The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #31  
Old 10-26-2016, 02:01 PM
dneal dneal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: The little house in the woods.
Posts: 3,041
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
dneal wrote:
"I don't know that anyone has measured frequency response, volume, etc... over an extended period of time while tracking amount of playing time."

I have, at least to some extent, and seen measreable changes.

As always, there are lots of problems with making long term measurements. It can be difficult to ensure that they're made in exactly the same way, for example, particularly if you're thinking about a term that might be months or even years. This can be circumvented to some degree by using a mechanical method to 'play' the guitar that can put in more power, and work day and night at it, but that's not like 'real' playing, so people often reject the idea.

A really good way to do it would be to make two identical guitars which can be kept together while you play one and not the other. It would be fairly easy to test them out 'before' and 'after' in front of audiences to see if there has been a change. This assumes these two 'identical' instruments actually sound the same to begin with, and that has proved to be a tough one.

Failing that, we will probably have to rely on before and after measurements, and possibly well-controlled recordings, of a fairly large number of guitars to resolve the issue. You can never 'prove' such things' of course; there's always some room for doubt, but there are well understood statistical methods that can set limits on the likelihood that something is real.

At any rate, no matter how you do it such testing will require a lot of time and effort. The most effective way to get this done is to find some hapless grad student who can be induced to take the project on as a thesis. That's a long shot, but somewhat more likely that convincing Homeland Security that understanding this will help in the fight against domestic terrorism.
Thanks Alan. I find your posts and insights about your experimentation extremely valuable, to include testing guitars for changes. I was just emphasizing the point about time and problems you acknowledged in this latest post. As I noted, I do believe guitars change over time (although I don't know if it's because of playing or age, or both). I also acknowledge there's no real proof, mainly because it's so hard to do.

But hey, if we can spend a couple of million to see if stressed out monkeys that are given cocaine become cocaine addicts, surely there's some grant funding available to test guitars...
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-26-2016, 11:24 PM
Mycroft Mycroft is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
dneal wrote:
"I don't know that anyone has measured frequency response, volume, etc... over an extended period of time while tracking amount of playing time."

I have, at least to some extent, and seen measreable changes.

As always, there are lots of problems with making long term measurements. It can be difficult to ensure that they're made in exactly the same way, for example, particularly if you're thinking about a term that might be months or even years. This can be circumvented to some degree by using a mechanical method to 'play' the guitar that can put in more power, and work day and night at it, but that's not like 'real' playing, so people often reject the idea.

A really good way to do it would be to make two identical guitars which can be kept together while you play one and not the other. It would be fairly easy to test them out 'before' and 'after' in front of audiences to see if there has been a change. This assumes these two 'identical' instruments actually sound the same to begin with, and that has proved to be a tough one.

Failing that, we will probably have to rely on before and after measurements, and possibly well-controlled recordings, of a fairly large number of guitars to resolve the issue. You can never 'prove' such things' of course; there's always some room for doubt, but there are well understood statistical methods that can set limits on the likelihood that something is real.

At any rate, no matter how you do it such testing will require a lot of time and effort. The most effective way to get this done is to find some hapless grad student who can be induced to take the project on as a thesis. That's a long shot, but somewhat more likely that convincing Homeland Security that understanding this will help in the fight against domestic terrorism.
Alan, has anyone followed up on "The Sonic Sitka" project?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-27-2016, 12:02 AM
Gallopinghost Gallopinghost is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: A temperate swamp west of the Cascades...
Posts: 256
Default

This might be a good indicator:

__________________
-Nate

Julius Borges OM-18 (Adirondack/Sinker Mahogany)
Bob Altman OM-2D (Adirondack/Brazilian Rosewood)
John Greven 00-12 (Lutz/Brazilian Rosewood)
Fraulini Erma (Sitka/White Oak)
Harmony H162 (Sitka/Mahogany)
Franklin Jumbo (Engleman/EIR)
Ken Hooper 12 Fret D28 (Carpathian/Honduran Rosewood)
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=