The Most Ergonomic Guitar

[GregP]

Playing while standing is a whole other thing, Wes. Then it boils down almost ENTIRELY to the weight distribution on one pivot point, combined with overall length!! However, the V does have a pretty cool way of wedging between your legs while sitting which gives neck position an ergonomic benefit over some other guitars. Vs aren't actually the least ergonomic guitars I can think of. But saying, "A V actually has some pretty good ergonomic benefits, especially my particular one that is perfectly balanced" is one thing I agree with. But come on. Quit playing devil's advocate and admit that typical guitar shapes such as a tele, strat, or yes a V, are not particularly good examples of actual ergonomics in practice.

Don't you think that pointing out the ergonomic benefits of a V was REALLY all that was required, instead of the more personal comments (red herrings and straw men, btw) that you threw my way?

Moving on-- if the question is, "what is the MOST ergonomic guitar," *I* certainly don't have an answer, and small details WILL be different from person to person. Arm and finger length might determine an ergonomically correct angle in fanned frets, as well as which fret should be the perpendicular one, for example. But it CAN be stated strictly objectively based on general body geometry that a Klein is MORE ergonomic than a tele... no matter HOW you slice it. And I love teles and the way they feel, in case you missed that point the first time around. There's such thing as objective observation without getting so dang "touchy feely" (to use your term) about your own personal biases.

Greg

[zeppelinchld]

i realize that there is no perfect guitar. and i realize that everyone is different, i just wanted to know what was the best for you specifically.

[Southpa]

Well, if I were to take a square block of wood and sit down / stand up with it like I would play a guitar (like most other people too, they can't be all THAT different, 2 arms, 2 legs, a torso and maybe a head) and if I were to cut the block of wood so all the sharp edges stop digging into my gut / chest, thigh and forearm ie. all the points where my body contacts the guitar, guess what I would have? I believe it would be something resembling a strat. It is THE shape that is contoured to fit most EVERY human body, unless you are some kinda freak. Then you get the Ovation Breadwinner (Bjornn Watsisface from ABBA played one, but thats about the only time I've seen one actually played.) But if a strat doesn't feel good to you then you just aren't holding it right.

Edited May 4, 2007 by Southpa

[GregP]

It's not that it doesn't feel good-- though, I prefer teles over strats. But a strat still has a less than ergonomic neck angle when played in a seated position.

You can mock the Breadwinner (and we all do, and it somewhat deserves it!) but that gets back to the point that... well, it's just a downright goofy guitar. You can feel cool playing a strat... pretty hard to do with a Breadwinner I would think. But that doesn't mean a strat is actually more ergonomic.

'Sides, I hate how "slidey" a strat feels. All slippery-like and it doesn't want to stay put on my lap. Maybe I'm just holding it wrong, but a tele stays put a lot better.

One thing's for sure and isn't likely to change any time soon... electric guitarists as a whole are a conservative lot, even the ones that love rock'n'roll and tearin' er... stuff... up!

[eljib]

Stop arguing! This is the most comfortable guitar you'll ever play.

http://folk.uio.no/jonhaar/pics/stygg6.jpg

[jmrentis]

Stop arguing! This is the most comfortable guitar you'll ever play.

http://folk.uio.no/jonhaar/pics/stygg6.jpg

I think I will have to argue with you about that jk

This is the most comfortable guitar I have played. I have never felt more comfortable or safer in my life as I did when I held/pointed this thing.

It's the second guitar down, the first one was terribly uncomfortableAK Guitar

EDIT: I found another one that looks pretty comfy at least in my opinion. I think it might be the most durable guitar design I have come across so far. If you have a chance go to the bottom and click the LA button and you can see a few more very comfy designs.

Comfy guitar

Edited May 4, 2007 by jmrentis

[DJALix]

I used to find that the Ibanez RG and JEM shapes seemed to fit me best. Had many of them over the years. Sat nice on the body when both standing and sitting. I never found a typical Fender Strat type that felt that good to me. This was until I picked up my first Washburn N4, Nuno's sig guitar.

http://www.washburn.com/products/electrics...ries/index.aspx

They have cut down Strat bodies which I thought was going to be a problem for me being 6ft tall and medium build, but the body size fit's like a glove. The swampash ESA model is very very light without being neck heavy and both the Alder and Padauk's (very heavey - custom only) are very well balanced when standing.

