Acoustic Guitar Question

[William2]

I was watching a video today of a young artist I follow. She was showing her guitar collection and describing them. One of her instruments was a Laurent Blondel OM guitar. Describing it she said it had an arched top and arched back. To finance this instrument, she sold a Collings OM which she also loved but said the Bondel suited the sound she wanted for her technique and fingerstyle playing. She also said while she loved both instruments if she played them side by side, the Blondel was much more powerful. Are arch topped acoustic guitars more powerful than just the flat top instrument? She also owns two 00 instruments by Virgil Pilon. Going to the Pilon site, I noted the two instruments she owns are available with either a flat top or an arched top version. The Pilon instruments she owns are also available with a floating bridge if wanted. I had never heard of this. I think when we talked about archtop jazz style guitars in the recent past it was noted that while they may be more powerful, they have less sustain. I wonder if this is not true with an archtop acoustic guitar.   

[unclrob]

 Having owned a bunch of archtops I would need to hear to help.

[B0WIE]

There's arched and then there's radiused. Arched is a different style of construction. Radiused is something many builders do. A radius is often used for stability, not really power. A radiused top can flex more with humidity changes than a truly "flat" top or back, though both are still flat top acoustics. As far as power goes, we don't really need power these days with modern sound reinforcement so that's mostly a personal thing (same reason why someone might want a dread over an OM). It's not like 150 years ago where the instrument had to fill the room with sound for the audience.

With power, you can also lose nuance. Double tops were a big thing in the classical world for the last 15 years. Now, they're quickly losing popularity as people prefer more nuanced tone and articulation.

Having not played the instruments she's using I can't give more of an opinion. "Better" is always subjective when it comes to tone. Brondels are mostly flat tops so I don't know if she's referring to an actual arch-top version or talking about the radius in the top.

[William2]

Thank you, Mr. BOWIE. I thought I'd share this video so everyone can see and hear these instruments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfFKmlX356A

[ronmac]

Radiused backs and tops, if designed properly, can be stronger/stiffer than a flat top. Builders may choose to make their tops/bracing thinner/lighter when building this way and that can lead to a voice that has a faster attack, more sustain and "bloom". Not desirable for all playing styles, but may be just what some players chase to support their technique and repertoire.

[Queequeg]

I have really enjoyed reading this thread. Hope it continues.
Also, I watched the entire 25 minute Lindsay Straw video.
This woman knows her you-know-what! i Haven't even heard of most of the boutique guitars she talked about and played.

As a side note, several years ago, a luthier handed me a parlor guitar and wanted to know what I thought of it. I looked it over before I began to play it.
I said, "this looks like adirondack".
"It is", he replied.
"On a parlor? Really?"
"Just play it."
I couldn't get over it. Sparkly and balanced and more volume than I ever would have expected from an 0 size guitar.
Years later I ordered a custom built parlor; adirondack/mahogany. Sure enough! It is my favorite small bodied guitar.
Hey, it's not just for dreads!

[William2]

Linday used to do demos on North American Guitar on You Tube. Since I play fingerstyle, I've always been attracted to her demos. Watching this video makes me sad I'm too old to buy an instrument from a boutique maker and that I sold my Waterloo WL-12. All I have is dreadnoughts and a smaller instrument would be nice as a change of pace. I love those Pilon instruments. But he is a one-man shop and with a nonrefundable 30% downpayment and no time completion information, I could die before I get the guitar LOL. Love that art deco bridge and headstock. I was surprised that her primary instrument at home was the Cordoba nylon string C-9. I started out on a nylon instrument. I looked at the Cordoba site and they no longer make lefty nylon instruments. But there is one new -10 lefty on Reverb. I have to think about this. The C-10 might be the instrument with their latticed bracing. I have heard this instrument on videos, and it is more powerful than the other Cordoba instruments. I am intrigued by this arch construction with thinner materials on these acoustic instruments. I kind of take issue with Mr. BOWIE on the importance of a powerful instrument. I'm not into amplifying my guitars and I think a lot of nuance comes from the player. Oh well.

[Queequeg]

Linday used to do demos on North American Guitar on You Tube. Since I play fingerstyle, I've always been attracted to her demos. Watching this video makes me sad I'm too old to buy an instrument from a boutique maker and that I sold my Waterloo WL-12. All I have is dreadnoughts and a smaller instrument would be nice as a change of pace. I love those Pilon instruments. But he is a one-man shop and with a nonrefundable 30% downpayment and no time completion information, I could die before I get the guitar LOL. Love that art deco bridge and headstock. I was surprised that her primary instrument at home was the Cordoba nylon string C-9. I started out on a nylon instrument. I looked at the Cordoba site and they no longer make lefty nylon instruments. But there is one new -10 lefty on Reverb. I have to think about this. The C-10 might be the instrument with their latticed bracing. I have heard this instrument on videos, and it is more powerful than the other Cordoba instruments. I am intrigued by this arch construction with thinner materials on these acoustic instruments. I kind of take issue with Mr. BOWIE on the importance of a powerful instrument. I'm not into amplifying my guitars and I think a lot of nuance comes from the player. Oh well.

I am particularly drawn to your final remarks which I give paramount weight to.
Far more than the strings. Much more than back and sides material.
It's the player, first and foremost. And so I spend most of my time concentrating on this. But I certainly like listening and learning about fine guitars and luthiers and all the rest, which is why I said I like this thread so much.

