For those of you that play irish rhythm guitar backup, what is your favorite guitar to use? I'm looking to eventually get me a guitar soon. I've been lookin' at Taylor's mostly but a few others that are in the $1500 and under price range. I like the dadgad and dropped-d tunings and am trying to learn others like double-dropped d(dadgbd) as well.
Like with most instruments: play lots of them! Our guitarists have Taylors. Old-time folks are into old Martins and Gibsons. My daughter loves her Takamine.
I've got a 1990 Martin M36 and a 1984 Guild D212. I use the 12-string mostly now as I am playing both melody and backup. Since amplifiers are frowned upon at sessions, you should probably get a strong sounding acoustic guitar. Taylors are good, but I prefer Martins for their acoustic sound. The only Takamines I am familiar with sound great when ampified, but the sound is not that great acoustically.
I've played a Larrivee OM-09 for the past several years and still love it--"still" meaning the honeymoon never wore off. The 03 and 05 series are also very nice guitars and great bang for the buck--especially the 03s. I'd probably go with the D series if I was just backing (to push a little more bass), but the OMs are sweet and very versatile. Larry's are great guitars and very reasonably priced.
I'd suggest looking more at what sort of features you want on a guitar physically, over and above who makes it, what the action in the shop is like etc. Factors you might want to consider are:
Body Shape: I prefer smaller guitars (OM size) for rhythm playing, I find they have a better tonal balance compared to other styles. To my mind, dreadnought guitars invariably sound overly bassey for playing with a plectrum, I tend to see them as a development to provide a better tonal balance for finger-pickers who have to overcome the greater inertia of the bass strings. There'll also be ergonomic issues in terms of what's comfy for you - but go with what feels best for you.
Materials used: For that sort of money, you'd probably be hoping for a solid wood top, back and sides. Solid woods generally sound nicer, more resonant and often louder. Certainly, for the money you've got I'd be wary of anything with a laminate back & sides - it's probably a bit over-priced. There's also a spruce Vs cedar and a mahogany Vs rosewood debate for top and back+sides respectively. The argument seems to be that spruce takes longer to reach its full potential, but often sounds a bit brighter than cedar.
Neck: Some people like deep necks (more like a semi-circle in profile), some people like shallow necks (more flat on the back). Depends on what you're used to. Kinda related to this, fingerboard width and string spacing are also very important. I like to be able to use fingers which are fretting strings to mute other strings, so I need a fairly narrow string space. Also, there was a phase of measuring string widths based on the edge of the string, not the centre - I quite like this (I have it on my guitar) but I'm not sure it really makes any difference.
Electronics: Don't. The factory electronics on guitars in this price range are invariably a rip off - they cost more than it'd cost to install a comparable system. And they often aren't that good.
On top of this it's worth remembering that a change of strings and a different set-up can radically alter both the playability and volume/tone of a guitar. Moving the string gauge up raises the action, makes the instrument louder but harder to play (although obviously there are limits to the volume). Moving the string gauge down lowers the action and makes the guitar easier to play, but can result in less volume and poorer tone. So no matter what you buy, it's important to get it set-up properly for the string gauge you like (cos obviously, you can move up a string gauge but have the action lowered by the truss rod).
Finally, don't be blinded by brand. Martins, Taylors etc are nice guitars, but go with what sounds good to you, not what you think are good. You probably don't quite have the money, but for a bit more (maybe $2000) you could probably find an unknown luthier who'd build you a guitar that represents better value for money and get a really nice instrument. It gives you more control over what the guitar sounds and plays like, plus you'll probably wind up with an instrument that represents the bottom rung of professional instruments. The only thing to be aware of with that is resale value - branded instruments tend to hold value better.
I recently bought a Martin DX1. (NAFTA guitar - Hecho en Mexico). It is loud. I am trying to learn to play it more softly. (Don't know if I'm succeeding though. )
I tried a lot of guitars when I bought this one. Other Martins didn't sound as good as this one. It has been rather surprising in some ways. There are times where I play notes while practicing to get the meldoy down. I have noticed that when I play notes on open strings (like a D, G, B) without another note being played next on that string, that the sound keeps ringing for a while. Not sure if that's always good.
It's in a lower price range than you mention - but the sound is rather nice.
