The "(un)importance" of acoustic traits when amplifying?

[Daniel Grenier]

I'm curious...

Where do you place the importance, or more to the point, the "un-importance" of top notch acoustic traits when plugging in - especially with non-mic amplification.

IOW, why buy an expensive Martin (or other hi-end) if you intend to plug in only? As long as the guitar has good playability, I think buying a basic guitar w/good pick up will produce as-good results regardless of its acoustic pedigree.

Agreed? Disagreed?

[rct]

As a player of only amplified acoustics when I use them out there, I disagree. As usual, nothing in guitar world is that simple.

rct

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Daniel Grenier

I'm curious...

Where do you place the importance, or more to the point, the "un-importance" of top notch acoustic traits when plugging in - especially with non-mic amplification.

IOW, why buy an expensive Martin (or other hi-end) if you intend to plug in only? As long as the guitar has good playability, I think buying a basic guitar w/good pick up will produce as-good results regardless of its acoustic pedigree.

Agreed? Disagreed?

"As good as results ? No --- usable , workable , sufficient or good enough , for the use situation ? Certainly can.

You cannot escape the reality that all amplified sound ultimately is only as good as the weakest element in the chain.

BUT:
What you are actually talking about is a subjective assessment as to how important the sound of the guitar is to you the player, verses what kind of realistic budget one has , and then factoring in relationship to what the specific venue or reason for amplification is .

This creates a significant amount of variables that renders blanket conclusions one way or the other not really viable " It all depends"

What may be sufficient for sitting in a subway may be fairly different than what is sufficient for a solo act at Carnegie Hall . And with everything in between things change

[Methos1979]

There's a certain amount of truth to what you are saying but it's more about the type of music/venue you are playing and then the type of audience you're performing to. In a small and relatively intimate venue where you are playing delicate and emotive acoustic material the tone of your guitar is still going to be playing a big part of the overall sound (depending on your pickup choices). In other words, the differences between a mahogany guitar and a rosewood guitar are still going to chime through and each of those will provide benefits and challenges that your audience will appreciate even if they don't realize it. But if you're playing honky tonk barroom country with a loud and drunk audience then no one will notice or care a lick about the nuances of your acoustic guitar tone.

That's why so many bigger name performers play lower end guitars on stage like Takamines or Ovations. For them it's about a rock solid guitar that amplifies yet handles feedback well and gets the job done and holds up to the rigors of road life while someone like Ed Gerhard is playing carefully selected tone machines built just for him. As a small venue performer I have two guitars. One I take when conditions are prime - environmentally and physically pristine (the Martin) - and the other I take when there's a chance that it's not (the Emerald). As with everything, it's a layered decision process and there is no one right answer for anyone. But I know if I was playing loud bars for drunks, I'd be taking the Emerald always or I'd be looking for a beater with a magnetic soundhole pickup.

[robj144]

An acoustic amplification system should be as transparent as possible. So, it matters a lot.

[L20A]

I have never heard a pick up that allows my guitar to sound the same way it does acoustically.
That is why I use a mic when on stage.

There is a lot of talk about the K & K pick up but I have never heard a guitar with that pick up in it be able to compare.

A mic isn't always going to work for every situation so pick ups are the alternative.

[1Charlie]

Live performance involves three basic elements:

1. How the guitar plays.
2. How the guitar sounds, amplified.
3. How the guitar looks (which shouldn't matter, but we all know it does).

I like to treat audiences to instruments that they usually wouldn't have a chance to see/hear otherwise, vintage guitars that capture a certain vibe. I use a soundhole M1 to amplify them, which gives me decent tone and does not permanently alter the guitar.

Do I worry about them? Nah. Most are "players", with years and years of pick rash, dings and such. But they look cool, play well, and sound as good as anything else I hear other musicians plug in.

I have yet to come across a "stage" guitar that I liked.

[Julian Mount]

For me, it's about what your guitar pick up and amplifier is making louder. Excluding wholly electromagnetic (ie: soundhole) pick ups, your under saddle or K&K type pickup is detecting the vibrations produced in your instrument made by the strings. So good vibrations (!) when amplified make a better sound.

