Acoustic Guitar Dogma

[drbluegrass]

I am (relatively) new to bluegrass and flatpicking. I played it some in the 70's and early 80's, returned to school for about 7 years in the late 80's and early 90's, and for the last 20 years or so had been deeply into traditional electric blues and swing jazz.
Having played guitar since 1961 I've acquired some skills that have allowed me to pick up bluegrass flatpicking maybe a little faster than I thought I would, although it has still required a lot of woodshedding and intense practice.
Anyway, in that short time since I've completely immersed myself in bluegrass and acoustic music. I've also learned an immense amount of information regarding acoustic instruments and added to the knowledge base I already had.
And one thing I've observed is there seems to be a considerable amount of dogma about acoustic guitars, just like I found with electric guitars and gear over the years. Some of it I've found to be quite true and some of it not.
Some of the dogma of electric gear over the years included things like...solid state amps are state of the art and are better (60's), heavier guitars have more sustain and better tone (70's), the heavier the bridge and nut the more sustain (70's), the cleaner the amp the better the sound (60's), the more sustain and distortion from an amp the better the tone (70's and 80's), the more powerful and the louder the amp the better the sound (60's, 70's, 80's, 90's), tubes and speakers don't matter (60's and 70's), maple guitars and necks are always brighter, the more effects the better, if it says "Reissue" in the name it's just like and as good as the original version (70's through the early 90's), etc.
In the short time since my "musical conversion", I have begun to observe what seem to be dogmas, some true and some maybe not so true, regarding acoustic guitars. Some might be referred to as "conventions" but to me, due to their rigidness, have become dogma.
As I said, just because they are dogmas does not necessarily make them untrue. And with some, I'm simply not sure.
OK...having bloviated about all that, here are some of the dogmas I've observed since returning to bluegrass flatpicking, and acoustic guitars:

1. Mahogany dreads are louder than rosewood dreads.

2. Mahogany dreads are for flatpicking and rosewood dreads are for rhythm.

3. Brazilian rosewood is the best tonewood.

4. Brazilian rosewood dreads are the best sounding.

5. Lighter dreads sound better.

6. After about $2500-$3000 the more money you spend on a guitar the better it will sound.

7. Vintage Martins sound better than anything.

8. Tonewoods make the guitar and are the most important factor in great guitar tone.

9. Dreads are only good for bluegrass, country, and some rock.

10. Dreads are the only good bluegrass guitar.

11. Varnish, hot hide glue, guitars sound better.

12. Old/vintage guitars all sound better.

Anyway, you get the idea. And, please...I'm not saying any of these are true or untrue. They're just observations I've made within the last 6 months. But some people believe so strongly in them that they get very defensive and their feelings are sometimes hurt if you dare to disagree.
They do often become dogma or "the convention" that, right or wrong, people are often extremely reluctant to let go of...myself included. It will be interesting to see how my personal dogmas change over the next few months and years. Please feel free to add to, discuss, debate, the list.

Tom

[warfrat73]

In regards to 1&2 I've not really heard it that way. What I have heard, and what I would suggest is the conventional wisdom is that hog dreads cut through the mix more b/c of their stronger fundamental.

In fact the notion that it's a convention that hog is for picking and RW for strumming is, in my mind, completely undermined by the Tony Rice/Clarence White 58957 D-28 idolatry which in some circles involves the sacrificing of small animals to appease the tone gods. I mean really, Martin, SCGC, Collings, and Larrivee (just to name the ones on the top of my head) have all copied this one instrument.

That having been said there is something to it.

There is certainly a trend towards worshiping all things old/trad. To this end I think that many people end up playing old Martins that sound mediocre at best, simply because they're old Martins (call this a response to number 12 I guess).

I would add to the list the notion that Tortoise shell picks sound better than plastic ones, to the extent that evidently people are offing pet turtles to make picks out of.

To me this is just part of the reverence to the gear of the past. Which, when you think about it, is kind of silly. Technology has advanced, not regressed, n'est pa?

[Misty44]

Good bloviating!

1. Mahogany dreads are louder than rosewood dreads.

Hogs have very powerful mids, good highs, and okay bass. They also drop off very quickly...the notes don't linger or overlap or get in the way of each other as much as the richer, fuller harmonics of rosewoods. BUT, as for loudness, a lot depends on choice of set up, strings, picks, and player technique. I wouldn't say categorically that one is louder than the other. Actually, I never really thought much about that comparison since if one plays in a bg group with amplification, the balance will be set by the engineer, and if not, the players will find their own loudness level. Good bg guitar players won't play very loud anyway, so the maximum output of a D-18 vs. a D-28 is irrelevant.

