the mid-range of a guitar?

[sirwhale]

When people talk about the mid-range, what notes are the talking about exactly? Is this a subjective statement or is there a shared consensus on what the mid-range actually is?

[UncleBill]

but I researched your (unfamiliar to me) guitars and they look pretty sweet , how do you like the CF one? I've never heard one but like the look and the nearly indestructible nature of them.

[sirwhale]

Originally Posted by UncleBill

but I researched your (unfamiliar to me) guitars and they look pretty sweet , how do you like the CF one? I've never heard one but like the look and the nearly indestructible nature of them.

Here is someone else's review:

http://www.acousticguitarforum.com/f...d.php?t=382996

I'm extremely happy with the guitar, won't be needing a new one anytime soon

[Silly Moustache]

Your question is a very valid one, and something that remains a mystery to many sound engineers.

To the best of my knowledge "mid-range" doesn't start at a particular note or finish at another - it is more about how well the guitar responds and gives out the degree of tonality.

This is why guitar aficionados pursue their personal holy grail of tonality (over and over again).
The better luthiers have skills to select tonewoods, and fashion them, and braces and shape them to make a guitar with a more dominant bass or a special round, tingling treble (forgive my poor adjectives).

The lowest Bass notes on a guitar, are far higher than the lowest notes on a double bass, and the trebles aren't as high as on a fiddle or mandolin but - within the notes available on a guitar, on a finely made instrument should be well balanced across the strings and the octaves.

I run an Acoustic Music Club, and often see different makes of guitars played acoustically, and whilst some are played better than others, I can now discern cheap guitars against some better quality makes without seeing them.

For instance a good Martin Dreadnought will evince a string bass, with somewhat less treble whereas an equivalent Collings will sound more balanced across the strings which, to a Martin disciple may sound less bassy or more trebly.

Taylors (well better ones) might also sound overly trebly , (even fragile) to some.

Cheaper guitars often sound (to me) as if all we can hear are ther strings resonating but little or nothing from the resonance of the guitar at all - a little like listening to someone playing a Fender Tele unplugged.

One of my regulars plays a Faith - a large jumbo (A Jupiter?) and although not an expensive guitar - it has a finer balance and warm resonant middle range than some far more expensive instruments. It is not a one off, I am very impressed with the tone and quality of Faith guitars. Your Mercury is, of course the smallest model, but I have played a couple and also found good balance.

Old sound engineers more accustomed to Rock music will EQ things using the old "smile" method - increasing the bass and treble and diminishing the middle. This is exactly wrong for a fine acoustic guitar which should need no EQ at all.


I hope that helps.

[Captaincranky]

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

Your question is a very valid one, and something that remains a mystery to many sound engineers.

To the best of my knowledge "mid-range" doesn't start at a particular note or finish at another - it is more about how well the guitar responds and gives out the degree of tonality.

Arguably. "mid range" centers at about 1000Hz. This is the point where the human ear is most sensitive. That's a fairly high note, more than an octave above the orchestral tuning note of A 440Hz, which is A above middle C. For purely musical purposes, again arguably, middle C could be considered "mid range". (I'm thinking about C above high C, which is pretty tough for even most sopranos. But that need a look up on my part).

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

This is why guitar aficionados pursue their personal holy grail of tonality (over and over again).

"Incessantly", I feel is also a good choice of word here.

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

The lowest Bass notes on a guitar, are far higher than the lowest notes on a double bass, and the trebles aren't as high as on a fiddle or mandolin but - within the notes available on a guitar, on a finely made instrument should be well balanced across the strings and the octaves.

The guitar at most, has 4 octaves. You would need a 24 fret instrument to obtain all 4.

The bass is tuned exactly 1 octave below the guitar. The guitar goes to E2, (about 82 Hz), the bass to E1 (about 41 Hz). This is assuming a standard 4 strng bass. There is some argument if we can actually hear as low as E0 (20 Hz,) We can feel it, but hear it? Not so sure.

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

Taylors (well better ones) might also sound overly trebly , (even fragile) to some.

I'm going to pick "brittle", as my adjective here.

Keep in mind there are 2 different type of "noise", used in the evaluation of audio. "White noise", has equal energy per Hz, while, "pink noise", has equal energy per octave. I'm just pointing out that, "equal balance per octave", is also a subject term.

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

Cheaper guitars often sound (to me) as if all we can hear are ther strings resonating but little or nothing from the resonance of the guitar at all - a little like listening to someone playing a Fender Tele unplugged.

I think lack of sustain might be a tell also.

Originally Posted by Silly Moustache

Old sound engineers more accustomed to Rock music will EQ things using the old "smile" method - increasing the bass and treble and diminishing the middle. This is exactly wrong for a fine acoustic guitar which should need no EQ at all.

In subjective "reality", they should be EQ'ing for a "frown",t least in the context of a band. Although the mid range level needs to be controlled, so the rhythm guitar doesn't step all over the vocalist's range.

Excess treble boost, (IMHO), yields the piezo "quack", not so much the pickup itself. This ignores the fact there may be a bit of overshoot on a piezo's initial transient. That said, without the artifically obtained high end, it shouldn't be anywhere as noticeable. The bass when over boosted, can clash with the bass's bandwidth in a detrimental way.

