Martin SC Asymmetric Body: Why?

[lar]

What is the purpose of the asymmetrical body?

http://martinrep.com/shapes.html. (select OOO and SC on the right side).

Improved comfort? Since the lower bout is actually wider than an OOO, how can it be more comfortable? Did they shape the upper body so that the bout is actually narrower where your arm sits on it (but wider elsewhere)? Is that what they did?

For those who have played/own an SC, do you think Martin succeeded in making it more comfortable?

[Inyo]

Originally Posted by lar

What is the purpose of the asymmetrical body?

http://martinrep.com/shapes.html. (select OOO and SC on the right side).

Improved comfort? Since the lower bout is actually wider than an OOO, how can it be more comfortable? Did they shape the upper body so that the bout is actually narrower where your arm sits on it (but wider elsewhere)? Is that what they did?

For those who have played/own an SC, do you think Martin succeeded in making it more comfortable?

Martin answers your question about the asymmetrical SC guitars. You might not like the explanation, disagreeing in the main that what Martin claims is in actual fact true, but here it is:

From the Martin page over at https://www.martinguitar.com/body-sc.html :

Plug in. Or don't.

The SC sounds incredible anywhere, plugged in or not. An asymmetrical body shape balances the output, giving you a boost of gain before feedback. You’ll sound clear and crisp plugged in onstage, even while cranked up to 11. And unplugged? Remember, the SC has all the heart and soul of a Martin, so expect to hear legendary, timeless tone wherever you play.

[Rudy4]

Originally Posted by lar

What is the purpose of the asymmetrical body?

http://martinrep.com/shapes.html. (select OOO and SC on the right side).

Improved comfort? Since the lower bout is actually wider than an OOO, how can it be more comfortable? Did they shape the upper body so that the bout is actually narrower where your arm sits on it (but wider elsewhere)? Is that what they did?

For those who have played/own an SC, do you think Martin succeeded in making it more comfortable?

Danny Ferrington worked to develop his asymmetrical bodied guitars in the early 90's, so the concept isn't really new and certainly pre-dates Martin's interest by several decades, no matter how they try to convince the purchasing public what they have "invented".

I own a very nice coffee table book "Ferrington Guitars" that you can find used easily. Danny details the reasons he went with assemetric body shapes for his acoustic and electric guitars.

[jricc]

Originally Posted by lar

What is the purpose of the asymmetrical body?

http://martinrep.com/shapes.html. (select OOO and SC on the right side).

Improved comfort? Since the lower bout is actually wider than an OOO, how can it be more comfortable? Did they shape the upper body so that the bout is actually narrower where your arm sits on it (but wider elsewhere)? Is that what they did?

For those who have played/own an SC, do you think Martin succeeded in making it more comfortable?

I own and gig an SC10e Sapele. It's the most comfortable acoustic guitar I've ever played, standing or sitting.
The body is only 4' deep, so that accounts for some of the comfort. The asymmetrical shaped does sit a little lower on your right leg, so your shoulder doesn't sit up high. The neck is real comfortable too.
So yes I believe Martin has succeeded in making a more comfortable playing guitar.

[Wade Hampton]

While I don’t own any Martin SC-style guitars, I’ve played several in music stores and found them very comfortable to play. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the asymmetrical body shape helps with electronic sound reinforcement.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Slimt]

Guitars have to appeal to all . I dont blame Martin for making changes to advance in there marketing. Those dont look awful. Just different.

[colins]

It's great that Martin have picked up on what builders like Danny Ferrington and Mike Baranik have been doing for decades. Now, if they could just work on their cutaways...

[Don Lampson]

Originally Posted by Slimt

Guitars have to appeal to all . I dont blame Martin for making changes to advance in there marketing. Those dont look awful. Just different.

As Talulah Bankhead once said, "Without fashion, & style, life, is like one long dental appointment..."

