The Acoustic Guitar Forum

Go Back   The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #61  
Old 10-08-2023, 03:21 PM
Alan Carruth Alan Carruth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,215
Default

Talk2Me wrote:
"I see there's no mention of the actual name of "the commercially available vibration device" they used."

It had been a long time since I read that article. The device they used works similarly to the ToneRite, in that it drives the top of the guitar with a 60 Hz signal, and not having used a ToneRite before, I assumed that it was the same device. My bad. I have since reviewed the article.

60 Hz is well below the pitch of any resonance of the guitar that can produce sound, so 'playing in' at that pitch seems unlikely to be useful. The device they used, whatever it was, input much less energy than playing, and produced very little sound output from the guitar. Perhaps the ToneRite does more?

The small sample size in the test was also an issue for me. I remember thinking at the time that I'd like to see a bigger study that was as well done.

It would have been nice if they had named the device so that other people could check their work, though...
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-08-2023, 03:54 PM
davidd davidd is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,771
Default

Will someone for once please state exactly what the Tonerite actually does on a physical basis that is a permanent change to the instrument? What changes take place in the wood, glue etc.? How are these changes scientifically proven? I'm tired of "I believe" and all the other metaphysical gobbledegook.
__________________
1990 Martin D16-M
Gibson J45
Eastman E8D-TC
Pono 0000-30DC
Yamaha FSX5, LS16, FG830, FSX700SC
Epiphone EF500-RAN
2001 Gibson '58 Reissue LP
2005, 2007 Gibson '60 Reissue LP Special (Red&TV Yel)
1972 Yamaha SG1500, 1978 LP500
Tele's and Strats
1969,1978 Princeton Reverb
1972 Deluxe Reverb
Epiphone Sheraton, Riviera
DeArmond T400
Ibanez AS73
Quilter Superblock US[/I]
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-08-2023, 04:03 PM
phavriluk phavriluk is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Granby, CT
Posts: 3,044
Default a thought

My opinion is that there's no changes to the guitar, but changes to the owner's bank balance.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-08-2023, 05:27 PM
Joseph Hanna Joseph Hanna is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Belmont Shore, CA
Posts: 3,240
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidd View Post
I'm tired of "I believe" and all the other metaphysical gobbledegook.
I can't tell you, David. I don't personally subscribe to the Tonerite/ToneTraveler notion. I will say, however, that I don't find the adherence to or dismissal of the subject much different than many of the acoustic guitar topics often discussed here, from bridge pins to nut material to string compounds to picks to Martin vs. Taylor and probably dozens of others that escape me at the moment. Calling for scientific proof of why Blue Chip picks sound better than Fender picks seems a titanic exercise in futility. The concepts are almost universally and singularly subjective. It's a harsh world out there, and if someone gets some enjoyment out of their ToneRite or their Dinosaur bridge pins or gosh knows whatever that may, in fact, seem a tad odd to me; instead of slinging darts, I tend to steer clear. That way...I don't get outwardly sideways on the gobbledegook. Live and let enjoy.

Last edited by Joseph Hanna; 10-09-2023 at 09:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-09-2023, 12:21 PM
Malcolm Kindnes Malcolm Kindnes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2,001
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidd View Post
Will someone for once please state exactly what the Tonerite actually does on a physical basis that is a permanent change to the instrument? What changes take place in the wood, glue etc.? How are these changes scientifically proven? I'm tired of "I believe" and all the other metaphysical gobbledegook.
Based on my experience, see previous post, it does nothing at all.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-09-2023, 12:30 PM
rick-slo's Avatar
rick-slo rick-slo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
Posts: 17,295
Default

IMO after a long bout of Tonerite there is possible enough humidity change in areas of the guitar top to make some difference (temporarily)... and then there is anticipatory positive thinking.
__________________
Derek Coombs
Youtube -> Website -> Music -> Tabs
Guitars by Mark Blanchard, Albert&Mueller, Paul Woolson, Collings, Composite Acoustics, and Derek Coombs

"Reality is that which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

Woods hands pick by eye and ear
Made to one with pride and love
To be that we hold so dear
A voice from heavens above
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10-09-2023, 12:38 PM
Alan Carruth Alan Carruth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,215
Default

davidd asked:
"Will someone for once please state exactly what the Tonerite actually does on a physical basis that is a permanent change to the instrument?"

That's the question we all want to see answered.

