Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ron "Oily" Sprague on August 6, 2011 at 5:32am

Dan,

You're not a slacker! I'm just on vacation, so have a lot of time to think of this stuff while the family is waking up / getting breakfast / figuring out the plans for the day. Like you, I was ultimately gonna recommend the "just live with it" approach, but that doesn't satisfy my scientific busybody soul ;-).

Unless Printer2 is willing to reframe the ringing problem as an "undocumented feature" of his very nice looking first build (I especially like the bass and treble clef sound holes placed in their "appropriate" locations)? :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dan Sleep on August 6, 2011 at 6:05am

LOL at undocumented feature...you must have worked for a software company.

oilyfool said:

Dan,

You're not a slacker! I'm just on vacation, so have a lot of time to think of this stuff while the family is waking up / getting breakfast / figuring out the plans for the day. Like you, I was ultimately gonna recommend the "just live with it" approach, but that doesn't satisfy my scientific busybody soul ;-).

Unless Printer2 is willing to reframe the ringing problem as an "undocumented feature" of his very nice looking first build (I especially like the bass and treble clef sound holes placed in their "appropriate" locations)? :-)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ron "Oily" Sprague on August 6, 2011 at 8:33am

Dan,

Nope, I've just used a LOT of software over the last 30 years, and been a beta tester for complex geophysical software during that time. I even admit to having programmers as friends ;-).

So now, any mistakes I make automatically become "undocumented features," "previously unknown workflows," or "SEP (Somebody Else's Problem)" :-).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Printer2 on August 6, 2011 at 9:25am

Hi all, wow more response than I was expecting, thanks a lot. No, not something you can live with. I will try to get a recording of it but not really set up for it right now. I find the biggest problem is with the two strings tuned to the same note (go figure). Hit the D and little off the other strings. Hit a G and muffle the string you hit you end up with the other one sounding. And not just a little, hit the high G and dampen it, the low G rings almost at the level the high G was at. Pick the low G and mute it, the high G rings but at a little lower level.

 

I have no problem not having a perfect instrument my first time out, done too many things to expect everything to be right. I may have to go to four strings and tune it to something like a Tenor guitar. It would be nice to get this one straightened out because it does look good with three strings.

 

Speaking of, has anyone looked at my second picture? I was wondering which arrangement of tuners looked least objectionable. I am having a hard time deciding.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Printer2 on August 6, 2011 at 10:45am

Messing around some more. Tried picking fretted notes on the neck and still got one of the unfretted notes to ring (played a D on the high G string and the D string decided to join in). May be a too resonant soundboard? Actually almost sounds like the guitar has its own built in reverb unit. It could be a selling feature if I can make the reverb sound darker.  :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ron "Oily" Sprague on August 6, 2011 at 12:20pm

Actually almost sounds like the guitar has its own built in reverb unit. It could be a selling feature if I can make the reverb sound darker.  :)

See? "undocumented feature" = new DarkVerb(tm)!

Seriously, though, this is an unusual response. Most builders would LOVE to have strings ring out like this. Any way you can work the "double jangle" into your playing technique?

Yep, I looked at your second pic. My personal pref, from an aesthetical standpoint, would be closer to the nut so that you have room on the headstock for your new "Now with DarkVerb(tm)!" logo :-). But from a playing standpoint, you may want to consider putting it further from the nut; it'll give you the ability to go lower on string value for a darker tone, and still have high enough sounding strings for a broader range of tones.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Henry Strat-o-varius Lowman on August 6, 2011 at 2:30pm

Sympathetic strings! You happened upon them by accident! SWEEEEEEEET! I've tried various ways to do it!

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Printer2 on August 6, 2011 at 3:11pm

It sure does fill out the sound. I am not going to worry about it too much right now, not going to bother me too much while I learn how to play this thing. I agree with you, ascetics says put it by the nut, still have to find a good looking logo. When I have some time I should try some different strings to see if this thing will like them.

oilyfool said:

Actually almost sounds like the guitar has its own built in reverb unit. It could be a selling feature if I can make the reverb sound darker.  :)

See? "undocumented feature" = new DarkVerb(tm)!

Seriously, though, this is an unusual response. Most builders would LOVE to have strings ring out like this. Any way you can work the "double jangle" into your playing technique?

Yep, I looked at your second pic. My personal pref, from an aesthetical standpoint, would be closer to the nut so that you have room on the headstock for your new "Now with DarkVerb(tm)!" logo :-). But from a playing standpoint, you may want to consider putting it further from the nut; it'll give you the ability to go lower on string value for a darker tone, and still have high enough sounding strings for a broader range of tones.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Printer2 on August 6, 2011 at 3:13pm

As my master once said, 'Do not try, do or do not.' Or was that from a movie or something?

Henry Lowman said:

Sympathetic strings! You happened upon them by accident! SWEEEEEEEET! I've tried various ways to do it!

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page