Vibrating a guitar to enhance tone.

[River]

Originally Posted by JM Vasek

From what I remember, that was about wood that had been treated with a type of fungus.

I think there's some potential for truth to the vibrations to tone idea, but pursuing it seems a bit silly to me.

That's the one.

[NowGibson]

Strads,Steinways,Gibsons..."To my limited knowledge, the only instance such significant loss of lignin occurs in nature is when the "white rot" fungi destroy the wood." They've batting this one around with boiling, baking , soaking in borax ect. before building the violin, citing the iceage grown wood which would have been available for Strad n Guaneiri being even slow growth, then down to the local "Alchemist" for your worm/termite proofing.
this page links to several articles:
Secret Of The Sweet-Sounding Stradivarius: Wood Density Explains Sound Quality Of Great Master Violins
Also liked the idea of recording a single string like they did then doing a spectral analysis.

Thanks JM Vasek.

[Kim]

I stumbled across this few years back.
Turns out it really worked and Fender was about to make a go of it.
I talked to Michael Tobias and Steve Rabe about the machine.
Turns out it was disassembled because one of them was going through a divorse and they didn't want the spouse to get any part of it.

Trying to track it down and reassemble it, I ended up talking to one of the janitors at the manufacturing plant and it was taken to the dump.

Michael Tobias said they could show it definitely worked.
The best guitars I have ever played were the ones that were played and not kept under the bed.

There are people who use speakers attached to the guitar to do the same.
I believe it works.

[ryanmichael95]

I'll bet, if you leave for work and have your guitar lying on the living room floor with Appetite for Destruction blasting through the stereo, when you come home and pick it up you will have SLASH TONE!

[NowGibson]

Must've been some divorce...

[Nick59]

100%, bona fide, gold-plated cobblers. On a list of "ridiculous Les Paul myths" (and it's a very long list) this would be somewhere in the top 10. I noticed that in Beauty of the Burst, in the interview section, Mr Iwanade asks 3 different people if the colour of the bobbins makes a difference to the sound. That would be in the top 10 too.

Like a lot of these things, it's based on what seems plausible - so a guitar that hasn't been played for a long time often sounds a bit crap. But it will improve with playing (and new strings, a set-up etc). Violins are a bit different, but it won't be a "lack of vibration" that makes derelict violins sound rubbish.

[NowGibson]

"this would be somewhere in the top 10" so I guess you won't be doing/trying it?

[cryptozoo]

Originally Posted by Nick59

100%, bona fide, gold-plated cobblers. On a list of "ridiculous Les Paul myths" (and it's a very long list) this would be somewhere in the top 10. I noticed that in Beauty of the Burst, in the interview section, Mr Iwanade asks 3 different people if the colour of the bobbins makes a difference to the sound. That would be in the top 10 too.

The bobbin color "myth" has always struck me as a bit of funny irony since most of the zebras or double whites I've seen ratings on have been, on average, hotter than many double-black PAFs. Is this because of the bobbin color? Nah, more likely it's because they wound a lot of hot ones in '59, and that just so happens to be when the white bobbins were being used. Or maybe because people pulled the hot zebras and double whites out to covet. Just one man's perception... anyways, carry on.

And for the record, I absolutely believe vibration would have an tonal effect on a piece of wood over time. I thought this was an accepted fact, especially in hollow-body stringed instruments.

[River]

Originally Posted by cryptozoo

<snip>And for the record, I absolutely believe vibration would have an tonal effect on a piece of wood over time. I thought this was an accepted fact, especially in hollow-body stringed instruments.

I do too, I just don't think it's a) always a good change and b) can be noticed by a human listening to an electric guitar. Acoustic, cello, violin, double-bass - maybe/probably so.

[NowGibson]

So I've done the preliminary recording/eq/analysis and interesting the R7 low E string signal is stronger than the R9's...
R7: 9's
R9: 10's
I'm using an SM57 and have a marker for 2" so as to minimize as much variables, which is whacked to begin with but these are the 2 lp's I have to deal with....also found using the headphones that the mic aimed at the neck/front pickup area had the strongest audible signal for both guitars and strummed with the same pick and as much "english" put on the single pluck.
Several takes showed the same result...yah you can do a blind test but the new R9 smells so NEW...
I'm dating these and have new sets of strings to change to when I get the pigtail steel post for the R9. R7's posts are still the originals.
I'm waiting till I have at least 40 hours and more recordings to do a break down.

