"Harmonic Content"....discuss

Lewy · November 2016

It's something that gets talked about a lot but just wondering if and how anyone actually consciously hears it. If I play a few harmonics on a string and then hit it open, I can hear them faintly in the openly hit string, especially as the fundamental note dies....often I'll hear the fifth harmonic die out last on certain strings.

Buts it's only when I'm doing that sort of conscious cork sniffing that I'm really aware of anything other than the fundamental in the sound of notes when I play them.

Is anyone's experience different?

paul_c2 · November 2016

Of course, everyone's experience will be slightly different, because our hearing and perception is all unique. However, I think you always subconciously hear the harmonics of any given musical note, since it is this which makes up the timbre of the sound. This is why a human voice sounds different to an oboe, or a clarinet, or a guitar, or a piano etc etc etc. Then of course there's variations within each type of musical instrument; and variations across the decay, sustain and release of each note of each guitar etc etc. Whether the change in volume of each harmonic overtone is significant enough to be perceptible to the majority, or a minority, of listeners is of course subjective.

"Aware of anything other than the fundamental" - I think if you can identify the timbre/tone of a particular instrument, then you've subconciously identified the range of harmonics you're hearing anyway.

Of course, if you listen to anything clearly (ie in isolation and at sufficient volume, with a focus on listening to it) then you'll notice more than if you hear it in a mix, or distantly etc

stickyfiddle · November 2016

It's worth bearing in mind that unless you're damping all the other strings, some of them will vibrate sympathetically via the resonance of the guitar, which is precisely why you can hear those 5ths resonating.

Lewy · November 2016

stickyfiddle said:

It's worth bearing in mind that unless you're damping all the other strings, some of them will vibrate sympathetically via the resonance of the guitar, which is precisely why you can hear those 5ths resonating.

A valid point although in the case I'm describing I am damping the strings ... It's definitely just on the string I've hit.

stratman3142 · November 2016

I can't improve on what @paul_c2 said but there's a video at the link below

ICBM · November 2016

You're hearing far more than the fundamental even if you don't realise it. The pure fundamental sounds very odd and un-acoustic-guitar-like, like the neck pickup of an electric guitar when you're playing around the 12th fret, and picking right over the pickup - only even more so.

I was recently working on one of those Gretsch Rancher guitars which has the pickup right up at the 19th-fret position, and the amplified tone bore no relation to the acoustic sound at all - almost all fundamental and sounded like a metal drainpipe.

Lewy · November 2016

Interesting stuff, thanks all.

So, a follow up question - if you've ever described an acoustic's sound as "harmonically complex", what are you actually discernibly hearing to prompt the use of that term? Can you think of any recorded examples?

I ask because this isn't something I've given much attention to and I suspect that actually hearing this stuff is a bit like wine tasting - you have to focus and practice picking out the nuance to get beyond a "tastes nice/doesn't taste nice" appreciation. To date, my appreciation of my guitars has mostly been limited to "is it louder than a banjo".

paul_c2 · November 2016

I'd not describe something as "harmonically complex" as such, since pretty much all tones have harmonics of some kinds in - but I guess one might describe the tone produced as in ICBM's post above, as "harmonically simple" if you were deliberately focusing on the content/volume of the harmonics.

paul_c2 · November 2016

I am wondering whether "harmonic content" or "harmonically complex" relates to harmony - ie different instruments playing at the same time to produce chords, or a guitar (or other polyphonic instrument) playing chords which are not simple chords. Or a non-simple chord progression etc?

Lewy · November 2016

Here's one I see regularly - "Compared to mahogany, rosewood back and sides give a more harmonically rich, complex sound"

Now, it may just be classic guitar hyperbole waffle in which case that's fine, but I'm wondering why in that particular case, people gravitate to thinking that rosewood has MORE going on as opposed to just a different timbre.

AliGorie · November 2016

Hm, Lewy - don’t worry about all that ‘talk’, it’s mostly hot wind.
The internet is responsible for taking people to some weird places concerning flat top steel strung guitars - which they call ‘acoustic’ - everything u hear is acoustic.
Heres an example - a poorly made - particularly the soundboard system rosewood b/s guitar may have less overtones than a well made guitar with mahogany b/s.
heres two videos, listen to them carefully and think of the implications of what JG’s saying for production line made guitars like 99% of us play.

TimmyO · November 2016

I've recently been trying lots of acoustic guitars (one will be my next purchase)

I sat in Westside in Denmark St with a load of Martins arranged around me (thanks to the guys in the shop - they were cool about it) just picking up and playing and putting down to try and hear the differences between some of these things.

