Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Telecaster Discussion Forum' started by newtwanger, Jan 18, 2013.
Love that movie, need to watch it again some day.
Frets unlevelled... and crowned!!
A big one
I mean, seriously..
I care about it, I just don't want massive amounts of it.
I guess I'm quibbling with the way Newtwanger is framing the dialog. Sustain, IMO like resonance, is not something to die for on an electric guitar. if you put the guitar together properly, of good parts, nothing busted, you should have plenty of sustain. I use premium parts so things don't break, so they last almost forever, and so they don't make lots of nasty, traishy sounds in addition to whatever music you're making.
um...just cut it up.
This is a great post, Ron, but the REAL
reason guitars with low action have less sustain normally is:
The saddle or nut is so low, and at least one fret is so high, that the plucked string makes contact with the high fret and damps out the vibration fairly early in the cycle. The science part, we never get to that.
Ron's "affliction" here is the guitars he builds and tests his theorems on, are too good; they're not representative of Joe Smith's average crummy guitar. My view, something really basic is screwing up a lot of people's guitars, long before the subject ever turns to sustain. It reminds me of what my nephew was telling me, about how he hadn't been playing the guitar I gave him. Simple, he said. He hasn't got any strings on it at the moment!!
Thank you panel for your input. I see once again Mr. Kirn weighs in with all his clarity and sense.
Now I'll tell you why I asked the questions:
I just finished my first set-neck build, with a Bigsby no less.
I like super low action and set it up this way.
According to what I've read on forumz these are 3 steps to sonic lameness but all wired-up-and-a-playin' it's freaking brilliant sounding (IMHO).
I understand what Ron said about low action and he's the only person I've read actually backing up a sustain-diminishing claim with what appears to be actual logic.
Through the day I made a new higher nut and jacked the action (I'm using a custom built Rutters Tele bridge with brass saddles) and can confirm a different feel and tone but though there may well be "less sustain" I can also say that it wasn't enough to stop me from putting the nut and action back to where I like it.
I purchased some finger-sustain lotion and vibrato enhancing hand cream from an online guitar boutique and should good to go!
EDIT: Boris posted while I was typing...
I agree completely with this. Of all the things that kill me on a guitar is when the owner/shop/builder doesn't assure the frets are correctly leveled. And because I like my strings super-shredder low, this is essential (not that I'm a super-shredder).
Since I'm only building 24 fret guitars now, that's also where you'll see fret buzz pop up most often.
When I want sustain, I put down my guitar and pick up my violin. Guitars shouldn't sustain too much. Attack and decay is the sound of a guitar. You want sustain, get a didgeridoo.
Hey Newt, congrats on your first set neck build.
I want to see Gilmour rock a Didgeridoo!
Thank you my friend!
I think pouring Chocolate Pudding over my Esquire is the only way to kill the sustain.
You would though, if it were playing...
Had to get that in somewhere.
Oh wait... someone beat me to it.
- sustain-killing technique
- low string height (due to saddles and/or nut)
- screwed up frets
- backbow or not enough relief
- amp not loud enough
Other than that, not much IMO.
I understand what you are saying and I have no sustain-o- meter to validate my claims.
I do know the strings feel more locked in and the body feels more alive with the super bullets. This all equates, for me, a better playing guitar and what I believe is more sustain.
I am no expert or a scientist. I would like to know if anyone else as used supper bullets and found, or not found, the same as I.
I depend on attack and lack of sustain, and lately been trying to figure a way to get my acoustic to stop sustaining so long.
Wait a minute, over on the Les Paul parts of the Universe the belief is that you want an aluminum tail piece because it has lighter mass and so gives better sustain. Both of these can't be right. :?:
There's obviously a lot of different ideas on what sustain is & where it comes from. I really don't hear a great difference in sustain in my 10 or so guitars (my LP Studio may be the exception). I really think of it as something that comes from the amp or a pedal.
I don't mean to be a jerk but having played a few good Teles thru a few good amps for a few years my take is: poor sustain = really bad guitar set-up /low action and/or you don't understand yer guitar.
IME a Tele sustains like mad if you want it to. An overdriven Tele bridge pup = tons of sustain. YMMV.
I have a few guitars, and have never played an electric that didn't have enough sustain. Maybe my notes are too short.