Tonerite fail

[jgo...@my-deja.com]

Researchers from Stanford and UC Berkeley have published "Effect of Vibration Treatment on Guitar Tone: A Comparative Study"

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCYQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsavartjournal.org%2Findex.php%2Fsj%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F22%2Fpdf&ei=HD_aVMfAC6LCsATvioCoCg&usg=AFQjCNEQUctCje8cdXHwap_kUItqu4FJOg

In this study, guitars were treated with "a device that is marketed as improving instruments through vibration." The vibrators were not identified as Tonerite, but were described as providing vibration at 60 Hz, attaching to the guitar's strings at the bridge, requiring 70 hours of application time and coming from three generations of the same device, all of which matches Tonerite

The researchers state "We performed player evaluations and physical property measurements on three matched pairs of guitars, before and after subjecting one guitar from each pair to a vibration treatment." They conclude "We find no discernible difference in the changes due to this vibration treatment from those due to a control or 'null' treatment. Players were not reliably able to tell which guitar of the pairs had been subjected to the vibration treatment. Changes due to the vibration treatment were also not discernible with our measurements of physical properties, despite demonstrated sensitivity to measure the subtle differences between guitars of the same make and model as well as changes due to weather or a relatively short aging and playing time."

They add "We do not make conclusions on the origin of the widespread anecdotal reports of improvements in sound associated with this vibration treatment, but note the well-established effects of the power of suggestion and marketing."

[hank alrich]

Thanks, J. I tracked down the PDF. Great stuff. I note Jay Kadis among
the researchers.

--
shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com
HankandShaidriMusic.Com
YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic

[gtr]

They should have done it for 7 *hundred* hours. That would fix it for sure!

[Tony Done]

> They add "We do not make conclusions on the origin of the widespread
anecdotal reports of improvements in sound associated with this
vibration treatment, but note the well-established effects of the power
of suggestion and marketing."

:) :) I'm sure they would have had a more positive result if the
guitars had been fitted with unobtainium bridge pins.

Years back that was a shaking table device in which it was possible to
monitor the changes in the guitar resonance frequencies as it was being
treated. - A much bigger concept altogether than the Tonerite. It was
reviewed in AG Mag, IIRC, and while the changes in resonance frequencies
were real, test panel results were mixed and would have been very
subject to confirmation bias. I haven't seen it touted for a long time,
so I'm guessing it didn't work very well at improving tone - whatever
that means.

--
Tony Done

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=784456

http://www.flickr.com/photos/done_family/

[don hindenach]

Very cool.

I have never understood why anyone would want to plug their actoustic instrument into wall current for hours at a time. It give me the willies just thinking about it.

--
-donh-
donh at audiosys dot com

[jgo...@my-deja.com]

On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 5:02:28 PM UTC-5, Tony Done wrote:
>
> Years back that was a shaking table device in which it was possible to
> monitor the changes in the guitar resonance frequencies as it was being
> treated.

That was the "Timbre Technologies" treatment

http://calendar.bic.caltech.edu/~gbelford/Acoustic%20Guitar%20Central-Aging%20a%20guitar%20with%20vibrations.html

I seem to recall Rick Turner telling me that the speaker Timbre Tech used in that device could easily have put out enough power to melt the glue in the subject guitars - the speaker was barely ticking over in the Acoustic Guitar magazine test. Rick wanted to unleash the speaker, but nobody was eager to volunteer a guitar

Clemens et al. note that the (presumable Tonerite) vibrator they tested was inputting to the guitar less than 1% of the power that would result from gentle strumming.

About Tonerite, Al Carruth posted this to rmmga in 2009: "It's a little hard for me to see how that thing is working. The guitar one seems to drive the strings. They say it is 'nearly silent', and that has me wondering. I've done some 'artificial playing in' experiments, and from what I've seen I needed to put about 2W of power directly into the guitar to get audible results in less than a week or so. At that level it's loud enough; maybe less than what you could get from hard strumming, but not anywhere near 'silent'. I have to wonder how the thing can be effective if it doesn't make any noise."

In other science and sound enhancement news, it appears that torrefied Sitka will be the standard top on Taylor 600 series guitars. There is an interesting article, "Maple's Rich Revival," about the re-design of the maple-bodied 600s in the current Wood and Steel

http://www.taylorguitars.com/wood-and-steel

and some "Taylor 600" demos on youtube.

