainless, crystal, etc..
Mago
Austrian Blech Machine
Something like this perhaps?
no, I mean a construction where none of the parts are connected by a type of body in any way.
Since the guy said the type of wood doesn't matter (despite the fact that they have different physical attributes), I conclude that you don't need a guitar body at all, according to his logic.
At last for the tone (playability aside).
Here's a really bad scetch of what I mean
Weird test? for sure. interesting non the less
Would be a bitch to get the dimensions, angles and stuff right.
If you make the poles shock absorbing it would be even better. No connection between the spots where the strings come in contact with a body whatsoever.
IMO it sounds ridiculous to say it doesn't matter at all.
I've correctly named guitars in blind tests from the acoustic tone, and the tone it gave through an amplifier. It most definitely relates through the pickup. Strandberg test shows the rest I think.