Andy V my understanding of guitar design is that the smaller bodied guitars such as 000, OM/Concert and parlour etc are more suited to fingerstyle playing and are biased to the treble strings via the bracing arrangement under the soundboard/bridge area to compensate for the thumb being able to impart a lot more force to the bass strings compared to the fingers on the treble strings - happy to stand corrected on this if any luthiers out there
the large body dreadnoughts and jumbo's are more suited to plectrum strumming techniques I would think
If I strum my martin 00028EC with a plectrum I tend to favour the middle strings as the treble strings tend to sound a bit toppy compared to the mid and low ends
anyhow JD-.... about choosing guitars I think you need to decide the style you are going to play first my preference body size as above for acoustic playing and if doing mostly plugged in stuff the Takemine or Cole Clark or other good factory jobs with good onboard pickups etc
if flatpicking in sessions then find the biggest body guitar you can find and string it up with piano strings ha
As far a neck profiles go the most comfortable to me is the V shape but you may not get this on the cheaper models
With regard to shape, you have to bear in mind that a sound of lower pitch sounds quieter, within the confines of the equal-loudness curves or Fletcher-Munson effect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contours
Either way, for my money I don't favour dreadnoughts or jumbos for rhythm playing. I had a OM shape guitar built for me a couple of years ago and its tonal balance is better compared to other people's guitars I've played. Again, I suspect it falls more to personal preference and how you play the instrument more than any form of hard and fast rule
Well, as far as size or body style I'm sorta leaning towards the smaller OM shape guitar over the dreadnought. I don't know if there is a specific type of guitar that sounds better in different tunings or not but I'd be playing in either DADGAD, Dropped D or DADGBD more often and I want something that sounds good in those tunings for sure. Mabye it doesn't make much difference, I'm not sure. I guess I'll just have to try out more guitars to see. I do have a Guitar Center about 30 mins. away from me. If you can tell from my username I'm really into John Doyle and ex-Lunasa player Donogh Hennessey style's of playing.
Interesting re the OM series Martins and I do know somebody who plays a 00 18 Martin in Dadgad and he sounds very nice. I had thought the D series would be very suitable for backing as I thought bigger meant more bass and indeed one day I hope to own something like a Martin D28. I'm told the more expensive Takamine are very good as they are made in Japan but the cheaper G and EG series are made in Korea and not as good. I think Arty McGlynn plays a Takamine and it sounds great.
Andy's advice is sound, although I'd quibble a bit here and there. Changing the strings doesn't raise or lower the action matrerially (at least, it shouldn't - if it does, your truss rod isn't doing its job). What is does do is to change the force needed to displace the strings, so it feels like the action is higher. However, the overall point that a change of strings will change the sound and feel of the guitar radically is important to keep in mind. Also worth keeping in mind is that every guitar is going to respond diferently to a different weight of strings. While on the whole, a heavier set will produce more volume, more bass, and more depth of tone even on the treble strings, it doesn't follow that every guitar will sound better with /013s than with ..011s. For a lighter-built guitar like my Martin, .013s will strangle the tone a bit, and I have to back off to .012, while my Epiphone likes the heavier gauges. Go figure. The upshot of this is, if you know you have a preference for a particular weight of string, and you're thinking of buying a guitar in the $1K price range, it's worth bringing in a set of strings and (with the permission of the store, of course) trying the guitar with the strings you like. Especially important if you're buying from a larger outfit that doesn't change strings very often, or keeps lighter strings on the guitars so they feel easier to play.
As to body size, I usually find that there isn't a very good correspence between size and suitability for any particular style of play. One of the greatest fingerpickers ever, Rev. Gary Davis, used a J-200, about the biggest guitar made, but plenty of other figerstyle players swear by the smaller instruments. For my money personal style is about the biggest factor in this decision. The way you as a player address the strings, whether with fingers, fingerpicks, or flatpick, will determine how the guitar responds. The response of the guitar will be determined far more by the way the guitar is braced and built than on the body shape and style. A guitar that's built like a tank, like my Epiphone or a mid-eighties Yamaha, will respond well to a very muscular picking style, but not to a delicate touch. A lightly-braced guitar with a thin top will sing out if treated gently, but clam up if you approach it more aggressively- no matter whether it's a super-jumbo or a parlor size.
As to tunings, I don't think that there is really a difference in the way one guitar or another responds to one tuning or another, limiting this strictly to the tunings themselves. Perhaps some guitars will be better suited to radical low bass tunings (don't assume size matters here! I can play my Martin triple-ought in low C, but not my Epiphone dreadnaught, for example) but for the tunings you're talking about any guitar should be able to do the work. More important to you might be how the guitar sounds in the styles those tunings suggest to you. Drop D brings out an open low end, semi-open voicings, and wants a more blended tone, while DADGAD often inspires a more "fingerstyle" approach, with lots of harp-like ringing strings that want to be heard as individual strings with little blend. More open tunings typically - not always - want a lighter construction, and thus a lighter hand.
Finally, as to Gutiar Center, while you should certainly give them a look, I would urge you to check out any local shops you can find. Partly because supporting local businesses is a good thing to do for various reasons, but also because over the long haul, it's really good to have a good relationship with a local guitar shop. And, as a more material consideration, the more guitars you look at, and the more shops you look in, the better you're able to compare prices and know that the price you're offered is a reasonable one.
Sorry for rattling on, I hope some of this is useful. Have fun on the hunt, and get a good one.