I *totally* hear the thing that people try to describe re Mahogany vs rosewood on otherwise fairly similar guitars (although I don't think on the ones I tried it was ever the only variable) : the Mahogany seemed dryer, quicker, more direct, the Rosewood fuller, slower-seeming almost (does this make any sense to anyone? lol )

My personal interpretation of the whole 'harmonically rich' thing is what I think I hear when I compare say a Martin to an Avalon/Lowden (I had one of the expensive Avalon back in the day) - it's a very different sound. Where the american guitar was strident and authoritative the celtic one was fuller across the spectrum, louder but also almost a bit compressed in that there sounded to be more of everything. Very different. both great.

I'll shush now and look forward to others thoughts on this - good question.

ICBM · November 2016

Lewy said:

Here's one I see regularly - "Compared to mahogany, rosewood back and sides give a more harmonically rich, complex sound"

Now, it may just be classic guitar hyperbole waffle in which case that's fine, but I'm wondering why in that particular case, people gravitate to thinking that rosewood has MORE going on as opposed to just a different timbre.

It's not only wrong, if there is any truth in it, it's the other way round!

Rosewood has a cleaner and deeper sound which could possibly be described as *less* harmonically rich than mahogany which is rougher and more midrangy - although I'm quite sure both actually have about the same harmonic complexity, just a different balance.

CHRISB50 · November 2016

ICBM said:

Lewy said:

Here's one I see regularly - "Compared to mahogany, rosewood back and sides give a more harmonically rich, complex sound"

Now, it may just be classic guitar hyperbole waffle in which case that's fine, but I'm wondering why in that particular case, people gravitate to thinking that rosewood has MORE going on as opposed to just a different timbre.

It's not only wrong, if there is any truth in it, it's the other way round!

Rosewood has a cleaner and deeper sound which could possibly be described as *less* harmonically rich than mahogany which is rougher and more midrangy - although I'm quite sure both actually have about the same harmonic complexity, just a different balance.

This. At least it's my experience.

When I got my Lowden (O22C), I A/B'd between RW back and sides and mahogany back and sides, both cedar tops.

The RW back and sides was almost all fundamental tone, with very little harmonic overtone.

The mahogany back and sided guitar still had a lot of fundamental tone but also loads of harmonic overtone. More of a 3D sound. I've found mahogany gets that 'bloom' effect you get on expensive amps with a decent electric guitar.

Lewy · November 2016

CHRISB50 said:

The RW back and sides was almost all fundamental tone, with very little harmonic overtone.

This is the nub for me I think - so when you hit a note on an acoustic, you can discern the fundamental and then the overtones (or lack thereof) as opposed to just hearing...a note? That's a listening skill I don't have. I obviously can hear a difference between rosewood and mahogany, but I definitely can't go "more fundamental and less overtones on that one".

Thanks for all the contributions, An interesting academic discussion.

CHRISB50 · November 2016

Lewy said:

CHRISB50 said:

The RW back and sides was almost all fundamental tone, with very little harmonic overtone.

This is the nub for me I think - so when you hit a note on an acoustic, you can discern the fundamental and then the overtones (or lack thereof) as opposed to just hearing...a note? That's a listening skill I don't have. I obviously can hear a difference between rosewood and mahogany, but I definitely can't go "more fundamental and less overtones on that one".

Thanks for all the contributions, An interesting academic discussion.

I think so, but it may only be in my head.

I'm just describing the sound in the best way I know. I don't think I have any special listening powers!

I think with regards to the overtones, it helps that it is a Lowden, and mahogany. The Celtic makers, as has been said above, seem to produce guitars with more going on in this respect, and overtones are definitely more noticeable with mahogany back and sides.

If I had the resources, I'd do a sound clip. If anything just to find out if I'm spouting bollocks

AliGorie · November 2016

ok - a little fun trial here, I've snatched this from the net, hope the guy don't mind and I'll put up the original after a bit.
It's a simple straight fingerpicked tune.
What do ya think this guitar is made of ?.

