|
Post by Tone on Apr 10, 2013 8:18:59 GMT
From time to time someone will say that a new guitar will sound better when it's been played in but what does that mean, why should it be and how long does it take? Surely a guitar isn't like a car engine where the mechanical parts take a little time to lose their stiffness and bed together? In, say, six months time the only difference in a guitar will be that the strings have worn and lost their initial brightness.
I can understand that over a long period of time the maturing of wood and paint and the ageing of pickups might make a subtle difference to the sound but this process takes years and can't really be described as "playing in" which, by association, I would have thought will happen much quicker.
Can someone enlighten me, please!
Cheers.
Tony
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 10, 2013 9:34:48 GMT
Hello, Tony. I read an article on tests comparing old violins to new ones. with blind tests and including Stradivarius and I think Guarneris. Essentially, I recall they found no audible superiority of old versus new. And also that some new instruments were perceived better sounding than the prized vintage ones.
I know there are theories about pores opening up and so forth due to playing, but I have some difficulty understanding that. The new guitar should sound better (giving some tonal adjustment for new strings).
Having said that, I know audiophiles break in cables by using them and claim tey sound better afterwards. I have sat in these tests with some crazy friends and must confess I can't tell the difference.
Cheers,
Andy
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 10, 2013 11:23:29 GMT
I think this sort of thing is in the myth category and is more to do with getting comfortable with whatever new thing you are doing. It's not the playing in of the guitar but of the player getting used to the new guitar and how it feels and sounds in the first few weeks.
In the classical guitar world I've heard the same sort of thing about spruce tops needing more time to "open up" as opposed to cedar tops and of some standing a new guitar in front of a hi-fi speaker for a certain amount of time (?) whilst playing classical guitar records through it! Yes, really.....
All nonsense to me......guitars are not like new shoes which will feel better after a few miles of walking around in them (I hate new shoes) and which will adapt somewhat to the shape of the feet.
As for strings it doesn't take long for them to settle down, get played in and then get played out!
jay
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Apr 11, 2013 7:41:09 GMT
Thanks Andy and jay. It seems, as I suspected, that it's an old wives' (or guitarists') tale.
Cheers.
Tony
|
|
|
Post by somebodyelseuk on Apr 11, 2013 8:58:02 GMT
'Played in'... it's just more guitarist-speak. It means nothing. There's a difference between a guitar that's new and one that's ten or twenty years old if it's been played regularly, but a period of months? Nah. Cheers, Julian
|
|
|
Post by frankmarvin on Apr 11, 2013 12:09:21 GMT
Sometimes my wife tells me that my face looks * lived in * if that helps, Frank:
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Apr 11, 2013 14:31:19 GMT
I think there is something to it. The guitars I don't play much or for a long time seem to take a few minutes at least before they start sounding how I remember them sounding. It happened recently with my Gretsch 6120-1957W, a guitar I gigged regularly about 3-4 years ago. I wondered why or how I would have bothered with it when I got it out and started playing it, then after a while it seemed fine. This was all through an amp. It happens every time to me with a guitar that hasn't been played for a long time. Regards, Charlie
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 11, 2013 16:29:26 GMT
Charlie.....it could be that it takes a few minutes for your memory circuits to kick in and really remember how it used to sound.....no disrespect.
jay
|
|
mj46
Member
Posts: 64
|
Post by mj46 on Apr 11, 2013 17:07:14 GMT
Hi I guess as someone said it really is about the guitarist getting used to the new instrument. However...I've played and had a close relationship with my Strat for years. A couple of years ago I bought a les Paul as I was moving more into blues. I was so dissapointed with it that I was almost embarrased to pick it up. After various adjustments I still wasn't happy (except that frets are closer than the Strat and that makes playing it more comfortable and quicker) so I left it on one side for 3 or 4 months. When i got back to it the guitar began to respond to my playing. Now it is the guitar I pick up first and B B King would be proud of some of the fills and solos! (Well, perhaps) I came to the conclusion that a guitar is like a new cat or animal. Board it up for a while and when you let it out it the guitar aturally accepts your house/playing as it's natural home and snuggles up!! Mike
|
|
|
Post by Charlie Hall on Apr 11, 2013 18:29:38 GMT
Hi Jay, I don't think my memory of sound is that bad. In any case, the sound I remembered came back! It happened so quickly it took me by surprise. Regards, Charlie
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 11, 2013 23:02:09 GMT
Hi Charlie.....my alternative explanation is that it takes a little while to remember how the guitar, which has not been played for a while, was being played and when that kicks in the remembered sound emerges.
This is a bit like a beginner player who is struggling to make his guitar sound nice, hands it to a pro who just about makes it talk,and up to this point the beginner may have almost convinced him or herself that the guitar just needs to be "opened up".
It's hardly ever the guitar's fault (unless it is one which is unplayable)
jay
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2013 6:05:30 GMT
Surely with a guitar that's new, the glues are going to take a time to fully harden, likewise the finish. Even the wood itself will normalise from it's storage condition. I don't think it's bunkum at all.