A mionr quibble, but the truss rod's job is not to lower and raise the action.
The truss rod is used to control neck relief. A heavy hitter needs a lot of neck relief, a light player very little. Yes, if you put on heavier strings you may need to tighten the truss rod a notch to correct the neck relief but this shouldn't alter the action enough so that you would notice.
Average neck relief might be about a 0.3mm gap between the bottom string and the sixth fret when the string is held down at the first fret and the join.
Action is lowered and raised by adjusting the saddle. Martin's usually come out of the box with a pretty high action so that you can lower it to your taste - it's easier to lower than raise it. I still hear people complaining about Martins because the action is so high.
Andy V has pretty well covered all the advice I would offer. I’ll just re-iterate that you *have* to get out and shop around. Don’t rush it. Take your time and try as many different instruments as you can. If possible, take along an accomplice to play while you listen. And don’t worry if it takes weeks or months to make up your mind. That’ s normal.
True enough, you don't change the action by adjusting the truss rod.
However, the purpose of the truss rod when it's not being adjusted is to add stability to the neck, so the tension of steel strings doesn't pull the neck out of line. That is, if your truss rod is doing its job, putting heavier strings on won't change the action in a noticeable way. Fair enough?
I might be entirely wrong in this one, but I thought action set up was done in terms of the three variables: nut height, bridge height and neck angle (i.e. truss rod). So you faff about with nut height to get the action at the nut, and then play with the other two at will (might be a slight over-simplification....)
There's something to do with that if you hold the string at the 11th fret, and at the 1st fret, and twang it it shouldn't make a sound. Or is it that it should make a sound?
As is probably evident, I can no more set up a guitar than I can hover....
Andy V, I agree about the nut and saddle, but I don't think that 'neck angle' is the same as 'truss rod' . As mentioned previously, truss rod adjusts the relief. Neck angle is controlled by how the neck meets the body, and would require a neck reset to adjust.
So that would be four variables. Levelling the frets might be considered a fifth variable, because if you want an extremely low action fret buzz is a constraining factor.
One quick thought in rhythm guitar playing - as a backup instrument it is important to "blend in" behind the melody rather than overshadow them. At the same time, it is important to have an instrument that can cut through the other instruments to provide a solid rhythm. The wood in the guitar body is important to determine the voide for any particular guitar. I use a Santa Cruz Vintage Artist that has a mahogoney (spelling??) body with a spruce top. The guitar design also enhances the bass end (the original design was for bluegrass). The mahogoney has a particularly bright tone which helps balance the guitar backing and allows it to be heard through several other instruments. The key is to then play at a volume appropriate for the istrument mix.
Neck angle, or pitch, is a matter of construction. Sometimes the glue in the neck joint softens and the neck has to be reset ( removed, refitted, reglued - not cheap!). Neck relief is a matter of truss rod adjustment (assuming you have a truss rod) and refers to the linear contour of the fingerboard – varying from absolutely flat (or back-bowed, if the adjustment is too tight) to slightly bowed. Neck relief is not independent of nut and saddle action, but it’s not intended as a means of adjusting the action (string height). First, you get the relief right, then you adjust the action at the nut and saddle.
irishrhythm brings up a good point about the top material. The Martin D-15 I have (mahogany top) is great for backing tunes. It's not too bass heavy and has a lot of mid-range tones. Melody instruments' timbre just pops right over the sound of this guitar.
That being said, I'll repeat the idea of taking your time and trying out a number of guitars in your price range. Bring along a friend w/an ear for the music and have them listen to you play and evaluate the sound. The way you play the guitar will determine how it sounds--having someone else play it probably won't sound the same to your audience.
Also, find a good guitar tech and get your new guitar a good setup once you do purchase.
I am not an expert, but I've been doing a lot of research of late in anticipation of getting a better guitar. For what it's worth, here is the consensus I've gathered from that research, regarding several issues that have been raised.
There seems to be wide agreement that the most important aspect of any guitar is how it's constructed. Thicker or thinner tops, one or another type of bracing, and other variables make a huge difference.
Next up, the top wood also seems quite important. Cedar and redwood sound "open" pretty much from day 1 but will not progress very much with additional playing. Cedar can be very responsive and warm sounding. Redwood has been described as between spruce and cedar. Spruces need a bit of time to reach their optimal tone. Adirondack (or red) spruce is perhaps the slowest to open up. Engelmann spruce is more responsive than other spruces (i.e., very little energy delivered to the strings will produce an audible tone) but can be over-driven by aggressive playing. That combination makes it popular with fingerpickers and it's often recommended for use with light strings only. Adirondack, in contrast, is a bit less responsive but has enormous head room. You can really bang away and the sound will get louder but not get "boxy" or brittle sounding. Sitka is a popular compromise, with good overall qualities. European spruces (most of which are a single species) have the potential for more complexity of tone but might be overdriven by really aggressive playing. It's hard to know exactly what you're getting when a top is described as "European" (or Italian, or German, or any of the European names) and there are documented cases of American woods being sold to European builders who then describe the wood as, say, German spruce.
