Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

What matters MOST with Guitar Sustain?


Recommended Posts

There were some good discussion about "sustain" in the "What matters most with (Metal) Guitar tone" post earlier. And serendipity (or Google's spying tech) led me to this interesting video which dealt with that exact topic.
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



This is pretty straightforward, until it isn't. 

 

Strings are the sound of a stringed instrument. If you pluck a string and any part of the guitar resonates in any way, sustain will be lessened as that resonance "robs energy" from the strings.

Some of the causes of loss of sustain are "fugitive threads" in the bridge or tailpiece, any string length that is not part of the nut to bridge span, a light, resonant material being used for the body or the neck of the guitar. Those are primary, if you reduce or eliminate any or all of these causes, less string energy will be robbed (absorbed) and the strings will continue to vibrate longer and sound more even. 

 

An acoustic guitar is specifically designed to rob energy of the strings. A banjo is a great example of converting string energy to acoustic sound, they are loud and have a very short sustain - they rob the strings of energy quickly and efficiently. 

 

There are other causes of loss of sustain. The magnetic field of the pickups will not only rob energy from the strings, in some cases it can even affect intonation to the point that it becomes impossible to properly intonate the guitar. You can ruin the intonation (and sustain) of a Strat with passive pickups and strong magnets just by raising all the pickups up closer to the strings. 

I know some players do not like to hear that, I had quite a few customers who refused to understand that concept and would revert the setup I did for them and then complain because I was correct and they were stubborn. I don't miss those players. 

 

There are also external methods to increase sustain. Obviously overdrive and/or compression will increase perceived sustain and both are popular and in use. 

Turning an amp up loud enough to get feedback will do it but many guitars have uneven response so some notes will "catch" and others won't. 

The more compression or overdrive you use and the closer you get to the speaker, the more sustain you can get.

Attached is a sample of guitar feedback/sustain using an amp sim with considerable distortion and putting the guitar close to the studio monitor. It wasn't very loud in the room, I could have held that note forever. 

  • Like 2
It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are a lot of factors, and a lot of anecdotal evidence. Some people say that the "magnetic drag" from pickups is negligible, but it is not, and I have images of waveforms that back up what KuruPrionz says.

 

Ultimately, what determines sustain is what draws energy out of the string as it vibrates. The bridge makes a big difference. I am very aware of sustain because I sample stringed instruments and I don't stop the sampling until the string level goes below -60 dB. With a Babicz bass bridge, I stopped sampling after 75 seconds even though the level hadn't gone below -60 dB, because I figure no one is going to play a note that long anyway! The bridge's mass seems important.

 

Then there are elements that are hard to quantify. Thicker strings should give longer sustain because they generate more energy due to their greater mass. But, they can also be more rigid, and stop vibrating sooner. Some people think flatwound strings have more sustain because they concentrate more energy on the fundamental. Who knows? And did they move the pickups further away with thicker strings?

 

Gibson Les Pauls have a carved arch top, which some people think is for aesthetic reasons. That may be the case, but that design also places the most density and mass directly under the bridge, which would in theory improve sustain. I think just about any guitarist would agree that Gibson's construction produces more sustain than Fender's. Some of that is undoubtedly due to the use of hardwoods. Gibsons cost more because the woodworking involved on the body and neck is more involved than it is with a Fender. However, Fenders have their own sound, which is certainly popular - and wouldn't sound like that if they were built like Gibsons.  

 

There's much discussion about string angle past the nut, and whether locking nuts are better because they reduce vibration after the nut. There are so many factors, and they interact to some degree. But I like to keep things simple. For me, it boils down to...

 

Pickups not too close to the strings

A bridge with significant mass

A body made of hardwood

 

...and turning the amp up to 11 :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Anderton said:

There are a lot of factors, and a lot of anecdotal evidence. Some people say that the "magnetic drag" from pickups is negligible, but it is not, and I have images of waveforms that back up what KuruPrionz says.

I think just about any guitarist would agree that Gibson's construction produces more sustain than Fender's.

For me, it boils down to...

 

Pickups not too close to the strings

A bridge with significant mass

A body made of hardwood

 

...and turning the amp up to 11 :)

"I think just about any guitarist would agree that Gibson's construction produces more sustain than Fender's.

 

I just went hunting for it and did not find but I'll keep searching. 

