Re: poly vs. nitro clear coat - age

In article <T7SdnRxEFsEEkZfbnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Don Evans <gtrdonevans@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Squier wrote:
In article <UICdnY5mEM216ZTbnZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Don Evans
<gtrdonevans@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Squier wrote:
In article <Q7adnWk6kMUkX5XbnZ2dnUVZ_qCmnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Don Evans
<gtrdonevans@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Squier wrote:
In article <Q6adnfqWO4QL0pXbnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Don
Evans <gtrdonevans@xxxxxxx> wrote:

Squier wrote:
In article <130ftsmeehj3d15@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jim
<askme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Guncho wrote:
The finish on a solid body guitar has no affect on the tone
what so ever.


This is incorrect so any newbies please disregard it. Keith
is wrong.


I challenge ANYBODY to tell the difference in tone between two
solid body guitars, one with nitro, one with poly. Violins,
acoustic guitars, etc. are different. And I own a vintage
nitro finished Strat. There are just too many other variables
that make the finish on a SOLID body guitar much less of a
factor. That's my opinion.



On an acoustic I'd say that the poly is superior because its
thinner.


I'm pretty sure that's totally incorrect as well.

Depends. I'm pretty sure that my Ibanez Artwood is poly, and
it is very thin, thin enough that you can feel the grain in the
solid Engelmann spruce top.



Chris



Ok - here's my take on this - enough of the voodoo -

String energy, Solid Body Electric Guitars and pickups.

Yes - the wood (and general construction of the guitar and all
its parts)
does matter but ONLY as it relates to either facillitating
or damping string vibration. The construction of the guitar
matters but only as it relates to the enhancement or detriment
of string vibration.

You talk like that's a small thing. It isn't. If it was, you
would have trouble telling a Strat with humbuckers from a Les
Paul.

Once you plug in a solid body elec. the pups can only deal with
string
vibration and then send it down the line as elec. signal.
The pups cannot 'hear' or see wood vibrations directly.

Tap on a pickup ... if it isn't silent, you are off base here.


ok... continue on reading if u dare

I dared last time. I'm not going to respond to every point. You
repeat yourself a lot here, so I'll just try to pick up the
stuff I really disagreed with.



What you are hearing when you place the headstock against
another piece of resonant wood is the residual energy being
dissapated and transfered from one piece of wood to the next.
You are creating a diaphragm... nothing to do with sustain -
more with the ability to increase the volume of the the
resonant energy that is loaded into the wood of a solid body
after you strum or plucj the strings (energy transferance..
hand - strings - wood and other parts of guitar).

Not quite sure how you "load" energy into a guitar, but OK.
Anything that dissapates energy will affect the energy source to
some degree. In this case, we're talking about the strings.
When you touch the guitar to anything, you are affecting the
resonance of the body, and so it's effect on the vibration of
the string.

however the pickups can only 'see' the energy of the metal
strings which form an electro-magnetic feast for the pups to
deal with. Pups cannot 'see' or deal with vibrating wood or
anything else except string vibration and the variances of
those vibrations.

Only in the case of perfectly un-microphonic pickups are you
right.


Here is the crux of
the biscuit though -

1. Pickups can only deal with energy loaded into the strings.
Pickups are magnetic and can only deal with the energy placed
into the metal strings above them or in some cases energy
loaded into metal (such as a bridge piece or inserted piece
that is metal placed into an acoustic type guitar etc) that
vibrates as a result of strings being plucked/strummed or
otherwise loaded
with energy.

By loaded with energy you mean inertia, right? There is no
energy source beyond the pick or hammering on of strings.
Everything else from there on out is expending or dissipating
that energy. Anything absorbing that energy in a non-linear
fashion affects the tone.


2. Electric/magnetic pickups CAN NOT "see" the vibrations from
the wood. Yes - when you strum a guitar the energy loaded
into the strings does transfer to the wood and other parts
of the guitar such as the nut bridge, etc.. BUT the pups
cannot do anything with this offloaded energy directly.
They can only deal with the energy of the string vibrations.

Not true. See above. I don't disagree that the majority the
pickup output comes from the strings, but not all. According to
you, my son's $170 Ibanez should sound just like a Les Paul, if I
put the same pickups on it. I doubt that.

Only indirectly (and this is
suspect) can the energy transfer from string to wood and
other guitar parts actually affect tone since the residual
energy from the initial loading of the strings to vibration
of the wood can in some cases actually come back and
continue to vibrate down the strings. The problem here is
that the strings on a solid body electric are actually
fairly isolated from the wood itself. Only a small
percentage of energy loaded into the strings initially
(string vibration is the result of this) actually dissapates
into the wood.

Actually, that's one of reasons solid body guitars sustain more
than hollow body guitars.