This maynot be the right category for this subject even tho it deals with Historics.

[Nick59]

Originally Posted by cryptozoo

The bobbin color "myth" has always struck me as a bit of funny irony since most of the zebras or double whites I've seen ratings on have been, on average, hotter than many double-black PAFs. Is this because of the bobbin color? Nah, more likely it's because they wound a lot of hot ones in '59, and that just so happens to be when the white bobbins were being used. Or maybe because people pulled the hot zebras and double whites out to covet. Just one man's perception... anyways, carry on.

And for the record, I absolutely believe vibration would have an tonal effect on a piece of wood over time. I thought this was an accepted fact, especially in hollow-body stringed instruments.

I just can't understand why anyone would think the plastic colour would make the difference. Anyone who works in industry knows that sometimes you have to substitute materials if there's a supply issue - but no matter how short the substitution period it doesn't make things made from the substitute material "magic" somehow! As the supplier wasn't doing the winding there is no link between the colour of the bobbin and the rating of the coil. That's also why I don't understand why so many people rip the covers off their PAFs to show that one or both of the bobbins are white. Who cares? Your pickup bobbins were made during a supply issue. And......?

An "accepted fact" isn't the same thing as being true! I could find you 1000 people who know it's an accepted fact that a quartz crystal will heal your aura, based on half understanding that quartz will vibrate if an electric current is applied. Nobody has come up with a plausible hypothesis why vibrations of tiny amplitude could modify the wood to create a "better tone". With car tyres repeated "vibration" (ie flexing while driving) actually keeps the rubber soft, by preventing the long chain molecules from linking, but a lack of flexing (leaving the car laid up for months or longer) allows the molecules to link, hardening the rubber. I can see no process in dead wood that would occur through the tiny input of energy transmitted through the bridge, tailpiece, frets, nut or tuner post. And if there were some magic process that had an audible effect in a violin and its thin rigid sheets of wood, it wouldn't do a thing to a solid lump of mahogany.

[cryptozoo]

It's simple, really -- if, in fact, zebras and double whites are more often hotter than their double black counterparts, then one could say that the bobbin color does make a difference. Not for the same reasons that seem to get you riled up, but it's still a difference. As for people removing covers to show white bobbins, the dork gene in humans always leans towards 'rare is better.' God knows, I've suffered from my share of it.

[kingedb]

i have a hard time understanding why the creator(s) have not created another machine. it's obviously not worth it to them.

[NowGibson]

There's a small increase when you remove the covers...but is it worth the bobbins exposure to sweat ect...as for the inventors of this, maybe they just got tired..divorce ect..will take the it out of you...but I'm looking to see if there is a way to speed up my lp's break in Clapton's 59 was 6 years old for the Bluesbreaker Beano album...my R7 is about the same age and sounded like my 09 R9 does now. I can imagine how it'll sound 5-6 years from now...bobbin colors, well if you can get someone to pay big bucks for your paf's (and you have them to sell!) lucky you. BTW BOB Iwande gives a theory for what happens to a LP when it ages in the back pages.

[NowGibson]

Let's see if I can upload a pic of the 2 Historics. 09 R9 and the 01 R7.
I noticed that the vibration comes out very strong at the tip/crown of the headstock, more so than anywhere else on the guitar.

[NowGibson]

After approx. 15 hours to my ears the overtones are showing up time to do another recording.

[Nick59]

Originally Posted by cryptozoo

It's simple, really -- if, in fact, zebras and double whites are more often hotter than their double black counterparts, then one could say that the bobbin color does make a difference. Not for the same reasons that seem to get you riled up, but it's still a difference. As for people removing covers to show white bobbins, the dork gene in humans always leans towards 'rare is better.' God knows, I've suffered from my share of it.