I read an article where somebody timed the sustain of a Les Paul and a Telecaster and the Telecaster out-sustained the Les Paul by a fair amount. That was a Fender with maple neck and ash body. Both factory stock. 

 

Bearing in mind that both guitars have some inconsistencies I can't say for certain that the test is 100% accurate as it will vary from guitar to guitar. I do remember trying out a dozen or more Les Pauls that were hanging on the wall at a local shop years ago. A couple of them rang like a bell and sustained beautifully. A couple of them sounded more or less like a wet log. Most of them were in-between. On the other hand, I've played a fair number of customer Teles that had the twang but not the "sing". 

 

FWIW, I've owned 2 Customs and several Studios, all of them sounded great so I'm not dissing. I ended up preferring my customized 335 and no longer own any Les Pauls. Teles make good giggers in large part because you don't have to worry about them much. Cracked headstocks are almost unheard of (I've glued a few Gibsons back together) and the cost of replacement is lowered since you could just buy another neck or body and screw everything back together. I like not worrying at gigs so I use the Fenders, has nothing to do with sustain since they both are fine in that regard. 

 

I build my own Teles and have had quite a few. I would say for certain that the one I had with the early non-fine tuner Floyd Rose on it out sustained any Les Paul I've played but that is anecdotal evidence. I do always go for the maple neck on a Tele and for the ebony fretboard on a Les Paul. 

 

Short answer, maybe, maybe not. 😬

  • Like 2
It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

I read an article where somebody timed the sustain of a Les Paul and a Telecaster and the Telecaster out-sustained the Les Paul by a fair amount. That was a Fender with maple neck and ash body. Both factory stock. 

 

I wonder if humbucker vs. single coil has anything to do with that. I have a Tele (which I love - best guitar Fender ever made) and it doesn't seem to sustain as long as my higher-end Les Paul.

 

Then again, those minute differences are probably nothing compared to what happens with an amp in serious overdrive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

I wonder if humbucker vs. single coil has anything to do with that. I have a Tele (which I love - best guitar Fender ever made) and it doesn't seem to sustain as long as my higher-end Les Paul.

 

Then again, those minute differences are probably nothing compared to what happens with an amp in serious overdrive. 

As I mentioned, there are differences from one guitar to the next and also over the years the hardware has changed, sometimes for better, sometimes for worse and sometimes no difference. 

It is certainly a fact that wood varies and also that some Les Pauls and or Teles weigh more than others. Humbuckers have higher output and stock Gibson buckers have less magnetic drag than stock Tele pickups. Since you lower your pickups the drag may be less of a factor but the output may be more of one if that makes sense. 

 

In the end, comparing guitars (even of the same brand and same year) is going to result in discrepancies.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a Parker DF made of basswood (not the carbon coated model) that has a straight string path to the nut, then a slight break to the tuners. It has Sperzel locking tuners, on one end and a pretty massive aluminum block at the ball end of the strings.

 

It sustains longer than my LTD Faux Pal model, which is 3 pounds heavier.

 

I don't know if any of the things I mentioned about the Parker (above) have anything to do with the sustain, so I'll leave that to anyone who knows more about guitar construction than I do.

 

Both of these guitars sustain longer than my Gibson ES330, but then as a hollow body arch-top, I understand why.

 

Notes ♫

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read interviews with Allan Holdsworth and Mike Stern which mention certain notes on certain frets having markedly less sustain than notes on the frets immediately next to it (next up and next down).

 

Stern felt it was just part of the individual guitar's personality, if the guitar has typical mostly wood construction - wood neck, fingerboard, and body.

 

Holdsworth was a lot more bothered by it.   If I recall correctly, he favored ebony fingerboards because he felt the sustain from fret to fret was more consistent.   He played a Steinberger for a while because its composite fingerboard also promised consistent fret to fret sustain.

 

My Parker Nitefly has the most sustain out my guitar collection.  I'm sure the composite neck has a lot to do with it.  I don't play it that much though, because I later bought other guitars whose tones I enjoy more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luthiers who know a lot more than I do say that a Richlite fingerboard is the best for consistency, stability with varying temperatures, and for being impervious to dead notes. It's also infinitely easier to replace the frets. But, guitarists insist on wood, because...well, it's wood. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah yes, dead notes - that was the term I had forgotten.   Among Holdsworth's obsessions were a fretboard completely free of dead notes.  If he were still alive today, he surely would have had somebody make him a guitar with Richlite by now.  He was always willing to try new technologies.