[printer2]

As said, it depends. Just like saying which guitar is best when not specifying what type of music to be played without knowing the type music and the type venue it is hard to say. Solo amplified coffee shop or in front of a medium loud band with drums is going be different. I'm building a guitar for a relative that wants it for the stage. I asked how he play's, he said he is more a strummer. Also important will be that it does not feed back from the sound out of the monitors. Both requirements led me to build a box that is not as responsive as it could have been.

[Jambi]

I've ventured down this path before. I thought that if I was going to record and play open mics the majority of the time, why not focus my budget on fixing up my old guitar (all laminate) and buying better mics/pickups/effects/mixers to mold the after sound how I choose.

A guitarist I respect a lot put it this way:
Any pickups put in an acoustic are going to get a better quality input from a better top, low end, mids etc...
harmonics, overtones etc... need good volume and presence to be picked up by mics, internal or otherwise.

And the hard and fast rule of mixing is to have the best sound to start with as possible to do the least amount of molding later.

[Jambi]

Another thing:

No matter how much you record/play out, this is an acoustic instrument we're talking about. You're going to end up playing it acoustically for a good amount of time. You should enjoy that time...

It's not that the unplugged tone is unimportant or doesn't affect the amplified sound, it's that EQ, speakers, effects, modeling, filtering, etc. often render the guitar's "natural" tone irrelevant.

If I was buying a guitar that was exclusively going to be plugged in -- especially one with a UST -- I'd worry about playabilty more than tone. The money I'd save on solid wood construction would be better spent on good electronics and tone-shaping pedals.

If I used a microphone system of any kind, I'd pay more attention to the unplugged tone.

[Nymuso]

Originally Posted by Daniel Grenier

As long as the guitar has good playability, I think buying a basic guitar w/good pick up will produce as-good results regardless of its acoustic pedigree.

I do not disagree, which is why my main gigging guitar is a relatively inexpensive Godin A6 Ultra, which doesn't sound like much unplugged but sounds tremendous through my PA, plus I don't have to fight the feedback war when running sound from the stage. However, I also have a Martin HD-35 with a Baggs M80 which serves as an excellent gigging alternative - but - also allows me to record a good acoustic sound when I need to, to have an enjoyable, good sounding instrument for jamming or to use in those situations where the guitar is miked by a competent contract / house sound person. I also enjoy playing it on the back porch or couch.

[Big*Al]

For the sake of the best possible sound, I generally use a K&K Meridian external microphone when playing out instead of the K&K Pure Mini pickups installed in my guitars. I have spent a great deal of time figuring out the optimum mic placement, amplifier placement, and preamp settings for the best possible reproduction of my guitars.

I mostly play in various ensembles at churches with other instruments and gaggles of vocalists . . . and the congregation joining in too. Can anybody there actually hear or appreciate any level of subtle acoustic guitar nuances in that setting? Naw. Not a chance . . . but I'm kind of OCD about it anyway.

[noledog]

* Disagreed...as full-time performer I've used Guild, Lowden, Goodall, multiple MIJ Takamines, and Martin Standard models. They DO make an "important difference" sonically imo, especially with the newer Aura Image systems like the one I have in my 000-18e Retro. I also think some mags designs like the Baggs M1A and M80 also bring out the characteristics of an individual guitar; having had them in my Lowden, Goodall and Martin D-18.

** btw to Methos comment that "bigger name performers play lower end guitars on stage like Takamines"; well the MIJ Taks that many bigger named artists use I would not consider to be "lower end" instruments imo. Having owned and performed with several over the years, I find them exceptional both acoustically and amplified. Take a look at a Pro Series from the P1's that start at 1,200 to the P7's that are close 3k. All of the pro artist's I know of like Blake Shelton, Toby Keith, Jake Allen, Lance Allen, etc are using MIJ models, not the low end G series. Having a BTO Goodall next to my MIJ Taks, I've compared fit n finish as well as wood grade and the MIJ Taks I've had compare favorably, tho sonically they are remarkably and subjectively different.....I currently perform with two standard Martins and one MIJ Takamine, they are my favs and the two series within their brands that I enjoy most personally and as a professional artist.

eric