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 12, 2013 6:15:34 GMT
Only an A/B test will settle this for sure, preferably blind! In the controlled test on violins I mentioned, “the most-preferred violin was new;” and “most players seemed unable to tell whether their most-preferred instrument was new or old.” Here is a link- www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/02/1114999109Andy
|
|
|
Post by frankmarvin on Apr 12, 2013 9:18:52 GMT
Andy: Thats very interesting and quite the opposite to what most would have assumed, but the evidence given in the link is quite indisputable, I suppose it means that tone is in the ear of the beholder:
Frank:
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 12, 2013 10:44:56 GMT
Maybe we should think of this when contemplating a master built Fender.....go to a dealer, ask him to bring out a range of Strats from the cheapest to the most expensive. Put on a blindfold and ask him to hand you one guitar after the other, use the same amp etc. Play.....then choose which sounds the best. Take off the blindfold and ask him how much for guitar no. 2 or 6. or whatever. After recovering from shock ask him if it comes in Fiesta Red with gold hardware and a maple neck. Buy guitar and possibly save a few thousand pounds.....are we really paying for something other than a playable guitar I wonder....such as knowing that it conforms to all the articles of faith in the search for......"that sound".
jay
|
|
|
Post by bill on Apr 12, 2013 11:57:35 GMT
Hi Tony,
I don't know the answer to your question but I would have thought that since a guitar is made of several components that your analogy may be appropriate.
Andy thanks for that link; the paper is very interesting.
It is worth noting that the authors state that one possible interpretation of the results is that "subjects cannot choose consistently under part 1 conditions, which may therefore be unsuited to studying player preferences". Also, despite the paper stating that "Asked about the making-school of their take-home instruments ... just 3 guessed correctly" there is nothing in the supporting information about that; according to the supporting information the players weren't asked to decide which instruments were old and which new, so I am puzzled. Nor were the subjects asked which instrument had the 'best' tone; they were asked to judge "range of tonal colors" which isn't the same thing. The difference is unfortunate given the introduction of the paper which implies that the aim was to test the hypothesis that "instruments by Stradivari and Guarneri “del Gesu” are tonally superior to other violins". Nevertheless in a limited (by number of violins, players & time) blind test it seems that violinists don't always prefer an old instrument to a new one.
Of course the question as to whether a played guitar will sound better than the same guitar if it has not been played cannot be tested since the same guitar cannot be both played and not played and then compared one to the other.
Obviously a played guitar has been subject to different conditions than if it had not been played. The played guitar has been subject to different atmospheric conditions by being removed from its case. The sound board has been subject to vibration from the strings whereas on a guitar that has not been played the sound board has been subject only to a constant force from the tension of the strings.
One thing that comes to mind is that if guitars do sound different after being played for a while then it is only possible to choose a new guitar by its tone and by comparison with other new guitars if any change in tone after being played for a while is somehow consistent, otherwise the new guitar that sounds 'best' may, after playing, turn out not to be so good.
Bill
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 12, 2013 14:41:57 GMT
Hi Bill........a test could be done if two identical guitars were available.
One of them is played and assessed for say a few hours and then left unplayed for say 6 months. The other one is played regularly for the same period. Then both are re-assessed. The first one would have to be deemed to be not played-in or insufficiently so to qualify for being not played-in.
I can understand the sound board point with regard to acoustics but not solid body guitars which don't have a sound board at all. But then I have never compared a half dozen solid body guitars without amplification to assess tonal qualities.....no doubt many people have......
jay
|
|
|
Post by frankmarvin on Apr 13, 2013 1:02:22 GMT
Jay: The problem would be getting two identical guitars to start with, from my experience, there is no such thing, maybe you know better but I dont see the practicality in the experiment you suggest, who on Earth would go to all that trouble for the end result to be doubted by most people? : I say this with the utmost respect as you obviously know your *stuff* , but just my own feelings on the subject:
Personally I think Andy's post and link says it all :
Regards: Frank:
Regards, Frank:
|
|
|
Post by didier on Apr 13, 2013 7:56:11 GMT
Guitars are in most cases made of wood. With time, and depending on storage conditions, the wood is likely to get drier, so may not sound exactly the same.
Didier
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 13, 2013 9:30:22 GMT
Hi Frank.....I certainly wouldn't do what I suggested because I don't think a well made guitar of any description needs to be played in.... more like the player has to get used to the instrument.
Maybe there are one or two acoustic scientists (guitar) out there who might be interested.
You're probably right about not being able to get two identical guitars because of all the variables involved but you cannot say what the end result will be until the experiment has been done......anyway people will always have doubts .....good thing too.
jay
|
|
|
Post by frankmarvin on Apr 13, 2013 9:52:11 GMT
Yups Jay, my feelings exactly, you have rung a bell with the acoustic, I have a 1976 Guild D40 Dreadnought, however since regaining my interest in the Shadows and rigging up with electric gear ( around the last 3 years) the Guild is lucky to be taken out of its case every 6 months or so but when I do, there is the unmistakeable rich tone that I always loved , totally unaltered by storage, as if it has been constantly played, of course the strings have been wiped down when I put it away, so any alteration in tone is beyond my perception, it sounds the same: Cheers,
Frank:
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Apr 13, 2013 10:54:41 GMT
Of course, even if there is a change over the years it would take place so gradually that you would be unlikely to notice it happening.