I came across a survey paper that I had printed out some time ago when I was looking for the copy of the Savart paper I thought I'd made. It's "Sound enhancement of musical instruments by 'playing them in': fact or fiction?", by Gregor Weldert, translated from the German by Nigel Edwards. It can be found at:
:https//www.researchgate/publication/320041676

In the 'Summary and Conclusion' he states:
"The available data on the objectively measurable effect through natural playing are inconsistent...."

"Artificial playing in through vibration treatment can produce measurable effects, but cannot be proved in every case."

"Subjective evaluations have only been made informally, or exist only as individual case descriptions... Even if these ... are numerous they remain exactly what they are: anecdotal individual case descriptions."

More work needs to be done to settle the question of whether there is some phenomenon there to be explained. If it turns out that there is, then we can start to figure out the cause(s).
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-09-2023, 08:23 PM
The Bard Rocks The Bard Rocks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mohawk Valley
Posts: 8,813
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
davidd asked:
"Will someone for once please state exactly what the Tonerite actually does on a physical basis that is a permanent change to the instrument?"

That's the question we all want to see answered.

I came across a survey paper that I had printed out some time ago when I was looking for the copy of the Savart paper I thought I'd made. It's "Sound enhancement of musical instruments by 'playing them in': fact or fiction?", by Gregor Weldert, translated from the German by Nigel Edwards. It can be found at:
:https//www.researchgate/publication/320041676

In the 'Summary and Conclusion' he states:
"The available data on the objectively measurable effect through natural playing are inconsistent...."

"Artificial playing in through vibration treatment can produce measurable effects, but cannot be proved in every case."

"Subjective evaluations have only been made informally, or exist only as individual case descriptions... Even if these ... are numerous they remain exactly what they are: anecdotal individual case descriptions."

More work needs to be done to settle the question of whether there is some phenomenon there to be explained. If it turns out that there is, then we can start to figure out the cause(s).
Exactly. What. I. Think.

But you, for obvious reasons, carry greater authority and are more believable.
__________________
The Bard Rocks

Fay OM Sinker Redwood/Tiger Myrtle
Sexauer L00 Adk/Magnolia For Sale
Hatcher Jumbo Bearclaw/"Bacon" Padauk
Goodall Jumbo POC/flamed Mahogany
Appollonio 12 POC/Myrtle
MJ Franks Resonator, all Australian Blackwood
Blackbird "Lucky 13" - carbon fiber
'31 National Duolian
+ many other stringed instruments.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 10-09-2023, 08:24 PM
YamaYairi YamaYairi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 2,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
Talk2Me wrote:
"I see there's no mention of the actual name of "the commercially available vibration device" they used."

It had been a long time since I read that article. The device they used works similarly to the ToneRite, in that it drives the top of the guitar with a 60 Hz signal, and not having used a ToneRite before, I assumed that it was the same device. My bad. I have since reviewed the article.

60 Hz is well below the pitch of any resonance of the guitar that can produce sound, so 'playing in' at that pitch seems unlikely to be useful. The device they used, whatever it was, input much less energy than playing, and produced very little sound output from the guitar. Perhaps the ToneRite does more?

The small sample size in the test was also an issue for me. I remember thinking at the time that I'd like to see a bigger study that was as well done.

It would have been nice if they had named the device so that other people could check their work, though...
When I used the Tonerite I had the guitar on a stand in a 20' x 15' bedroom and the sound was loud enough that I had to close the door to the room. I am sure that the sound level depends on the guitar, but with mine it was pretty loud.
__________________
Warren

My website:
http://draudio56.wix.com/warren-bendler

"It's hard...calming the Beatle inside of me."
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-10-2023, 01:43 PM
Alan Carruth Alan Carruth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,215
Default

One of Weldart's conclusions was that more power input was more likely to be effective. The device used in the Savart paper produced very little sound.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-10-2023, 03:54 PM
RogerHaggstrom RogerHaggstrom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Örnsköldsvik, Sweden
Posts: 168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Carruth View Post
I came across a survey paper that I had printed out some time ago when I was looking for the copy of the Savart paper I thought I'd made. It's "Sound enhancement of musical instruments by 'playing them in': fact or fiction?", by Gregor Weldert, translated from the German by Nigel Edwards. It can be found at:
:https//www.researchgate/publication/320041676
I like that article. Here we have a plethora of other plausible theories than mine to explain the playing in effect from vibration. I particularly like the one assuming that the "glue" around the stiff cellulose fibers will get more fluid when moved, in that case, all the moving parts in the guitar will get less internal friction from a vibration session or playing.