Yes, I probably sounded a bit harsh.......But I thought it was good enough if YOU yourself knew you had these rare PAFs. And anyone interested could peer through the hole to see the bobbin colour anyway. It's even more baffling for me when Historics have aftermarket double whites or zebras fitted, as there is zero rarity there!

As for hotter coils, Ronny Proler (for one) in BOTB says there's no difference in tone (or at least he can't tell) between white and black, and he that there isn't a connection between colour and resistance. He also seems to think that the reading and tone are not noticeably connected in his experience.

I wonder why it is assumed that the temporary change in bobbin colour is associated with hotter coils (something that Iwanade himself says isn't the case) - why would Gibson suddenly change how they wound them as soon as the truck pulled up with the boxes of loose white bobbins from the supplier? And why would they then go back to the old way as soon as they got black bobbins again?

I suppose it's part of the mythmaking again - together with:

"The wood (from that special species, Acer magica, that only grew from 1958-60) was allowed to naturally season for 100 years, while the kiln they had was only used to reheat their packed lunches. Thin nitro was then applied to allow the wood to breathe, as suffocated mahogany leads to tone turds."

[ptgold]

this is lame...just play your guitar man

[NowGibson]

Here's a thread that covers similar ground with articles.
OLD WOOD vs NEW WOOD ????

Theories by Suhr and others are there.

[Nigel Tufnel's tech]

Originally Posted by NowGibson

Here's a thread that covers similar ground with articles.
OLD WOOD vs NEW WOOD ????

Theories by Suhr and others are there.

I may as well post it again here.




You may find this very interesting. This is an interview by Dave Berrluck from Guitarist magazine with John Suhr of Suhr guitars.


G: You’re applying for your first patent, a way to induce resonance by vibrating the body, yes? Tell us about that.

JS: The patent is, I think, mainly to make sure nobody else can stop us from doing it more than something I think is going to be the next big thing. It’s really so I have the space to explore and someone can’t come along and say, “that’s my idea!” The idea itself is nothing new —it’s been done in the acoustic guitar world and in the violin world and I’m sure in the electric guitar world but the fun part for me is the analysis of the vibration of the wood. So, no ifs or buts.

For example, if I take Mike Landau’s favourite Strat and remove everything off the body and I analyse that body’s vibrations and I compare it to one I’ve cut and painted as far as I’m concerned it doesn’t matter how you got there, if they have the same response they have the same response. I don’t see any fault with analysing the vibrations of the wood because to me that’s it. Anything you do to that body is going to change it but with this process we can see what’s changed and by how much.

G: Will this process also allow you to vibrate the wood to change its response?

JS: Yes, but that’s not what my patent is because many people have proven that it is a reality. My patent is on how I’m doing it which is totally non-destructive; it doesn’t require any permanent mounting or anything to the guitar. And I am able to vibrate it with extreme amounts of energy.

G: Would this be something you could offer as a retro service, to alter and improve the response of an instrument?

JS: Yes, a customer will be able to ship the Suhr guitar back to us and have it treated. And also it kind of throws a bit of a wrench into the works. I’m not going to say that this is it, it works wonderful because I honestly don’t know yet. I just need to have the patent to allow me to explore it further but I know now that I can analyse the vibrations and to me that is the most important thing. So I can say this neck doesn’t belong on this body because they’re too close to this interval or whatever the problem is, they’re causing a dead spot or they’re causing a spot on the guitar that’s too loud, or certain frequencies are not being produced. I can even compare the output of the pickups to the resonance of the body and see what happens at different frequencies and why.

I’m convinced we’re gonna learn some things that we never knew about. I don’t know of anyone who has gone into it in this depth. People have done a lot with acoustics, looking at patterns and how dust settles on the top. Archtop makers like Bob Benedetto will sit there and tap on a guitar but I asked him once, when he taps on an archtop top what is he looking for? He said, “I’m looking to make some sense out of it before the day I die.” About the only thing he can really tell when he taps on a guitar is how thick the top is. That’s primarily what he’s looking for, the thickness of the top — is it strong enough, can he get away with removing some more wood? But as far as is this going to be a great sounding top, he’s like… someday I’ll find out.