 

Richlite seems like a fairly new technology for guitars.  I first saw it on one of the Martin guitar models.  In the electric guitar world, Strandberg introduced their first Richlite model either last year or 2 years ago - I forgot.  Now their Boden Prog NX and Boden Metal NX lines have it.  No doubt there are other electric guitar makers who have started using it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Anderton said:

Luthiers who know a lot more than I do say that a Richlite fingerboard is the best for consistency, stability with varying temperatures, and for being impervious to dead notes. It's also infinitely easier to replace the frets. But, guitarists insist on wood, because...well, it's wood. 

Graphite fretboards are fantastic, stable, no dead notes. I have 2, one each on a Rainsong OM1000 6 string and Rainsong WS3000 12 string. The body response on both guitars is very even, with smooth treble response beyond what wood can deliver. I had a graphite Moses Tele neck for a while, very even response but I didn't care for the shape or width - too slim for me. Still, a good option for a screwdriver guitar. 

 

On the other other hand, I've found that the extra jumbo (Dunlop 6100 or equivalent Jascar super jumbo) fretwire does improve eveness of response as well and can be installed on anybody's favorite guitar as an improvement. 

 

Richlite is a manufactured product with even density and weight, those are the preferred characteristics for even response, probably quite similar to graphite fretboards. 

As to it being "infinitely easer to replace the frets", modern fretting techniques make the job pretty consistent regardless of material. I always clamp frets into place, never use a hammer. If you arch a piece of hard rock maple to the fretboard radius (yes, multi-radius fretboards require more cauls) and put a neck support on the non-mobile side of a good sized C clamp, with a bit of crazy glue you can smoothly press frets into any fretboard material and they will not pop loose (Yes, Eric Johnson says he can hear the difference, he can probably hear a fly poop in the next room and know if it's a male or female fly). The installation aspect of replacing the frets is pretty straightforward, even if a bit tedious. It doesn't take long unless there is binding involved. 

 

I will fully admit that it's the removing of the old frets that causes problems with some woods (more than others). I've found maple boards are consistently easier to refret than rosewoods or ebony, far less (if any) chipping when frets are removed. I don't recall pulling frets out of a Richlite board. 

 

I can tell you that the absolute worst guitars to pull frets on are the rosewood board Pre CBS Fenders. Leo made a contraption that pushed the frets in from the side so the tangs did not press wood out of the way from the top, they pushed it out of the way from the side. I've never tried to push frets out from the side, anymore I would just recommend that someone put the old neck away for safe keeping and install a new neck with the shape and frets that they like. I'll never pull the frets on an old Fender again and I know I'm not the only one. 

 

Other things that improve evenness in the neck - 2 steel bars inlaid into the neck like my 63 Sears Silvertone Danelectro guitar that cost $37 when it was new and still has a fantastic playing and sounding neck. A heavier, more substantial truss rod, like Warmoth uses, will improve evenness too. Finally, just a thicker, wider neck will have better response. I have a Strat with a Warmoth 1 7/8" fatback maple neck, Jascar super jumbo frets and I scalloped the board. It sings everywhere, no dead spots. People with smaller hands would hate it. 

 

I've played all sorts of guitars with dead spots. Sometimes it's the neck, sometimes the bridge and or to a lesser degree the nut. It can be resonance from the strings between the bridge and the tailpiece and if it's an arch top guitar with a trapeze tailpiece or a Bigsby, those are problematic as well. 

 

Lots of reasons why many guitars have uneven response. Lots of different constructions, woods, hardware, etc. Pickups with strong magnets too close can ruin sustain as well. There is no simple answer, despite the efforts of the fellow in the video at the top of the first page. 

  • Like 1
It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Parker DF has an ebony fretboard with hardened stainless steel frets. I've had it for years, gig with it, and still see no signs of fret wear.

 

I haven't noticed dead notes, because, as it's my 7th instrument, I haven't become accomplished enough to notice that.

 

Back to tone:

 

I have Duncan P-Rails that give me P90, Rail, Series Humbucker and Parallel Humbucker tones. I spend most of the time on the P90 option, because I really like the tone and the response they give me. The rails are the weakest, but engaging both and turning the gain up will give me a strat-like tone. I forget which position is series and which is parallel humbucker, but one gives me a normal humbucker tone, the other gives me a thinner tone, more like a mini-humbucker Firebird.

