K.Yairi G1F - PICS PAGE 3
Moderated By: mods
I had some random thoughts about small-bodied guitars at the music shop today:
Factory guitars are made in factories to standards. Unlike everything else, guitars made by luthiers are actually MORE consistent than their factory equivalents. A luthier can tune the top and braces to achieve a consistent tone from different pieces of wood. A factory just plugs ahead with the wood they have, so all the natural inconsistencies shine through. Try before you buy. I played 3 high end Taylors today: one was great, one was slightly less great, and the last was a clunker. Same basic body shape and woods, but individual variances make some work and others not as well.
Wood selection is more important on smaller guitars because the top has to vibrate much more in order to produce good volume.
It's easier to keep a small body guitar "floating" on your lap. The less you dampen the back, sides, and top with your body, the more volume you'll get. It's hard not to lean on a dreadnaught or jumbo.
All things being equal, a smaller guitar will be louder than a bigger one when fingerpicking. A bigger guitar will be louder when playing with a pick.
Tonewoods:
Sitka Spruce - standard modern wood. Good balance between stiffness and weight to provide both good response and volume. This is a "middle-of-the-road" sound, between compressed/responsive and loud/powerful.
Engleman Spruce - Lighter in color and weight than Sitka. Some volume and top-end is sacrificed to get a richer sound at lower dynamic levels. A good choice for fingerstyle, but tends to lose clarity when played hard.
Adirondack Spruce - standard in the 30s, but scarce since WWII. Stiffer than Sitka and is capable of much more volume, but feels less responsive and likes to be driven hard. Mostly used on bluegrass guitars.
Cedar - Lots of volume and high-end is sacrificed in order to get a rich, warm, pleasant sound when fingerpicking. But, even a strong fingerpicker can push this wood past its optimal level. Tends to lose clarity quickly when played louder. Often used on lower-end guitars to compensate for the thinness caused by poorer quality backs and sides.
Mahogany - midrangey and helps a lot with projection. Tends to make a focused, warm, pleasant sound.
Rosewood - allows more volume than mahogany and has a wider frequency response. Tends to sound fuller and richer, but doesn't project as well.
Maple - not rich or even loud. Pretty, but really only useful on acoustic-electrics to fight feedback. Expect a dead, slightly harsh, flat sound.
finally, remember that companies cannot be as discriminating with rarer woods (Engleman, Adirondack, and Rosewood especially). They may even be worse quality, and produce a worse sound, than the cheaper Sitka or mahogany. A good rule is to use your eyes. Woods with consistent color, grain, and reflectivity usually are better quality and sound better. Nothing is guaranteed, though. A good piece of wood can be made crummy if mishandled and a crummy piece of wood can be made great.
happy hunting!
Factory guitars are made in factories to standards. Unlike everything else, guitars made by luthiers are actually MORE consistent than their factory equivalents. A luthier can tune the top and braces to achieve a consistent tone from different pieces of wood. A factory just plugs ahead with the wood they have, so all the natural inconsistencies shine through. Try before you buy. I played 3 high end Taylors today: one was great, one was slightly less great, and the last was a clunker. Same basic body shape and woods, but individual variances make some work and others not as well.
Wood selection is more important on smaller guitars because the top has to vibrate much more in order to produce good volume.
It's easier to keep a small body guitar "floating" on your lap. The less you dampen the back, sides, and top with your body, the more volume you'll get. It's hard not to lean on a dreadnaught or jumbo.
All things being equal, a smaller guitar will be louder than a bigger one when fingerpicking. A bigger guitar will be louder when playing with a pick.
Tonewoods:
Sitka Spruce - standard modern wood. Good balance between stiffness and weight to provide both good response and volume. This is a "middle-of-the-road" sound, between compressed/responsive and loud/powerful.
Engleman Spruce - Lighter in color and weight than Sitka. Some volume and top-end is sacrificed to get a richer sound at lower dynamic levels. A good choice for fingerstyle, but tends to lose clarity when played hard.
