Is a heavier acoustic a better thing?

Zonular

Is it down to taste or does it have any benefits? 

BigPaulie

It's really down to the particular guitar.

However, in general, people go for lighter built acoustic guitars in the belief that they'll be more resonant. Heavier acoustics are "believed" to be overbuilt or have excessively heavy finish applied. On the flipside a heavier built guitar may be more robust.

All that said, if I were to pay a guitar that sounded and felt better than something lighter, the weight wouldn't put me off.

Tannin

Absolutely it has benefits. Build strength and longevity are obvious, but a heavier build also tends to produce a more controlled, compressed sound, and performs much better in an amplified stage situation.

Whether you like the sound, well that's a matter of taste and there are no right or wrong answers. It is what you like. Personally, I have always liked the more disciplined sound of a heavier build. On the other hand, two of my seven are very lightly built. They are very different, very responsive. Some things sound great on them .... and some things sound much better on a heavier guitar. 

Which is better? Les Paul or Strat? Ans: they are different. Both are good. Play the one you prefer. If you like them both, play both!

Having said all that, bear it in mind that there are two ways to build an acoustic back: you can have a live back (which is reasonably light and is designed to move and make a sound) or you can have a dead back (which is designed to simply reflect sound from the top and not move at all). Sides are always "dead", tops are always "live", the back can be either. So you could have a very heavy guitar (if you weigh the whole thing) which plays like a paper-light guitar because  it has a very light, responsive top. Or maybe vice-versa. 

guitarfishbay

I’ve found I prefer the response of lighter acoustics, but also individual guitars can vary so much that I’d always advise trying as many as possible if you can

guitarfishbay

Tannin said:

Having said all that, bear it in mind that there are two ways to build an acoustic back: you can have a live back (which is reasonably light and is designed to move and make a sound) or you can have a dead back (which is designed to simply reflect sound from the top and not move at all). Sides are always "dead", tops are always "live", the back can be either. So you could have a very heavy guitar (if you weigh the whole thing) which plays like a paper-light guitar because  it has a very light, responsive top. Or maybe vice-versa. 

I was not aware of this but it makes sense 

stickyfiddle

I have 2 acoustics. My HD28 is quite heavy, not necessarily that loud for the model, but sounds really sweet and projects well. 

My Atkin 47 is a smaller, mahogany-er affair, weights next to nothing and is really loud when playing, but I think doesn't fill a room so well. 

I don't think there is a single rule where heavier/lighter = better

Zonular

Cheers guys, I've a all laminate electro acoustic that sounds great and a little heavier. Just picked up a Freshman solid top that's much lighter and fills the room so much more but is a feather weight in comparison.

ICBM

It depends on the individual guitar to a large extent. As with electrics to a lesser degree, lighter acoustic guitars tend to be more 'resonant' and louder but can end up sounding quite midrangy. Heavier ones can be bassier and more powerful-sounding, although not quite as loud. It's a fine balance. My favourite acoustic is not particularly light, but does have good bottom-end and volume.

That said, by far the worst expensive 'high end' acoustic I can remember playing was also extremely heavy, much more so than I think I've ever noticed a proper acoustic guitar be before, and it sounded dead and frankly crap.

Honkycat

I had this experience too, with a Lowden African Blackwood guitar. Really heavy, really expensive, but terrible sound.

bertie

the two best (responsive and dynamic) acoustics Ive played,  my Brook and Bezzers Lowden,   light as feathers  

Lewy

I read an interview with the luthier Mario Proulx in which he said he’d prefer to build his guitars more heavily (NOT braced more heavily, but with heavier back and sides etc) but then people wouldn’t buy them. I think I remember him saying Bill Collings felt the same. 

earwighoney

Honkycat said:

I had this experience too, with a Lowden African Blackwood guitar. Really heavy, really expensive, but terrible sound.

I played a Richard Thompson signature Lowden, with Cedar and Ziricote back and sides, and it was really heavy and an absolute stinker!  I remember playing another Lowden in Wunjo at the same time, which was a cheaper Spruce/Indian RW which was a feather in comparison and was a delightfully resonant instrument.

Lewy said:

I read an interview with the luthier Mario Proulx in which he said he’d prefer to build his guitars more heavily (NOT braced more heavily, but with heavier back and sides etc) but then people wouldn’t buy them. I think I remember him saying Bill Collings felt the same. 

Interesting. I think the same theory applies to a few makers (the Somogyi disciples and others) who use double sides for their instruments to create a louder instrument.

I have a very nice flamenco guitar, which has Amazon Rosewood back and sides, and it's on the heavier side of things, but it's incredibly loud, if anything a bit too loud to manage at times.  

But, I still think it depends on the maker, there are great light instruments and greater heavier ones as well.

Lewy

ICBM said:

That said, by far the worst expensive 'high end' acoustic I can remember playing was also extremely heavy, much more so than I think I've ever noticed a proper acoustic guitar be before, and it sounded dead and frankly crap.

Did it sound crap out front or just "from the office"? I've got a Mossman which is a fairly sturdily built dreadnought and it sounds decidedly lackluster from the playing position but gorgeous if you're sat in front of it.

ICBM

Lewy said:

Did it sound crap out front or just "from the office"? I've got a Mossman which is a fairly sturdily built dreadnought and it sounds decidedly lackluster from the playing position but gorgeous if you're sat in front of it.

No, it sounded crap to everyone in the shop no matter who was playing it.

It was a PRS Martin Simpson Private Stock model. It sounded like a cheap Takamine and weighed about as much as a Les Paul.

(Slight exaggeration, but it felt like it!)

bertie

ICBM said:

 a cheap Takamine 

ah the ones you need to strum with a lump hammer to get the soundboard moving

jaymenon

My two best acoustic guitars also happen to be the lightest weighing ones I have.
A Maestro Raffles, Martin D28 and a Lowden O35.

The same lightweight and responsiveness that make them so beautiful unplugged - would probably make them absolute dogs if played amplified...

bluecat

Years ago I had an Ecko Ranger VI with bolt on neck,a very  heavyweight guitar,nice sound and tone,very well made with a heavy finish.It all depends on how strong you are!!
Every thing about the guitar was heavy duty.

Mellish

A friend had a Fylde years ago. That was pretty heavy IIRC and built like a tank. Very good guitar, though, great tone  

TimmyO

There's definitely at least one British luthier whose "thing" is that his acoustic guitars are really heavy by design - it's bugging me that I can't remember his name - but I played one and it was REALLY noticeable and prompted the conversation with wherever I was (I can't remember if it was at a show or a shop - not much help am I really...) but it was his particular, deliberate approach to guitar building 

earwighoney

TimmyO said:

There's definitely at least one British luthier whose "thing" is that his acoustic guitars are really heavy by design - it's bugging me that I can't remember his name - but I played one and it was REALLY noticeable and prompted the conversation with wherever I was (I can't remember if it was at a show or a shop - not much help am I really...) but it was his particular, deliberate approach to guitar building 

Was it Sobell or NK Forster?

guitarjack66

I've only got a cheap acoustic and although it doesn't feel very heavy to me,when I lifted an expensive Taylor guitar it was significantly lighter and it appeared that was intentional. I am guessing it has something to do with the 'quality' of the wood used.