All of these top wood characteristics are "averages," the individual piece of wood and how it's used being more important than the species. Different top woods vary in stiffness, density, and strength. For example, a soft piece of Sitka may have less headroom than a hard piece of Engelmann, despite the opposite being the more general case. A good builder who can devote a fair amount of individual attention to instruments will adapt materials and methods to achieve the desired result.
Wood for back and sides is less important than top wood. How much less i]important is open to varying opinions. Some builders and players claim that it makes essentially no difference while others claim that they can differentiate between several different types of rosewood in a blindfold test. I think the latter people are usually talking about the guitars they build themselves or the brand that they personally own. When the makers are more varied, the results seem less consistent. All that being said, there seems to be a fairly widely-held belief that rosewood produces a more complex tone while mahogany gives more focus. Walnut is in between. Maple also gets described as more focused.
Size does not determine tone. Some builders (like Goodall) have a reputation for getting astounding volume and "fullness" from their smaller bodied guitars. James Goodall avoids scalloping the braces on some of his small-body models because he feels that scalloping would make them too bassy, despite their diminutive size.
Instruments from the same manufacturer can vary, sometimes a little and sometimes a lot. Big builders like Martin and Taylor, partially because they turn out so many guitars (each makes in the neighborhood of 75,000 per year), can span quite a range with respect to tone and volume, even for identical models.
One person's ideal guitar may only be so-so to another. Not because the latter isn't as discriminating as the first, but because they have different tastes.
Changing strings and picks can produce substantial tonal variations, as can playing style. The guitar itself is important but much of the sound resides in the player.
A good set-up can make a world of difference in the overall experience of a guitar.
More expensive guitars often outperform less expensive ones, but not always. Lots of players talk about having encountered one or more amazing guitars that played far beyond what you'd expect based on their cost. Similarly, many talk about being left cold by high-priced boxes. I have generally preferred $2000 guitars to $1000 guitars and $1000 guitars to $500 guitars, but even in my relatively limited experience, I've been surprised a few times (in both directions). Part of this is liking a particular type of sound and part of it is that guitars are made of wood and wood can vary. Lots of factors interact to make a guitar what it is and sometimes there are surprises.
Bottom line: try as many as you can and get the one you like best. I know this is the old saw, but it has a valid basis.
Finally, enjoy the journey. The more instruments you play, the more refined your tastes will become and the more you'll enjoy the "right" guitar when you find it.
Sorry for the long post. Got a bit carried away there.
Very nicely put, devellis, I enjoyed that. Thanks. There's also some difference between USA and European building traditions. McIlroy, Lowden, Fylde, etc. seem very distinct to me, from equivalent American makers and from the Asian importers. I'd also suggest its a good idea to support the small manufacturers. Martin, Taylor, Gibson make great guitars, but independent luthiers always need the work, and can provide a bespoke custom instrument matched to your playing style.
Nice summary of lots of ideas there, devellis. The topic of tone woods can be deep and mystical and after thirty-five years of hanging out with luthiers and guitar shop proprietors and playing hundreds (or thousands) of guitars, it still fascinates me.
My personal experience with spruce and cedar tops is that, after about six months, they both seem to continue to change at roughly the same rate.
Because of their popularity and relatively stable history, a lot of the conventional wisdom about tone woods originated in familiarity with Martin guitars. For example, I’ve always noticed distinct and predictable characteristics in the sounds of their rosewood and mahogany models. But I don’t always hear that same distinction when I listen to rosewood vs mahogany models by other builders, so I think it’s true that construction and the quality of wood are considerably more important to the sound than the particular type of wood. Which is a good thing, since the traditional tone woods may well be gone or prohibitively expensive in a few decades.
We listened to several guitars, (Martin, Gallagher, Santa Cruz,Garrison) and chose the Garrison G50, It had the best sound.
Their carbon fibre brace system may have had something to do with it.
Garrison has since been bought out by Gibson.
