Opening up. What have you observed?

[AndrewG]

Wade pretty much summed-up my experience; although atmospheric variables can make the wonderful guitar you played yesterday sound like a real dog today, depending on how much moisture it has absorbed. But generally over time I would say an overall 'depth' of tone becomes more apparent.

[merlin666]

I am not sure if opening up is the right term but I still own my first "good" (braz) guitar that I bought new more than 40 years ago. I bought it mainly because of its big bass and pronounced crystal clear trebles. Now that it has gracefully aged it sounds very warm and balanced with many overtones, and it needs a very light touch. I don't play it often as I prefer the more direct sound of my newer guitars.

[dneal]

I can think of three distinctions of "opening up".

The first is the initial settling. This seems to me to be completely rational. A newly built guitar will react to the initial stresses it's subjected to.

The second is the "opening up" people usually think of. This is the aging and perhaps material fatigue a new or unplayed guitar experiences. It's certainly more subjective of a phenomenon, but it makes sense to me that bass in particular increases slightly as the top "loosens up" and gains more excursion. Classical players think they play out, and trebles decrease. It could be an issue of eq (as mentioned already). I have experienced "tight" guitars that changed over time, but I don't believe in buying a guitar you don't like the sound of in hopes that it will improve with playing. If it doesn't have enough bass to suit you, move on to a different guitar.

The last is the "opening up" that seems to occur after playing for a short period. This is subjective as well, but I have experienced guitars sounding better after 30 minutes or so of playing.

[Misifus]

I have only ever had one guitar from the moment the luthier finished it, my Kinscherff High Noon. When I received it from him the sound was magnificent I had no complaints at all, but careful observation led me to notice that the sixth string was not as loud as the fifth. Playing all six strings slowly let me hear that the bass string was less loud than its neighbor. After about a year of frequent playing, I noticed that the sixth string was now as loud as the fifth.

As Wade and others commented, this didn’t affect the higher strings, only the low one. I observed carefully, and I am certain that a change took place. Again, this didn’t really change the overall character of the sound of the guitar, the sound was and is excellent. However, there was a change, a welcome change, in the sound in the low end.

[min7b5]

I think if you have a lightly built guitar, you play a lot, and you have a substantial attack, a new guitar changes quite a bit in the first few weeks/months. I agree with what was said earlier in terms of basically it all happening in the bass/lower mid-range, and using the word “open“ is about as good as a descriptor I can think of for what happens.

My own anecdotal experience -and this is obviously impossible to quantify- is it kinda keeps developing in that direction until it hits peak ripeness about the time the guitar need new frets -which for me on my main guitar is about three years.

And though this might not be a popular opinion, I find a lot of people who have, say, a brand new dreadnought, with light gauge strings, that play very lightly, less than an hour a day, and not every day.... will say the guitars don't change at all. I don’t think that’s a big surprise.

[gmel555]

Have had several different new guitars over the years in various body sizes and tone woods. Generally they become more vibrant and dynamic. Vibrant in the sense of more sustain, complexity and better note separation. Dynamic in the sense that a light touch can produce notes that -although low in volume- are still complex and full; and that a heavy touch doesn't overload into loud mush, but instead retains nice complexity, full/rich note separation. Another way I notice responsiveness is when I can play more lightly than before and get volume and "musicality" that previously required a heavier touch.

Generally agree with Wade about the treble side but did have one guitar with a sinker redwood top where the treble really did became more vibrant over the first year.

[alnico5]

I confess that I don't remember what my 412 sounded like in 1996, other than I liked it enough to buy it. I do think the top has taken on a warmer shade of brown.

[PiousDevil]

Originally Posted by zmf

This is also my problem with the idea of "opening up". Not saying it doesn't happen. Quite the contrary given that most guitar owners comment on it. But what is the valid reference point over the course of years? And what else has been happening during that time?

All I know is that I've had a few guitars for more than five years and they sound great. Different? Not sure.

My brother got an Eastman E10OM a year or two ago. I played it when he got it, and it was nice enough, but I remember not being overly impressed, thinking it sounded a bit tight. I didn't play it again until a year or so later, after he had been playing it regularly. The next time I played it I was blown away by how full and rich the tone sounded. It is absolutely gorgeous now.

[zmf]

Originally Posted by Misifus

When I received it from him the sound was magnificent I had no complaints at all, but careful observation led me to notice that the sixth string was not as loud as the fifth. Playing all six strings slowly let me hear that the bass string was less loud than its neighbor. After about a year of frequent playing, I noticed that the sixth string was now as loud as the fifth.

Originally Posted by PiousDevil

My brother got an Eastman E10OM a year or two ago. I played it when he got it, and it was nice enough, but I remember not being overly impressed, thinking it sounded a bit tight. I didn't play it again until a year or so later, after he had been playing it regularly. The next time I played it I was blown away by how full and rich the tone sounded. It is absolutely gorgeous now.

These two different types of reference points sound like good methods for assessing change. Perhaps if I'd paid attention to the string balance from the outset.....

We usually don't step away from our guitars for a year, so the change can be too gradual to notice. The old "warming up a frog in a pan of water" thing.

