Easy players - Always a case for easy = better?

[EvanPC]

Sound aside, is the easiest playing guitar one you're always after? Do you want your setups to make your playability feel almost effortless?

 

After getting my hands on some PLEK'd LPs and G&L's recently, I was pretty blown away by the ease of play I felt. Some of these guitars felt like they were strung with 9's, they played so easily. My curiousity is piqued though, at the thought that I'm not sure I like the sensation. I think I actually like needing to push the strings to make them do what I want to do, versus feeling like I could still play this guitar if I had feathers for fingers.

 

Anybody else kind of like the tug of war between yourself and the guitar more so than the submissive, defeated opponent-like guitar who won't fight back?

 

I have a feeling preferred style/genre could influence answers. If I were a hybrid picking jazz guy, I'd probably love the ease of play and could see how it would be better (for example)...but I'm not that kind of player at the moment.

[milod]

I dunno....

 

My searches for guitars always has been for one that seemed to play by thought, not fingers, if that makes any sense at all.

 

m

[grampa]

Jack White likes to have a fight with his guitar. He will find some old weird guitar that is almost impossible to play and fight with it until he gets it to work. I like a little push back from my guitar but I don't really want to get into a fight with it.

Ease of playing is nice but not to the point of sacrificing sound.

[grampa]

I dunno....

 

My searches for guitars always has been for one that seemed to play by thought, not fingers, if that makes any sense at all.

 

m

 

Yes it does. I believe I have a "psychic" connection with my beloved Gobson F-25. We work together and it does at times seem like it is playing itself through me.

[Guest FarnsBarns]

Yes it does. I believe I have a "psychic" connection with my beloved Gobson F-25. We work together and it does at times seem like it is playing itself through me.

 

Wow, I thought it was just me, I only buy guitars that play me rather than the other way around.

 

The very slick, low action on my Plek'd R6 did take some getting used to though.

[brundaddy]

To me, the order of importance is, from the top:

 

1. feel/playability/comfort
   
2. looks & workmanship (though not always hand-in-hand)
   
3. engineering/build strength/structural integrity (this being #3 may explain why I like Gibsons. If it was #1, Gibsons would be out!)
   
4. sound- last because there are so many things you can do to change the sound
   

 

I'll pull a guitar off the wall because of the look, but I may put it right back because of the feel.

[vourot]

I guess it had to happen. A complaint that a guitar plays too well. Wow. I'm speechless.

[EvanPC]

That is not at all what I'm saying. Do not put words in my mouth.

 

I stated my personal preference for what feels good to me, and was curious about what others thought. Simply asking the question of, if it feels easier, does that make it inherently better.

[EVOL!]

I play hard so I need a tough guitar that can take some abuse and push back a little. Fancy shredder guitars, especially in lighter woods, feel like a priceless vase at the edge of a wobbly table; it could fall at any time and shatter into a million pieces. I would destroy an Ibanez Jem in less than a month. What drew me to my SG is that it is heavier than any other SG I have played. It has an ebony fretboard and when strung with 11s and equipped with that Bigsby, it is a meaty instrument. I am not a total Neanderthal. The guitar is set up well with comfortable action, straight neck, and proper intonation.

 

You want finesses? Go see Steve Vai or Eric Clapton. You want rock & roll animal? Come see me play.

[ksdaddy]

There have been occasions when I would exclusively play my Telecaster for a week or more. I found that after a week, I had not only gotten wimpy fingers which made it difficult to go back to an acoustic, I began getting lazy on the Tele as well.

 

Roy Buchanan said in a 1976 Guitar Player interview (paraphrased) that a player should spend some time practicing on an acoustic with tough action, then when he'd pick up the telecaster, he found he could wrap the strings right around the neck. I haven't always followed that advice but it's never left my brain.

[Silenced Fred]

I'm a hack. I tried playing those shredder guitars with the action so low a piece of hair can't fit underneath. Doesn't work for me.

 

I like a good action, but I do love the feeling of pressing the strings, too light and I don't feel it. I guess that means I suck, but I like it

[chase1410]

I agree with you Evan, and is one of the main reason, why I deter from Strats and Tele's...I always find my self overbending with 9's and sometimes even 10's... I need to feel that tension when bending.

[charlie brown]

Well, one develops, and adjusts their technique, out of need.

If you have a great playing guitar, there's less effort,

in technique, to achieve the same result. That's all.

