Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodallboy
I've never played a guitar "with too much going on" and "too many harmonic overtones".
Additionally, I've never heard those terms used by other than a few people connected with this forum.
I suspect it's some kind of code language for, I like what I'm playing/able to afford/just want to stay loyal to my_____.
Other than those reasons it's the nuttiest reason for not liking a guitar I've ever heard.
|
Maybe you need to get out more.
I'm a huge fan of Goodalls but I know exactly what people mean when they say those things. Some guitars have lots of overtones and long sustain. Consequently, the fundamental note has to compete with those overtones and successive notes have to rise above the sustaining sound of previous notes. this can all lead to a sort of muddiness or indistinctness. If you're playing lots of notes at a brisk clip, the individual noes can get lost in a sort of "sound soup."
Actually, one of the things I really like about Goodall guitars is that they seem to avoid those problems despite having lots of rich overtones. I think the overtones are loud enough to give warmth and color to the tone but quiet enough not to compete with the fundamental. Also, the sustain isn't super long, so successive notes don't run together and get lost.
But I can imagine someone wanting an even cleaner fundamental tone for certain types of playing and some Goodall guitars may not suit their taste.
If this all sounds like overly precious forum-speak to you, I should explain that I had those perceptions before I was an active forum member. I went and played some guitars, looking to upgrade from a Seagull. Someone handed me a Goodall and I heard something that was completely different from what I was hearing in other guitars I'd tried up until that point. I think any good set of ears would hear it if pointed out. I really liked what I heard.
Some years later, I heard a particular Santa Cruz guitar that had some of the warmth and complexity of a Goodall but had really long sustain. The notes all ran together and that particular guitar drove me crazy, although other players in other styles really liked it. So, for me, at any given moment, the Santa Cruz had too many different prominent sounds (the current fundamental, the decaying remnant of the previous fundamental, and all their associated overtones). For someone else, that mix was ideal. I find the Goodall mix very pleasant. For someone else, it's too much going on, just as the Santa Cruz was for me.
Those perceptions weren't cultivated in forum discussions. They were pretty obvious tonal differences that struck me immediately when I heard those particular guitars. It wasn't until considerably later that I read discussions indicating that others had had similar reactions to similar guitars. When they described their reactions, they were pretty much what I'd experienced and made perfect sense to me. Had I not experienced those various guitars that way, I might have not understood what they meant.
So maybe your never having encountered any mention of guitars having "too much going on" is more a reflection of limitations in your experience than others' blind devotion to a certain brand or just some "nuttiest reason for not liking a guitar."