Sustain vs. Rhythm... Help or Hindrance?

[tw2_usa]

Hi All,

 

I'm in the market for a J-45. I've played many. I am primarily interested in playing rhythm guitar and have been playing just about a year with good progress.

When I test these guitars, the ones with less sustain are more satisfying as I can play cleaner rhythm on them. However, when I pick one up (usu. a TV or TV Adi), the sustain is so beautiful and magical, but my rhythm playing goes sloppy with lots of unwanted carryover of sound.

I am curious to know if it's the player or the guitar? Can I expect as I improve more to be able to play tight, punchy rhythm style on a guitar with sweet sustain, or is it more common/correct for a player who enjoys/excels at rhythm playing to opt for a guitar with less sustain?

 

Lastly, I find the ones with greater sustain have better dynamics, louder louds and softer, present softs. Is that most common, or might there be a low-sustain/wide dynamics combo out there waiting for me to find her.

 

All opinions appreciated. Thanks.

[Hoss]

I've changed from being primarily a fingerstyle player to a rhythm player. And I've also found that certain types of guitars no longer work for me, because of this change.

 

So, the good news is you need many different guitars to meet different playing demands. Try to be cheerful about this as you explain it to your spouse--I find that effusive optimism and a positive approach is the best way to tell my wife that I need to spend more money for additional guitars. :)

 

I can make a guitar with a louder sustain work for rhythm, but it has to be when backing a particular musical style that doesn't demand the 'punch' that I would normally expect to use. Sort of a smoother approach.

 

But again, IMO, that's why they make different guitars. Good Luck!

[onewilyfool]

Tomwood, I agree, too much sustain, AND too much overtones are just no good for rhythm guitar. Better an old Gibson archtop for rhythm..

[Rambler]

I played for a while in a duo with a singer-songwriter. My L00 Blues King was just right to play biting single string leads, partial chords and slide under his slower and bluesier numbers. It didnt fare so well if I needed an arpeggio to ring out. Horrible if I had to strum. His 12 string (ring/sustain) worked just fine for all of that. Our best gig out, I played my J50 all the way--those slope Js can be mighty versatile.

[Jerry K]

A lot of rhythm players do favor archtops with high initial volume and rapid decay. However, there are some things you can do even if the guitar has a lot of sustain. If you play chords with open strings (ie 'cowboy chords') at the top of the neck, you can use your right hand - for ex. the heel of your right palm - to damp the strings and stop the reverberation. Easier and better sounding usually is to play chords with only 2 to 4 notes and fret each note with the left hand, damping any unused strings with your left hand. This will tend to produce chording more in the middle of the neck. You then control the decay by lifting your left hand fingers but keeping contact with the strings so the notes are damped. This is how I tend to play rhythm. Another thing I do with rhythm is to use a 'chicking' technique where the right fist descends and hits the strings after a chord. You can hear both techniques in my sample - We've got a world that swings, below. I am playing it on a CJ-165 maple, which normally has a lot of sustain but you can see that I am able to pretty effectively stop a chord from sustaining.

[SuperG]

I agree on your points about sustain/overtones not being ideal for rhythm. I tend to play mostly rhythm myself and have found that strings make a huge difference in getting the right sound.

 

I tried a set of Martin SPs on my Southern Jumbo (essentially a J-45), which to be fair I loved on my Gibson Gospel. They almost prompted me to sell the SJ-- far too jangly and 'modern' sounding. The same SJ with John Pearse strings is to my ear the perfect chunka-chunka rhythm machine, while still displaying incredible dynamics. I also recently purchased a J-185, which although much brighter than the SJ, lends itself nicely to rhythm playing. You can bet that I’ll be experimenting with a few different string types.

 

So I’d suggest leaning towards a J-45 with strong fundamental dynamics since those dynamics will always be there regardless of your style. From there you can always 'tone it down' a bit with strings that are right for you today.

[zeebee]

I agree that string choice can make a big difference and have found 80/20's reduce the overtones and suit a hog guitar more favourably.

[Rambler]

Might add that rhythm can imply a of things--and call for different tones. Strums? HB or Dove for a percussive sound; rw dread for a bold ringing one. (the rw dread also gets 1st call for Bluegrassy low string runs and chord chop). Rolling arpeggios and partial chords? a quick attack with some snap (but not piercing), full-sounding but not too bassy. Id look at martin M/Om or a Gibby slope J. Scratchy funk: something quick, dry and bright.

[onewilyfool]

I met this guy with a 40's J-45, and he had electric strings on his guitar???? He played mostly rhythm....and he said he liked the "old time" sound they produced?????? May be worth a try....

[asmith9509]

A mahogany-backed J45 is the consummate rhythm guitar; probably the most recorded guitar in history for that purpose. I find that once the strings get a little cruddy, the sustain and overtones drop dramatically and you get that punchy, dry Gibson sound.

[powerpopper]

Might add that rhythm can imply a of things--and call for different tones. Strums? HB or Dove for a percussive sound; rw dread for a bold ringing one. (the rw dread also gets 1st call for Bluegrassy low string runs and chord chop). Rolling arpeggios and partial chords? a quick attack with some snap (but not piercing)' date=' full-sounding but not too bassy. Id look at martin M/Om or a Gibby slope J. Scratchy funk: something quick, dry and bright.

[/quote']

 

That's an important distinction to make between rhythm styles.

 

For me, rhythm means (mostly) strumming to accompany my own vocals. I would lean toward my J-45 or the Hummingbird for that purpose.

 

If I'm going to a Bluegrass meet-up, (which I have yet to do ) the Martin HD-28V would get the call.

 

I actually prefer the tonal sound of Rosewood, but I find Mahogany to be better suited to vocal accompaniment.

[larryp58]

Might add that rhythm can imply a of things--and call for different tones. Strums? HB or Dove for a percussive sound; rw dread for a bold ringing one. (the rw dread also gets 1st call for Bluegrassy low string runs and chord chop). Rolling arpeggios and partial chords? a quick attack with some snap (but not piercing)' date=' full-sounding but not too bassy. Id look at martin M/Om or a Gibby slope J. Scratchy funk: something quick, dry and bright.

[/quote']

I agree, I play my SongBird Deluxe every Friday night in a bluegrass gig. The rosewood does have the perfect ringing tone for that genre of music. But my Southern Jumbo TV has the perfect tone for solo gigs. (i.e. Neil Young, America, James Taylor, CSN, Eagles, CCR, etc.)

[tw2_usa]

Awesome help, thanks much.

[Rosewoody]

The thing I like most about Gibson is that quick decay. Old strings, also flatwounds, can tone down that excessive sustain. Another taste I've developed is for "quiet" guitars. I once had a J-45 that really required a heavy hand to get a large sound, whereas a D-28 was just naturally very loud in comparison. But with a quiet guitar I find you can get the big tone when you really spank it, where the loud guitar goes into overdrive and either distorts or is just too loud and obnoxious.