Folks that love to "feel" or even "fight" a guitar,

probably (I'm guessing, here) learned on guitars that

fought them. While I can understand the "feel" aspect,

and why some prefer certain guages, of strings, or neck

sizes and action height, to attain that, I will Never

understand, wanting to "fight" a guitar. Unless they

have some "power" issues? LOL

 

CB

[milod]

I think a lotta personal preference comes from one's personal experience.

 

I'd argue significantly against real rock and roll not using finesse, however. Even 8-38s can be flatpicked for plenty of "wham" back by the bridge on an SG or LP or whatever. Then a very low setup and light strings can work well for faster or more finessed work.

 

Maybe that comes from a bit of "classical guitar" background since that's what I started on, yet I think sometimes that electric players regardless of style tend not to use the tonal and attack differences available by where they do their pickin'. Sometimes ditto even with steel acoustic players.

 

Yeah, it may mean reconsidering a lotta stuff in terms of technique and even amp settings.

 

Besides, what's rock and roll? I dunno. The stuff I played in the 60s had similarity, a lot of it, to stuff done in the '50s and thence through the next 50 years or so to today. Depends on what bands, what tunes, what concepts you preferred and - if you were halfway practical, what you get paid for.

 

For what it's worth, when and where I did most of my "rock" stuff some 45 years ago, very low action and flatwounds were kinda the "in thing" for bands. That brought a number differences in technique, too, compared to how I and most others play nowadays.

 

m

[RobinTheHood]

I like a good feeling neck and playability first and foremost. If the neck doesnt feel good, I wont look at anything else on the guitar. If the action doesnt feel right, I will look to see why - and if it is fixable. After that it is construction and sound.

 

As a bass player, I've gotten into the habit of looking for basses with good necks and nice, low action. High action on a bass is especially unproductive from a playability standpoint...particularily if you play above the first seven or eight frets. Hey, many people dont.

 

Also with acoustic guitars. Same thing, but I'm even more picky. There isnt a whole lot you can do for an acoustic with high action, aside from filing the bridge. I probably look at action above anything else with acoustic.

[WahKeen]

When I first got my Strat a while back, I had a hard time playing it after playing my Les Paul. It was to the point to where it was almost unplayable to me, and I kept hitting/sliding down the volume knob with my right hand pinky. I was so mad, but I guess I kept attacking the beast and not letting me attack me. Eventually, it got tamed and have no problems playing it and enjoy playing Strats. I find now that after playing the Strat though, the LP feels easier to play.

 

Maybe that't what Jeff Beck was talking about (sissy LP's). To me LP's are like fine cars, and Strats are like rough motocycles. It's MHO.

 

Having said that, I suppose I have "medium" action set ups for my LP's, because I don't like rattling on the low strings. I can't seem to get them low enough to not buzz. In the end, it works out as middle action. It may even work for my style anyway. But I would like to try the lowest possible action on at least one of my LP's to experience that. I've turned the truss rod for the buzzing issue and lowered the action on the bridge. The "medium" action is the best I can come up with for no buzzing and comfort. But anyway... carry on.

[MojoRedFoot]

It's a tough call. I have some that really push me and I absolutely love them and a few that are effortless. It's a mood thing.

[charlie brown]

Yeah, I've tried several different things, over the years.

Right now, I've settled for putting '9's on my Strat...

even sometimes using a "hybrid" mix, with heavier strings on

the bass side. Kind of like a "Heavy Botton, Skinny Top"

thing, but a bit lighter top, and not (quite) so heavy bottom.

That way, going back to 10's on the LP's or most other Gibson's,

isn't such a drastic change. For me, personally, I like the 9's

or that "hybrid," on the Fender scale. And 10's, on Gibson's.

But, that's just Me.

 

CB

[EvanPC]

There have been occasions when I would exclusively play my Telecaster for a week or more. I found that after a week, I had not only gotten wimpy fingers which made it difficult to go back to an acoustic, I began getting lazy on the Tele as well.

 

Roy Buchanan said in a 1976 Guitar Player interview (paraphrased) that a player should spend some time practicing on an acoustic with tough action, then when he'd pick up the telecaster, he found he could wrap the strings right around the neck. I haven't always followed that advice but it's never left my brain.

 

Funny. In my own mind, I've always likened playing on an acoustic to condition for an electric to a baseball player taking swings in the batter's box with a donut on his bat.

 

Also, in the case someone misunderstood, I didn't mean to imply I necessarily want to "fight" a guitar, or intentionally play something that's setup poorly. I want a fantastic setup...but I like the "feel" of tension, or resistance. To use another baseball analogy; I'd rather throw a baseball than a wiffle ball.

[milod]

For what it's worth, I look at this topic somewhat different than some years ago, but what I'm playing and how I play it have differed over the years, too.