I enjoy seeing imaginative innovations in guitar building, although I doubt much success will follow this "innovation"... I expect this sales campaign will play out, kind of like, when Martin presented their "Oval Hole" line of guitars?

Don

[Coler]

I find the SC shape extremely comfortable. Then again I never found an 000/OM uncomfortable to play. However the SC shape, and 13 fret design sort of invites you to get up and around the guitar more. Just my opinion.

[Jimbo00]

Not that it matters much, but I agree & disagree with the Martin explanation.

Explanation: Balance of output perhaps, boost of gain not so much. It's an offset acoustic shape. And being an offset at the rear end of it, it's still a single cut at the neck join. Unplugged there is no gain to boost. Balance of output I'm even on the fence over. What if I chord strings & never use the Low E ? Where is that balancing happening ? If they want to tell me they're shaping the sound like Ovation Lyrichord bowls do to enhance sound, I'd be good with that, but even balancing output is a debatable. Plugged in, isn't one using an EQ for that ? and it's also still a center hole top.

Again, going back to Ovation for innovation, they use the leaf hole top to avoid feedback, other guitars do similar porting. With the Ovation Leaf holes, those are at the front end and to either side of the neck. According to Ovation, the area of the leaf holes is equal to what their center hole would be. The pro for that is less tendency for feedback at a higher volume threshold. The con, the strings aren't vibrating over the sound hole to introduce sound into the bowl, it's relying more on the wood (or carbon fiber on some models) top & bridge contact for sound wave transfer.

I get that the offset might shape the sound differently, but the strings are going to dump sound into the bowl and the sound waves are going to use the entire bowl relative to location and what area is open for that particular string. The sound waves are going to enter the bowl thru the sound hole & the frequency of the sound is almost indiscernible instantaneous for the speed of sound for such a small distance and start bouncing all over the wall of he bowl. there's virtually no control in that, it pretty much will do what it does in spite of intended design for control.

At any rate, they have their explanation, I'm just not buying into it. Fender Acoustaconics are both Telecaster single cut & Jazzmaster offset bodies. It's a hybrid and it has 2 pickups, the piezo under saddle as well as a shawbucker. Add that anything voicing is all plugged in, unplugged it does what it does and there is no control other than wood density, shape, soundhole size & location.

https://www.fender.com/en-US/acousta...972233183.html

[Silly Moustache]

I believe that C.F.Martin now has more competition since the opened the doors in 1833.

Formerly a very conservative company which created designs copied world wide.

In the 1970s many alternative small factory builders started building Martin designs ....but better.

Many far-eastern makers arose copying their designs, made increasingly good instruments but for considerably less.

Companies like Ovation and Taylor made/make acoustic guitars primarily to appeal to electric guitarists, and I guess that this is aimed at that market.

Martin are being attacked on price, quality and they might appeal to a younger audience.

The radical design changes that Martin introduce from time to time rarely last long, but seemingly it is considered a necessity to keep renaming and/or restyling the basic products.

I'm a Luddite and no longer consider any Martin instrument (or Gibson) designs later than about 1933 so obviously not aimed at old geezers like me, but maybe the younger crowd might like them.

[abn556]

I don’t like that body shape at all. Wouldn’t be able to get used to the look.

[Steve DeRosa]

It's what happens when, after a hard day of CEO'ing, you're sitting back in an oversize leather highback chair, nursing a glass of $750/bottle single malt in front of a roaring fire on a chilly Eastern Pennsylvania night - and, as the uber-hootch begins to kick in, you think to yourself:

"Gee, I wish I was Bob Taylor..."

[PDogg]

When your soloing chops not only melt your face, but also melt your lower bout...

[davenumber2]

I was in GC a couple months ago and picked up one of these SC models to play (not sure which one). All I really remember about it was how heavy it was. It felt like picking up a tele. Had to be at least 6 lbs. I'm sure the neck hardware adds some weight but wasn't expecting that much. Maybe it was an anomaly.