When you place the headstock onto another piece of wood
or anything else that can also have a resonance point you are
effectively creating a diaphragm that acts much like a
vibrating speaker so you can hear the wood vibrate at certain
tone oscilations. The pickups cannot hear this since wood
does not create a magnetic field. Yes, other parts of the
guitar can affect string vibration - its duration or the
opposite, the damping of string vibration. A nut made of
felt would definitely put a damper on the strings, where as
a nut made of brass would definitely create a longer sustain
of string vibration since a lot less energy is being
absorbed by
the metal brass nut (this leaving more energy in the strings to
keep vibrating.. actually oscillating) as opposed to a felt nut
which would absorb a lot of the string energy and dissipate it
within the felt.

3. People will strum or play an electric solid body unplugged
and here is where you can hear the residual energy of
transfer to the wood. You obviously hear the strings
vibrating that is giving you the bulk of what you hear when
it is unplugged. But you are also hearing the residual
vibrations of the wood itself (though subtle it's there)
which adds to the tone. In a sense the solid body is being
heard like any other acoustic non-elec. guitar. However it
is false to assume that this has necessarily anything to do
with what the guitar will sound
like plugged in.

Why is it false?

Once plugged in - all
that matters to the pickups is what the strings are doing.
In some very small matter the wood plays a part only if that
residual energy (wood vibration) can be channeled back into
making the strings vibrate further. The idea of a solid body
is that the residual energy from the wood is isolated from
the strings. So people that consider solid body electrics
with properties with that of an acoustic are misguided. An
acoustic guitar is designed so that both initial energy
loaded into the strings AND the wood
body and neck work together. You do not have electric pickups
to deal with.

4. The only way wood or body and neck material make on any solid
body when it is plugged in and what you will hear is
how it relates to adding or modifying string vibration since
that is all that matters to pickups. This is minimal at best
and the only way that wood matters is when you play your
electric unplugged when you can hear the residual (vibration)
energy
loaded into the wood.

5. Finish coats on solid body electric guitars matter minimally
to the actual "tone" of an electric guitar. Finishes such as
polycoat or nitro lacquer would matter so minimally as to not
be an issue. A poly coat or a nitro coat is not going to
impact string vibration (actually soon after the strings
vibrate over magentic pickups a semi-spherical oscillation
begins to occur - not a simple back and forth vibration) and
thus will not affect 'tone' to any measurable degree.

Not sure how this matters. The direction of the string vibration
has to do with whether or not the finish affects the tone?

However, different finishes will affect the
visual appeal of a guitar and might exhibit tonal differences
when the guitar is played acoustically.

Might?

However, once the guitar is
plugged in and the output becomes an electrical signal - the
finish coat differences on a guitar matter very little and
most would say it is extremely minimal in its affect on
string vibration and energy being read by the pickups.

Whew... this is such a simple thing.. I wonder why people
think it is some sort of voodoo or something or something
artsy that only those with blessed ears can discern.

No Voodoo, no mystery, and my ears certainly aren't blessed. It
is pretty simple, we agree there, but absolutes just don't work
here. Everything affects a guitar's tone even the size an weight
of the player.

An electric guitar is a
science project, an acoustic guitar is where the voodoo and
cratsman art is more involved since in an acoustic - the
energy that offloads from the initial input from the strings
and then into the wood and other parts of the guitar is all
heard and meaningful. This has nothing to do with the way an
electric
solid body guitar works.

So you believe that electric guitars don't respond acoustically?
I suggest that the interaction between the guitar body and the
vibrating strings has everything to do with tone. Just giving
different guitars the same pickups won't make them sound
identical .... why is that?

Don


Thanks Don for the replies.

How about answering them.

No - I just do not believe that acoustic properties that can
be minimally exhibited by solid body electrics make up a large
portion of what creates sound from an electric solid body.
I am saying that the wood is way down (waaaaay down) on the list
of things
that affect sound and tone
even though it is a minor contributor in an indirect way.

None of the stuff I've mentioned is indirect, and with all due
respect the fact that you do not believe something doesn't make it
untrue. I know what you are saying, now how about some proof ....

But I just cannot agree about solid body guitars having 'tone
wood'. That's a sham to me.

And yet you quote people at Fender talking about tone wood in your
defense. Is it just that you don't like the expression? If wood
does affect how a guitar plays, how is that a sham?

Ah well - I might seem like a pain in the arse - but I do like
the replies and conversation whether we agree or disagree.
This stew of knowledge and confusion will hopefully serve up
some tasty stuff along the way. At least people are thinking
about it.

Hopefully you will learn some stuff as well. You seem pretty
closed minded right now. I asked some questions you didn't seem
to want to answer. You like to put forth your theories, but when
it comes down to it, you don't support anything you say. You just
repeat it over and over in different words. I begin to feel like
the "baffle 'em with bull***" mode is in play. In any case,
you're talking and not listening.

Don



and what scientific proof do you offer that wood plays a major
factor in the tone of a guitar ? You offer nothing yourself.