 

There is also a Graph Tech Piezo under the bridge. The guitar isn't 'tone wood' because the piezo is acoustic, and the tone is quite thin. ;) It sounds like an acoustic, but not a very good one by itself. What I like to do on some songs is to blend the piezo with the mag pickups to get a bit more high frequency attack and tone.

 

But I admit, that's just for my ears, I doubt the audience knows the difference. As long as they like the notes I play and the expression I use to play them, I'm happy.

 

And if they don't, I'll pick up the sax in a song or two, and I'm quite good at that instrument, I've been playing it since I was a kid.

 

Insights and incites by notes ♫

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Notes_Norton said:

My Parker DF has an ebony fretboard with hardened stainless steel frets. I've had it for years, gig with it, and still see no signs of fret wear.

 

I haven't noticed dead notes, because, as it's my 7th instrument, I haven't become accomplished enough to notice that.

 

Back to tone:

 

I have Duncan P-Rails that give me P90, Rail, Series Humbucker and Parallel Humbucker tones. I spend most of the time on the P90 option, because I really like the tone and the response they give me. The rails are the weakest, but engaging both and turning the gain up will give me a strat-like tone. I forget which position is series and which is parallel humbucker, but one gives me a normal humbucker tone, the other gives me a thinner tone, more like a mini-humbucker Firebird.

 

There is also a Graph Tech Piezo under the bridge. The guitar isn't 'tone wood' because the piezo is acoustic, and the tone is quite thin. ;) It sounds like an acoustic, but not a very good one by itself. What I like to do on some songs is to blend the piezo with the mag pickups to get a bit more high frequency attack and tone.

 

But I admit, that's just for my ears, I doubt the audience knows the difference. As long as they like the notes I play and the expression I use to play them, I'm happy.

 

And if they don't, I'll pick up the sax in a song or two, and I'm quite good at that instrument, I've been playing it since I was a kid.

 

Insights and incites by notes ♫

My brother has a Parker Fly, one of the original ones. Not sure about your guitar, I haven't seen it but the fretboard on the Fly is a manufactured material, probably Richlite or graphite. The frets have no tangs, there are no fret slots. They glued the frets in place, something I don't think anybody else does. Stainless steel frets are much more durable and do not wear as easily as standard fretwork, Ken Parker thought things out and did what he thought was best, rather than following "tradition". I like the Parkers, wish they'd made one like my brother's guitar but with a fat, wide neck. They didn't, so it goes. 

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Kiesel (formerly Carvin) Allan Holdsworth signature guitar has a neck with dual carbon fiber rods, in addition to the adjustable truss rod.  Fingerboard is ebony.  Kiesel has been using this neck design since the Carvin days.   I briefly owned a Carvin Holdsworth Fatboy and did not detect any dead spots, although I did not thoroughly test every single fret under every string.

 

Holdsworth also favored as little neck relief as possible.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love a Sustainiac. I have an EBow and I love that too. My brother has a Fernandez guitar with some sort of sustainer pickup in the neck position. It's great fun, add a volume pedal and a delay - great sound. 

Both could get interesting, completely out of control in a heartbeat cranked down low so nobody else hears it and runs away. 

 

"They're killing animals down there!!!!" 😇

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KuruPrionz said:

Acou-Fiend looks fabulous and a well written review. 

Someday...

 

I used it a lot on the song Perspective. This link takes you directly to the solo where it's most prominent.

 

Hmmmm...probably should have included that in the review! I think I'll go back and edit it.

  • Wow! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything Craig thinks is worth a look... is worth a look!

 

I had a Fernandes Fretless Sustainer for a bit.  Sold it to a musician friend, and got a viola.  If I knew how hard that road would be, I might have chickened out, lol.

 

I love my Digitech Freqout pedal, although results vary from guitar to guitar, because of all we discussed earlier about dead spot locations that vary by guitar.   My Fender Eric Johnson Thinline seems to have the least number of dead spots with the Freqout - must be its baseball bat neck.   I don't have a Les Paul to compare though.  My humbucker guitars are all semi-hollow.

 

Plain old compressor is also fun - to me anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, KuruPrionz said:

My brother has a Parker Fly, one of the original ones. Not sure about your guitar, I haven't seen it but the fretboard on the Fly is a manufactured material, probably Richlite or graphite. The frets have no tangs, there are no fret slots. They glued the frets in place, something I don't think anybody else does. Stainless steel frets are much more durable and do not wear as easily as standard fretwork, Ken Parker thought things out and did what he thought was best, rather than following "tradition". I like the Parkers, wish they'd made one like my brother's guitar but with a fat, wide neck. They didn't, so it goes. 