Adirondack Spruce - standard in the 30s, but scarce since WWII. Stiffer than Sitka and is capable of much more volume, but feels less responsive and likes to be driven hard. Mostly used on bluegrass guitars.
Cedar - Lots of volume and high-end is sacrificed in order to get a rich, warm, pleasant sound when fingerpicking. But, even a strong fingerpicker can push this wood past its optimal level. Tends to lose clarity quickly when played louder. Often used on lower-end guitars to compensate for the thinness caused by poorer quality backs and sides.
Mahogany - midrangey and helps a lot with projection. Tends to make a focused, warm, pleasant sound.
Rosewood - allows more volume than mahogany and has a wider frequency response. Tends to sound fuller and richer, but doesn't project as well.
Maple - not rich or even loud. Pretty, but really only useful on acoustic-electrics to fight feedback. Expect a dead, slightly harsh, flat sound.
finally, remember that companies cannot be as discriminating with rarer woods (Engleman, Adirondack, and Rosewood especially). They may even be worse quality, and produce a worse sound, than the cheaper Sitka or mahogany. A good rule is to use your eyes. Woods with consistent color, grain, and reflectivity usually are better quality and sound better. Nothing is guaranteed, though. A good piece of wood can be made crummy if mishandled and a crummy piece of wood can be made great.
happy hunting!
-
taylornutt
- .
- Posts: 4908
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
I agree with you on everything except about Maple. Maple is a preimium tone wood. I have it on my Taylor 614ce. Very clear and warm tone. Idea for light strumming and great for fingerpicking. Ideal for performing with a band because the maple cuts through the mix with strong mids and trebly high-end. The downside of maple is the lack of low end thump that you get with other tone woods like rosewood. One of the most clear and direct acoustic tones out there.Will wrote:I had some random thoughts about small-bodied guitars at the music shop today:
Tonewoods:
Sitka Spruce - standard modern wood. Good balance between stiffness and weight to provide both good response and volume. This is a "middle-of-the-road" sound, between compressed/responsive and loud/powerful.
Engleman Spruce - Lighter in color and weight than Sitka. Some volume and top-end is sacrificed to get a richer sound at lower dynamic levels. A good choice for fingerstyle, but tends to lose clarity when played hard.
Adirondack Spruce - standard in the 30s, but scarce since WWII. Stiffer than Sitka and is capable of much more volume, but feels less responsive and likes to be driven hard. Mostly used on bluegrass guitars.
Cedar - Lots of volume and high-end is sacrificed in order to get a rich, warm, pleasant sound when fingerpicking. But, even a strong fingerpicker can push this wood past its optimal level. Tends to lose clarity quickly when played louder. Often used on lower-end guitars to compensate for the thinness caused by poorer quality backs and sides.
Mahogany - midrangey and helps a lot with projection. Tends to make a focused, warm, pleasant sound.
Rosewood - allows more volume than mahogany and has a wider frequency response. Tends to sound fuller and richer, but doesn't project as well.
Maple - not rich or even loud. Pretty, but really only useful on acoustic-electrics to fight feedback. Expect a dead, slightly harsh, flat sound.
finally, remember that companies cannot be as discriminating with rarer woods (Engleman, Adirondack, and Rosewood especially). They may even be worse quality, and produce a worse sound, than the cheaper Sitka or mahogany. A good rule is to use your eyes. Woods with consistent color, grain, and reflectivity usually are better quality and sound better. Nothing is guaranteed, though. A good piece of wood can be made crummy if mishandled and a crummy piece of wood can be made great.
happy hunting!
J Mascis Jazzmaster | AVRI Jaguar | Tuxedo-stang |Fender Toronado GT |
Squier FSR Sparkle Jaguar | Squier CV Mustang |1971 Fender Bronco| Baja Telecaster |
Squier FSR Sparkle Jaguar | Squier CV Mustang |1971 Fender Bronco| Baja Telecaster |
-
westtexasred
- Shortscale Cultural Minister
- Posts: 16977
- Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:10 pm
- Location: Minneapolis
-
taylornutt
- .