Cheers.
Tony
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 16, 2013 10:49:49 GMT
Hi Tone and all,
it does mean in certain quarters the reduction of the internal tension all material inherently shows. It was invented and 1977 patented by Prof. A. von Reumont who could proof by applying his external sound wave reduction in numerous cases. (in german it is called "Vibrationsentdämpfung") The application of this method will lead to an alignment of all the different materials a modern guitar consists of, and therefore will reduce the tensions of the material. You can either apply an external sound source like cute cube or prime vib (see also g. forrester`s homepage) or play your instrument frequently. After 12 to 24 days of applying this method I could hear a difference regarding openess of tone and response to attack. Certainly if played frequently you can get the same effect but at a longer time period. So hopefully this answers Tones question about the playing in definition and the time period if applied externally. Regards Shadowkarl
|
|
|
Post by grip on Apr 16, 2013 12:47:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by frankmarvin on Apr 16, 2013 23:50:25 GMT
Hi Chris, the link you posted says it all, what a load of rubbish, another *toy* for people with more money than sense to indulge in and no doubt, they will hear the benefit , well of course they will, the alternative is to admit that they have wasted their money on a gimmick: Dear me, what has the world come to:
Frank:
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 17, 2013 7:38:12 GMT
Hi Chris and frankmarvin,
I have only stated the scientific foundation of "the play in" devices and approach; by the way you do not have to buy this gadget you showed on the link: cute cube is better. You can also rent this device for one month at 60.-$. The most important thing is the white noise range pattern as i stated, not the device itself. Well, if one never tries out new things it is easy to qualify something one does not understand at first sight as a "gimmick". The original question of this thread was: What does "play in mean" and can one abbreviate this period? No comment or assessment was asked for. Or as Mc Culloch once stated: Don`t bite my finger, look where it points to. shadowkarl
|
|
jay
Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by jay on Apr 17, 2013 16:40:42 GMT
.....guitar manufacturers should "play-in" all instruments before selling them to the public as part of their process...that is if they believe it is necessary which they probably don't.......neither do I.
I'm not sure what shadowkarl is saying ....alignment of materials and reduction of internal tension.......sounds like the misapplication of something to do with something else......
Is this phenomenon permanent or do the materials get all tense again and out of line due to the guitar not being played for six months or so?
Whatever is going on at cellular level right under our noses the remedy seems to be to .....well play the guitar which is why we bought it in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by shadowkarl on Apr 18, 2013 8:27:14 GMT
My last comment on the subject what does "played in" mean?
Hi Jay,
your first point may well be executed by professional guitar companies, but secretly because otherwise - if using v. Reumonts method - they would have had to pay licence fees. (at least until 1992) Similar loudspeaker manufacturers should "break in" their products before selling. Unfortunately I cannot explain van Reumonts full reasoning in english, and his book is not available in english. Wonder only why he could get a patent if his findings were a misapplication of.. as you stated. The cracks in bells made of steel are another proof of inherent tensions in material structure, which Reumont did reduce by his sound vibration method. If you weld saxophones of different metals together you do "heating" to "align the inherent tension of the different materials. (like brass and solder joints e.g.) And even the solid guitar body do sound, when not connected to an amplifier, and as ecca has stated in his answer above consist of different materials, wood glue etc... which you could "allign" at least reduce the inherent tension. The Test with old Stradivaris and new violins is also doubtful, as you do not know how frequent the precious old violins have been played (mostly they sit in a humidor at a collectors home!) I agree very much with your last point: we should not reason so much about this difficult matter called sound and acoustics as this is always in the ear of the beholder; but play our instruments frequently. That gives pleasure and satisfaction and that is why we have bought them after all. shadowkarl
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 18, 2013 8:38:57 GMT
On the topic of minute differences in a guitar's tone, I am told that the guitarist Eric Johnson can detect what battery brand is in his pedals. I am not quite there, but I can tell when the battery in my wireless transmitter is dead. Just kidding.
|
|
|
Post by abstamaria on Apr 18, 2013 8:49:32 GMT
By the way, some racing engine shops like to use "aged" engine blocks, some left to the elements for years, on the theory that the internal stresses built up during the forming and manufacturing process would resolve and straigfhten themselves out. It's something like the heating and reheating processes for certain steels, I suppose. I can understand that the granular and other structures of a manufactured product, such as a cast engine block or machined billet, might benefit from that, but less able to perceive it in a product made of a natural material, such as wood. If anything, the joints and bindings in a guitar might become loose with age and use.
I can also see that a speaker might be manufactured with the expectation that it will reach a degree of correct looseness after several hours of use. It should be possible also to manufacture a speaker that, after glues, etc., have cured, will sound as good as it will ever be right out of the box. I have some difficulty understanding why a cable will have to be broken in.
But I'm keeping an open mind.
|
|