The DF is one of their later models, without the carbon skin. It's traditionally built, all wood, has an ebony fretboard, and hardened stainless frets.

 

It has all the great innovations initiated by the Parker, except the carbon exoskeleton.

 

Ken mentioned that the only problem with the original Parkers was making a profit, since they cost so much to manufacture. Perhaps this was a last ditch effort to keep the company alive? Or an offering for someone who wanted a more tradiitonal build.

 

I and the guy who wanted a Parker, but not the carbon exoskeleton. Why? I like wood and I like the ability to mod it if I so desire.

 

The one on the left is my original and now my practice guitar. The one on the right is the custom model, with the Duncan P-rails and my gigging guitar.

 

They weigh 5 pounds each, stay in tune sometimes from gig to gig, are so well contoured and balanced it feels like I'm wearing the guitar instead of holding it, and the only bad thing about them is this: They are so perfect for me, I no longer have GAS. I can look at other guitars, and appreciate their beauty, but I don't have the pleasure of lusting for them and finally purchasing one. :D

 

Notes ♫

 

NN01_2Parkers.jpg

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi. I just saw this post. I've been obsessed with sustain for years. Here is what I've learned:

 

 

We are talking about "NATURAL" sustain here so forget about sustainers, compressors, etc. Sustain in guitars is a "subtractive" thing. It means that the "theoretical" perfect guitar on paper has the most possible sustain, then everything that is "not so perfect" starts to rob sustain. Read on.

 

On paper, the guitar with the most sustain would be a 1 piece guitar made of a very dense, solid, and still material, such as steel or concrete. That makes the energy STAY in the strings as opposed to being TRANSMITTED to the body, bridge, frets, etc. Solid dense materials WILL not sympathetically vibrate with strings. On the other hand, a soft, flexible, and loose material WILL sympathetically vibrate with strings, robbing sustain.

 

So, contrary to what most people think about resonance, it is the sustain enemy! You pluck a string and transmit your energy to the vibrating string. Then, it is ALL about The Conservation of energy

  • The guitar with MOST sustain keeps the energy ONLY in the strings. It DOES NOT transmit the energy to the body, bridge, etc. The result: the MOST sustain (energy IN the strings) and the LEAST acoustic volume (Energy NOT in the guitar materials). For example A 1 piece steel guitar.
  • The guitar with the LEAST sustain keeps almost NO energy in the strings. it DOES transmit almost all energy into the body, bridge, etc. The result: the LEAST sustain  (energy NOT IN the strings) and the MOST acoustic volume  (Energy IN the guitar materials). For example a BANJO.

This is why electric guitars have MORE Sustain than acoustic ones. Electrics have a solid body and are not meant to sound loud acoustically. Acoustic guitars are designed to have acoustic volume so the top is supposed to move/vibrate. There is a trade-off in volume/sustain in acoustic instruments!

 

So in real life, we don't have steel or concrete 1 piece electric guitars! They are made out of different woods with different degrees of hardness, glue, moving parts such as tremolos or bridges with saddles, frets, etc. So all we can do to MAXIMIZE sustain is to start a very solid guitar (ex: a good solid/heavy Les Paul) and then pay attention to details to ENSURE most of the energy STAYS in the strings and is NOT transmitted to the guitar materials. Make sure:

 

Bridge:

  • Make sure it is SOLID good material and does not move. I avoid die-cast and prefer "real" metal bridges.
  • Use Teflon tape in the posts/threads to avoid any movement.
  • Make sure the Saddles springs do not rattle.
  • Make sure the Saddles do not move in the channel.
  • Make sure the saddle grooves are properly cut/filed.

Nut:

  • Make sure it is properly cut to avoid buzz on the open strings.
  • Have one made out of good solid material
    NOTE: Nuts ONLY affect open strings and have ZERO impact on fretted notes. Still, we want a good one to have good action, proper intonation, and nice sounding open strings!

Break angle:

  • You NEED some angle after the nut and bridge. Otherwise, the string does not have enough force to "sit" at the 2 points where it is supposed to rest.
  • Floyd rose/Locking nuts are exceptions as the string ends in those points. They are firmly attached there, so no problem there!
    NOTE:  How much break angel? just enough so that the string vibrates freely. You will know if there is not enough angle. The guitar will simply not sound right.

