Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

i admit, every so often i go to Ed Roman's website to look at his exquisite inventory. [i am by no means giving the guy credit] and yes, i have read many of his rants, many of which i disagree with and many that are just full of utter ****. but one of his rants caught my attention, he goes on about the great tonal qualities of Limba - yes many people know what i am talking about. he always goes on about how filling tone wood is bad, that it dampens the tone of the wood <<< with this comment it implies he does not use any wood fillers and/or he uses an alternative, either that or he does use fillers and if so he is a hypocrite. my question is, the guy isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed [his rants are evidence of this] if he has a "secret" to making a guitar with great tone in his ears [question relates to finish, not tone wood] so what is it? then again the guy could be just full of ****.

Posted

Poly does a great job filling pores... for a few weeks or months. Then it shrinks right down into them leaving little dents all over. Oh well, I learned from my mistake and will take the extra step or two next time. :D

Posted
Poly does a great job filling pores... for a few weeks or months. Then it shrinks right down into them leaving little dents all over. Oh well, I learned from my mistake and will take the extra step or two next time. :D

i mean the real poly...the multi part type...that stuff you buy in the hardware stores is not the same

Posted

No matter what's used for filler, it's still only a wee bit on the outside surface that's being filled... which is also sanded back so that there's really very little filler at all. The entire rest of the body of the guitar is still full of Ed's magic 'tone-pores', so I don't know what the argument's supposed to be.

Greg

Posted
No matter what's used for filler, it's still only a wee bit on the outside surface that's being filled... which is also sanded back so that there's really very little filler at all. The entire rest of the body of the guitar is still full of Ed's magic 'tone-pores', so I don't know what the argument's supposed to be.

Greg

when i read it i assumed he meant body filler.....such as bondo,because a picture on the page showed a guitar with body filler on it from ibanez...

Posted

Could be. I assumed the other. :D I have no desire to search through Ed Roman rants to find out. B)

Posted
Poly does a great job filling pores... for a few weeks or months. Then it shrinks right down into them leaving little dents all over. Oh well, I learned from my mistake and will take the extra step or two next time.  :D

i mean the real poly...the multi part type...that stuff you buy in the hardware stores is not the same

Sorry, I miss spoke. I'll go back to my corner. B)

Posted

well i got a much better response than i thought i would.

QUOTE (GregP Jun 6 2004, 08:48 PM)

No matter what's used for filler, it's still only a wee bit on the outside surface that's being filled... which is also sanded back so that there's really very little filler at all. The entire rest of the body of the guitar is still full of Ed's magic 'tone-pores', so I don't know what the argument's supposed to be.

Greg

thanx Greg, you have finally convinced me to use filler.

Posted

:D

I like finding holes in poor arguments. Mr. Roman makes it too easy sometimes though; bless his misguided little heart.

Posted

I have to defend Ed Roman here....He is definately quite the asshole to deal with and some of his rants are pure speculation, but there are also interesting and good concepts. For example the direct coupling stuff, etc. I think his website is VERY informative to read and starts me thinking also there is alot of nonsense....Concerning the claim of finishes that rob the guitar of it's tone Ed is not the only one believing that....there are many pro-builders claiming that....although I myself don't believe it....

Posted
Just wanted to add that I can very well imagine that the finish has an impact on the acoustic tone of the guitar....but through an amp I think it doesn't matter....

I have a cheap japanese built Yamaha which sounded awefully dead even with nice pickups (SD Custom in the bridge), the paint appeared to be thick and plastic-like. I stripped it down to bare wood and it sounds alive now (even though the body is 6-7 pieces total). I'm gonna have to oil it some day :D

Posted

Direct coupling... there are holes in THAT argument, as well. If you trace through the entire -actual- signal path from the second a string is plucked to the moment it's amplified, there's very little difference that direct mounting should have upon your tone. On the other hand, it's a very tidy way to mount a pickup for bolt-in necks, and for that reason alone it's still a very viable method. Eddie Van Halen also notices a difference in tone, but he has notoriously picky ears. Will it have an impact? Certainly. Will it completely alter your pickup's tone destiny? Not likely.

Where Ed Roman falls short in his rants isn't in his ideas or the concepts he supports. Many of those have supporters who could produce quantifiable data if they could actually be arsed. No, the problem is that he exaggerates the impact of each thing to a ludicrous degree, which takes away from the believability of his argument. But that's another thread.

Back to this one-- ff course the [i}finish{/I] can affect the tone. Although the degree to which the finish impacts tone is still a matter for debate, I think anybody would agree that there is SOME noticeable difference between different finishes (laquer vs. shellac for instance). But that's even further support of my particular point of view-- what difference is a wee bit of pore filler going to make if you're still going to put lacquer over top of it? Not a bit of difference at all. The argument was about filler, not about finish, and if Ed thinks that grain filler is detrimental to the tone of a guitar... well, normally I'd be diplomatic and say "There might be a BIT of a difference" but in this case I'd say that the best ears in the world wouldn't notice it.

What I'm always surprised about is the degree to which people transfer acoustic instrument dogma over to an electric guitar without taking into account that the 'tone formula' is much different for an electric.

Greg

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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...