http://www.guitarnation.com/articles/calkin.htm

I thought all the GAS'ers might find this interesting. I saw this article a while ago but couldn't remember who wrote it or the title when I went to look for it later. Anyhow, I stumbled across it again when I was searching for Sycamore information. I have never played a Sycamore guitar and, this past weekend, John Hall gave me a really pretty set of Sycamore. It is pretty wood, to me, and when I picked the set up John gave me I was astonished at how light it was. I think a guitar made out of that Sycamore set and a really good stiff top along with Spanish cedar neck would make a really featherweight instrument. Well, enjoy the article. It certainly is food for thought.

Thanks for posting !
As you said, food for thought:
"I don't believe that unquartered wood is a handicap. I don't think the species of wood contributes to the tone of a guitar."   :ohmy:

Very interesting perspective and who can argue his experience and credentials - finally a cure to my GAS :laughin:


Luv his close "None of this will sway a mind that is already drenched in traditional guitar mythology, but so be it. Most of those folks never made an instrument".  :smile:




Unclear to his position ( possibly a quick reading error on my part) if he is stating no tonal difference between Rosewood, mahogany and maple  or the alternatives he makes reference & discusses  :?

Nice topic GA-ME!!!!  So friends what's your take :?

I see myself as rational somewhat open individual tho who am I to argue with John CALKIN. Saying this I luv Maple Guitars  blindfolded I am drawn to them in any Guitar Shop over all other tone woods. My own collection of acoustics it's the Maple I favor. Is this real or is my head full of traditional guitar mythology :?


This Forum always gets the wheels turnin :thumbsup

I'm inclined to think that there must be some very subtle tonal differences between two identically constructed guitars except for the back and sides woods being completely different, but if so many of the builders claim that there is little or no tone variation and that tone is determined by construction techniques than who are we to argue?

In terms of tonewoods, there is an assumption made by we buyers based on what the large scale builders generally offer, which to my eye is based on wood porn attributes rather than ease of use in building, or sound quality which to my mind is kind of like judging a woman strictly based on her looks.

It would have been nice to take the article a step further mentioning that locally grown and harvested trees promote a heathy local economy given that the rain forests have been raped and plundered for so long now, and it's not like a replanted sapling will be ready for harvest any time soon.

Should I be apologizing for my inflexible opinion?  Should I have prefaced my thoughts with "IMHO"?  Draw your own conclusions.  These are mine.

           DAVE

A wonderful read thanks so much. :thumb

If I remember right a few years back Samick made a dread out of  Sycamore  and it sound pretty nice.

A few years ago I toured the Santa Cruz Guitar Company.  Richard Hoover showed me some guitars made from local Sycamore.  They were beautiful.  I had never seen Sycamore used in a guitar before.   I couldn't play them because I am a lefty but I have to believe Richard when he says that they have wonderful tonal characteristics.   I don't think he would build guitars that looked good but did not sound fantastic.   In the Santa Cruz area sycamore is plentiful so he is using it in certain builds.   He also showed me a piece of sycamore that washed up on the beach a few years ago.  He thinks it may be hundreds of years old.   He's saving it for some very special guitars.     

Here's a pic of Richard with his prized slab of old sycamore


[attachment deleted by admin]

 Very interesting, thanks so much for the post!

I've read this before and found it very interesting. The wood of a sound board greatly effects the tone of the instrument. Spruce , ceder and Hog topped guitars each have a unique sound print. The back and sides however is another matter. With an Ovation 100% of the sound comes from the sound board. I wonder what persentage of the sound comes from the back and side of a conventional guitar ?

Hi all, it's been awhile.

About 18 months ago, I was at a local music store here in Edmonton and heard a couple of guitars made of graphite.  I must say, they sounded pretty awesome.  I can't remember or didn't even check if they had traditional wood soundboards or if the whole guitar was of the high-tech graphite material, but they were all charcoal grey in color including the tops.  They were quite expensive, if I remember.  I don't remember the brand names of them.  It was actually another guy, a much better player than me, who was playing a couple of these and he was pretty impressed also.  I didn't actually play them myself.

Kurt

I've commented on this article before. This has to be the worst guitar building article I've read. I really think he is overstating his position and doesn't even believe what he wrote(or he just has terrible hearing). Unfortunately it was published and made its way to the internet where it gets linked over and over as proof for something. Besides being full of vague statements and contradictions, it's devoid of anything remotely scientific. The acoustic properties of different woods are a real and measurable thing (damping constants, velocity of sound, modulus of elasticity).

Quote from: Braxton on December 08, 2010, 08:33:41 AM
"I don't believe that unquartered wood is a handicap. I don't think the species of wood contributes to the tone of a guitar."   :ohmy:

"Honduras rosewood is extremely hard and brittle. Guitars made from it have a cold, glassy sound lacking in depth, but they are very loud."

Quote from: jeremy3220 on December 10, 2010, 01:40:33 PM
I've commented on this article before. This has to be the worst guitar building article I've read. I really think he is overstating his position and doesn't even believe what he wrote(or he just has terrible hearing). Unfortunately it was published and made its way to the internet where it gets linked over and over as proof for something. Besides being full of vague statements and contradictions, it's devoid of anything remotely scientific. The acoustic properties of different woods are a real and measurable thing (damping constants, velocity of sound, modulus of elasticity).



"Honduras rosewood is extremely hard and brittle. Guitars made from it have a cold, glassy sound lacking in depth, but they are very loud."

Jeremy, I think folks take this article literally and I am not too sure that was the intention. I think what he was getting at was there is no magic wood that is so great that it dimninshes all other woods. In effect, the point I actually take from the article is there is no Gospel concerning tonewoods in general and the smart individual will judge each set of wood independently of preconcieved notions. I'm pretty sure there is a good deal of sarcastic humor going on here!

I know but the problem is that it's a published article in a Lutherie magazine not some forum post. People do take it literally and I don't think that's the reader's fault. I even agree that tonewood selection generally isn't as important as the design, who built it, the size,etc but it should have been more scientific and less satire. Of course, it's not as bad as Robert Godin up on stage shaking his hands and saying 'the sound become better by the exercise of the wood'... that's my all time favorite  :rolleye:

Actually really good reading

This is exactly how I ended up with my L03

Wife and I had our back to two fine players / pickers
and round and round went many many high end guitars
and the whole time we were "blindfolded".

Had my heart set on a Gibby or perhaps that
expensive Martin.  Imagine walking out with a
MUCH LESS COSTLY steel string.  Larrivee!!?

I'm still smiling!

So I indeed agree with it being the BUILDER
whom sets the tone (I can easily pick out a
Taylor and usually a Breed blindfolded)

Add me to the Heretic List -- I actually think that
the "cheap hog" sepele wrapped box I walked
with had superior tone than other "tonewoods".

Yes it's all subjective - but I buy guitars much like
speakers - blindfolded.  Once I found the sound then
fret radii and nut spacing come into play with me.
My buy was all about tone and not money.

I'm HERE because Larrivee sold me -- blindfolded!
In point of fact I had only seen this brand once before
I went shopping and NEVER would have purchased by eye.

Or better put the larrivee best expressed the tone I was after.

Thanks for posting - this article taken at face value
validates what most miss - it's the builder and his
quality and experience that sets the "tone"

Anyone remember Lloyd Loar?  Still chasing his tone!