It might be a situation that we’ll say to an artist — who has a wonderful guitar —bring in that guitar and we’ll plot it out and we’ll figure out how to make a body that vibrates the same. But I’m not going to blow smoke up anyone’s arse. If I don’t know, I’ll tell you I don’t know. However, if you think about measuring repeatable measurements compared to people just trying to listen in different environments with different pickups and bridges, there’s just no comparison. We’re talking about getting down to the root level of how this piece of wood is vibrating. It doesn’t matter if it was cut down 20 years ago or 400 years ago. If those two pieces of wood vibrate the same then they’re going to sound the same.

My hunch is that we are going to be able to selectively bombard it with frequencies to make certain frequencies come out. For example, if I find a dip at a certain frequency where its not resonating or sustaining I am pretty convinced that I can bombard it with that frequency and make it have a better response, if not correct it. It kinda throws a funny offset into it because if this is true and it really works this way then you’re basically saying that if someone has been playing the guitar badly, or one way, for twenty years, would this influence the way that piece of wood vibrates and there’s a good chance it might. If there’s molecular reasons why, in a cellular level of the wood, this might be the case it really just has to do with it loosening up at certain frequencies. It’s kind of like breaking in a speaker. We all know that you break in a speaker and it will sound very different.

There’s still a lot more to it [the electric guitar] than most people think. I’ve seen guitars, not necessarily my own, that customers would want to put pickups into and they don’t like the way something sounds and I can try everything in the world but if that guitar just doesn’t ring properly its never going to sound good.

[NowGibson]

Thanks for posting it again..."duck"
added this to the other thread...
Read the comments/articles here and one theory about vibrating is that it redistrubutes the moisture in the wood..has some merit if you think of the woods cell walls/chemical content (movement from a high concentration to a lower concentration) but they said it wasn't permanent unless the violin was constistently played. Read about glass being still a "liquid" and as it ages gets thicker on the bottom brings to mind a Queen tune...and a toilet paper joke...I digress. So if you continually vibrate a guitar ( they did a violin for 10 cycles a minute) and orient it in a different direction, let's say towards the control cavity, can you then expect the moisture content to go up? reading with a meter...other thing is like sifting media thru different screens, it goes quicker when shaking. I've owned a 54 gt that I put PAF's in and the combination was something....
Sorry to dredge up an old thread was trying this on my 09 r9.

[NowGibson]

BTW: my R9 resonates at around 50hz and 63Hz G and B using the NCH tone generator.
Next is the Chladni patterns.

[Nick59]

Originally Posted by Nigel Tufnel's tech

I may as well post it again here.




You may find this very interesting. This is an interview by Dave Berrluck from Guitarist magazine with John Suhr of Suhr guitars.


G: You’re applying for your first patent, a way to induce resonance by vibrating the body, yes? Tell us about that.

JS: The patent is, I think, mainly to make sure nobody else can stop us from doing it more than something I think is going to be the next big thing. It’s really so I have the space to explore and someone can’t come along and say, “that’s my idea!” The idea itself is nothing new —it’s been done in the acoustic guitar world and in the violin world and I’m sure in the electric guitar world but the fun part for me is the analysis of the vibration of the wood. So, no ifs or buts.

For example, if I take Mike Landau’s favourite Strat and remove everything off the body and I analyse that body’s vibrations and I compare it to one I’ve cut and painted as far as I’m concerned it doesn’t matter how you got there, if they have the same response they have the same response. I don’t see any fault with analysing the vibrations of the wood because to me that’s it. Anything you do to that body is going to change it but with this process we can see what’s changed and by how much.

G: Will this process also allow you to vibrate the wood to change its response?

JS: Yes, but that’s not what my patent is because many people have proven that it is a reality. My patent is on how I’m doing it which is totally non-destructive; it doesn’t require any permanent mounting or anything to the guitar. And I am able to vibrate it with extreme amounts of energy.

G: Would this be something you could offer as a retro service, to alter and improve the response of an instrument?