Rhythm Guitarists
Rhythm Guitarists
For those of you that play irish rhythm guitar backup, what is your favorite guitar to use? I'm looking to eventually get me a guitar soon. I've been lookin' at Taylor's mostly but a few others that are in the $1500 and under price range. I like the dadgad and dropped-d tunings and am trying to learn others like double-dropped d(dadgbd) as well.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by JD-DHguitar
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
The guitarist that I play with swears by Takamine. I have one of his old ones (the preamp blew) and its a very nice guitar. The action is great on it.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by rob_handel
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Like with most instruments: play lots of them! Our guitarists have Taylors. Old-time folks are into old Martins and Gibsons. My daughter loves her Takamine.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by wyogal
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I've got a 1990 Martin M36 and a 1984 Guild D212. I use the 12-string mostly now as I am playing both melody and backup. Since amplifiers are frowned upon at sessions, you should probably get a strong sounding acoustic guitar. Taylors are good, but I prefer Martins for their acoustic sound. The only Takamines I am familiar with sound great when ampified, but the sound is not that great acoustically.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by Celtic Guitar
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I'd suggest McIlroy.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I've played a Larrivee OM-09 for the past several years and still love it--"still" meaning the honeymoon never wore off. The 03 and 05 series are also very nice guitars and great bang for the buck--especially the 03s. I'd probably go with the D series if I was just backing (to push a little more bass), but the OMs are sweet and very versatile. Larry's are great guitars and very reasonably priced.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by gw
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I'd suggest looking more at what sort of features you want on a guitar physically, over and above who makes it, what the action in the shop is like etc. Factors you might want to consider are:
Body Shape: I prefer smaller guitars (OM size) for rhythm playing, I find they have a better tonal balance compared to other styles. To my mind, dreadnought guitars invariably sound overly bassey for playing with a plectrum, I tend to see them as a development to provide a better tonal balance for finger-pickers who have to overcome the greater inertia of the bass strings. There'll also be ergonomic issues in terms of what's comfy for you - but go with what feels best for you.
Materials used: For that sort of money, you'd probably be hoping for a solid wood top, back and sides. Solid woods generally sound nicer, more resonant and often louder. Certainly, for the money you've got I'd be wary of anything with a laminate back & sides - it's probably a bit over-priced. There's also a spruce Vs cedar and a mahogany Vs rosewood debate for top and back+sides respectively. The argument seems to be that spruce takes longer to reach its full potential, but often sounds a bit brighter than cedar.
Neck: Some people like deep necks (more like a semi-circle in profile), some people like shallow necks (more flat on the back). Depends on what you're used to. Kinda related to this, fingerboard width and string spacing are also very important. I like to be able to use fingers which are fretting strings to mute other strings, so I need a fairly narrow string space. Also, there was a phase of measuring string widths based on the edge of the string, not the centre - I quite like this (I have it on my guitar) but I'm not sure it really makes any difference.
Electronics: Don't. The factory electronics on guitars in this price range are invariably a rip off - they cost more than it'd cost to install a comparable system. And they often aren't that good.
On top of this it's worth remembering that a change of strings and a different set-up can radically alter both the playability and volume/tone of a guitar. Moving the string gauge up raises the action, makes the instrument louder but harder to play (although obviously there are limits to the volume). Moving the string gauge down lowers the action and makes the guitar easier to play, but can result in less volume and poorer tone. So no matter what you buy, it's important to get it set-up properly for the string gauge you like (cos obviously, you can move up a string gauge but have the action lowered by the truss rod).
Finally, don't be blinded by brand. Martins, Taylors etc are nice guitars, but go with what sounds good to you, not what you think are good. You probably don't quite have the money, but for a bit more (maybe $2000) you could probably find an unknown luthier who'd build you a guitar that represents better value for money and get a really nice instrument. It gives you more control over what the guitar sounds and plays like, plus you'll probably wind up with an instrument that represents the bottom rung of professional instruments. The only thing to be aware of with that is resale value - branded instruments tend to hold value better.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by Andy V
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I recently bought a Martin DX1. (NAFTA guitar - Hecho en Mexico). It is loud. I am trying to learn to play it more softly. (Don't know if I'm succeeding though. )
I tried a lot of guitars when I bought this one. Other Martins didn't sound as good as this one. It has been rather surprising in some ways. There are times where I play notes while practicing to get the meldoy down. I have noticed that when I play notes on open strings (like a D, G, B) without another note being played next on that string, that the sound keeps ringing for a while. Not sure if that's always good.
It's in a lower price range than you mention - but the sound is rather nice.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by grumblingoldwoman
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
As a follow-on to Andy V, you may wish to check these fellows out...
