#31
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Try this links...
http://xinio.info/?http://ifile.it/o53u9vt/etg.djvu (.djvu format ~5 MB) or http://xinio.info/?http://ifile.it/a...0387743685.rar(.pdf format ~27 MB) Let me know if they don't work... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
1 ~> Unknown. It would actually require some instrumentation (as previously posted) to quantitatively measure this. 2 ~> "doubling of sound volume"? No. (btw - where has that statement been made/advertised?) "Response" - define that pls? (sounds subjective) 3 ~> Yes. I would guess that this is a major contributing factor. 4 ~> The McPherson & Batson are really so different from one another, I would say it's a bit of a nonstarter to lump them (as well as the other builder) together and attempt to compare them to "traditional" builds.
__________________
'08 Batson Grand Concert | Myrtlewood & Sinker Redwood '93 Larrivee OM-10 cutaway | IR/Sitka florentine String Section Portrait PajeMusicTube (youtube channel - vids in HD) |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
__________________
"Still a man hears what he wants to hear, and disregards the rest." --Paul Simon |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Welcome to the discussion Paje.
Quote:
Quote:
Well, this is one definitive answer. Quote:
Mitesh |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Welcome to the discussion Paje.
Thanks Of course, but we can hardly accomplish measurements, so what we can do is, we can be content with detectable/perceivable changes. Like, if I put my finger on the upper bout soundboard near 20th fret and play low E string, my archtop vibrates very less but my friend's flattop gives considerably high vibrations (relatively). And so on... Accurate measurements can be made. I just don't have the prerequisite equipment. Subjectively I would say there is an increased output/input quotient on my Batson. The same was not observed with my (formerly, now sold) McPherson. So I can not necessarily attribute it to one particular design factor but, if I had to guess, neck cantilevering is a minor part of the equation with the bracing, soundboard (hole or not) and bridge design being much more significant. I am not sure whether I read/heard it, it was written/said in a suggestive manner or it was an informed guess on my part, but I think that IS logical, No? Any ways, does your NO means no gain in sound what so ever (compared to say a regular flattop with similar build quality) or There is considerably high sound but NOT DOUBLE, say 1.5 times or may be 1.25 times? As about response, I mean "the ability of instrument to respond to the lightest touch". Ok. There were posts referencing "marketing hype". I wanted confirmation of these claims. It's proper to be clear that no manufacturer is actually making those statements. My observations (subjective) are, again, that it varies. My Batson is the most responsive/sensitive guitar I've ever experienced. I think a 25% gain in sound-transmission efficiency is possible. It responds efficiently to the lightest touch and can get loud as anything when played such. The tone varies nicely with technique and it excels at expression. The McPherson is completely opposite. It's tone was consistent no matter how dynamically it was played. It was also much more subdued, almost compressed sounding. Well, this is one definitive answer. This is not an attempt to compare the above three guitars with each other (thanks to you, I made it explicite in the first post itself), rather these three are mentioned here due to their innovative/non-traditional features. The purpose here is to compare these (and other such guitars with other innovative features) with standard/traditionally built instruments with respect to the results like sound level (volume), Tone (fundamental vs. Overtones, as perceived by player and listener), response, Attack, Sustain and whatever differences one may have observed for these instruments (again, as compared to traditional ones). I understand that you're not trying to compare the three guitars to one another. I am suggesting perhaps you should. The contrasts I've detailed between my McPherson and Batson, for example, make comparing them as a group to traditional guitars a bit of an academic exercise imho. If all these guitars shared all of the same "non-traditional" features the discussion would probably be more fruitful. In my own comparison (McPherson vs Batson) the only shared design feature is the cantilevered neck. The only deduction I can make from that is the contribution of the cantilevered neck can be negated by bracing, soundboard hole and/or bridge placement. Lastly, there is a science vs art aspect. Not to mention that words are utterly insufficient. I would humbly suggest - go play these models that have piqued your curiosity. You'll get a massive ROI in information. Cheers, Paje
__________________
'08 Batson Grand Concert | Myrtlewood & Sinker Redwood '93 Larrivee OM-10 cutaway | IR/Sitka florentine String Section Portrait PajeMusicTube (youtube channel - vids in HD) |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Few more links...
http://www.guitarmasterworks.com/abo...stics-101.html http://www.rainsong.com/sound/ Rethinking the braces (?)... |
#38
|
|||||
|
|||||
That's what I was referring to, when I implied we CAN'T. We are not equipped.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Now this is something I won't be able to do. I don't think there is any store in my country selling any one of this (or for that matter, any high end custom guitar). This is not going to happen in near future. And that's the reason I need to ask it here . |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Best of success in your search! Cheers, Paje
__________________
'08 Batson Grand Concert | Myrtlewood & Sinker Redwood '93 Larrivee OM-10 cutaway | IR/Sitka florentine String Section Portrait PajeMusicTube (youtube channel - vids in HD) |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks Paje. |