JS: Yes, a customer will be able to ship the Suhr guitar back to us and have it treated. And also it kind of throws a bit of a wrench into the works. I’m not going to say that this is it, it works wonderful because I honestly don’t know yet. I just need to have the patent to allow me to explore it further but I know now that I can analyse the vibrations and to me that is the most important thing. So I can say this neck doesn’t belong on this body because they’re too close to this interval or whatever the problem is, they’re causing a dead spot or they’re causing a spot on the guitar that’s too loud, or certain frequencies are not being produced. I can even compare the output of the pickups to the resonance of the body and see what happens at different frequencies and why.

I’m convinced we’re gonna learn some things that we never knew about. I don’t know of anyone who has gone into it in this depth. People have done a lot with acoustics, looking at patterns and how dust settles on the top. Archtop makers like Bob Benedetto will sit there and tap on a guitar but I asked him once, when he taps on an archtop top what is he looking for? He said, “I’m looking to make some sense out of it before the day I die.” About the only thing he can really tell when he taps on a guitar is how thick the top is. That’s primarily what he’s looking for, the thickness of the top — is it strong enough, can he get away with removing some more wood? But as far as is this going to be a great sounding top, he’s like… someday I’ll find out.

It might be a situation that we’ll say to an artist — who has a wonderful guitar —bring in that guitar and we’ll plot it out and we’ll figure out how to make a body that vibrates the same. But I’m not going to blow smoke up anyone’s arse. If I don’t know, I’ll tell you I don’t know. However, if you think about measuring repeatable measurements compared to people just trying to listen in different environments with different pickups and bridges, there’s just no comparison. We’re talking about getting down to the root level of how this piece of wood is vibrating. It doesn’t matter if it was cut down 20 years ago or 400 years ago. If those two pieces of wood vibrate the same then they’re going to sound the same.

My hunch is that we are going to be able to selectively bombard it with frequencies to make certain frequencies come out. For example, if I find a dip at a certain frequency where its not resonating or sustaining I am pretty convinced that I can bombard it with that frequency and make it have a better response, if not correct it. It kinda throws a funny offset into it because if this is true and it really works this way then you’re basically saying that if someone has been playing the guitar badly, or one way, for twenty years, would this influence the way that piece of wood vibrates and there’s a good chance it might. If there’s molecular reasons why, in a cellular level of the wood, this might be the case it really just has to do with it loosening up at certain frequencies. It’s kind of like breaking in a speaker. We all know that you break in a speaker and it will sound very different.

There’s still a lot more to it [the electric guitar] than most people think. I’ve seen guitars, not necessarily my own, that customers would want to put pickups into and they don’t like the way something sounds and I can try everything in the world but if that guitar just doesn’t ring properly its never going to sound good.

I will repeat what I said before - that's 100%, bona fide, gold-plated cobblers! Change a few words and that sounds exactly like the publicity for the utterly fraudulent BICOM machine, which "uses electrical frequencies to change the vibration energy of cancer cells into those of healthy cells"......Or "changes a smoker's vibrational frequencies into those of a non-smoker. That'll be $800, thanks".

"Yeah, I'll vibrate your guitar to make its fequencies better. That'll be $800, thanks."

On another forum there is a thread on this subject, complete with microscope photo, of wood that has been vibrated. It apparently shows "sediment" that has been loosened from the walls of the wood cell walls, thereby "allowing air into the cells" and making the wood more resonant....So that sediment wouldn't have been loosened by having a saw go through those cells, then? If there was no air, what was in the cells before the sediment was loosened? A vacuum? Maple syrup?

The tiny amplitude of vibration in a solid body guitar has many times less energy than picking the thing up or putting it back down, or when you sling the case in the car and drive it somewhere. And large amplitude sound waves coming from a speaker translate into tiny waves when they hit a solid object.

There was also a confident (and therefore plausible-sounding) claim on the thread that a guitar that hasn't been played (ie an "under-the-bed" minter) would be a turd for the "lack of vibration" reasons. Tom Wittrock and Elliott Easton both immediately discredited that one! This seems more like attempts to find "evidence" to prove a theory that has little real basis in fact.