http://mcconnellguitars.com/
You can follow the link to the Duhks to find out what Jordan's all about.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by manOtick
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Andy V my understanding of guitar design is that the smaller bodied guitars such as 000, OM/Concert and parlour etc are more suited to fingerstyle playing and are biased to the treble strings via the bracing arrangement under the soundboard/bridge area to compensate for the thumb being able to impart a lot more force to the bass strings compared to the fingers on the treble strings - happy to stand corrected on this if any luthiers out there
the large body dreadnoughts and jumbo's are more suited to plectrum strumming techniques I would think
If I strum my martin 00028EC with a plectrum I tend to favour the middle strings as the treble strings tend to sound a bit toppy compared to the mid and low ends
anyhow JD-.... about choosing guitars I think you need to decide the style you are going to play first my preference body size as above for acoustic playing and if doing mostly plugged in stuff the Takemine or Cole Clark or other good factory jobs with good onboard pickups etc
if flatpicking in sessions then find the biggest body guitar you can find and string it up with piano strings ha
As far a neck profiles go the most comfortable to me is the V shape but you may not get this on the cheaper models
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by BrendanDoherty
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
With regard to shape, you have to bear in mind that a sound of lower pitch sounds quieter, within the confines of the equal-loudness curves or Fletcher-Munson effect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-loudness_contours
Either way, for my money I don't favour dreadnoughts or jumbos for rhythm playing. I had a OM shape guitar built for me a couple of years ago and its tonal balance is better compared to other people's guitars I've played. Again, I suspect it falls more to personal preference and how you play the instrument more than any form of hard and fast rule
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by Andy V
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Well, as far as size or body style I'm sorta leaning towards the smaller OM shape guitar over the dreadnought. I don't know if there is a specific type of guitar that sounds better in different tunings or not but I'd be playing in either DADGAD, Dropped D or DADGBD more often and I want something that sounds good in those tunings for sure. Mabye it doesn't make much difference, I'm not sure. I guess I'll just have to try out more guitars to see. I do have a Guitar Center about 30 mins. away from me. If you can tell from my username I'm really into John Doyle and ex-Lunasa player Donogh Hennessey style's of playing.
# Posted on March 9th 2008 by JD-DHguitar
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Interesting re the OM series Martins and I do know somebody who plays a 00 18 Martin in Dadgad and he sounds very nice. I had thought the D series would be very suitable for backing as I thought bigger meant more bass and indeed one day I hope to own something like a Martin D28. I'm told the more expensive Takamine are very good as they are made in Japan but the cheaper G and EG series are made in Korea and not as good. I think Arty McGlynn plays a Takamine and it sounds great.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by SpoonsNBonesMan
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Andy's advice is sound, although I'd quibble a bit here and there. Changing the strings doesn't raise or lower the action matrerially (at least, it shouldn't - if it does, your truss rod isn't doing its job). What is does do is to change the force needed to displace the strings, so it feels like the action is higher. However, the overall point that a change of strings will change the sound and feel of the guitar radically is important to keep in mind. Also worth keeping in mind is that every guitar is going to respond diferently to a different weight of strings. While on the whole, a heavier set will produce more volume, more bass, and more depth of tone even on the treble strings, it doesn't follow that every guitar will sound better with /013s than with ..011s. For a lighter-built guitar like my Martin, .013s will strangle the tone a bit, and I have to back off to .012, while my Epiphone likes the heavier gauges. Go figure. The upshot of this is, if you know you have a preference for a particular weight of string, and you're thinking of buying a guitar in the $1K price range, it's worth bringing in a set of strings and (with the permission of the store, of course) trying the guitar with the strings you like. Especially important if you're buying from a larger outfit that doesn't change strings very often, or keeps lighter strings on the guitars so they feel easier to play.
As to body size, I usually find that there isn't a very good correspence between size and suitability for any particular style of play. One of the greatest fingerpickers ever, Rev. Gary Davis, used a J-200, about the biggest guitar made, but plenty of other figerstyle players swear by the smaller instruments. For my money personal style is about the biggest factor in this decision. The way you as a player address the strings, whether with fingers, fingerpicks, or flatpick, will determine how the guitar responds. The response of the guitar will be determined far more by the way the guitar is braced and built than on the body shape and style. A guitar that's built like a tank, like my Epiphone or a mid-eighties Yamaha, will respond well to a very muscular picking style, but not to a delicate touch. A lightly-braced guitar with a thin top will sing out if treated gently, but clam up if you approach it more aggressively- no matter whether it's a super-jumbo or a parlor size.
As to tunings, I don't think that there is really a difference in the way one guitar or another responds to one tuning or another, limiting this strictly to the tunings themselves. Perhaps some guitars will be better suited to radical low bass tunings (don't assume size matters here! I can play my Martin triple-ought in low C, but not my Epiphone dreadnaught, for example) but for the tunings you're talking about any guitar should be able to do the work. More important to you might be how the guitar sounds in the styles those tunings suggest to you. Drop D brings out an open low end, semi-open voicings, and wants a more blended tone, while DADGAD often inspires a more "fingerstyle" approach, with lots of harp-like ringing strings that want to be heard as individual strings with little blend. More open tunings typically - not always - want a lighter construction, and thus a lighter hand.
Finally, as to Gutiar Center, while you should certainly give them a look, I would urge you to check out any local shops you can find. Partly because supporting local businesses is a good thing to do for various reasons, but also because over the long haul, it's really good to have a good relationship with a local guitar shop. And, as a more material consideration, the more guitars you look at, and the more shops you look in, the better you're able to compare prices and know that the price you're offered is a reasonable one.
