Do guitars “close down”?

[Silly Moustache]

I would also concur. I remember a discussion on the old Collings forum about Tonerites and two or three wrote that they used them for a few hours to "wake up" less used guitars.

I tried the same thing on one or two of mine and believe it made a difference, but such things are subjective.

[Wade Hampton]

Truthfully, I've never experienced this, or if I have it was so subtle that I didn't notice.

The main reason that guitars of mine that have gone unplayed for a while don't sound their best when pulled from their cases is that the strings generally aren't at their best any longer. When I restring them they sound like the same fine guitars they were the last time I played them.

But I'm speaking strictly for myself and am NOT attempting to cast doubt on anyone else's experiences. Many would-be debunkers who challenge the idea of, say, guitars breaking in, seem to follow this logic pattern:


1.) I can't hear it;

2.) Therefore it doesn't exist;

3.) Therefore all you poor fools are deluding yourselves.


When it comes to guitars closing down, I haven't experienced this for myself, at least not in the way that many of the contributors to this thread have experienced. That's as much as I can state.

Other folks' mileage obviously varies.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

[Tnfiddler]

Originally Posted by M Sarad

Last time I posted about guitars going to sleep and then waking up after playing, an expert responded and said it was hogwash.

This happened to me after I got my Bourgeois and posted about it. If you can’t scientifically prove it, it doesn’t happens according to some folks on here. Or it was just my ears getting used to the sound. My guitar the night I posted was pretty weak sounding for about 15-20 minutes and then just started opening up and getting bassy and loud. I know what I heard and know it happened.

[KenL]

Absolutely they do, in my opinion. My best example of this involves an Alvarez-Yairi DY-57 that I bought several years ago. It had been set aside and not played for several years. I took it home and humidified it for a week before I did anything with it, as it was bone-dry.

I then cleaned it up and polished the heck out of it. The set-up was fine, and I put a new set of Elixir Lights on it. It looked great, but didn't sound like much.

I took it out to the front porch on a nice afternoon and started strumming away. It was not at all loud and sounded kind of muffled.

And then, voila! It was as if somebody flipped a switch and that thing turned on and became a guitar again! The volume jumped and it rang out clear as a bell. It was remarkable! My wife was sitting behind me and I turned around and she was looking at me and said "what just happened?" She heard it too!

That was a really good guitar, but like a dummy I sold it. I recently got another one, and it is in the shop right now for a setup. I pick it later today, am anxious to see how it turns out.

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Face it: they sulk if you ignore them.

Funny but true, Bob.

A few times I've taught a six-week course in Great Britain, and would leave my dread home for the duration. It would always sound sulky when I returned stateside, and require several days of playing to open back up again.

Hell hath no fury like a dreadnought scorned!

[varmonter]

There has been a billion threads about this subject. Usually regarding the tone rite. I think most agree that guitars do open up and conversly they would close
Down. There are more mixed feelings on the Tonerite.

[varmonter]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

Truthfully, I've never experienced this, or if I have it was so subtle that I didn't notice.

The main reason that guitars of mine that have gone unplayed for a while don't sound their best when pulled from their cases is that the strings generally aren't at their best any longer. When I restring them they sound like the same fine guitars they were the last time I played them.

But I'm speaking strictly for myself and am NOT attempting to cast doubt on anyone else's experiences. Many would-be debunkers who challenge the idea of, say, guitars breaking in, seem to follow this logic pattern:


1.) I can't hear it;

2.) Therefore it doesn't exist;

3.) Therefore all you poor fools are deluding yourselves.


When it comes to guitars closing down, I haven't experienced this for myself, at least not in the way that many of the contributors to this thread have experienced. That's as much as I can state.

Other folks' mileage obviously varies.

Hope that makes sense.


Wade Hampton Miller

Well stated wade. Certainly its more like an elephant trap. If you dont have any elephants ..it must be working..

Originally Posted by KenL

Absolutely they do, in my opinion. My best example of this involves an Alvarez-Yairi DY-57 that I bought several years ago. It had been set aside and not played for several years. I took it home and humidified it for a week before I did anything with it, as it was bone-dry.

