Tonedef
Specifically, the bottom part that would normally rest on your thigh?
Like most people here (I guess), I've toyed with the idea of building my own electic guitar body. I have an idea for a body shape, but it would mean that the bottom concave bit wouldn't be present.
How much of a problem would this be? I reckon for playing while standing it wouldn't be an issue at all, but what about sitting down? Does anybody here own a guitar that isn't ergonmically shaped that way, that is still comfortable to play while sitting?
[deleted]
The existence of the flying V shape is all the evidence required that you do not have to take guitar players into account when designing a guitar.
Warren
Tonedef wrote:
Specifically, the bottom part that would normally rest on your thigh?
Like most people here (I guess), I've toyed with the idea of building my own electic guitar body. I have an idea for a body shape, but it would mean that the bottom concave bit wouldn't be present.
How much of a problem would this be? I reckon for playing while standing it wouldn't be an issue at all, but what about sitting down? Does anybody here own a guitar that isn't ergonmically shaped that way, that is still comfortable to play while sitting?
There are a number of weird guitar shapes that don't work so well sitting down, a good example being the Flying V and it's many variations. (although some people like the Flying V's shape for sitting, go figure).
It just means you have to hold the guitar differently or potentially shorten your strap to support the guitar whilst seated.
All depends on what you're willing to sacrifice in terms of comfort really.
---mario---
Do yourself a favor and have a look at B.C. Rich guitars, they are IMHO the kings in strange guitar shapes when it comes to comercial avaibility
Tonedef
...mario... wrote:
Do yourself a favor and have a look at B.C. Rich guitars, they are IMHO the kings in strange guitar shapes when it comes to comercial avaibility
Oooh! Mockingbird, I likes that! Yeah, some odd shapes, but they mostsly look as if they have some sort of concession to ergonomics, apart from the flying V variants of course.
Hammeron
V's are designed to rest on the inner thigh whilst standing 8)
Explorers have that cool metal look whilst having the cutout that also allows you to sit and play.
I've never played a Razorback but it's a bit like a cross between the two, IMO ?
---mario---
haha, Slash (Saul Hudson who played for Guns 'n Roses for a long time aswell) plays a trans red mockingbird along with his LP.
With a V you play with your right leg (righthanded players) in the V and support with your left leg
[deleted]
Hammeron wrote:
V's are designed to rest on the inner thigh whilst standing 8)
I'm not sure I understand how that works... ??? They're a bit pointy at that end. ? And, checking on Google images, I see everyone with the legs of the V out to the side of the body.
chris77
I reckon if you want to enjoy playing it, then it's important that it's as comfortable as possible to you. No use having a piece of eye candy that just sits and stares at you with it's Picasso like face...
IceCreamMan
ergonomics is like how long is a piece of string
it all depends on the import you place on it .......
i have a V in my collection, i love it but its ergonomically unviable as i practice a lot sitting down...i would not want it as my only guitar.
i love my strat for its comfort factor amonst other features an value the ergonomics thereof ....ymmv
DonovanB
A flying V is the most uncomfortable guitar I have ever played. The square edges dig into your forearm when you play and I wound up with a sore arm for days after a gig.
I sold it after that.
Maybe this would have helped
PeteM
I've found that what's ergonimically comfortable for one is not necessarily ergonimically comfortable for another. I reckon it's important though to play whatever is comfortable for you. Anything that is uncomfortable will tire you out and impact negatively on your playing. In other words be careful that the 'look' doesn't overshadow the practicalities. It's boring I know. ☹
AlanRatcliffe
Depends on how you play. For those of us that play high (or those with more... err... shapely bodies themselves), the body sculpting (stomach and forearm cuts) is important. If you sit a lot the bottom cutaway becomes of paramount importance. For those that always play standing, slung low a la Jimmy Page, any damn plank will do the job.
Tonedef
Well, the practicalities are important. Same reason I dont own a 1980s GTV-6 3.0l. Beautiful car but no thanks. And listening to varied opinions is never boring.
Its like my granpaw Nantuck once said to me, "Bring me a f*****g beer, you little s**t!". Well actually that doesnt have anything to do with it now that I think about it.
Hammeron
Regarding the V.
Shredders will, whilst standing obviously, support the guitar body with the upper leg in the V. {Pointy bit above and below the leg} You then support the ax with the upper leg.
Saw some footage of Wishbone Ash my dad took at the Dome last year, and the guitarist was loving his V!, seemed a bit out of place, but cool! ?
Hammeron
@ Tonedef, are you tone deaf or just Tonedef, Tonedef? :?
Tonedef
Well, I cant distinguish mauve from chartruesse, if thats wot you mean.
Banditman
Tonedef wrote:
. I have an idea for a body shape, but it would mean that the bottom concave bit wouldn't be present.
Ever look at Bo Diddley's Gretsches?
Hammeron
Then you're tone deaf, Colourblind ?
[deleted]
Bo Diddley did play planks!
