Action Height vs Tone

gcalico · #1 04-21-2008, 02:36 PM

I have a guitar that I would like to lower the action on but I have been told that the tone may suffer. The string height at 12th fret under the low E is currently around .125" and I would like to bring it down to .094".

Assuming no buzzing problems, will there likely be a noticeable change in tone at the lower action height? I'm basically a strummer but I do some fingetstyle as well. I really like the tone now and I don't want to change it, unless it gets better of course.

ljguitar · #2 04-21-2008, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gcalico

I have a guitar that I would like to lower the action on but I have been told that the tone may suffer. The string height at 12th fret under the low E is currently around .125" and I would like to bring it down to .094".

Assuming no buzzing problems, will there likely be a noticeable change in tone at the lower action height? I'm basically a strummer but I do some fingetstyle as well. I really like the tone now and I don't want to change it, unless it gets better of course.

Hi gcalico...
First off, welcome to the group. We are glad you joined us.

My experience tells me it depends on who made the guitar, your style and the how you play it. I don't think there is a blanket statement that fits all situations of lowering action and the effect on tone.

Rather than lower the current saddle, why not buy a second saddle blank, cut it to .094 and then compare the two? This would not only give you comparisons, but an option for seasonal changes (if you live in a location where you have seasons where humidity varies).

banpreso · #3 04-21-2008, 02:52 PM

i don't think you'll have to worry about loss of tone. you probably won't be able to play as hard without buzz, but you don't have to worry about the tone, if you play with the same style, and without buzz.

i mean just look at ryan guitars, they are some of the best sounding guitars out there, and the action is just spot on. same thing with taylors.

what is your saddle material? you might wanna go bone if it's plastic or tusq.

there's a thread on this topic not long ago.... let's see who finds it

SteveS · #4 04-21-2008, 02:55 PM

To lower the strings at the 12th fret .032", you need to lower the saddle .062". If you take a standard saddle/bridge combination that is .500" above the soundboard, you are lowering that by about 12%. You are decreasing the energy that the top will see by about that much -12%.
I think you'll notice it.
What you have is the all important consideration of the trade off between tone vs. playability.
There's only one way to find out if it is worth it to you.
The good news is, if you don't like it, you can shim it back up at very little cost.

gcalico · #5 04-21-2008, 03:02 PM

To clarify, the guitar in question is a coco/sitka Webber roundbody and I do like the projection that I get with it. Turning down the power, if that's what I would be doing, isn't too appealing. On the other hand, I'm pretty used to my other guitar which has the lower action I find more comfortable.

ljguitar · #6 04-21-2008, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gcalico

To clarify, the guitar in question is a coco/sitka Webber roundbody and I do like the projection that I get with it. Turning down the power, if that's what I would be doing, isn't too appealing. On the other hand, I'm pretty used to my other guitar which has the lower action I find more comfortable.

Hi GC...
Many guitars have power to spare.

I'd not preclude that you can determine percentages in volume that directly coorelate to percentages of the height of the action.

dthumb · #7 04-21-2008, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljguitar

Hi GC...
Many guitars have power to spare.

I'd not preclude that you can determine percentages in volume that directly coorelate to percentages of the height of the action.

i'd have to agree. the distance the string requires to vibrate fully without contacting the frets is static. volume has little to do with action aside from the fact that action set too low may cause rattling or buzzing which will dampen the projection. a good setup will maximize and account for this.

Jeff M · #8 04-21-2008, 03:17 PM

Lengthy and at times heated discussion about this very topic some time back;
http://69.41.173.82/forums/showthrea...ghlight=action

Several folks who actually build guitars chimed in, so there is some input from some knowledgable people.

From Frets.com, a great site for guitar related information, about how to lower the actio at the saddle;
http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Musi...raction01.html

Also, be sure to check the action at the nut.
Many guitars could use a bit of tweaking at that end...and it often goes overlooked;
http://www.frets.com/FRETSPages/Musi...nutaction.html

DM3MD · #9 04-21-2008, 03:38 PM

I think what Larry J said is spot on. Try a new saddle set up at the action you like and make your own comparison. I don't think you can accurately assign a percentage of how much volume you'll lose by lowering your saddle. My D42 didn't change at all from the factory setup with very high action, to the post-setup saddle height, which is considerably lower.

zacz · #10 04-21-2008, 04:21 PM

I've noticed tonal changes when doing subtle neck adjustments. It seems as if I get more bass presence when the action is a little higher. I would assume the same concept applies for saddle adjustments.

random works · #11 04-21-2008, 04:48 PM

I lowered the action on a dread so it plays with mediums more easily that it did with lights. I get more sound with the mediums and still get fair playability.

String choice is a big factor sometimes.

RW

rcolosi · #12 04-21-2008, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gcalico

I have a guitar that I would like to lower the action on but I have been told that the tone may suffer. The string height at 12th fret under the low E is currently around .125" and I would like to bring it down to .094".

Assuming no buzzing problems, will there likely be a noticeable change in tone at the lower action height? I'm basically a strummer but I do some fingetstyle as well. I really like the tone now and I don't want to change it, unless it gets better of course.

Hi GC,
This is a good question ....and the first part of my comment is to say in all the years I've been working on these instruments, I can't remember a guitar in which the action was lowered and the instrument set up correctly, where the owner suddenly disliked the guitar because of the lack of volume.

If it does make a difference, it will likely be minimal. I've had the action on my Collings everywhere from slide-ready to Stratocaster and the darn thing sound the same wherever it is. There is no formula or percentage you can do in advance to determine what's going to happen or what percentage of volume you'll lose. In a previous post, Larry J said, "I don't think there is a blanket statement that fits all situations of lowering action and the effect on tone." ..couldn't agree more.

The bottom line is if the action is uncomfortable, have the guitar professionally set up to your liking, and if it is done correctly, I'd make a good bet you'll be very happy with it.

re17 · #13 04-22-2008, 01:11 AM

I know some people say the truss rod should not be regarded as a way of adjusting the action, but if the setup on your guitar is virtually spot-on, then you can tweak the string height by giving the truss rod a small (1/8 to 1/4) turn in the appropriate direction. It's a simple experiment that will allow you to discern immediately if you like the difference in playability, and possibly, tone.

I gave the neck on one guitar a slightly greater forward bow last night with a 1/8th turn on the truss rod to try get rid of some buzzing, and was surprised that the guitar immediately sounded just slightly louder. It wasn't conducted to scientific standards of course and perhaps it could be accounted for by my being subconsciously less inhibited in playing when I knew buzzing was less likely afterwards.

Richard

kenny5060 · #14 04-22-2008, 01:22 AM

Go ahead and lower it. You don't want a guitar you don't want to play.

Ignore the people who like high actions -they don't know about these things

markwayne · #15 04-22-2008, 08:25 AM

Well, if you play bluegrass with no amplification and need every last bit of volume a guitar's top can muster to compete with a banjo, you are going to want action high enough that you can smack the strings pretty hard without buzzing and, therby, losing vibrational energy meant to drive the top through friction between the string and frets. These players work up endurance and technique to achieve this kind of playing and don't mind the extra height.

Now, that being said, in my experience very, very few people play this way anymore. (Even among the bluegrass crowd.) Sound reinforcement has allowed the guitar to be heard without driving our instruments so hard and given us more dynamic range to work with as a bonus.

So, long post short, if your action is so high that you are unable to produce good clean tone or feel comfortable enough to play your best, you and your guitar are not going to sound good. And, as I have experienced more than once sitting in with electric players, if the action is so low that I have to play with an unnaturaly (for me) light touch to get a good, clean note without strings buzzing, I am not going to sound good.