As for this being lame and we should just play our guitars, if that was the case there would be no forum, not even people stopping playing long enough to take photos to post on here.....;-)

[River]

Originally Posted by Nick59

I will repeat what I said before - that's 100%, bona fide, gold-plated cobblers! Change a few words and that sounds exactly like the publicity for the utterly fraudulent BICOM machine, which "uses electrical frequencies to change the vibration energy of cancer cells into those of healthy cells"......Or "changes a smoker's vibrational frequencies into those of a non-smoker. That'll be $800, thanks".

"Yeah, I'll vibrate your guitar to make its fequencies better. That'll be $800, thanks."

On another forum there is a thread on this subject, complete with microscope photo, of wood that has been vibrated. It apparently shows "sediment" that has been loosened from the walls of the wood cell walls, thereby "allowing air into the cells" and making the wood more resonant....So that sediment wouldn't have been loosened by having a saw go through those cells, then? If there was no air, what was in the cells before the sediment was loosened? A vacuum? Maple syrup?

The tiny amplitude of vibration in a solid body guitar has many times less energy than picking the thing up or putting it back down, or when you sling the case in the car and drive it somewhere. And large amplitude sound waves coming from a speaker translate into tiny waves when they hit a solid object.

There was also a confident (and therefore plausible-sounding) claim on the thread that a guitar that hasn't been played (ie an "under-the-bed" minter) would be a turd for the "lack of vibration" reasons. Tom Wittrock and Elliott Easton both immediately discredited that one! This seems more like attempts to find "evidence" to prove a theory that has little real basis in fact.

As for this being lame and we should just play our guitars, if that was the case there would be no forum, not even people stopping playing long enough to take photos to post on here.....;-)

I'm, like, thinking I agree with you. But we need to at least stop and eat and sleep and stuff, right? Play, eat, sleep, play, eat, sleep. Right? Just skip the vibrators?

[NowGibson]

Going out to play some...she sounds sweet. Now for some sweat.

[Tonal Fretter]

First, I want to say I didn't quite read this whole thread, or do I claim to be an expert on this or anything like this. That being said, vibrating guitar can effect tone, on a solid body guitar I can't say how or why but on acoustics, or any other hollow bodied guitar I can. The the vibrations off the soundboard of an acoustic creates sound and when you buy a new guitar the soundboard has not been affected by such vibrations that much. Therefore the wood is 'tight', but after introducing the soundboard to vibrations due to playing, the fibers in the wood loosen up and separate slightly allowing for the soundboard to vibrate in greater amounts. This increase of movement ultimately can affect tone, usually by broadening the range of mids and bass but sometimes it doesn't really do much of anything. Anyways this is just my thoughts on the matter.

[River]

Originally Posted by Tonal Fretter

First, I want to say I didn't quite read this whole thread, or do I claim to be an expert on this or anything like this. That being said, vibrating guitar can effect tone, on a solid body guitar I can't say how or why but on acoustics, or any other hollow bodied guitar I can. The the vibrations off the soundboard of an acoustic creates sound and when you buy a new guitar the soundboard has not been affected by such vibrations that much. Therefore the wood is 'tight', but after introducing the soundboard to vibrations due to playing, the fibers in the wood loosen up and separate slightly allowing for the soundboard to vibrate in greater amounts. This increase of movement ultimately can affect tone, usually by broadening the range of mids and bass but sometimes it doesn't really do much of anything. Anyways this is just my thoughts on the matter.

"Soundboard" is the operative word, IMHO. Solid-body electric guitars ain't got none.

[NowGibson]

yup....playing it is funner than 'sperimentin on it. blues to beatles...slide. can't wait for the pigtail parts...she deserves it.

[mrkenny]

Interesting thread. Seems plausible to me. There have been some posts pointing out that "vibrating" an acoustic guitar would perhaps benefit from this procedure more than a solid body guitar. I wonder if a chambered LP or a semi hollow bodied, ES series guitar might fall somewhere in between.

[NowGibson]

" I wonder if a chambered LP or a semi hollow bodied, ES series guitar might fall somewhere in between." that's a thought...more air space like an acoustic chamber..there is the tone control cavity, wire routes, toggle switch, and pickup routes.
Wonder if a chambered guitar would also resonate from the top?