I then cleaned it up and polished the heck out of it. The set-up was fine, and I put a new set of Elixir Lights on it. It looked great, but didn't sound like much.

I took it out to the front porch on a nice afternoon and started strumming away. It was not at all loud and sounded kind of muffled.

And then, voila! It was as if somebody flipped a switch and that thing turned on and became a guitar again! The volume jumped and it rang out clear as a bell. It was remarkable! My wife was sitting behind me and I turned around and she was looking at me and said "what just happened?" She heard it too!

That was a really good guitar, but like a dummy I sold it. I recently got another one, and it is in the shop right now for a setup. I pick it later today, am anxious to see how it turns out.

This is more how ive experienced this opening up. even more dramatic
with mandolins. Your playin along and all of a sudden it just blooms.

[bufflehead]

Originally Posted by Wade Hampton

But I'm speaking strictly for myself and am NOT attempting to cast doubt on anyone else's experiences. Many would-be debunkers who challenge the idea of, say, guitars breaking in, seem to follow this logic pattern:


1.) I can't hear it;

2.) Therefore it doesn't exist;

3.) Therefore all you poor fools are deluding yourselves.

Nicely put. But what Wade terms a "logic pattern," I would call an epistemological discourse.

Not to nitpick, of course.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Face it: they sulk if you ignore them.

Bob

Hi Bob

I know…the other day I caught one of mine checking his cell phone in the middle of the song we were playing!!

[JC.]

The question isn't whether they sleep. The question is what do they dream about???

[LadysSolo]

Originally Posted by Bob Womack

Face it: they sulk if you ignore them.

Bob

I agree with this - Mine definitely sulk, and the more I play them the happier they seem to be, and more cooperative with getting the notes right (or is this just the result of practicing/playing more?)

[DesertTwang]

I'm a scientist by training, and that training tells me that as much as I love a hypothesis, there needs to be some kind of mechanistic explanation for that hypothesis to be true.

I'm not judging whether guitars do open/close or don't, but my scientific training tells to be cautious about putting too much faith into what's simply a subjective impression. My brain, my ears, my fingers --- all those things are not objective observers. Quite the contrary, they are active participants in the whole equation. What a good scientist does is make every attempt to take out the active participant in an experiment. That's why clinical studies are double-blinded (if they're good). Because if you simply asked the participants who took the placebo, they would tell you, "Oh yes, this drug you gave me works really great!"

This is how I think about anyone who claims a guitar opens up or closes down and bases that statement simply on their subjective experience.

Please note that I'm not saying such a statement cannot be true (it might be!). All I'm saying is it cannot be trusted, at least not under the purview of what is considered reliable science.

I think about it this way: Whenever I play with a metronome, I could swear the metronome is off the beat and strays from the timing.

But if I came here and stated that as a fact, people would not take me seriously. Why? Is that statement really so fundamentally different?

So why do we do essentially the same thing with the issue of guitars opening up/closing down in the absence of any scientifically sound, mechanistic explanation of how exactly that process of opening up/closing down would actually work in reality? I'm talking on a mechanistic, material level, in other words, on the level of wood, the heavily treated and processed remains of a dead biological tissue.

Another scientific principle is Occam's Razor: The idea that if you have a bunch of possible explanations for a phenomenon, more than likely, the simpler one is the correct one. In this example, the two possible explanations are: 1) a lifeless, manufactured object changes its characteristics by some unexplained, potentially magical mechanism, or, 2) a living, thinking, feeling, hearing object which happens to be the most complex in existence in our entire solar system changes its perception by one of the millions of possible mechanisms that have been proven to participate in how humans feel, think, perceive etc.

According to Occam's Razor, the answer which possibility is the more likely one is pretty straightforward.

The scientist in me also reminds me to remain open to new, unknown ways of how the world works, and yes, I am absolutely willing and ready to be convinced of how such a mechanism could work toward the effects that so many claim to have experienced (I haven't, by the way), but until somebody does exactly that, the scientist in me reminds me to remain skeptical.

[Red_Label]

I do agree that guitars tighten up and get less tuneful if left neglected for a period of time. I've experienced it many times on guitars over the years. I have several guitars in the closet right now that seem to be doing that, since others are receiving my current attention.