Other than having a smaller body, the most ergonomic thing I have found is the Steven's extended cut away, which add's to the overall shape and detailing. Helps make the whole thing lighter also I guess, but for me the cutdown body is amazing.

[Robert Irizarry]

I was going to just gloss over your post,since in the last one you basically played the hand of "I pretend to misunderstand your post in order to take umbrage",but I did read it,and you have some good points...but what you are again doing is trying to twist my post to mean the exact opposite of what I actually said.

In the real world, where we can actually talk and debate in real time, there are still misunderstandings and miscommunications. Forums, where communication is limited to a few words and a limited context, are rife with opportunities for misunderstanding. I've admitted to having misunderstood or misinterpreted a fellow PG member's statements. There's really nothing more to say on the matter and hopefully this thread will return to topic.

Regards,

Robert

[syxxstring]

Im gonna have to represent here.

No ones brough up the Parker flys.

Light weight curved all the right ways. Maybe not everyones bag but hands down winner for me.

I also play about a dozen different guitars with varied neck shapes. I think this helps me because I'm not always locked into a particular grip.

[jmrentis]

Im gonna have to represent here.

No ones brough up the Parker flys.

Light weight curved all the right ways. Maybe not everyones bag but hands down winner for me.

I also play about a dozen different guitars with varied neck shapes. I think this helps me because I'm not always locked into a particular grip.

I know this might sound insane, but I believe it's relevant to your post. I own some birds and all the avian vets I have spoken with suggest having a number of different sized branches for the birds. This is so they do not have muscle problems from being stuck with one grip. Obviously, with people playing guitar it is not as important as we don't sleep with a guitar in our hands(well not always at least ), but having multiple shaped and sized necks would have some benefit to muscle use and grip, possibly even a noticeble difference. By using different guitar necks you build muscles or areas of muscles that you would not, using one neck. It also helps to prevent injuries or problems as greg mentioned. I think we should name it "guitar wrist/fingers/elbow/shoulder", similar to how people say tennis elbow.

[Geo]

I own some birds and all the avian vets I have spoken with suggest having a number of different sized branches for the birds. This is so they do not have muscle problems from being stuck with one grip. Obviously, with people playing guitar it is not as important as we don't sleep with a guitar in our hands(well not always at least ), but having multiple shaped and sized necks would have some benefit to muscle use and grip, possibly even a noticeble difference. By using different guitar necks you build muscles or areas of muscles that you would not, using one neck. It also helps to prevent injuries or problems as greg mentioned. I think we should name it "guitar wrist/fingers/elbow/shoulder", similar to how people say tennis elbow.

Interesting. But I find it's difficult to play differently shaped necks--takes some adjusting, and seems to impede your playing. I guess it would be something to get used to.

An even bigger factor might be your actual fretting technique... are your fingers tense? It's hard, but sometimes if focus on playing a scale super-relaxed-ly, I find I play it better... not sure if that's relevant...

[jmrentis]

I agree that some shaped necks are uncomfortable, but I do believe that with time and practice your arms would adjust by building up muscles in different areas and eventually it would become more comfortable. I think in time and using different shapes you would gain an overall improvement in technique due to the increase of ease while playing. As you said though at first it would can be difficult, cause cramps, sore muscles and so on.

As for playing tense or not, I admit when I first started playing when I was 13 or somewhere around there, I would jam the frets as hard as I could and even then get buzz. As I played it took less and less effort to press the strings down and after a while I could play very loose with both hands and have no problems. I must say one of the more difficult hand habits to break for me was loosening my picking hand(when using a pick). For a while I played with a fist, but I found that I had much more control and speed playing loose with my hand open and fingers dangling. Again, I think it's part technique but part practice and time. Much of my fretting improvement came from learning more complicated chords and playing them up and down the entire neck. It built a lot of muscles and increase my control.

[Mattia]

All my necks are slightly different shapes, some big, some small, and it's part of each individual guitar. I play slightly differently on each of them.

