Acoustic Guitar finish...Tone?

[Tele-Meister]

Well, I have a Silver Creek D-170 acoustic (Top: Solid Spruce , Back / Sides: Solid rosewood, D-28 copy ect.).

Anyways, it’s a good guitar. I like the tone. But I get this weird feeling each time I play it. Almost like it is somewhat muted, or "Holding back" something...in other words I feel like I can get more sound out of it, somehow.


Which is my question. How many of you guys notice a very difference in tone from a Poly finished guitar vs. a Hand rubbed finish / Oil finish / Nitro finish ACOUSTIC guitar?

Would it be worthwhile to refinish this guitar?


I wonder if that thick poly finish is holding back the wood from resonating to it's fullest potential.

My old 60's Yamaha Acoustics are loud and resonate and I wonder if that is Partly due to the thin lacquer finish on them.

[otterhound]

This guitar may require some time to open up , as it is called .
You may want to try different strings . A refinish will almost certainly change your guitar regardless of the type of new finish that is applied . It may be good , it may not .
A change of bridge pins , saddle and or nut are fairly simple as well as inexpensive .
For me , if I was unable to get the sound that I want by changing the simple things , I would consider setting the guitar down or selling it , and then finding the one that I want .

[Tele-Meister]

Originally Posted by otterhound

This guitar may require some time to open up , as it is called .
You may want to try different strings . A refinish will almost certainly change your guitar regardless of the type of new finish that is applied . It may be good , it may not .
A change of bridge pins , saddle and or nut are fairly simple as well as inexpensive .
For me , if I was unable to get the sound that I want by changing the simple things , I would consider setting the guitar down or selling it , and then finding the one that I want .

Yes, but the guitar already has a good setup. I tried several strings, and I found the best one out of all of them. And it has Bone bridge & nut ect.

And it is about a year old and been played to death...I can't see it Opening up that much more.

Thus my question about a better finish,,,

[Wayne Alexander]

Thick finishes damp the sound a bit. Thin finishes don't. I prefer the feel of nitro over poly myself, but I can't say for certain whether a really thin poly finish would sound different from a really thin nitro finish.

[spauldingrules]

Seriously, the best advice for finding good sounding acoustic guitars is to have someone else play it, and stand in front of it to hear what it really sounds like. Being a foot or two above and slightly behind the soundhole is not the best place to hear it. They all sound "muted" this way. You are probably just hearing its "warmth."

Occasionally, with my acoustic which I love, I strum a D, hold it, and turn the guitar to face me so I can hear it how it is meant to be heard.

[Stuco]

I've gotten where I like satin finishes on acoustics a lot. They seem to not be as thick generally either. I wouldn't refinish that silver creek because that is a LOT of work for very little change. You could steel wool or scotchbrite it to knock off some of that finish and make it satin. If you do, please wear a respirator, who knows whats in that chinese plasticy paint.

[ProToneThinline]

Acoustic guitars are a lot like speakers - the need to time to "play in". I know a guy that would buy a new guitar, then set it in front o fhis stereo speaker for a day or so, and play the stereo into the guitar to help it loosen up. I've never tried it, be he claimes it works wonders. When I got my Taylor (back in '93), it sounded good, but a little thin. After a few months of playing it got the nice, rich sound you'd expect from a dreadnaught. You be the judge......

That having been said, the finish does affect the tone. I have an inexpensive Ovation GC057. It comes in two finishes - clear red (stain), and a heavy black (paint). While both are poly finished, I thought the red (being a lighter finish under the poly) sounded much more "open" that the black.

[DOGMA Dunn]

Humidity can have a small effect on the sound. Guitars I played in high humidity areas sounded different in areas where the humidity was very low. IMO finish has small affect on sound too. But I would not refinish the guitar to get the difference. D28 often use medium strings and it sounds best when attacked hard IMO. Also, in fingerstyle techniqe, it is important to not rest/brace the fingers or hand or arm on the sound board or bridge while playing, unless you are using it for the dampening effect.

[Stuco]

Originally Posted by ProToneThinline

Acoustic guitars are a lot like speakers - the need to time to "play in". I know a guy that would buy a new guitar, then set it in front o fhis stereo speaker for a day or so, and play the stereo into the guitar to help it loosen up. I've never tried it, be he claimes it works wonders. When I got my Taylor (back in '93), it sounded good, but a little thin. After a few months of playing it got the nice, rich sound you'd expect from a dreadnaught. You be the judge......
.

He's right, it does work. You can also hang it in a room that gets a lot of noise, or you can play the snot out of it, or you can use a tonerite.

[JohnnyRebKy]

Get rid of the D28 copy and get a D28 . Problem solved :)

[otterhound]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRebKy

Get rid of the D28 copy and get a D28 . Problem solved :)

I was trying to not be so blunt .

[DuncanAngus]

I'm sure that the poly/nitro finish has something to do with it. How much, no way to really know.

I'd be questioning the bracings first. Standard bracings don't allow the top to vibrate the way that scalloped ones will. Can you feel the top move the way you do on an instrument that sounds good to your ear? If you reach in the soundhole, you can just feel them and know if they've been shaped.