https://app.box.com/s/g18wpee0owwy0z3g4nt50bh09g9gk9yj

heres how it goes Lewy, I have smallish far eastern ‘copy’ guitar, it’s sitka and some kind of wood the advertised as ‘mahogany’. As with most production guitars the makers decide on the models they’re going to build and the designs / dimensions their gonna use (inside and out), it doesn't sound like a typical classic dry, woody (earthy) guitar, it's got lots of reverby character and overtones.
This is where the player comes in - to find the ‘good ’n’.
I may have got lucky with this guitar as I preferred it’s sound to the more expensive Adirondack / R/Wood model.
All of this stuff leaves u to wonder if u consider what Mr Greven is saying - is, where u have a pile of tops / b/sides and braces on a production line - is, will there be some of those raw materials more suited to a given design / dimensions / size - when u consider stiffness, density etc. ?
hope u can understand what I’m getting at here.
Where Mr Greven has the luxury of choosing each component for a given outcome, he can predict the ‘overtone’ content to a fairly fine degree.
Same may be true that a production line guitar just has the right ingredient for a given model to make 1 in xx high in overtone partials.
Who knows

Lewy · November 2016

AliGorie said:

I may have got lucky with this guitar as I preferred it’s sound to the more expensive Adirondack / R/Wood model.
All of this stuff leaves u to wonder if u consider what Mr Greven is saying - is, where u have a pile of tops / b/sides and braces on a production line - is, will there be some of those raw materials more suited to a given design / dimensions / size - when u consider stiffness, density etc. ?
hope u can understand what I’m getting at here.

So one can infer that there's a chance (within limits) that any production guitar could coincidentally roll off the line with exactly the same combination of component woods as it would had Greven meticulously tap/flex tested and selected everything.

It does make you wonder what goes on at, say, the Collings factory when someone specifies Adi bracing as an upgrade option...do they then go looking for a top that's then going to work with that bracing or do they just think f*ck it, give 'em what they asked for and use the top that was next up to be used anyway.....

As for what the guitar is made of...no clue, but I could hear lots of overtones going on (or was it just sympathetic vibrations of undamped strings?). Is it a trick question....is it a strat through an acoustic sim or something?

AliGorie · November 2016

hey Lewy, as u say 'within limits' I doubt even the 'boutique' shops match up the components for a soundboard - sure they'll start of with 'nice stuff'. Theres a good video of Dana Bourgeois 'voicing' a top, most work to 'standard' dimensions which will play to the safe side - to negate warranty repairs.
No it's not a trick question - just an interesting one.

mellowsun · November 2016

I don't know if this is the right word, but I find that some guitars can be too 'resonant', which is great for certain styles, e.g. Celtic tunes in DADGAD, but other times you don't want all that overspill.

Can be hard to record and place in a mix also.

But, for solo playing, it's such a satisfying sound it can be very addictive.

TimmyO · November 2016

I recall years ago a brand (I'm *almost* certain it was Taylor) had a thing going on about how it mattered possibly more how you made it rather than what it was made from, and to make the point constructed an acoustic guitar from pallet wood (or something similarly 'trash' material) and carted it around various trade shows as part of the promo. It was, by all accounts, good.

Didn't Yamaha make a production guitar out of bamboo?

AliGorie · November 2016

yeah, it’s (mostly) in the design & build, u’r right Lowdens acoustic design(s) (soundbox dimensions / bracing position etc) are harmonically rich.
Lowden S-35M all mahogany with plenty of overtones,

@ 2.20 in heres one that defies all the nonsense re R/wood Hog stereo types, a spruce / Mahogany that sounds thoroughly modern and has a great tone with a good balance of fundamental to overtones particularly for solo fingerpicking and it’s a 1931 00018 Martin - string choice and playing style have some influence on how it sounds though. It’s the basis of the modern’ steel string guitar - the ‘OM’ before they chopped the top to give access to the 14 fret to body, ’n squared the bottom to match.

other than John Greven I have great respect for these highly qualified guys (amongst others) who regularly debunk the bull***t nonsense.
Alan Carruth
John Arnold
John Hall
can be found over on ’The Log Cabin’ forun
http://theunofficialmartinguitarforum.yuku.com/forums/6/The-Log-Cabin#.TgpOFIUmwao

also
Luthiers Forum
http://luthiersforum.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=10101&sid=636ed21ec502c0fbbb376678f2c61b0f

yeah Mellowsun,
there is currently a trend for ’on steroids’ sustain + overtones which typically use 'lattice' (triple X brace) construction.
heres an example, the guys doing his best but the definition of the piece is getting lost with all the sustain and overtone content, interestingly when u hear these types of guitars being played it’s mainly ‘mood music’ pace and not to complicated - u’d need to be top notch on your damping technique to play faster complicated music on this type of guitar or it would just come out a mess - wrong tool for the job.