[Russ C]

Great relies everyone - about as much logic and objectivity as my question could get I think.
My own acoustic guitars really don't get enough working out (I'm on electrics most of the time) and that may well be why my own observations are a bit thin on the ground.
One specific I can recall is a Maton Messiah (dread) I bought nearly new in the early 90's. Its only weakness to me was a noticeable bloom (perhaps a slight wolf note) on low E which has disappeared over the years.

I can't help conecting the "drier" and more responsive tones I hear in torrefied guitars and older guitars to the higher frequencies. I thought trebles may have received more mention - but no. Perhaps the increased clarity that's been mentioned and maybe some shift in mids is what I perceive.

[SuperB23]

My experience is that a guitar improves for the positive tonally the more it gets played. This is more true for Spruce topped guitars. It also has a more dramatic improvement on a guitar that is freshly built and recently strung up for the first time.

[Wade Hampton]

Pious wrote:

Originally Posted by PiousDevil

My brother got an Eastman E10OM a year or two ago. I played it when he got it, and it was nice enough, but I remember not being overly impressed, thinking it sounded a bit tight. I didn't play it again until a year or so later, after he had been playing it regularly. The next time I played it I was blown away by how full and rich the tone sounded. It is absolutely gorgeous now.

A number of years ago an acquaintance of mine bought the least expensive F-5 style mandolin that Weber made: mahogany back and sides, satin finish, no binding. He let me play it, and I was appalled: I thought it was a terrible instrument. No bass response to speak of, not very loud, definitely on the tinny side.

He didn’t ask me what I thought of it, and I didn’t volunteer my opinion because he was very pleased with it. He had only recently taken up mandolin, and this was his first high quality instrument.

Maybe five or six years after that I was riding the Alaska Marine Highway ferry across Prince William Sound to teach at a music camp in Cordova, Alaska, and my acquaintance’s teenaged son was on the same trip. He was going to the camp as a student. He had that same mandolin I’d tried years before with him, and offered to let me play it.

It was the most dramatic change in an instrument that I had ever witnessed: it had changed in EVERY respect. Substantially more bass response and sustain, sweeter mids, and as gmel noticed on his redwood-topped guitar, even the treble response was more prominent.

It was also much easier to play with a lighter touch, because the whole mandolin had come alive in a way it simply hadn’t been before. In the intervening years since I had last played it, it went from a total clunker that I’d played mainly out of politeness to an instrument I would have liked to own.

I had encountered instruments that had changed noticeably over time, and continue to, but that was the single most dramatic example.


Wade Hampton Miller

[DaveKell]

I have a 1982 Yairi DY90 super abalone willed to me last year by a wealthy friend who went to japan and directly commissioned it from Kazuo Yairi. My friend had an extensive collection he maintained in pristine condition. This guitar had opened up to a sound that should’ve been reserved for the gods. Everywhere I played it I was asked what I’d take for it. No other guitar I’ve owned in 50 years ever came close to the matured voice it had. It was unfortunately demolished in a bad car wreck. Tomorrow it’s going off to a highly respected restoration guy who worked 22 years in the Martin repair shop. He’s confident he can make a survivor out of it. With 5 splits in the top I’m concerned the sound will not be the same. That will be a tragic outcome but the restoration guy doesn’t think that will happen. This guitar made a believer out of me of the concert of opening up b

[justonwo]

I have a number of luthier friends and have commissioned a number of guitars, so I've had the opportunity to play more than a few guitars moments after birth. They usually sound very stiff and one dimensional. The biggest changes I've experienced happen in the first 20-30 hours of playing, where the guitar starts to develop sustain and overtones. The attack starts to sound less staccato and harsh. I've heard brand new guitars freshly strung develop from complete duds in the first 30 minutes to gorgeous guitars.

After the initial 20-30 hours, the rate of change - as one might expect - is much slower. The changes are more nuanced and hard to track. I don't have a long enough musical memory of my instruments to recognize the change that happens over years.

[Wade Hampton]

Juston wrote:

Originally Posted by justonwo

I have a number of luthier friends and have commissioned a number of guitars, so I've had the opportunity to play more than a few guitars moments after birth. They usually sound very stiff and one dimensional. The biggest changes I've experienced happen in the first 20-30 hours of playing, where the guitar starts to develop sustain and overtones. The attack starts to sound less staccato and harsh. I've heard brand new guitars freshly strung develop from complete duds in the first 30 minutes to gorgeous guitars.

Same here. I was in Roy McAlister's shop when he strung up the terz guitar he'd built for me for the first time ever, and in just five minutes of playing there'd been a noticeable change. I took it with me that same evening to a music party at Bob Alman's house in Santa Rosa, California, and Joe McNamara (then the West Coast Martin rep) and I sat together playing tunes. After about twenty minutes Joe said:

"Man, the sound of that little guitar has changed since you sat down!"

So the sound on an absolutely brand new guitar changes in a dramatic way that most players never get to observe.

Juston continued:

Originally Posted by justonwo

After the initial 20-30 hours, the rate of change - as one might expect - is much slower. The changes are more nuanced and hard to track. I don't have a long enough musical memory of my instruments to recognize the change that happens over years.

It's definitely slower after that initial rush.


whm