Alan Ratcliffe wrote
??? Stiffness and hardness are completely different concepts. Balsa is stiff (about the best stiffness to weight ratio of any wood), so are cedar and spruce - but hard they are not.
Not really if one is talking about the property of material which resists bending - not the ability to withstand dents. We can nit-pick, but I'm way past semantics here. ?
Alan Ratcliffe wrote
In a perfect system yes ....but the guitar is not a perfect system. The inconsistency is part of the very nature of wood - and that's why we use it. Sure you can use a material with the same stiffness, hardness and weight, but it will not have the chaotic structure of wood. It will more than likely be a homogeneous substance, rather than feature a porous cellular structure like wood. All this means that wood has more of a random structure than any manmade materials and thus imparts a lot more "character" to the voice of the instrument ....because it is not perfect and consistent. Ultimately, that character wood imparts to the tone is what we, as guitarists, want.
Really? How pray tell is all of this converted to an electrical signal? 8)
Alan Ratcliffe wrote
That was admittedly a bit off the wrist (I'm lazy, sorry ?), but the concept does encompass a lot of characteristics of any specific piece of wood. It should more properly be the grain and cellular structure. A wood with larger cell structure will generally be lighter in weight, softer and have a lower resonant frequency than one with a smaller cell structure. Ash is a brilliant example - the Southern species grow in water and as a result have a larger cell structure (to hold more water) - when this wood dries out it is much lighter than it's northern relative (northern, hard, baseball bat ash). Also cuts from the lower part of the tree hold more water, so are less dense when dry. A harder wood with a larger cell structure may weigh the same as a softer wood with smaller cells, but they will sound different.
Really? How pray tell is all of this converted to an electrical signal? ???
Alan Ratcliffe wrote
You've got that backwards - the bridge is the node, and the closer to the node (the one fixed node a guitar has), the less overtones the string has because of the constraints the node puts on it's vibration. That is why the string is quieter at the bridge position - less overtones.
Not quite sure what you're describing here - the 2 main anchor points, are the bridge and headstock (headless guitars exempted), the nut is an additional anchor point and then of course wherever one places one's fingers. By setting the string in vibration an equal tension is applied on the anchor points - basic concept of tension along wire.
Also volume and harmonic content are not the same thing - or as you put it 'quiet and overtones'. Are you suggesting there is less volume (total energy) or less harmonic content closer to the bridge.?
Think about it for a sec. before responding...
Alan Ratcliffe wrote.
...or subtracted - a notch filter is an effect too. The device is changing the sound, and to me, if something changes the sound it is an effect. It is a simplification, sure - but surely still valid?
By that definition everything in creation is an effect - that description is too broad to be meaningful.
Alan Ratcliffe wrote.
As I understand it (and admittedly DSP is not my bailiwick, so feel free to correct me here), but modelling is basically convolution, right? Convolution takes a signal (a), compares it to a reference signal (b) and outputs signal (c) by changing (a) to sound like (b). Is that correct? Surely while it is an advanced form of effects processing, to say it is not an effect is simply semantics?
That is why I posted the link - it helps to read a bit about the topic before any real technical discussion is meaningful.
Convolution is 'heart' of the concept - but then combustion is heart of the motor car, so can we reduce discussion about engine performance to a few sentences like - "just add more pistons - that'll work"
My definition of FX is a device that treats the signal (in terms of this discussion) as whole - it affects the sound without considering the original impulse. A simple example would be an equalizer as you mentioned - it cannot add harmonic content from the original signal.
The engineers behind the VG would have to consider the 'exact' harmonic content captured by pick-ups at various positions along the string.
To cut a long story short - the principles would have to be
reproducible to work. The fact that this tool exists is testament that the electrical concept of how sound is produced is spot on. If the "chaos theory" of wood were great influences this device would have died in beta testing.
As for excellent electric solid body guitars and basses not being made of wood - there are many, but I'm sure you know this...
http://www.status-graphite.com/status/frames/index_home.html