"Fletcher-Munson" phenomena raise havoc with human perception of sound, along with room acoustics. Very simply, or ears "roll off" at low and high frequencies, when music, or any other "noise", is played at low volumes. That's what the goofy little "loudness button" is for on the home stereo, to restore the lost frequencies as the volumes drops. From my own experience, often the HF loss is ignored, an the boost is concentrated in the bottom end.

I would argue that most 12 strings can benefit from being plugged in while playing solo, to balance their sound. Given the quirks of our hearing, and the very forward mid range these guitars present, a bit of bass boost and a little HF cut, do the nerves a modicum of good. When trying to place a 12 in a band context, that balance is not longer correct.

What I tried to do here, is illustrate the differences in terminology between the somewhat subjective terms used by musicians, with the terminology of high fidelity sound reproduction in general/

[sirwhale]

Thanks for the technical input

So, if we're saying above middle C, when people on this forum talk about a "good mid range" on a guitar - could they be referring to, roughly, the notes of the high B and E strings?

Or is it that possibly a lot of the people on this forum mean different things when they all say mid range?

[devellis]

I think when people are talking about a guitar with strong mids, they're talking about the emphasis on notes in the vicinity of the open and first-position D and G strings. It's not a precise description, to be sure. But those strings are the middle of the notes most commonly played and that's what I think of as the midrange. I think of the B and E as treble strings, the low E and A as bass strings. Each of those pairs defines, loosely, a range of the guitar's tone. This isn't a perfect system, of course (for example, the 5th string harmonic on the low E sounds the same note as the high E played open). But I suspect that I'm not the only one who uses the terms in this low-tech way.

[Captaincranky]

Originally Posted by sirwhale

Thanks for the technical input

So, if we're saying above middle C, when people on this forum talk about a "good mid range" on a guitar - could they be referring to, roughly, the notes of the high B and E strings?

I think I was partly emphasizing how crazy, (perhaps "obsessive"), audiophiles are in a different context. They have 10 octaves to rant about, and we have for the most part, only 2 and a minor 3rd. (E2 to G4, or E-6 open to e-1 3rd fret.) I'm thinking that most people are talking in terms of the guitar's open string balance. So, I guess as devellis suggests, a guitar's bass is E-6 & A-5, it's mid range is D-4 & G-3, and its treble is B-2 & e-1.

I'll go a bit further and suggest that, "mid range", to the average male guitar player/ singer, means good clarity and projection throughout the baritone vocal range.

This is partly responsible,(IMO),for Martin dreadnought's. popularity. Another factor is a less than prominent high end. So,the guitar warms the sound across the bottom, and doesn't trample the singers place in the mix, with too much spit in the treble.

The truth is, basically we want, "good balance between the strings", but we shop for how that "balance", is curved to our personal taste.Which does serve to explain why we're never done shopping....

Originally Posted by sirwhale

Or is it that possibly a lot of the people on this forum mean different things when they all say mid range?

Not only possible, but more than likely probable.

All instruments produce different harmonics, aslong with a fundamental frequency. A flute, a trumpet, a violin, and a guitar, all sound very different playing the same note. The construction materials all add a different set of harmonics, (Actually similar harmonic intervals, but in very different proportions).

This amounts to the reason why you should buy the guitar that "speaks to you", with the added proviso you should take a seat in the audience, and have it played TO you. Because god knows, you'll never know how it really sounds, sitting behind it for years on end.

The only way I can think of for you to settle this issue to your satisfaction, is to get several different guitars, a calibrated microphone, and an audio spectrum analyzer, and literally, "see for yourself", what's going on across the frequency spectrum.

At the end of the day, somebody would still tell you, no matter what the gauges say, guitar "X", is way better sounding than guitar, "Y".

[Brucebubs]

Find 2 guitars by the same maker.
Same body size.
One Rosewood back and sides.
One Mahogany back and sides.
Same strings, same tuning
Play the Rosewood guitar first.
Then play the Mahogany guitar.
You'll know straight away.

[rick-slo]

Somewhere in the 120 to 300 frequency range. If those frequencies stand out well above the rest (i.e. not a lot of low end or high end) it will give a boxy sound.

[printer2]

How does this stack up on the midrange meter?

[Jerry D]

Originally Posted by devellis

I think when people are talking about a guitar with strong mids, they're talking about the emphasis on notes in the vicinity of the open and first-position D and G strings.

I agree with this.

[steelvibe]

Originally Posted by Jerry D

I agree with this.

I also agree with this statement because, providing a guitar is relatively well balanced, this would be true on any given guitar and how those notes sound on that guitar. As soon as other factors are brought in (other instruments, effects, amplifications, eq, etc.) than the mid range on any guitar becomes impure.

Not only are the notes on the D and G strings of most interest, their interplay with the bass strings and treble strings can also contribute to a guitar's overall midrange- what I like to think of as lower and upper midrange. I think mahogany and myrtewood b/s and some carbon fiber guitars shine here.

[sweiss]

Nobody really knows. I certainly don't.

As evidenced by the posts in this thread so far, ask 10 people and you'll get 10 different answers...and they all sound good to me.

[printer2]

OK how about this? The 114 seems to have more midrange to me than the 314. Is that what we are talking about here?