[Steven Bornfeld]

Can we infer that guitar tops don't "open up" or merely that Tonerite
won't do it?
Maybe it's the player-schvitz opens the top.

Steve

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 2/11/2015 2:08 PM, jgo...@my-deja.com wrote:
> torrefied Sitka

Torrefied?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrefaction

Is that like special sauce?

Steve

[jgo...@my-deja.com]

On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 2:16:11 PM UTC-5, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>
> Torrefied?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torrefaction
> Is that like special sauce?

The linked Wikipedia entry is sorely in need of expansion and updating. Torrefied wood can mean either charcoal or something that still looks like wood, and, over the last few years, several builders have been trying this second stuff in guitars. In the torrefaction process, wood is slowly raised to a temperature high enough to produce permanent physical and chemical changes in its cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin and resin components.

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 2/11/2015 2:45 PM, jgo...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> The linked Wikipedia entry is sorely in need of expansion and updating. Torrefied wood can mean either

charcoal or something that still looks like wood, and, over the last
few years, several builders have been

trying this second stuff in guitars. In the torrefaction process,
wood is slowly raised to a temperature

high enough to produce permanent physical and chemical changes in its
cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin and

resin components.
>

Interesting--thanks. I'm several decades past my chem degree, and I
don't have a clue as to what changes might take place short of
incineration--maybe oxidation or hydrolysis.
This source deals with torrefaction as a means of increasing the energy
density of wood--apparently by driving off hemicellulose. Claim is that
it makes wood more friable, which doesn't sound like something good for
a tonewood.
Can't find much about its influence on tonewoods used as such.

http://www.agrireseau.qc.ca/references/32/presentations_guelph/2Torrefaction%20-%20Pros%20and%20Cons%20By%20Mathias%20Leon%20UoG.pdf

Thanks for posting.
Steve

[Tony Done]

I got to thinking about this during a discussion of temperature and
equilibrium moisture content (EMC) and vapour pressure deficit (VPD) in
UMGF. Over normal environment temperatures, temperature has only a small
effect on moisture content for a given relative humidity, which
surprised me. However, the drying effect increases as the temperature
goes up. - No surprise, but it did make me wonder whether you should
wrap your sitka planks in kitchen foil before baking them in the oven.
After all, the process is supposed to be chemical - eg changes in
hemicellulose, rather then physical, eg changes in moisture content.
Maybe I should read up on it some more.

[Steve Freides]

It's the conservative portion of the UK government - sometimes also used
to refer to their supporters in the general population as well.

-S-

[Steve Freides]

I don't think I've ever seen the word "schvitz" in print before. I'd go
with shvitz.

-S-

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 2/12/2015 11:20 AM, Steve Freides wrote:
>
> I don't think I've ever seen the word "schvitz" in print before. I'd go
> with shvitz.
>
> -S-
>
>

Well, it's transliteration, so I guess anything goes. Or I'm reading
too many of Andrew Schulman's posts.

S

[jgo...@my-deja.com]

On Wednesday, February 11, 2015 at 4:32:20 PM UTC-5, Steven Bornfeld wrote:
>
> Interesting--thanks. I'm several decades past my chem degree,

> torrefaction

> Can't find much about its influence on tonewoods used as such.

> Thanks for posting.

Torrefaction of guitar tops appears to still be open to experimentation and difference of opinion as to what is good. Taylor is using temperatures above 300 F and an oxygen-free atmosphere in what I suppose is an industrial-scale oven. Dana Bourgeois seems to think lower temperatures are the way to go, but he doesn't supply any numbers

http://bourgeoisguitars.net/aged-tone-guitar-series/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCLOXSYi-KA

Harvey Leach says some of his luthier buddies are experimenting in old ovens in their shops.

[Steven Bornfeld]

Well, the proof is in the playing. And I suppose what the tops look
like in 20 years.

Thanks,
Steve

[dsi1]

My guess is that most of it has to do with the player's ability to process what his new guitar is doing. After playing the guitar for a while, our brain learns to interpret the response of the top, dynamic characteristics, and even the mechanics of the guitar. It takes us a while to get comfortable when driving a car new to us, guitars aren't any different. We don't really hear with our ears, we hear with our brain and as far as our brain goes, processing is always where it's at.