bad acoustic guitar

BillDL

Tannin said:

Not that good a point, actually. It is perfectly possible to have a best-of-breed pickup system and a tight-fitting saddle. Maton do that as routine.

I don't want to get into an argument or dispute because I like you and I concur with just about everything that you say, but the guitar referred to in this thread is an Epiphone Masterbilt DR 500MCE, not a Maton.  I stand to be corrected, but doesn't Maton use its own pickup "system" comprising a square U shaped metal channel that fits tightly into the saddle slot and contains the pickup element and the removable saddle on top of that (something like a Takamine) ?  I'm not sure if Maton have always done it this way.  Perhaps this is a fairly new pickup system and they maybe used to fit more standard "strips" under the saddles, but even so if tight saddle slots and under-saddle transducer strips worked for Maton then that's fine.  I suppose different luthiers have different ideas about this aspect also, but every article I have read concerning installation of under-saddle piezo transducer strips or cables suggests that the saddle should be able to slide up and down inside the slot for best results - not rattly loose, but not press-in tight either.  That of course refers to optimising electro-acoustic performance, NOT unamplified pure acoustic.

Having a pliable sided round coaxial transducer under the saddle rather than an inflexible "rod" type (see below) is probably not the best material for vibration transfer to the soundboard when played unamplified, but conversely a tight fitting saddle is more likely to retain the vibrations.  I've gone off-topic a bit with this anyway, because the original question centres on uninspiring tone when played UNamplified, but I just wanted to conclude with my own observations from experience.

Just for completeness, the Epiphone Masterbilt DR 500MCE has a Fishman Sonicore under-saddle piezo transducer and a Fishman PreSys pre-amp.  The Fishman Sonicore piezo transducer is a 2mm diameter flexible "soft" coaxial round element with external braid where the signal wires are connected to it in a straight line.  The coaxial nature of the element means that is squashes down by about 0.2mm under string tension, hence their directions to sand off 1.8mm - not 2mm - from the bottom of the saddle.  In contrast, their stiff, hard, non-squashable AG Series piezo-ceramic element (where the wires are connected at 90 degrees) is an oval "rod" that is flatter and thinner in height at only 1.22mm and doesn't compress.  Fishman recommend that the saddle slot should be no deeper than 50% of the total saddle height and there should be an absolute minimum of 20 degrees string breakover angle, except on some Martin guitar models where this is less crucial.  For both types of under-saddle transducer Fishman recommend that the saddle should slide easily into the slot, but should not fall out when the guitar is turned upside down i.e. a sliding fit that can easily be removed with light finger pressure rather than a "snug" push-in fit that needs to be gripped tightly and pulled out of the slot.  Bone saddles can have soft internal spots, so they recommend more consistent synthetic saddles.

Mellish

^^^ totally agree with the not wanting to get into arguments.

People watching, wondering whether to sign up, can be easily put off by members arguing. 

The loser is the forum. 

Just my opinion. 

 

Tannin

That's great, detailed information, @BillDL. ;

I don't pretend to know anything much about pickups; about half of my guitars have them, the other half don't, and I'd have to stop and think to remember which is which, let alone how they were installed - but I'm quite certain that the pickup-equipped ones are every bit as good as the pure-acoustic ones. The same applies to all the other guitars I've played in anger.  And this brings me, in the light of your comments, and those of @ICBM earlier,  to rethink. 

ICBM started by saying (to over-simplify for the sake of brevity) that all built-in pickups are bad, to which I responded (essentially) no, they clearly don't do any harm, nor do they cost anything. In the light of your detailed post, however, it seems that factory pickups vary a lot in their design, and in turn on their potential acoustic effects. 

Oh, as a matter of off-topic detail, I believe that the Maton pickup system has been installed in much the same way for many years. It was originally developed by Brad Clark in collaboration with Tommy Emmanuel (back before Clark left to found Cole Clark guitars about 20 years ago) and has been updated a half-dozen times in the years since then. Like most good makers, Maton offers the facility to update old guitars to the latest pickup if desired. Last time Cole Clark released a new pickup, they offered it to existing owners free of charge. I haven't bothered updating mine though - I never plug in so what would be the point? 

ICBM

Tannin said:

ICBM started by saying (to over-simplify for the sake of brevity) that all built-in pickups are bad

No I didn't! In fact, all three of my acoustics have pickups. (Just pickups though, no preamps.)

What I said was that electro-acoustics are worse value for the same money than a pure acoustic, because you're buying something that you don't actually need, if you're not going to use it. In my opinion this true regardless of how cheaply the manufacturer can fit the system.

Tannin said:

Like most good makers, Maton offers the facility to update old guitars to the latest pickup if desired.

Actually this is extremely unusual. I didn't know about Maton, but the only other major manufacturer I can think of who does this is Takamine. Almost all other pickup systems are not forwards-compatible, and will require substantial work to replace or upgrade an obsolete system. This is one of the main problems with them.

guitarjack66

Tannin said:

That's great, detailed information, @BillDL. ;

I don't pretend to know anything much about pickups; about half of my guitars have them, the other half don't, and I'd have to stop and think to remember which is which, let alone how they were installed - but I'm quite certain that the pickup-equipped ones are every bit as good as the pure-acoustic ones. The same applies to all the other guitars I've played in anger.  And this brings me, in the light of your comments, and those of @ICBM earlier,  to rethink. 

ICBM started by saying (to over-simplify for the sake of brevity) that all built-in pickups are bad, to which I responded (essentially) no, they clearly don't do any harm, nor do they cost anything. In the light of your detailed post, however, it seems that factory pickups vary a lot in their design, and in turn on their potential acoustic effects. 