Sorry for rattling on, I hope some of this is useful. Have fun on the hunt, and get a good one.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
A mionr quibble, but the truss rod's job is not to lower and raise the action.
The truss rod is used to control neck relief. A heavy hitter needs a lot of neck relief, a light player very little. Yes, if you put on heavier strings you may need to tighten the truss rod a notch to correct the neck relief but this shouldn't alter the action enough so that you would notice.
Average neck relief might be about a 0.3mm gap between the bottom string and the sixth fret when the string is held down at the first fret and the join.
Action is lowered and raised by adjusting the saddle. Martin's usually come out of the box with a pretty high action so that you can lower it to your taste - it's easier to lower than raise it. I still hear people complaining about Martins because the action is so high.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by DonaldK
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Andy V has pretty well covered all the advice I would offer. I’ll just re-iterate that you *have* to get out and shop around. Don’t rush it. Take your time and try as many different instruments as you can. If possible, take along an accomplice to play while you listen. And don’t worry if it takes weeks or months to make up your mind. That’ s normal.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Bob himself
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
True enough, you don't change the action by adjusting the truss rod.
However, the purpose of the truss rod when it's not being adjusted is to add stability to the neck, so the tension of steel strings doesn't pull the neck out of line. That is, if your truss rod is doing its job, putting heavier strings on won't change the action in a noticeable way. Fair enough?
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Jon Kiparsky
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I might be entirely wrong in this one, but I thought action set up was done in terms of the three variables: nut height, bridge height and neck angle (i.e. truss rod). So you faff about with nut height to get the action at the nut, and then play with the other two at will (might be a slight over-simplification....)
There's something to do with that if you hold the string at the 11th fret, and at the 1st fret, and twang it it shouldn't make a sound. Or is it that it should make a sound?
As is probably evident, I can no more set up a guitar than I can hover....
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Andy V
Oh, and as Bob says, guitars sound very different from above and behind compared to in front of them
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Andy V
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Andy V, I agree about the nut and saddle, but I don't think that 'neck angle' is the same as 'truss rod' . As mentioned previously, truss rod adjusts the relief. Neck angle is controlled by how the neck meets the body, and would require a neck reset to adjust.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
So that would be four variables. Levelling the frets might be considered a fifth variable, because if you want an extremely low action fret buzz is a constraining factor.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
One quick thought in rhythm guitar playing - as a backup instrument it is important to "blend in" behind the melody rather than overshadow them. At the same time, it is important to have an instrument that can cut through the other instruments to provide a solid rhythm. The wood in the guitar body is important to determine the voide for any particular guitar. I use a Santa Cruz Vintage Artist that has a mahogoney (spelling??) body with a spruce top. The guitar design also enhances the bass end (the original design was for bluegrass). The mahogoney has a particularly bright tone which helps balance the guitar backing and allows it to be heard through several other instruments. The key is to then play at a volume appropriate for the istrument mix.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by irishrhythm
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Neck angle, or pitch, is a matter of construction. Sometimes the glue in the neck joint softens and the neck has to be reset ( removed, refitted, reglued - not cheap!). Neck relief is a matter of truss rod adjustment (assuming you have a truss rod) and refers to the linear contour of the fingerboard – varying from absolutely flat (or back-bowed, if the adjustment is too tight) to slightly bowed. Neck relief is not independent of nut and saddle action, but it’s not intended as a means of adjusting the action (string height). First, you get the relief right, then you adjust the action at the nut and saddle.
# Posted on March 10th 2008 by Bob himself
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
irishrhythm brings up a good point about the top material. The Martin D-15 I have (mahogany top) is great for backing tunes. It's not too bass heavy and has a lot of mid-range tones. Melody instruments' timbre just pops right over the sound of this guitar.
That being said, I'll repeat the idea of taking your time and trying out a number of guitars in your price range. Bring along a friend w/an ear for the music and have them listen to you play and evaluate the sound. The way you play the guitar will determine how it sounds--having someone else play it probably won't sound the same to your audience.
Also, find a good guitar tech and get your new guitar a good setup once you do purchase.
# Posted on March 11th 2008 by dr_funkenstein
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
I am not an expert, but I've been doing a lot of research of late in anticipation of getting a better guitar. For what it's worth, here is the consensus I've gathered from that research, regarding several issues that have been raised.
There seems to be wide agreement that the most important aspect of any guitar is how it's constructed. Thicker or thinner tops, one or another type of bracing, and other variables make a huge difference.