2. Mahogany dreads are for flatpicking and rosewood dreads are for rhythm.

If this be true, please don't tell Tony Rice...I wouldn't want him to switch from his 1934 rosewood D-28, it sounds just fine to me!

7. Vintage Martins sound better than anything.

The pre-war sound sure is pretty, and I certainly would love to add one to my collection (yeah sure). BUT, that sound is so subjective, so personal. Some of the best sounding pieces Tony recorded were done on post-war guitars from the 40's and 50's.

I've heard many of the other observations (dogmas), but they only become relevant to people with finer, more acute auditory senses than I have.

[RustyAxe]

I'm not sure these are dogma ... or whether it's just your misunderstanding of what you read. I began to discuss each point, but it's not worth the effort.

[Sprikitik]

13. The Tonerite "really works" to "open up" your guitar

[Christian Reno]

In my opinion, none of the points you listed are absolutely true, but that is only logical since there are not many absolutes in the guitar world.

[grampa]

Dogma is best if ignored. It's limiting and will restrict creativity.

[kohara]

Agree with 5 (lighter is better) and 12 (older is better)... and that's about it. The rest of it depends on the individual guitar and whoever might be listening to it...

I'll bet some folk even disagree with those (but they'd be wrong).

[David Hilyard]

I disagree with # 6. The rest I agree with, but only if you put the word "Some" in front of the statement. Then it works fine with me.

I don't think dogma works here.

[zmf]

Tom,

There are exceptions to all the statements, and some are incorrect.

But you have identified a general belief system probably held by a majority of guitarists. For some statements, the proof of this is the prices charged for guitars with certain features.

I'm curious about where #6 came from. The inverse could also be true.

[David Hilyard]

Yes, I think I'd be okay with the list if it was worded like this.

1. Some mahogany dreads are louder than some rosewood dreads, and vise versa.

2. Some mahogany dreads are for flatpicking and some rosewood dreads are for rhythm, and vise versa.

3. Some Brazilian rosewood is some of the best tonewood.

4. Some Brazilian rosewood dreads are some of the best sounding.

5. Some lighter dreads sound better, but some don't.

6. After about $2500-$3000 the more money you spend on a guitar the more it will cost.

7. Some vintage Martins sound better than lots of other Martins, but some new Martins blow some vintage Martins out of the water.

8. Some tonewoods make a better guitar but the most important factor in great guitar tone is in the hands of the builder.

9. Some dreads are only good for bluegrass, country, and some rock, but some others are great for fingerstyle, slack key and any other style of music.

10. Dreads usually make a really good bluegrass guitar.

11. Those that believe varnish, hot hide glue, guitars sound better are probably fooling themselves into a belief that is based on mythology.

12. Some old/vintage guitars sound really good. Some sound really dead.

I'd feel better about those statements, personally.

[Brent Hutto]

There is a meta-belief, if you will, that ought to be at the top of your list. Perhaps labeled "Belief Zero".

That being the belief that any meaningful information about an actual, individual guitar can be gleaned from a bunch of received wisdom shared among Internet forum obsessives.

All this is perfectly nice as a time-wasting way to talk about guitars online but buying a guitar based on any such "rules" is sheer folly.

[Christian Reno]

Originally Posted by David Hilyard

6. After about $2500-$3000 the more money you spend on a guitar the more it will cost.

That may be the truest statement in the thread.

[kohara]

Originally Posted by Brent Hutto

There is a meta-belief, if you will, that ought to be at the top of your list. Perhaps labeled "Belief Zero".

That being the belief that any meaningful information about an actual, individual guitar can be gleaned from a bunch of received wisdom shared among Internet forum obsessives.

All this is perfectly nice as a time-wasting way to talk about guitars online but buying a guitar based on any such "rules" is sheer folly.

Wow, I always thought that, even if a rule was not true before it was posted in this forum, once posted it immediately became true, legal and even canonical with immediate compliance required.

[B-Nads]

Originally Posted by Christian Reno

That may be the truest statement in the thread.

My thoughts exactly.