 

E.g., when I was backing up fiddlers for "old time" stuff and doing simple flatpicking, I wore heavier strings on the acoustic or AE guitars. Ain't done much of that in 30 years so... light strings on 'em all.

 

I have mixed emotions on the concept of using the acoustic as sort of a "workout" toward lighter strings on the electric.

 

I use different technique, both left and right hand, with heavier strings. This may sound odd, but to me, playing different strings makes me really "think" I'm playing a different instrument. It's a different sort of muscle memory in ways. Something about putting a flatpick in my right hand makes me think "bluegrass," and then my left hand does stuff differently too... Hard to explain, but...

 

m

[Mojorule]

This is a really interesting thread.

 

Since I acquired my Gibson I can really appreciate what Milod refers to as playing the guitar with your mind. I've never played anything which was so easy to play - and that's with 11s and a wound third, EVOL. It really does play itself in physical terms, leaving me free to think about what I want to play rather than concentrating on achieving a sound mechanically. Generally this is a truly idyllic place to be as a guitarist, and I agree that it is largely the neck which helps (and quite probably the 11s, which I'd never tried before).

 

That said, I also have days when the playing is a bit too slippery. Still goes well, but it does indeed feel as though the guitar is playing me, and that feels somewhat less ideal. The neck almost forces me to move around and play jazz, rockabilly and country licks. All great styles that I love playing, but sometimes I just want to play the blues. All the more so, because my guitar offers up some especially great tones for blues. But the 11s, the frets, the ebony board and the neck profile don't always lend themselves to slow bends and vibrato in terms of feel. Then I actually do have to concentrate on mechanics more and fight the guitar a bit, just to do something a bit simpler than the set-up seems to want me to do. On days like that, it's as though the sound of my instrument is at odds with its set-up.

 

Generally though, I can't speak highly enough of having a guitar with a neck, board and strings which promote ease of playing. It opens up so many new possibilities. That said, I also think that I benefited from starting out on a classical and struggling to learn electric licks on it for years too, since it required a certain discipline from both hands to sound good (more stretching because of the nut width, less easy bending, more attention to the tonal effects of my own picking, as Milod notes). So I am in favour of an occasional ascetic return to the acoustic in order to strengthen the fingers and improve technique. And I agree that a steel-string acoustic can up the ante on that front. Once you can get a steel-string acoustic to sound reasonable, your fingers should be strong enough to meet with any electric and make it sound half decent.

[canon_mutant]

Well, can't play 9s on anything. It's just me, as others sound fine with 9s. They're just too light for me.

 

I think the reason I am so sold on Carvin guitars is their relieved heel design and tung oiled neck are just SO sweet. Add in electronics and woods of your choice and it's hard to not get a favorite guitar out of the deal when you're done.

 

Recently played a compound radius neck that I can certainly see the benefits of. Plek'd necks are fine but I still like the late 50s Gibby neck feel.

 

So I can certainly appreciate the refinements over the years.

 

Doesn't mean I no longer enjoy playing the R9 or the 355 though. Love the tones I can get out of my Strat but as my aging hands get more sore, that 9.5" neck is beginning to become a problem. May need to find a 62.

 

That hollowbody 355 is still the tone monster of the crowd with those 57 classics.

[FirstMeasure]

A guitar can be too easy to play, for me. If the action is too easy everything come out Legato. I need a little "fight", or perhaps Resistance. Too much resistance and you loose sustain, so it's a balance.

[charlie brown]

I don't know...I think "resistance," is...or can be "technique" driven, and utilized,

with whatever guitar, you're using. I know, what (I think) you're talking about,

regarding the "feel," of resistance. But, to me...you can control that, as well

as use that natural feeling of "resistance," no matter the guitar. The technique

and/or trick, is to be able to do it, effortlessly, no matter what guitar you use...

your's or someone else's. That's where excellent technique, comes in...IMHO. I'm not

saying I HAVE that, myself. My "technique," if you want to call it that, is EVER evolving.

And, to be honest, it has it's good days, and bad. ;>b But, I am to a point, I can be

reasonably comfortable, on a number of different necks, with different string guages,

just by altering that technique, to fit the instrument. Good thing, too...as my guitar

"collection," has all kinds of various necks, and "resistance/feel" characteristics.

 

I guess, the short version, is the better I got, technique wise, the less important, that

the actual guitar I was playing, became. But, I still have a LONG way to go, even so. ;>)

 

CB

[neilpanda]

I really like the feel of the PLEK'd LPs and my strat, its been set up by me at least 8 times now, feels great!