A good luthier can scallop bracings to some degree, but it's expensive and no guarantee you'll like it. Same with the refinishing option. Remember, if you decide to do a refin on the top, you'll be removing poly, not nitro and that's not a lot of fun at all.

Tough call... (d-28) Did I just type that????

[GigsbyBoyUK]

Hey there Tele-Meister

Some friendly words of warning...

Be very careful before even thinking about refinishing an acoustic. Stripping the finish from an acoustic is a whole different ball game compared to a solid body electric. I know: I did it. Took me ages and pretty much ruined the guitar as anything that involves sanding an acoustic guitar is very tricky. Those tops in particular are very thin and on mine, I made it way too think in places.

(I guess a professional who really knows what they are doing has ways to do it better, but I for one found it very hard - especially around the bridge and where the neck meets the body.)

Now I can just about get away with light-ish strings and detuning, but anything else starts to pull the bridge up considerably.

Removing the gloss poly finish DID improve the tone a little, but at the expense of having a guitar I can actually use as I'd like.

[Westreverb]

I have a Silvercreek and am delighted with the sound
Its sound is different than it's brother(Cole Clark fatlady 2) but it's a different guitar.
One is sanded natural finish and the other is poly gloss.
Its got it's own individual sound and I'm stoked with it
If I'd paid 2plus grand I would be a little disappointed but it is what it is and for 245 I'm stoked
Refinishing the guitar is a huge job and it will affect the playability and feel as well as the sound
Good luck in your quest

[TaylorPlayer]

I would venture a guess that there is much more to it than just the finish. As others have said, variations in humidity can make a HUGE difference. Strings dying also makes a difference.

Taylor uses a UV Poly finish... while some don't care for the Taylor tone, I think most acoustic players find it great "when played by a good player". Gibson uses Nitro. While some don't care for the Gibson Tone, again, I think most players find it great "When played by a good player".

Age also has a major function in solid wood guitars. Maybe an older Nitro finished guitar can sound better due to the wood and finish ageing together? I have not seen too many "Vintage" Poly guitars so that remains to be seen for me.

I own both in the form of Taylor and Gibsons. Each has it's own voice and that has more to do with size, bracing, scale and wood type. I would consider the type of finish to be the smallest part of the tonal puzzel.

[charliebrown]

Originally Posted by Tele-Meister

Well, I have a Silver Creek D-170 acoustic (Top: Solid Spruce , Back / Sides: Solid rosewood, D-28 copy ect.).

Anyways, it’s a good guitar. I like the tone. But I get this weird feeling each time I play it. Almost like it is somewhat muted, or "Holding back" something...in other words I feel like I can get more sound out of it, somehow.


Which is my question. How many of you guys notice a very difference in tone from a Poly finished guitar vs. a Hand rubbed finish / Oil finish / Nitro finish ACOUSTIC guitar?

Would it be worthwhile to refinish this guitar?


I wonder if that thick poly finish is holding back the wood from resonating to it's fullest potential.

My old 60's Yamaha Acoustics are loud and resonate and I wonder if that is Partly due to the thin lacquer finish on them.

I had a similar experience playing a few acoustics in the $1200 and above range while shopping...even those with a nitrocellulous finish. Some sounded really nice, others, even with fresh strings sounded (like you said) as if they were holding back...nothing was vibrating as it should...or as I think they should. I try them, if the sound dead (no matter who makes them or who hypes them) I move on-quickly.

In my opinion, a new guitar should sound really good...as it ages, it should improve. I don't hold out much hope for one that sounds lifeless to begin with.

[charliebrown]

Originally Posted by TaylorPlayer

I would venture a guess that there is much more to it than just the finish. As others have said, variations in humidity can make a HUGE difference. Strings dying also makes a difference.

Taylor uses a UV Poly finish... while some don't care for the Taylor tone, I think most acoustic players find it great "when played by a good player". Gibson uses Nitro. While some don't care for the Gibson Tone, again, I think most players find it great "When played by a good player".

Age also has a major function in solid wood guitars. Maybe an older Nitro finished guitar can sound better due to the wood and finish ageing together? I have not seen too many "Vintage" Poly guitars so that remains to be seen for me.

I own both in the form of Taylor and Gibsons. Each has it's own voice and that has more to do with size, bracing, scale and wood type. I would consider the type of finish to be the smallest part of the tonal puzzel.

Me thinks you're right.

When I bought my Taylor, I had 2 different people in the store play it AFTER I played 6 different guitars. Granted, mine is "just" a 114...but the things you hear when listening to others as well as listening to yourself on the same instrument can be telling....the best guitars sound good no matter which of us played them...the not-so-good sounded "ok" in the hands of a great player when you can listen to all of them within seconds of each other...not always practical to do.

[mattdean4130]

STRIP IT OFF!!!!
I'm a huge advocate for oiled acoustics after stripping my inexpensive solid top martinez and finding a totally new guitar afterwards.
I used a chemical stripper, but stay away from joins and binding.

Hand sand around those. Takes some work, but well worth the extra resonance.