Re: poly vs. nitro clear coat - age



Squier wrote:
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.

I'll checking it out, believe me. Whether or not I agree with you, it's
obvious you visualize what is going on. Add some more empirical knowledge,
and you might just crack the code.

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.

I think a lot of what we who have been at this a while believe about the
subject comes from personal experience. Any data crunching I've done is
just adding up observations and coming to conclusions about them.

All the way from the muscles flexing, to the fingers hitting the
strings

The biggest variable of all .. that one. Part of the reason all the other
stuff isn't ovbious is, IMO, because the human response to unique
characteristics in musical instruments is to consciously or unconciously
cope with them and in so doing, alter their effect.

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.

Have you checked out Bill Lawrence yet?

And then amp and speaker makers
do the data crunch on theier equipment. But there is no opus on
how it all fits together.

Right.

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.

I'm very much interested in this stuff .. not sure how much difference it
makes ultimately, but yes.

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.

I think you have some good observations, I just think the picture is bigger
than you see yet.

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.

I have experience on mine. And the same applies. I really would like to
hear your answers to some of my questions ... when you figure it out. :-)

Don


.

Loading