As for Parker Flys...well, they're find if your standing, and they are quite lovely, lightweight, sexy things, but they're pokey-in-the-rib-guitars when seated. No ergonomic goodness there!

[Robert Irizarry]

I agree that some shaped necks are uncomfortable, but I do believe that with time and practice your arms would adjust by building up muscles in different areas and eventually it would become more comfortable. I think in time and using different shapes you would gain an overall improvement in technique due to the increase of ease while playing. As you said though at first it would can be difficult, cause cramps, sore muscles and so on.

That's actually quite an interesting idea that I think merits further thought. It reminds me of what a beginner goes through learning the basics or when someone closer to intermediate starts to delve into more complex chords or patterns. Muscles have to develop strength in slightly different directions, pressure has to be applied in new ways, etc. Very cool. Thanks for that.

Regards,

Robert

[Masina]

Strat. Without doubt.

[uglogirl]

LOL.

She can play a vee because unlike me she's developed her musculo-skeletal system carrying around those enormous um....

never mind.

Actually, I love the way explorer's balance.... the neck is like closer to my center which feels really comfortable.

Uglogirl

Edited May 6, 2007 by uglogirl

[badsnap]

OK eljib...I laughed out loud (sorry people, I don't do the text message ancronym thing)!! Thanks for breaking things up...how can one have such good comedic timing on a thread...just what I needed at just the right time!

Peace...Rog

[Drak]

Robert, no offense taken at all, I love a good debate.

I would counter with something along these lines: my personal opinion varies from the (seemingly) somewhat standardized ergonomic designs I've seen lately for this reason (broad in scope and hard to define tho it might be).

I think that the MIND wants to be catered to at least as much or more than the physical body does, so I call into question the entire basis of which most ergonomic designs are drawn from from their very inception.

Lets say it from a different angle: instead of just applying the mechanics of your basic ergonomic design to our 'shape' as homo sapiens with our inherant attached skeletal and muscular structures bla bla bla, let us also include the brain, the senses, the whole enchilada, the entire BEING ...instead of simply just the physical attributes when it comes to ascertaining exactly what is ergonomic and what is not. I understand this point of view probably goes past the accepted definition of what ergonomic is and is not, but that is what it means to me when discussing ergonomic guitar designs.

What I am implying here is that I am possibly stretching the word ergonomic past it's normally accepted limitations to include the atmospheric, the rhizzospheric, The ~Ether~ Of All The Human Senses Combined to form what I personally consider to be 'ergonomic' in design. My interpretation, I know, but that's the way I think about it.

You say musculoskelature (I think that's what it was), I say all sensory systems combined. ALL of them.

Example: let us say you have a typically designed ergonomic guitar (not that I am trying to be derogotory of the ergonomic design by using the word 'typical', I am not, and I applaud the research actually), but it has been painted with a wild pink and black paint job with the saying YOU CAN ALL SUCK MY FREAKING BALLS on the face of it, and you are playing at your local church where everybody knows you.

Depending on your personal accepted level of risk, your muscles may very well indeed tighten up, your pulse races, you may perspire, feel uncomfortable, and you cramp up, while playing a perfectly acceptable ergonomic guitar.

Switch scenario: You are now dressed like Billy Ray Cyruss, playing a typical Blackguard styled Butterscotch Telecaster in a country bar on a Friday night when everything's going your way.

No cramps, no perspiration, no nervousness, and no 'ergonomic' guitar involved.

Maybe a crappy example, but it brings my argument to the fore: everybody has a different idea of what is ergonomically correct for them, and there is a point where the science drops off, because it is not simply up to the skeleton and muscles as to what is comfortable and what is not, your entire sensory perception package all has to be in agreement. At least that's where I differ from the typical train of thought.

You could say but Drak, if I blindolded you, your argument then is pointless, but I would counter with the fact that that argument is living in the vacuum of the scientific, that we all use all of our senses all the time, and that our senses are part of what make up our ergonomic systems, of what we truly feel comfortable with and what we do not.

Or, say you had a nice ergonomic guitar that was covered in fur, but you were a lifetime card carrying PITA member.