Next up, the top wood also seems quite important. Cedar and redwood sound "open" pretty much from day 1 but will not progress very much with additional playing. Cedar can be very responsive and warm sounding. Redwood has been described as between spruce and cedar. Spruces need a bit of time to reach their optimal tone. Adirondack (or red) spruce is perhaps the slowest to open up. Engelmann spruce is more responsive than other spruces (i.e., very little energy delivered to the strings will produce an audible tone) but can be over-driven by aggressive playing. That combination makes it popular with fingerpickers and it's often recommended for use with light strings only. Adirondack, in contrast, is a bit less responsive but has enormous head room. You can really bang away and the sound will get louder but not get "boxy" or brittle sounding. Sitka is a popular compromise, with good overall qualities. European spruces (most of which are a single species) have the potential for more complexity of tone but might be overdriven by really aggressive playing. It's hard to know exactly what you're getting when a top is described as "European" (or Italian, or German, or any of the European names) and there are documented cases of American woods being sold to European builders who then describe the wood as, say, German spruce.
All of these top wood characteristics are "averages," the individual piece of wood and how it's used being more important than the species. Different top woods vary in stiffness, density, and strength. For example, a soft piece of Sitka may have less headroom than a hard piece of Engelmann, despite the opposite being the more general case. A good builder who can devote a fair amount of individual attention to instruments will adapt materials and methods to achieve the desired result.
Wood for back and sides is less important than top wood. How much less i]important is open to varying opinions. Some builders and players claim that it makes essentially no difference while others claim that they can differentiate between several different types of rosewood in a blindfold test. I think the latter people are usually talking about the guitars they build themselves or the brand that they personally own. When the makers are more varied, the results seem less consistent. All that being said, there seems to be a fairly widely-held belief that rosewood produces a more complex tone while mahogany gives more focus. Walnut is in between. Maple also gets described as more focused.
Size does not determine tone. Some builders (like Goodall) have a reputation for getting astounding volume and "fullness" from their smaller bodied guitars. James Goodall avoids scalloping the braces on some of his small-body models because he feels that scalloping would make them too bassy, despite their diminutive size.
Instruments from the same manufacturer can vary, sometimes a little and sometimes a lot. Big builders like Martin and Taylor, partially because they turn out so many guitars (each makes in the neighborhood of 75,000 per year), can span quite a range with respect to tone and volume, even for identical models.
One person's ideal guitar may only be so-so to another. Not because the latter isn't as discriminating as the first, but because they have different tastes.
Changing strings and picks can produce substantial tonal variations, as can playing style. The guitar itself is important but much of the sound resides in the player.
A good set-up can make a world of difference in the overall experience of a guitar.
More expensive guitars often outperform less expensive ones, but not always. Lots of players talk about having encountered one or more amazing guitars that played far beyond what you'd expect based on their cost. Similarly, many talk about being left cold by high-priced boxes. I have generally preferred $2000 guitars to $1000 guitars and $1000 guitars to $500 guitars, but even in my relatively limited experience, I've been surprised a few times (in both directions). Part of this is liking a particular type of sound and part of it is that guitars are made of wood and wood can vary. Lots of factors interact to make a guitar what it is and sometimes there are surprises.
Bottom line: try as many as you can and get the one you like best. I know this is the old saw, but it has a valid basis.
Finally, enjoy the journey. The more instruments you play, the more refined your tastes will become and the more you'll enjoy the "right" guitar when you find it.
Sorry for the long post. Got a bit carried away there.
# Posted on March 11th 2008 by devellis
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Very nicely put, devellis, I enjoyed that. Thanks. There's also some difference between USA and European building traditions. McIlroy, Lowden, Fylde, etc. seem very distinct to me, from equivalent American makers and from the Asian importers. I'd also suggest its a good idea to support the small manufacturers. Martin, Taylor, Gibson make great guitars, but independent luthiers always need the work, and can provide a bespoke custom instrument matched to your playing style.
# Posted on March 11th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Nice summary of lots of ideas there, devellis. The topic of tone woods can be deep and mystical and after thirty-five years of hanging out with luthiers and guitar shop proprietors and playing hundreds (or thousands) of guitars, it still fascinates me.
My personal experience with spruce and cedar tops is that, after about six months, they both seem to continue to change at roughly the same rate.
Because of their popularity and relatively stable history, a lot of the conventional wisdom about tone woods originated in familiarity with Martin guitars. For example, I’ve always noticed distinct and predictable characteristics in the sounds of their rosewood and mahogany models. But I don’t always hear that same distinction when I listen to rosewood vs mahogany models by other builders, so I think it’s true that construction and the quality of wood are considerably more important to the sound than the particular type of wood. Which is a good thing, since the traditional tone woods may well be gone or prohibitively expensive in a few decades.
# Posted on March 11th 2008 by Bob himself
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
Some more info
http://www.soloperformer.com/index.php?article=0047
# Posted on March 13th 2008 by wolfbird
Re: Rhythm Guitarists
We listened to several guitars, (Martin, Gallagher, Santa Cruz,Garrison) and chose the Garrison G50, It had the best sound.
Their carbon fibre brace system may have had something to do with it.
Garrison has since been bought out by Gibson.
# Posted on March 24th 2008 by leftynow