Someone will work it out - sometime
__________________
Many ways to do wrong, fewer ways to do right
www.gammelgura.se
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-10-2023, 04:30 PM
davidd davidd is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,771
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerHaggstrom View Post
I like that article. Here we have a plethora of other plausible theories than mine to explain the playing in effect from vibration. I particularly like the one assuming that the "glue" around the stiff cellulose fibers will get more fluid when moved, in that case, all the moving parts in the guitar will get less internal friction from a vibration session or playing.

Someone will work it out - sometime
Is this for real? The glue gets more "fluid" ... "internal friction from a vibration session"?
__________________
1990 Martin D16-M
Gibson J45
Eastman E8D-TC
Pono 0000-30DC
Yamaha FSX5, LS16, FG830, FSX700SC
Epiphone EF500-RAN
2001 Gibson '58 Reissue LP
2005, 2007 Gibson '60 Reissue LP Special (Red&TV Yel)
1972 Yamaha SG1500, 1978 LP500
Tele's and Strats
1969,1978 Princeton Reverb
1972 Deluxe Reverb
Epiphone Sheraton, Riviera
DeArmond T400
Ibanez AS73
Quilter Superblock US[/I]
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-10-2023, 04:40 PM
RogerHaggstrom RogerHaggstrom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Örnsköldsvik, Sweden
Posts: 168
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidd View Post
Is this for real? The glue gets more "fluid" ... "internal friction from a vibration session"?
Read the article. The "glue" is the lignin and the hemicellulosa...
__________________
Many ways to do wrong, fewer ways to do right
www.gammelgura.se
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-11-2023, 01:09 AM
colins's Avatar
colins colins is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 3,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by davidd View Post
Is this for real? The glue gets more "fluid" ... "internal friction from a vibration session"?
It’s been a while since I studied materials as part of my engineering degree but my recollection is that physical changes (what some might call changes in fluidity in some circumstances) are quite possible to achieve via external influences. Some changes are long lasting while others are short-term, depending on the material and the influence.

Heat treatment of metals is a classic example of an external influence, in this case heat, having a long-lasting effect on the material in question. Cracking of metals due to vibration is well known.

With respect to plastics there are two completely different responses to heat, one class being thermo-setting and the other being thermo-plastic. Plastics also respond different to external forces such as tension.

Wood is a mix of polymers interspersed with a matrix of lignin. The polymers (cellulose and hemicellulose) have quite different volatilities and responses to heat and other influences (acids and enzymes for example). I might use different words to Roger but it doesn’t surprise me at all that vibrations to wood could have short-term or long-term effects on the wood.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-11-2023, 12:50 PM
davidd davidd is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,771
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerHaggstrom View Post
Read the article. The "glue" is the lignin and the hemicellulosa...
I tried to slog through most of it but I found this in the last paragraph interesting...


"Subjective evaluations have only been made informally [27], or exist only as individual case descriptions by satisfied customers of the suppliers of the method equipment. Even if these evaluations are numerous, they remain exactly what they are: anecdotal individual case descriptions. Such customer opinions can theoretically be psychologically explained. Proof through controlled double-blind tests has not been brought. But this does not mean that the method has no audible effect. Clear evidence is not yet available, and there is still no answer to the question whether the changes are felt to be mostly positive or not."

So we are back to people believing whatever they want to believe.
__________________
1990 Martin D16-M
Gibson J45
Eastman E8D-TC
Pono 0000-30DC
Yamaha FSX5, LS16, FG830, FSX700SC
Epiphone EF500-RAN
2001 Gibson '58 Reissue LP
2005, 2007 Gibson '60 Reissue LP Special (Red&TV Yel)
1972 Yamaha SG1500, 1978 LP500
Tele's and Strats
1969,1978 Princeton Reverb
1972 Deluxe Reverb
Epiphone Sheraton, Riviera
DeArmond T400
Ibanez AS73
Quilter Superblock US[/I]
Reply With Quote
Reply

  The Acoustic Guitar Forum > General Acoustic Guitar and Amplification Discussion > General Acoustic Guitar Discussion

Thread Tools





All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, The Acoustic Guitar Forum
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=