- Posts: 4908
- Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:04 pm
- Location: Dallas, TX
Great video. You see a lot of Jumbo Maple guitars to help add some low end and add more volume. My Taylor 614ce does have a volume limit, but a lot of that is the size of the body as well.
J Mascis Jazzmaster | AVRI Jaguar | Tuxedo-stang |Fender Toronado GT |
Squier FSR Sparkle Jaguar | Squier CV Mustang |1971 Fender Bronco| Baja Telecaster |
Squier FSR Sparkle Jaguar | Squier CV Mustang |1971 Fender Bronco| Baja Telecaster |
And maple is the standard for violins, cellos, double basses, etc.
I hesitated a bit before typing that one. What I can say is that I'VE never played a maple-backed guitar that sounded good. I'm sure they can exist, and I'm sure if anyone has made it happen it's Taylor.
Technically speaking, Maple focuses the tone more on the fundamental. So you sacrifice some richness, but gain more projection and clarity.
Part II: Body Shapes:
In general, the squarer and larger a guitar is, the more volume and bass it can produce. But, a bigger top weighs more and requires more energy to vibrate. So for fingerstyle a smaller top is usually better. In all-things-being-equal land:
Dreadnaughts are the loudest and bassiest. A well-made Adirondack and Rosewood dread can put out over 90db (as loud as a diesel truck). They are the standard for bluegrass because they can get close to the 110db (as loud as a chainsaw) of a well-made banjo.
Jumbos are bigger than dreads, but the extra bend at the waist makes the top functionally smaller. The sound is not as loud, but has better projection in the treble and upper midrange. It a large band situation, you would PROBABLY be able to hear a jumbo better than a dreadnaught. The top is the heaviest of the standard shapes and requires the most energy to move.
A Grand Auditorium is almost the same size as a dread, but an extra little bend at the waist cuts some of the bass.
Grand Concert is smaller and a little more pinched at the waist than a Auditorium. Less bass, and more compression results in less treble response.
Parlors can come in all shapes and scale lengths, but the same basic rules apply. More shapely shapes mean less bass, and visa-versa. With the smallest, lightest tops of the standard shapes, a parlor SHOULD feel the most responsive to dynamics, but at a certain point will stop getting louder if played harder.
A longer scale length affects the tone the same way it would on an electric, but also puts more tension on the top. A top under greater tension will have a higher natural resonance and be brighter. Think about it like a drum head.
I hesitated a bit before typing that one. What I can say is that I'VE never played a maple-backed guitar that sounded good. I'm sure they can exist, and I'm sure if anyone has made it happen it's Taylor.
Technically speaking, Maple focuses the tone more on the fundamental. So you sacrifice some richness, but gain more projection and clarity.
Part II: Body Shapes:
In general, the squarer and larger a guitar is, the more volume and bass it can produce. But, a bigger top weighs more and requires more energy to vibrate. So for fingerstyle a smaller top is usually better. In all-things-being-equal land:
Dreadnaughts are the loudest and bassiest. A well-made Adirondack and Rosewood dread can put out over 90db (as loud as a diesel truck). They are the standard for bluegrass because they can get close to the 110db (as loud as a chainsaw) of a well-made banjo.
Jumbos are bigger than dreads, but the extra bend at the waist makes the top functionally smaller. The sound is not as loud, but has better projection in the treble and upper midrange. It a large band situation, you would PROBABLY be able to hear a jumbo better than a dreadnaught. The top is the heaviest of the standard shapes and requires the most energy to move.
A Grand Auditorium is almost the same size as a dread, but an extra little bend at the waist cuts some of the bass.
Grand Concert is smaller and a little more pinched at the waist than a Auditorium. Less bass, and more compression results in less treble response.
Parlors can come in all shapes and scale lengths, but the same basic rules apply. More shapely shapes mean less bass, and visa-versa. With the smallest, lightest tops of the standard shapes, a parlor SHOULD feel the most responsive to dynamics, but at a certain point will stop getting louder if played harder.
