4beagles Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 Anybody consider this an issue- the weight of a guitar- in terms of sound?? Are the newer Hummingbird Originals lighter in weight then the previous models? Any feedback on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gossmanster Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 I don't think weight so much determines sound as is often a symptom of other factors that contribute to the sound: the heaviness of the bracing, the thickness of the top, the type of wood, the bridge, the water content of the wood. I just played a whole series of used Gibsons and Martins at the local store, and they are all over the map on weight...even the same model vary dramatically on weight, but I can't say all the light ones sounded better or worse. Many of the lightest guitars were really great sounding, but part of that is that they are aged, the wood has dried, and also I happen to like mahogany which is a little lighter than say maple. My understanding is a lot of old Gibsons were very lightly braced and that contributes to the sound...it also contributes to many of them not surviving, so we're listening to those that were the best off the line, or sounded the best and were therefore protected. Collings has tried to reproduce that in their Waterloo line, and I think those guitars sound great, and they are very light. The store also has a 1926 Martin OOO that felt like it was filled with helium. It sounded great, but I think that had more to do with the construction and age of the wood than just the weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 One of the reasons the early-1930s L guitars have achieved their legendary status is the weight. My 1932 L1 clocks in at around 2 3/4 pounds. It is so lightly built you half expect it to float out of the case when opened. The Kel Kroyden without a truss rod could weigh as little as 2 1/2 pounds. I do have to give Collings a nod here. Their take on the Kel Kroyden which differs from the originals in that it does have a truss rod is still so lightly built they come with a warning not to string with anything heavier than 11-52 strings. To build a guitar that light in this day and age takes some serious chutzpah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard McCoy Posted December 12, 2021 Share Posted December 12, 2021 I don't think weight is much of a consideration with acoustic guitars. Even those built like tanks are still fairly lightweight compared to any electric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhanners623 Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 Every GREAT acoustic I've ever played has been light, but "light" is a relative term, I suppose. I should say that every guitar I've played that I thought sounded great felt very light to me. I've noticed that Sweetwater lists the weight of acoustics it has in stock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluesKing777 Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 9 hours ago, zombywoof said: One of the reasons the early-1930s L guitars have achieved their legendary status is the weight. My 1932 L1 clocks in at around 2 3/4 pounds. It is so lightly built you half expect it to float out of the case when opened. The Kel Kroyden without a truss rod could weigh as little as 2 1/2 pounds. I do have to give Collings a nod here. Their take on the Kel Kroyden which differs from the originals in that it does have a truss rod is still so lightly built they come with a warning not to string with anything heavier than 11-52 strings. To build a guitar that light in this day and age takes some serious chutzpah. Compare the Waterloo/KK to my National Resophonics I played today at lunchtime - Tricone weighs in on their spec sheet at 8lbs 14oz (though it feels like about 20!) and my single cone M14 weighs in at about 5lbs 12 ozs.........plus National cases! Yep, if we have to walk or hitchhike or hobo it, we will take Waterloo in its lightweight Hiscox case! BluesKing777. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seagull Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 (edited) Perhaps it's just in my head, but I have always felt a lighter guitar tends to be the better sounding one. If it's a solid wood guitar and lighter, I think a better quality chuck of tree tends to be used. Strong enough to hold up, yet lighter than the next... I used weight as one of my selection criteria when picking my J-45 Studio online last year. I'm happy with it, but I might have been just as happy with the heaviest of the bunch too. I'll never know now. In a perfect world I would have played them each and let my ears do the talking. But you know it was 2020 and all. Edited December 13, 2021 by Seagull Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwlsky Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 My J-15 is significantly lighter than my J-185. They both sound amazing, but the J-15 is much louder. Don't know if the weight has anything to do with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twang Gang Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 I have a Hummingbird Original model that I got new in 2020. I don't have a really accurate scale but it weighs about 4.5 pounds. I don't know how much an older one might weigh. I also have a Hummingbird Quilt model which is maple and weighs about 5 pounds. The maple one is a little louder. That may be due to the type of wood, but in this case the heavier guitar is louder than the lighter one. Although not apples to apples due to Mahogany vs. Maple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 There does seem to be a Law of Psychoacoustics which says a lighter built guitar will be more responsive than a heavier built instrument. But there is also always going to be a give and take in a build between sound and wanting to solve an engineering problem which more often as not comes down to avoiding warranty issues. The happy medium with a guitar like a J45 seems to fall in the 4 pound to 4.4 pound range. So while 1/2 pound or so heftier than my 1942 J50 they are slim jims compared to some of the later-1960s guitars I have played with the heavier bracing and ADJ saddle bridges. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jt Posted December 13, 2021 Share Posted December 13, 2021 31 minutes ago, zombywoof said: There does seem to be a Law of Psychoacoustics which says a lighter built guitar will be more responsive than a heavier built instrument. Well, that depends on what you mean by lighter built guitars. If you're referring to the top only, I agree. But invho, lighter overall build does not correspond to a more responsive instrument, and, depending on build style, may be inversely correlated. By far the loudest guitars I have ever played are Smallman classical guitars. A Smallman can weight 3.4 kg, or 7.5 lbs. But they are incredibly responsive and loud. How? Greg builds the guitars with laminated backs and sides designed to eliminate vibration. He then builds the tops very thing -- under 1 mm in some spots. Think the thickness of a business card. Really. There are stories of classical guitarists John Williams accidentally sticking his thumb through the top. He braces the guitars with balsa/carbon fiber in a lattice configuration. Many folks in the steel string world build guitars exhibiting a Smallman influence in that they utilize laminated backs and sides designed to eliminate vibration, resulting in only the top vibrating/absorbing the energy of the strings. Now, whether this design results in a better sound is, again invho, debatable. But it's not debatable that the design results in a louder, more responsive instrument. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4beagles Posted December 14, 2021 Author Share Posted December 14, 2021 thanks for the feedback..........I notice that the guitar in question seems to have the weight in the neck/ neck joint rather then in the body itself...............as best as I can tell.....I hace also thought that the lighter the better but not in every case...my 1954 D-28 ( Braz) is a heavy one and sounds incredible..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombywoof Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, jt said: Well, that depends on what you mean by lighter built guitars. If you're referring to the top only, I agree. Mainly talking about the tops -how the wood is thicknessed, the carve of the bracing, the bridge plate. If you ever took a gander under the hood of say a Harmony and saw the girth of the back braces and thick tail block alone you would see where some of the extra weight comes from. But I still love those guitars. Edited December 14, 2021 by zombywoof Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorrisrownSal Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 In terms of modern guitars, When I would buy online, especially from Wildwood or Sweetwater, I’d absolutely pick light weight Gibsons over heavier ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gossmanster Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 This question made me think and read. Previous discussions that make some good points https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=220532 https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=585158 https://www.acousticguitarforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=538385 Mostly discussing different models and woods. Most people think all other things bring equal, weight doesn't matter. Some speculation that a light guitar will be more responsive and a heavier guitar might have more bass. The luthiers on those threads don't consider weight as a factor. However, top thickness does matter and effects weight, as does the wood drying out with age. If you really want to go deep, check out https://esomogyi.com/articles/specific-top-thickness-in-the-guitar/ tldr...he likes thinner, lighter tops. But after all the reading, I'm not going to choose my guitars based on weight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kwlsky Posted December 14, 2021 Share Posted December 14, 2021 Agreed. I think the weight of a guitar should be considered for comfort purposes only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.