Oh, as a matter of off-topic detail, I believe that the Maton pickup system has been installed in much the same way for many years. It was originally developed by Brad Clark in collaboration with Tommy Emmanuel (back before Clark left to found Cole Clark guitars about 20 years ago) and has been updated a half-dozen times in the years since then. Like most good makers, Maton offers the facility to update old guitars to the latest pickup if desired. Last time Cole Clark released a new pickup, they offered it to existing owners free of charge. I haven't bothered updating mine though - I never plug in so what would be the point? 

I had no idea that Cole Clark was begun from a Maton employee/luthier/manager leaving to start up their own range of guitars. Very informative. In fact I had no idea Maton were older than Cole Clark such is my limited knowledge of Australian made guitars.

BillDL

Mellish said:

Tonerite, actually _). It clips onto the strings and buzzes. 

I bought my girlfriend an 8" Love Honey Tonerite.

Mellish

@BillDL ; yes, but this...this is different. It clips onto the strings and emits a tone. 

You can do the same kind of thing by letting a guitar listen to music. 

You guys are just trying to get me at it  

BillDL

Oh right.  Gotcha.  The one I bought just goes under the G-String.

Mellish

Just back from walking Bowler, the dangerous beast.

Not a problem @BillDL, I'll take humour any day. It's arguing that I dislike cos no-one benefits, least of all those involved  

Dave_Mc

Mellish said:

^^^ totally agree with the not wanting to get into arguments.

People watching, wondering whether to sign up, can be easily put off by members arguing. 

The loser is the forum. 

Just my opinion. 

 

They can, but never seeing any arguments can also put people off. It's a bit like those totalitarian countries who act like they're amazing because they never have any protests- *not* having protests is a danger sign more than having them is! Especially (going back to forums now) if the "getting along" is artificial, and only enforced by the mods etc..

I can only talk for myself (and being someone who's been on forums for years, I may be completely different from newcomers!), but seeing a forum where arguments aren't allowed puts me off! In fact, that's one of the reasons I stopped going to TGP- it was made very clear to me, by the mods, that they basically didn't care who was right or wrong, just that there were no arguments. That even extended to people propagating misinformation- you'd get into more trouble for arguing with them than for talking nonsense! I think they may have rowed back on that more recently, but the damage was done and I kind of took the hump and left, lol.

Mellish

@Dave_Mc ; so OK, tell me what arguing achieves?

Members involved get wound up and for what? Where's the positives that come from it? There aren't any that I can see  

Mellish

I guess what I'm trying to say above is, before you get drawn into an argument on here, take a step back. By arguing, you'll not only ruin it for others but, more importantly, for yourself  

bertie

Just because someone who is "respected" says something, doesn't make it right/correct  and if it isnt then they should be challenged.  That's all good. If done with empathy   

I dont believe in "slanging matches"  but how is arguing any different to having a healthy difference of opinion ?   Its just a different word for the same thing ?   

Mellish

I'm not suggesting my opinion is more right than anyone else's. I merely threw it in FWIW  

Dave_Mc

bertie said:

Just because someone who is "respected" says something, doesn't make it right/correct  and if it isnt then they should be challenged.  That's all good. If done with empathy   

I dont believe in "slanging matches"  but how is arguing any different to having a healthy difference of opinion ?   Its just a different word for the same thing ?   

Agreed @bertie , that's exactly what I mean. If by "arguing", you mean having a fight for the sake of it, then I agree with you @Mellish . But if you just mean having a difference of opinion... if you don't allow that, is there any point in the forum in the first place? 

Also- if there are differing viewpoints, I'd rather read them and make my own mind up (even if things get a little tetchy) rather than have people self-censor to avoid an argument.

EDIT: Just to be absolutely clear- what I said here (and in the post above) is completely unrelated to anything @ICBM or @Tannin or @BillDL ;said in this thread. I like all of them and think they're all a credit to the forum- and I don't know enough about acoustics to really have an opinion about in-built electronics!

Tannin

Dave_Mc said:

I like all of them and think they're all a credit to the forum

Yes indeed. These pages are populated by a remarkable collection of interesting, informed, kindly and funny people. (I won't mention names because .. well, where would I stop? but start with @BillDL and others mentioned above and go on from there. I can't think of a single regular here on the acoustic pages that I wouldn't be delighted to sit down with for a yarn over a glass of something. 

Sorry @dazzer22 you can have your thread back now. Let us know where you are up to with your thinking. 

Mellish

@Dave_Mc ; of course there's nothing wrong with healthy debate.

It's when it gets beyond that and gets bitter and nasty that it benefits no-one.

EDIT: apologies to OP. I never intended to hijack your thread. It was about the forum in general, not any specific category. Sorry all  

guitarjack66

I think you need debate in anything. My other forum of frequency is a football forum and that is lively to say the least. I find it humourous that arguments could get heated over a theme so apparently benign as guitars though. Of course the bickering can be influenced by the introduction of politics or religion into topics completely unrelated.

bertie

guitarjack66 said:

I think you need debate in anything. My other forum of frequency is a football forum and that is lively to say the least. I find it humourous that arguments could get heated over a theme so apparently benign as guitars though. Of course the bickering can be influenced by the introduction of politics or religion into topics completely unrelated.

its easy to get "over heated" about anything you're passionate about  -  that's the "passion"

guitarjack66

bertie said:

guitarjack66 said:

I think you need debate in anything. My other forum of frequency is a football forum and that is lively to say the least. I find it humourous that arguments could get heated over a theme so apparently benign as guitars though. Of course the bickering can be influenced by the introduction of politics or religion into topics completely unrelated.

its easy to get "over heated" about anything you're passionate about  -  that's the "passion"

I've lost most of my passion for anything nowadays,it's just more of an 'enjoyment' and 'pastime.' I dont have any history with guitars or music so I just float along picking up bits and pieces here and there.