[B0WIE]

There's definitely levels when it comes to how much expression an instrument affords a player. I'm not sure how this got misinterpreted into nuance coming from the guitar. But, in a lot of the "cannon" guitars, you sacrifice some things for raw volume. One of the more common ones is a range of tones. You see it discussed a lot in classical guitar communities. I don't think it's as relevant to most steel string players as most play with a pick. Playing with fingers, your control of expression is many times greater and you find just how wide the tonal and dynamic range of an instrument is.

 In the steel string world there are builders who get a shocking amount of volume while also leaving for a wide range of dynamics and tones (SCGC is the first that comes to mind). But, I think most of the louder acoustics I've played have had a distinctive voice and not as much tonal range. Think of bluegrass guitars. Exceptional power but they tend to have a distinctive voice. You're not going to get the range of voices and expression available from something like a luthier built mid sized guitar. If I angle my nail slightly when I play my Collings, the tone will shift a little, but it still sounds like that guitar and there's no mistaking it. In my randy Reynolds 000 (the lightest acoustic I've ever played), that slight change in technique creates a dramatic shift in tone and, volume, and attack. That's what I mean about the level of nuance an instrument affords you.

[Queequeg]

There's definitely levels when it comes to how much expression an instrument affords a player. I'm not sure how this got misinterpreted into nuance coming from the guitar. But, in a lot of the "cannon" guitars, you sacrifice some things for raw volume. One of the more common ones is a range of tones. You see it discussed a lot in classical guitar communities. I don't think it's as relevant to most steel string players as most play with a pick. Playing with fingers, your control of expression is many times greater and you find just how wide the tonal and dynamic range of an instrument is.

 In the steel string world there are builders who get a shocking amount of volume while also leaving for a wide range of dynamics and tones (SCGC is the first that comes to mind). But, I think most of the louder acoustics I've played have had a distinctive voice and not as much tonal range. Think of bluegrass guitars. Exceptional power but they tend to have a distinctive voice. You're not going to get the range of voices and expression available from something like a luthier built mid sized guitar. If I angle my nail slightly when I play my Collings, the tone will shift a little, but it still sounds like that guitar and there's no mistaking it. In my randy Reynolds 000 (the lightest acoustic I've ever played), that slight change in technique creates a dramatic shift in tone and, volume, and attack. That's what I mean about the level of nuance an instrument affords you.

In the Lindsay Straw video that William linked, she discusses dreads and comes to the same conclusions you posted above.
And to your other point on classical guitars I do find that it is much easier to finesse a nylon stringed guitar than with steel strings and thereby imparting more of the player's said "nuance".
I also liked what Lindsay had to say about guitar strings. Echos my own thoughts in that regard.

[B0WIE]

On the topic of Lindsay, for those interested, she has two albums free to listen to on YouTube. It's not guitar focused, which is why I like it. Charming singer/songwriter albums.

[William2]

On the topic of Lindsay, for those interested, she has two albums free to listen to on YouTube. It's not guitar focused, which is why I like it. Charming singer/songwriter albums.

I'm not into singer songwriter artist for the most part, but I do like her performances in this area. I notice a lot of detail in some of her guitar accompaniments compared with a lot of people that sing and back themselves up on guitar. And that right hand of hers betrays a developed classical guitar technique. And she does solos like the Leo Brower Etudes on solo guitar.

[William2]

In the Lindsay Straw video that William linked, she discusses dreads and comes to the same conclusions you posted above.
And to your other point on classical guitars I do find that it is much easier to finesse a nylon stringed guitar than with steel strings and thereby imparting more of the player's said "nuance".

I was thinking about nuance and different types and sizes of guitars yesterday and this morning. When I started playing again, I decided to try the steel string acoustic. I played classical guitar but always hated playing with nails. Yet they are necessary for the full color spectrum a nylon string instrument can offer. The string material offers a greater variety of tone colors. And you will find a classical player uses a lot more changes in hand position and placement between the bridge and sound hole. I don't find changing my position on a steel string instrument offers as much nuance as a nylon string instrument regardless of size and I think this because of string material and tension. Maybe this is why Lindsay said she plays her Cordoba the most when at home. I also agree with her description of the Waterloo instrument. I'm guessing her instrument with these different qualities of sound may be due to the fact that she plays solos also. I mean once you start singing, the guitar becomes subordinate to the voice.  So, I decided to try the steel string guitar because I didn't want to use nails and it offered the one thing a classical guitar doesn't for the most part, a greater sustain. After trying out various sizes, I settled on a dreadnought because it offered for me the greatest dynamic range. And if you couple that with a legato style of playing you have a mini piano. So maybe whatever instrument you choose, there might be something missing. Anyway, having my coffee this morning and playing plucked chords on my Larrivee SD-40RW, I really like this sound of no nails, and a long sustain. It is very pretty and mellow. And yet, listening to some classical players yesterday, I am getting an urge to grow a set and get a nylon string guitar. Time will tell. Maybe I'll change my mind this afternoon LOL.

[B0WIE]

I play acoustics with a classical technique and I've found some acoustics change character more with hand position and technique than others. For me, the more lightly built ones tend to be this way. Though, I can't say that's necessarily why they have that range. One of my steel strings was built by a classical builder and you can really hear it. Of all the Larrivees I've owned I think the SD60 had widest palate. It could go from sounding like a piano with the damper pedal down to being brilliant and sparkly. I think that's why I spent so many hours on that instrument. Quite a world to explore with that one.