A longer scale length affects the tone the same way it would on an electric, but also puts more tension on the top. A top under greater tension will have a higher natural resonance and be brighter. Think about it like a drum head.
Just watched that video - all I heard was pick scratches lol.
Anyway.
Part III: Bracing:
The standard brace sizes are 1/4" and 5/16". The smaller braces are more flexible; they allow the top to move more with less force, but that means the top reaches its maximum volume sooner. Smaller bracing is usually better for fingerstyle, and bigger for picking.
Pretty much all you'll find in everything but the highest-end vintage recreations in X-bracing. You can see the "X" through the soundhole. It's the stiffest of the standard bracings, which allows the top to be thinner and lighter. In practice, it gives a great balance of volume and response - the exact reason it's the standard.
"Forward-shifted" X-bracing was the original design used by Martin before 1938. It had one less brace than the current standard, and allowed more flexibility behind the bridge. It was louder and deeper sounding than the current X, but they discontinued it because the strings of the time (14 or 15 gauge in today's terms) warped the tops. It's now used on purpose-made bluegrass dreadnaughts with the caveat "for light or medium strings ONLY!"
Most X-bracing these days is scalloped. Scalloping increases the flexibility of the brace slightly, but mostly is done to lower weight. A guitar with scalloped braces will be louder, deeper, AND more responsive than unscalloped. A better tone in nearly every respect. Some players still choose unscalloped if they prefer a more focused, tight tone and are willing to give up a little volume, or they want a period-correct 1930s-50s guitar.
Ladder bracing was the standard before X-bracing, and dates back to before steal strings (though it was used by some companies through the 60s). Being that it was designed for gut strings, it isn't the best for steal. The sound is a little dark, midrangey, woody, and compressed. Players who choose it usually do so because they want a period-correct guitar for blues or roots music. The sound is less rich than X-bracing, but it does have an appealing "old-timey" quality.
Fan-bracing is used on classical guitars and is designed for the greatest flexibility on instruments that will not have much string tension.
Back braces have less of an effect, and can even be optional. Some Taylor guitars with laminate backs forgo bracing altogether, in favor of a slight arch for strength. Other larger guitars use big, thick braces to keep the wide wood pieces from splitting. I have a guitar from the depression where the back is braced with glue-soaked cloth! More bracing tightens the tone and increases projection, while less bracing deepens the tone.
Anyway.
Part III: Bracing:
The standard brace sizes are 1/4" and 5/16". The smaller braces are more flexible; they allow the top to move more with less force, but that means the top reaches its maximum volume sooner. Smaller bracing is usually better for fingerstyle, and bigger for picking.
Pretty much all you'll find in everything but the highest-end vintage recreations in X-bracing. You can see the "X" through the soundhole. It's the stiffest of the standard bracings, which allows the top to be thinner and lighter. In practice, it gives a great balance of volume and response - the exact reason it's the standard.
"Forward-shifted" X-bracing was the original design used by Martin before 1938. It had one less brace than the current standard, and allowed more flexibility behind the bridge. It was louder and deeper sounding than the current X, but they discontinued it because the strings of the time (14 or 15 gauge in today's terms) warped the tops. It's now used on purpose-made bluegrass dreadnaughts with the caveat "for light or medium strings ONLY!"
Most X-bracing these days is scalloped. Scalloping increases the flexibility of the brace slightly, but mostly is done to lower weight. A guitar with scalloped braces will be louder, deeper, AND more responsive than unscalloped. A better tone in nearly every respect. Some players still choose unscalloped if they prefer a more focused, tight tone and are willing to give up a little volume, or they want a period-correct 1930s-50s guitar.
Ladder bracing was the standard before X-bracing, and dates back to before steal strings (though it was used by some companies through the 60s). Being that it was designed for gut strings, it isn't the best for steal. The sound is a little dark, midrangey, woody, and compressed. Players who choose it usually do so because they want a period-correct guitar for blues or roots music. The sound is less rich than X-bracing, but it does have an appealing "old-timey" quality.