[AcousticDreams]

Originally Posted by jmat

My experience is yes for some guitars but not all guitars have the same characteristics. My Adi topped Collings seems to needs a wake up while My Sexauer guitars seem more ready to go. I had some cedar topped guitars (now sold) that seemed to never change.

Originally Posted by jaymarsch

I play with a light touch and have several guitar playing friends who play with a much heavier attack. I find that if they have played my guitars for a while then I go to play them, the tone seems more alive to me, like they have woken up from the meditative stupor that my playing must have put them in. So it does seem to me that guitars are totally capable of both opening up and closing down.

Best,
Jayne

Originally Posted by tippy5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPgft749Pic

instrument exercise.

While there have been several threads in the past about this subject matter, I find this Thread's comments to be most logical in all areas, for & against.

Humidity, memory, string life, would most certainly all have an effect on our perception of sound.

However, two of the most interesting new concepts would be Jaymarsch observation about playing intensity & Jmat's observation about tops & or Luthier's build design.

The difference between heavy touch and light touch playing is hard to deny. This can make a difference in so many areas including Recording techniques, string choices, and size of guitar. I would assume that heavier playing would put more vibrations into the guitar.

The concept of different wood tops and different Luthier builds of tops also makes good sense. While Spruces may share similar qualities, their grain structure & stiffness varies. It is not out of the realm of possibilities that different wood tops and build structures need more or less time to open up.

And of course tippy5's 60 minute segment on Strats is hard to deny.

[Rodger Knox]

Originally Posted by DesertTwang

I'm a scientist by training, and that training tells me that as much as I love a hypothesis, there needs to be some kind of mechanistic explanation for that hypothesis to be true.

I'm not judging whether guitars do open/close or don't, but my scientific training tells to be cautious about putting too much faith into what's simply a subjective impression. My brain, my ears, my fingers --- all those things are not objective observers. Quite the contrary, they are active participants in the whole equation. What a good scientist does is make every attempt to take out the active participant in an experiment. That's why clinical studies are double-blinded (if they're good). Because if you simply asked the participants who took the placebo, they would tell you, "Oh yes, this drug you gave me works really great!"

This is how I think about anyone who claims a guitar opens up or closes down and bases that statement simply on their subjective experience.

Please note that I'm not saying such a statement cannot be true (it might be!). All I'm saying is it cannot be trusted, at least not under the purview of what is considered reliable science.

I think about it this way: Whenever I play with a metronome, I could swear the metronome is off the beat and strays from the timing.

But if I came here and stated that as a fact, people would not take me seriously. Why? Is that statement really so fundamentally different?

So why do we do essentially the same thing with the issue of guitars opening up/closing down in the absence of any scientifically sound, mechanistic explanation of how exactly that process of opening up/closing down would actually work in reality? I'm talking on a mechanistic, material level, in other words, on the level of wood, the heavily treated and processed remains of a dead biological tissue.

Another scientific principle is Occam's Razor: The idea that if you have a bunch of possible explanations for a phenomenon, more than likely, the simpler one is the correct one. In this example, the two possible explanations are: 1) a lifeless, manufactured object changes its characteristics by some unexplained, potentially magical mechanism, or, 2) a living, thinking, feeling, hearing object which happens to be the most complex in existence in our entire solar system changes its perception by one of the millions of possible mechanisms that have been proven to participate in how humans feel, think, perceive etc.

According to Occam's Razor, the answer which possibility is the more likely one is pretty straightforward.

The scientist in me also reminds me to remain open to new, unknown ways of how the world works, and yes, I am absolutely willing and ready to be convinced of how such a mechanism could work toward the effects that so many claim to have experienced (I haven't, by the way), but until somebody does exactly that, the scientist in me reminds me to remain skeptical.

Very good post! As for a mechanism, it's possible that the guitar top needs to "warm up" to operating temperature on the molecular level. Energy dissipated by the top is converted to heat, maybe that little bit of heat makes a difference. It's a stretch to explain why ambient temperature doesn't make any difference in this, but it may be possible. I don't believe it's true, but it could be.