Fretwork:

  • Frets MUST be leveled and crowned. otherwise, you will get fret buzz and it will KILL your sustain! The string energy will be "captured" by the frets and will make fret noise,  as opposed to staying IN the strings.

Action, assuming you have good fretwork:

  • HIGHER action may have more sustain as the vibrating strings WILL NOT touch the frets at all!
  • LOWER action may have less sustain as the vibrating string MAY touch the frets, even if "just a little" during the note attack.

Setup:

  • Obviously the better the setup, the better everything else is, including sustain.

Pickup height:

  • Do not have the pickups ridiculously close to the strings!
  • In my experience, if the pickup distance is right, the effect on sustain is negligible. 

Everything else:

  • Make sure there are no unnecessary rattles or movement in screws, tuners, strap pins, pickup rings, loose frets, string trees, stop tails, etc.

 

Also, consider:

 

Gadgets: There are things like Fender FatFinger that promise you more sustain. It adds mass to the headstock. Some people swear by heavy tuners and bridges. Those things MAY help ONLY if the other aspects discussed here are not taken care of. It won't do anything to a guitar that is already rigid enough with no moving parts and a good setup/fretwork.

Experiment: Use your judgment. See a lousy tunning machine that moves? Change it! Have a dirty worn tune-o-matic bridge that rattles? Get a new one!

Be reasonable: You will NOT get good sustain in a guitar that has a FLEXIBLE neck, regardless of how still the other materials are. Similarly, you will not get sustain out of a $5000 guitar that has a terrible fretwork or worn-out bridge that rattles and has the saddle grooved deformed.

Conclusion: I think good sustain can be achieved with any guitar as long as the construction is good enough, has good solid materials, and you check the points above.

Final Note: Personally I do not really care to have long 40-second notes! If you want that, get a sustainer! The reason I LOVE good natural sustain is that I feel the guitar reacts better to my playing. Tapping and legato feel smoother as the string tends to "vibrate easier". I feel you need to use less energy to play.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Regards,

Munscio

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Munscio said:

I hope this helps.

 

Helpful and concisel!

 

I'd also like to mention that unlike some players, I don't always want sustain. With high-gain processors, every little vibration gets amplified, which can interfere with recording a "clean" guitar sound for subsequent processing. I have favorite guitars for leads when I want a guitar to "sing," and favorite guitars for rhythm, when I want a guitar to "talk." 

  • Like 1
  • Cool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

Helpful and concisel!

 

I'd also like to mention that unlike some players, I don't always want sustain. With high-gain processors, every little vibration gets amplified, which can interfere with recording a "clean" guitar sound for subsequent processing. I have favorite guitars for leads when I want a guitar to "sing," and favorite guitars for rhythm, when I want a guitar to "talk." 

Agreed on the subtle but not subtle "squick squacks" that we often do not hear in the context of a live situation but become very apparent when recording. 

It's a big reason for why I stopped using round wound bass strings and switched to D'Addario Chromes, which are flat wound but still fairly bright and chimey. My bass parts are less messy sounding as a result. 

 

It's also why I am looking to put flat wound strings on the low 2 strings of my baritone 8 string, the winds are larger because the strings are larger and even the slightest slide when lifting a finger can generate an awkward noise here and there. The higher strings can provide the chime, I just want to have a nice low end too. 

 

When I got my Rainsong OM1000 used from a friend, his dad had used it for recording an album of guitar music. He had flat wound strings on it and I left them on for a while. 

It was easier to get a clean sound recording. In the end I went back to round wounds, light gauge which minimizes the size of the wraps and therefore the "coarseness" of the "blit-blat" sounds. I just love the chimey tones more. I do have a couple of sets of flat wound strings on hand and may put a set on one of my electric guitars for an option. 

 

I've also used both hands for muting strings for decades. I use the edge of my right hand - the side with the little finger - to mute or muffle strings down by the bridge and I use the tips of my left hand fingers to stop notes by lifting up but not off the string so it is no longer fretted. I've also used the edge of my right hand to muffle on the strum and then pull it away so the strings can ring after the attack has been muffled. 

 

Sustain is a tool for expression, like all tools, we must choose when we need it. It's nice to have it but it's also nice to not have it, why else would anyone use a banjo?

You can use a screwdriver as a pry bar but why?

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...