Why the traditional sound hole?

[RussellHawaii]

Why do we really need the round sound hole in the middle of a flattop guitar? We’ve seen the success of off-set soundholes, such as with Emerald, Wilborn, McPherson and others. They sound great. This seems to bring only advantages and no disadvantages.
The Skytop design with no sound hole on top and only large soundports on the side, seems to me the next step in guitar evolution. Lots of sound to the player and a full soundboard to vibrate without restrictions.
So, why the sound hole?

[L20A]

To quote Tevye from "The Fiddler On The Roof"
TRADITION

[jaymarsch]

Since the traditional sound hole has worked fine for centuries, why not have the round sound hole? There have also been the f holes a la mandolins and fiddles and offset holes show up now and again.
I confess to being somewhat of a traditionalist so I guess I prefer round sound holes in acoustic guitars unless it’s an arch top or an octave mandolin.
I imagine that most luthiers want to emulate the formula that has worked for a long time before deviating from the traditional design and construction of an acoustic guitar since every change has the potential to compromise something else.
Best,
Jayne

[brencat]

Don't care for the look of offset soundholes or anything avant garde for that matter. Put that stuff in a museum please, and not in my lap

[rollypolly]

so you can reach in to get your pick.

[warfrat73]

As a practical matter, a fairly large central soundhole also makes a lot of repairs easier. Regluing a bridge, or loose brace, or working on the bridge plate, cleating a crack, etc. are all a lot easier if you can stick your hand in there and do the work and/or reach it with a clamp.

[619TF]

Ummm...because it works?

[RussellHawaii]

Ok, so it’s ‘tradition,’ I get that. Moving forward, though…
For those of us who enjoy evolution as well as respect for tradition, my question remains. This openness to progress has allowed cutaways, bevels, soundports and pickups to advance the guitar design.
For the ‘traditionalist,’ I would ask ‘but what if it’s really better? Shouldn’t it be considered?’ The ability to design braces that are ideal for a large uninterrupted soundboard is a big deal.
I’m a traditionalist myself, and my old Martins will not be getting modern upgrades. But there’s a place for advancement. Typewriters are traditional, but we use word processors now because it’s an undeniable advancement.
A side port or offset sound hole ejects picks just fine. And I can reach both hands inside my Skytop’s side ports for maintenance!

[frankmcr]

No, "tradition" is the king or queen of the U.K. being driven to important ceremonies in a horse-drawn carriage.

Three or four hundred years of a particular design having proved itself effective is "experience".

[tadol]

The thing about evolution is it takes a lot of time to determine what will thrive, what just survives, and what was just an interesting or unusual alteration. Usually, takes more than a couple generations. You say “we’ve seen the success of the offset soundholes” but have we? I’ve seen a couple that sound and seem good on video - and a couple that didn’t seem to have “it” in person. Much like guitars that are built very “traditionally” -

We’ll see how they are doing 5, 10, 25 years from now - but if you like them, definitely support those builders!

[rllink]

It is out of the way under the strings. Less chance of snagging a pick or a finger. I built a ukulele with a half dozen holes of descending sizes in an arc across the top. I thought it looked cool. I kept catching a finger when I strummed though. If it were a guitar and I was playing with a pick I would have ended up dive bombing the strings to stay out of them. It also sounded like a dud, but I'm not sure it was because of the sound holes. I think it was over braced. But the sound holes were in the way, at least for me.

I'm sure one could design a guitar with the holes where they wouldn't get in the way, but why?

[Krab]

If look at the math that Yamaha did when they started making guitars, they left it alone. That speaks volume.

[steelvibe]

Because Martin.

[dspoel]

Just guessing here, but having a somewhat symmetric instrument could add to the mechanical stability of the instrument. It could also influence vibrational properties, but exactly how would need sophisticated measurements.

[619TF]

Originally Posted by Krab

If look at the math that Yamaha did when they started making guitars, they left it alone. That speaks volume.

Ah but WHICH math did Yamaha use? The math where they calculated physical size, sound wave properties, wood quality and placement or the financial math where they figured that's the way it's always been done and to do otherwise would be costly to design, produce and might not sell so well? If you've "looked at the math" I'd like to know what you saw as THAT probably "speaks volumes" more than anything else.