I realize that this is going to irk the pea-waddin' out of some of y'all, but having played pre-war, post-war and every other kind of Martin guitar that there is, with and without abalone purfling inlaid along the edges, I honestly believe this relatively recent online meme asserting that Style 40 and upwards abalone trim along the edge "improves" the sound of the guitar is nothing more than an elaborate rationalization that employs circular reasoning deployed by affluent guitar owners trying to convince themselves (and, perhaps, their spouses or significant others) that these guitars sound "better" and are thus "worth" the substantial upcharge that getting all that shell encrustation costs.
Nothing more.
The routed channels along the edges of the tops and backs that the shell trim is glued into are as physically isolated from the vibrating plates of the instrument as it's possible for them to be. There are also channels routed for other types of decorative purfling, and - truthfully - the mass of the abalone isn't noticeably heavier than many other trims used by guitar makers.
Perhaps if instead of using abalone purfling, Martin started using depleted uranium purfling around the edges of its fanciest guitars then, yes, you might make a reasonable argument that those depleted uranium-trimmed Martins sound different than the Martins that AREN'T decorated with munitions-grade metal.
But abalone simply does not have that sort of physical heft. There's no mechanism described by modern physics that can account for a few ounces of abalone trim somehow changing the tone of the guitars decorated with it. Not when there are no significant weight differences between it and the wood that would otherwise be there.
The only plausible explanation, frankly, is "wishful thinking."
I also note that not a single "abalone trim makes guitars sound better" advocate has chosen to respond to my earlier pointing out that there has been a radical transformation in the actual abalone being used for this purpose: from the old hand-cut multiple pieces on older instruments like my 1988 000-42, or the eleven strips of laminated Abalam used on a modern Martin D-45.
Why the silence, guys? Could it be that you didn't know that, and so it would be inconvenient to try to come up with a plausible explanation of how the tonal effect remains the same even though the abalone itself that gets used has changed in a fundamental way in the past few years?
C'mon, guys, you can try a little harder than that.
Wade Hampton Miller
|