Fan-bracing is used on classical guitars and is designed for the greatest flexibility on instruments that will not have much string tension.
Back braces have less of an effect, and can even be optional. Some Taylor guitars with laminate backs forgo bracing altogether, in favor of a slight arch for strength. Other larger guitars use big, thick braces to keep the wide wood pieces from splitting. I have a guitar from the depression where the back is braced with glue-soaked cloth! More bracing tightens the tone and increases projection, while less bracing deepens the tone.
As for all this talk about woods making guitars sounding like this or that...any combination of the best tonewoods on paper can sound great in your head but put to practice those are only a ballpark reference...I've picked up cheap 70's import guitars made of god knows what that played like shit but sounded better than any new Martin or Gibson I've ever heard. I am not an acoustic guitar luthier and know nothing about what it takes to build a great guitar, but I am a player and know what sounds good. And Will, my Guild G37 BLD disagrees with your maple backed theory. Maybe it has something to do with the arched back. Or to do with the fact that I played every guitar I could get my hands on under $1000 and it was the one that sang best to me.
I will take the ICP stance on the issue. Guitars are miracles. Fuck guitar scientists. There's enough guitars out there to just play them til you find the one you like the sound and feel of best, no matter what woods it's made of. If the stars are aligned when a guitar is built or sometimes even broken in, you get something out of an instrument that you can't recreate on paper.
I will take the ICP stance on the issue. Guitars are miracles. Fuck guitar scientists. There's enough guitars out there to just play them til you find the one you like the sound and feel of best, no matter what woods it's made of. If the stars are aligned when a guitar is built or sometimes even broken in, you get something out of an instrument that you can't recreate on paper.
Went to a local guitar shop and saw a beauty. It's a lot more than i want to spend, £799 in the shop (seen it for £649 online).
K.Yairi G1F.
Handmade Japanese guitars. It has a solid spruce top, mahogany back and sides.
It looked sooo nice. The size/shape were perfect. The body wasn't as curvy as the usual parlours, which I guess makes it a bit louder and better for strumming. It is a parlour though. It's smaller than it looks in the photos.
This is the only video I can find:
[youtube][/youtube]
The sunburst was really nice. There is also a natural finish I've just seen online... even better. I'm seriously considering it. I've just found an online shop with a 2nd hand one.... might have to give them a call!!
K.Yairi G1F.
Handmade Japanese guitars. It has a solid spruce top, mahogany back and sides.
It looked sooo nice. The size/shape were perfect. The body wasn't as curvy as the usual parlours, which I guess makes it a bit louder and better for strumming. It is a parlour though. It's smaller than it looks in the photos.
This is the only video I can find:
[youtube][/youtube]
The sunburst was really nice. There is also a natural finish I've just seen online... even better. I'm seriously considering it. I've just found an online shop with a 2nd hand one.... might have to give them a call!!
Damn am I glad to hear that.Will wrote:Yairis are amazing!!!!
I had never heard of them before I saw it but it jumped out at me. I'm going to investigate the 2nd hand one I found, find out the condition etc. The shop has it down as "great condition" and it looks good in the photos, maybe a slight chip on the headstock. They're not good quality photos though. The price says "RRP: £599. CALL FOR PRICE" so it could be lower than £500 even which would be great. The best new price i have found is £650.
Any maker can turn out the occasional clunker, but Yairi has an excellent reputation. He runs a deliberately small shop and picks all his own wood. He's really a true craftsman.
I approve of this choice!
edit: this is obviously a sales pitch, with terrible music, but it gives you a sense of Yairi's work:
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
I approve of this choice!
edit: this is obviously a sales pitch, with terrible music, but it gives you a sense of Yairi's work:
[youtube][/youtube]
[youtube][/youtube]
From what I can gather, Alvarez is trying to get their name more prominently displayed on their products. I don't think there's any real difference - their just being a little more savvy about marketing the past few years.DanHeron wrote:What's the difference between the Alvarez Yairi and the K.Yairi guitars?