The same has been talked about in the classical guitar world where raw power (volume / projection) has been the goal for some builders which has replaced the sweeter more traditional Spanish sounding instrument, some makers are now responding to ‘excesses of the new’.

Lewy · November 2016

@AliGorie Very useful video examples. Thanks!

No wonder my ear isn't really tuned into the whole overtone thing - I've never spent much time playing in a way that lets them emerge. Ragtime/Piedmont Blues with a lot of damping, bottleneck where really the overtones aren't coming from the guitar itself, and latterly bluegrass/flat picking where the notes don't hang around long enough for it to matter....

But I'm starting to toy with a bit more non-raggy fingerstyle - it will be fun to see what the guitars I have will do
in this regard...

ICBM · November 2016

TimmyO said:

I recall years ago a brand (I'm *almost* certain it was Taylor) had a thing going on about how it mattered possibly more how you made it rather than what it was made from, and to make the point constructed an acoustic guitar from pallet wood (or something similarly 'trash' material) and carted it around various trade shows as part of the promo. It was, by all accounts, good.

It was Taylor. They're actually an interesting example, because their guitars *do* sound quite similar regardless of wood type. In my opinion they also sound rather characterless in general, so that is perhaps not surprising! I certainly don't think you can't make a *good* guitar out of almost any wood, but that isn't the same as saying all woods sound the same.

Anyone who plays a Martin D-18 and a D-28 and then says that the wood type makes no difference should probably have their hearing tested. (Yes, the fingerboard and bridge are also different woods on these, but some people would claim that makes even less difference.)

AliGorie · November 2016

one final thing and I’m done with my ranting on this subject (my apologies).

loads of “guitar salesman” talk about u’r topic here - the kind of stuff that gets picked up and regurgitated over the www, but u have to wait till 6.05 mins in - @ the end (so he doesn’t appear ill informed) to get to where he say’s precisely what we’ve agreed to above, the average viewer wont get beyond the first 2 or 3 minuets, damage done !.

Alan Carruth

When I'm thinking of making a guitar to have a particular tone it's:
1)Size and shape,
2) top and bracing (it's a system, after all),
3) B&S wood.

All of this assumes that since I'm making it, it's going to sound like one of mine.

Oh, the sound clip is of this guitar - it’s a 12 fret 000 made by John Slobod (John is Circa Guitars)
It’s spruce and maple and maple is not supposed to sound like this according to what ya hear / read on the internet.

ICBM · November 2016

AliGorie said:

ok - a little fun trial here, I've snatched this from the net, hope the guy don't mind and I'll put up the original after a bit.
It's a simple straight fingerpicked tune.
What do ya think this guitar is made of ?.

https://app.box.com/s/g18wpee0owwy0z3g4nt50bh09g9gk9yj

Damn, I forgot to reply to this before you posted the answer - yes, I guessed what it was, but that just sounds like being clever after the event now

.

I completely agree about maple not sounding "how it's supposed to". It makes me seem much less clever if I say that my two 6-string acoustic guitars are both maple-bodied Gibsons

. They actually sound quite different from each other, although they're totally different in every other respect than the wood and the maker - but both have what I think of as the 'maple tone'.

AliGorie · November 2016

nice pair IC, always liked the curvy Gibsons - read somewhere G Lowden based his first (big ‘O’) model on the J200.
I have a maple ’n spruce trady ’Spanish’ nylon and it sounds sweet with a full bass - surprising.
Forgot to say Stuart Ryan is a fine player and that guitar can hold it’s own in any company, is it a coincidence I also like the 00018 in the MS video ?, donno
ops - said I was finish with this thread - a lot going on in it

me bad.

barry2tone · November 2016

On similar lines, it galls me to hear (cheap) laptop speakers distinguish between (say) a £4k 914ce Taylor - good woods and build - and the lush red sonic carpet preceding luthier-built unobtanium, and similar priced 1930's Martins.

The 400-3,400hz range of telephony is similar to laptop speakers, and standard guitar tuning 82 - 330 Hz .
So it's below bandwidth, along with male voice bass frequencies .
Each chap you talk to on the phone is distinguished only by interpreting overtones of said chap.

So probably not (just) the fundamentals that give the "character".

TheBigDipper · November 2016

I recently bought a new Brook Taw with a Spruce top and Bubinga back & sides. I also tried one with the same top but Rosewood back & sides. Presumably everything about them was the same apart from the wood - apart from small differences in the build. They didn't sound the same.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Become a Subscriber!

"Harmonic Content"....discuss

Comments