Would that be ergonomically conducive for you?

Would you play your best with a guitar like that, even tho it was musculo-skeleturally 'correct' from a design standpoint?

[GregP]

+1 vote for flakiest post by Drak evar.

I understand what you're saying, though. I agree that if you feel ridiculous or out of place with something, your... er... holistic... er... chi centre of... er... spiritual ergonomics might be in jeopardy.

But be honest... all you're REALLY saying is, "ergonomics schmergonomics, I feel damn silly and would feel socially uncomfortable (eg. ashamed or self-conscious) playing such a weird looking guitar." You're willing to make the perfectly acceptable sacrifice of "some" ergonomics (a tele is still pretty comfy! Ergonomics certainly aren't out the window!) for the sake of not feeling silly, and there's nothing wrong with that. But you can't take that stance and paint it as "a different interpretation of ergonomics." Ergonomics iz ergonomics, and what you're talking about is aesthetics and self-consciousness. A whole separate and legitimate line of debate, but not one that actually addresses the issue.

Of course, if you're tough enough to not give a da** what other people think, or to even embrace the cool of alternate designs, then the selfconsciousness is gone, too! I for one wouldn't feel anything even resembling shame with the Forshage guitar in my hands! I saw him playing his own live, and it looked great as a standing and strapped-on (no funny comments...!) guitar, too. The Forshage body is a bit sleeker and less out-of-the-ordinary looking.

In any event, all these "live" situations are fairly moot points. Sure, the way a guitar hangs on a strap is important, but that's a much easier ergonomic problem to solve. There, with the exception of the neck weight/balance issue (not to mention overall weight so you don't break your back) it's a matter of strap height and subsequent guitar position. I mean, how high can any given person hoist their guitar before they look like a total idiot? As an experiment, I'm sure we've all taken the time to hoist that guitar up when nobody's looking... not right to the neck, but higher than usual... tilted the neck up more than one normally would... and felt our wrists breath a metaphorical sigh of relief as ergonomics take over. But you can guarantee I wouldn't wanna rock out with a guitar up that high, even when standing up. I remember one guy in my dad's band did that (with a strat, no less) and I always thought he looked a right git. No offence to high-guitar-strappers.

The MORE likely situation for a lot of us who aren't gigging musicians, is that we'll be at home with an audience of one (children/friends/spouse) if we're lucky. Generally not.

Greg

[Jon]

Or, say you had a nice ergonomic guitar that was covered in fur, but you were a lifetime card carrying PITA member.

Hilarious typo, it's PETA, buddy. Same difference, right?

[jmrentis]

When I first started thinking about this topic, I weighed the ergonomics of guitar while including the psychological angle. After thinking more about it, I realized that was not part of what ergonomics was. I knew this and should have realized this sooner especially considering I just went over a similar thing in one of my online classes. I think it is more difficult to seperate those two subject for certain people. I cannot recall the personality types, but I would bet that people that are more mathmatically gifted have an easier time seeing this topic without involving an psychology. As Drak, my immediate response was to include some small aspect of psychology, rather than the strictly ergonomics. I guess it's completely besides the point, but I do think left vs. right brained individuals might have a different initial response or thought on the subject.

I think I might try to develop a new area of science called Zen-onomics and will include classes on the Ether, where I would ask Drak to teach, he might even offer extra credit for those who knew what the WOD was.

[CrazyManAndy]

Or, say you had a nice ergonomic guitar that was covered in fur, but you were a lifetime card carrying PITA member.

Hilarious typo, it's PETA, buddy. Same difference, right?

But Pita's taste so good!

CMA

[GregP]

Especially when filled with Gyros and Tzatziki sauce!

[Vendelcrow]

I put my vote on Klein...

[Robert Irizarry]

I put my vote on Klein...

Based on my own experiences building a Klein based guitar, I would tend to agree. However, I have to say the Forshage I've recently written about looks to be an excellent contender as well. The Forshage is influenced by the Klein, the Teuffel Tesla and the Ovation Breadwinner. Here's the main article which includes links to follow up articles on the neck and body build - The Forshage Hollow Body Electric Guitar.

Regards,

Robert