I'm not trying to prove that at all. I merely am saying that I
think the wood has a significant effect on the overall performance
(tone, liveliness, sustain, feedback properties, etc.). You have
been saying that the wood doesn't matter. I disagree, and have
asked what I think are fair questions. You aren't really answering
any of them.

At least I am attempting to. And I'll get better at it in time.
I am still young and learning - but I refuse to believe in this
tone wood thing (for solid body electrics) just because this
is some oft repeated addage that generates from people quoting
acoustic guitar makers and believing that it has the same major
impact on tone concerning a solid body electric.


It doesn't.
But once again - you offer nothing except good questions against
what I say. I appreciate that because it makes me work harder
and learn more how to prove what I say in a matter so succinct
that there can be no argument. I am not there yet - and either are
you for your counterpoint.

Difference is, I'm not trying to prove my point ... I'm just trying
to open a much needed window of possibilities on yours.

You are merely fluffing up old addages
that have little or no proof as they relate to _solid body electric
guitars_.

The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. If, IME, a new swamp ash
Tele sounds brighter and snappier than an Alder Tele made in the
same year with the same pickups, I look for reasons why. As I said
somewhere else, there is more to this than treble and bass response.
Danny Gatton spoke of how fast a guitar responded. He was talking
about pickups, but I find that with everything else equal the wood
contributes to this as well. I'm not alone in this observation.
You can't really believe that everyone who can hear/feel the
difference in wood effect on a guitar is being stupidly led by
advertising and opinion of others.

All the arguments I have heard that have merit only apply to
acoustic (non electric solid body) instruments. This type
of info cannot be applied the same to solid body electrics.
Wood is a minimal affect on tone on solid body electric.
I will not back down from that statement. Anything else is
gibberish.

Great, don't back down. With all due respect, the one with the
dogma here seems to be you. You are trying to make your opinions
sound like science ... much like the pre-empirical "scientists"
using logic and rhetoric to "prove" principles. When you have made
more empirical observations, I think you will relax your stance.

Take it easy.

Don



Don - you have shown me NO science to back up anything you have said
at all.

You have shown me a lack of reading and responding to my questions ...
originally asked as ways to get you to say something concrete.

Don't put the monkey on my back - it's on yours right now.

No monkey on mine, sorry ... I'm not the one claiming that pickups are the
only significant factor in electric solid body guitar tone, you are.


Ah well - we'll all have this same discussion another day and another
time.

Probably, not ... you aren't really discussing at all, just stating your
theories ... none of which are backed up at all, BTW, except by your
theories.

In time we might get this all figured out.

Nah, it's already figured out, you just won't see it.

The cool part is no matter
if the road you or I take ir believe is eventually wrong or right -
it's all good. We learn just as much by finding out the wrong way as
in finding out the right way.
Depends on your point of view - it's all good though.

I have no idea what you're talking about here. What "way" do you mean?


Anyways - I have based my stance on fact - I have more work to do
with the math - but it is fact - you offer absolutely nothing even
remotely factual at your end. Good day to you.

I would love to see one of these "facts". I don't mean you saying the same
thing over again ... show me how you proved, scientifically, that only the
pickups have a significant effect on solid body guitar tone. Please post
some of this math you are using.

Just for the record, I'm completely aware that in most signal paths these
days you can barely tell a Les Paul from a Strat ... that's not what I'm
talking about. I really would love to see your evidence, since you dissed
me for not coming up with any, of anything you are saying. Not anecdotal
stuff... I gave you some of that and you didn't respond at all .... but
science. Let's hear it!

Don




Don - I am still young - I admit that - but discussions like this
give me the resolve to one day be able to give exact science to
what is happening. It seems I'm on the right path - I know I am.
The problem is that no one has ever really taken the time to crunch
down the data into at least a large part of all the variables that
make a solid body ultimately sound the way it does.
All the way from the muscles flexing, to the fingers hitting the strings
and still all the way through cable and finally coming out of amp/speaker.
It seems that some pickup makers do all the math but only when it
comes to pickups/string vibration. And then amp and speaker makers
do the data crunch on theier equipment. But there is no opus on
how it all fits together. I presented a hypothesis and will work
from there. It is a place to start. I hope one day to be able to
do it all and figure it out. And at least be able to explain using
science the entire signal path. Sounds like some doctoral dissertation
many years from now. But it all begins with a seed. And people like
you (whether you know it or not) help to water it and get it started.
Thanks.

In the meantime.. i still won't back down - I believe a lot of what
i say has merit and in time much of it (although not all of it) will
eventually prove out. And if not - it is all along the journey of learning.
Where it leads ? I have no idea. My best thing is to not trip and pay
closer attention to the pebbles underfoot while not looking too
much at the mountain ahead.

I have youth on my side. Sometimes it is a detriment but most of
the time I find it to be an advantage in the long run.
.

Loading