'A resonant body gives good sustain'. Another myth?

OilCityPickups

Cirrus said:

Evilmags said:

The answer is really simple physics. The louder the amp the more difference in sustain in a resonant guitar. (Accoustic/335/Tele). Assuming the same hardware a light resonant bit of wood will suck more energy from the strings than heavy non resonant stuff. As you increase volume the more resonant wood will transmit more vibrations to the string and resonate more.  Things that dissipate energy, like springs, shit bridges, poor joins, glue, thick finishes ect also contribute to resonance. 

Yeah, this is it. I was thinking about it in the shower earlier  It's the symbiosis between the guitar and amp together that make a loud electric guitar feel alive in your hands - It's a feedback loop (sometimes literally)

The 'sound train' is like the drive train in a car ... everything matters ... and I'm a firm believer that the 'electric guitar sound' is guitar plus amp. 

jeztone2

impmann said:

"Yes, because heavy guitars sustain so much better and sound better. And sound 'bigger'."

Myth.

As anyone who picked up my Les Paul at the Jam will tell you, it weighs next to nothing, it is wonderfully resonant and sounds huge.

Its not hard and fast as a rule.

But does it have masses of low end? 

I used to own a lightweight Les Paul & the big issue tonally was that it didn't have anywhere near the low end of others I tried that were all heavier. So I sold it on. Same with chambered guitars. I can always hear a distinct absence of low end. There may be the odd one that breaks that rule. But I've never played one. 

ToneControl

Funkfingers said:

that's a very bad speech
He sounds as vague as Dumble

ToneControl

I had an all-maple Yamaha Superflighter once
Humbuckers, the most nasal thin guitar I ever played

I tried overwound Kinmans (my choice became the Woodstock set) my mahogany bodied strat: far too dark, I had to replace them with brighter pickups

Jez6345789

What  is missing here is context does Nile Rodgers want endless sustain.
does Santana want quack and spank.

there 100's of guitars All do a different job for different people.

As my reading of physics goes the best sustain is 2 x cubic metre block of granite with a single string tuned across them

the rest of the stuff in a guitar context is a subtractive process and it the bits taken away we like not the string stretched between the granite blocks

so effectivel a neck of x dampens or removes certain frequencies a body of y removes other parts.

endless sustain for most guitarists is santana or a Gary Moore cover down the dog and gynocologist. All feedback not sustain.
.

notanon

+1 for @Evilmags and then comes the factor of resonant frequency. Play a note at 10Hz and my 'beer barrel' will wobble all day long. 440Hz I'm okay.

This ain't a yes/no, rather more/less.

When does the damper become the positive feedback and ring? An analogy is: to test if wood is seasoned and ready to burn then bang two pieces together. A thud, it ain't seasoned. A clink the wood is good to burn. Even cast iron can oscillate - amazing really.

Best visual representation of this is to Google Slader waves in sand - awesome!

A guitar body, even a solid is going to contribute to the oscillations. The same brand can't offer real consistency - unless they by all the same wood from the same location in the same year (denseness of the wood, the rings) will fluctuate but, . . . they could be consistent at identifying what makes a good guitar?!?

Drew_TNBD

Three-ColourSunburst said:

unless you are playing so loud that you are setting up a feedback loop

Well that very thing is one of the cornerstones of electric guitar music.

Neil

Regarding sustain, it was the king in the early '70's.

Remember all of those aftermarket brass nuts, bridges etc that were all the rage because of the extra sustain? Some makers even stuck lumps of brass in the body.

Wonder where they all went? 

Sassafras

Neil said:

Regarding sustain, it was the king in the early '70's.

Remember all of those aftermarket brass nuts, bridges etc that were all the rage because of the extra sustain? Some makers even stuck lumps of brass in the body.

Wonder where they all went? 

It wasn't a sustainable industry.

octatonic

OP: Define 'resonant' and I'll respond.

Skipped

Bucket said:

I'm not fussed about sustain. I just know that when I pick up a guitar and I can feel the body resonating when I play it, I always know I'm going to enjoy playing it.

This post has already received 5 Wisdoms.

If the current owners of the  Gibson brand were listening to their customers, surely they would not have waited 20 years to produce a Historic Les Paul which does not have a plastic sheath wrapped around the truss rod?

Gassage

When I was a kid I'd ask both parents the same question and if I didn't get the answer I was looking for I'd rephrase it time and time again to illicit the answer I wanted.

Weird how this happens on forums too.

guitarfishbay

octatonic said:

OP: Define 'resonant' and I'll respond.

I'll have a go.

Guitar vibrates nicely to any of E, G, A, and D notes.  Since those are the keys people play in.

Three-ColourSunburst

Neil said:

Regarding sustain, it was the king in the early '70's.

Remember all of those aftermarket brass nuts, bridges etc that were all the rage because of the extra sustain? Some makers even stuck lumps of brass in the body.

Wonder where they all went? 

An obvious question. Did all that brass actually add to the sustain of the instrument? Also, in the light of what has already been said, if it did was that extra sustain apparent when playing quietly or only when playing loudly enough to set up a feedback loop?

MartinB

I think the concept of "resonance" as discussed in an intuitive way by musicians is not always the same thing that physicists or engineers would use the word to mean.  That can make these threads a bit pointless, as I'm not sure everyone is talking about the same thing.  

Gassage

Three-ColourSunburst said:

Neil said:

Regarding sustain, it was the king in the early '70's.

Remember all of those aftermarket brass nuts, bridges etc that were all the rage because of the extra sustain? Some makers even stuck lumps of brass in the body.

Wonder where they all went? 

An obvious question. Did all that brass actually add to the sustain of the instrument?

If I could find a brass that could make my instrument sustain, I'd not be with Alistair. Fact.

octatonic

guitarfishbay said:

octatonic said:

OP: Define 'resonant' and I'll respond.

I'll have a go.

Guitar vibrates nicely to any of E, G, A, and D notes.  Since those are the keys people play in.

Not the OP though.

Drew_TNBD

Resonance to me is where the fundamental frequency of a thing oscillates in unison with an input source.

Same principle as finding the fundamental on an EQ - dime the gain, have a very tight Q value, and sweep the range until the EQ 'rings' very loudly and harshly... then dial the gain back down and widen the Q a little bit, and either boost or scoop depending on if you want more of that frequency or less.

But I think guitars are probably a bit more complex than a simple subtractive passive EQ circuit.

Modulus_Amps

I played a aluminum body/neck guitar through one of my amps at last years guitar show, sustain for days at low volume and very clear, very bright though, but that can easily be sorted with a treble bleed cap. If I had the money I would have bought one as they played great. Cant remember the company but hoping they will be at the show again this year

57Deluxe

what the ancient Greeks didn't know about guitar manufacture ain't worth Jack...