Sound Hole Design?

[fernsemer]

Sound Hole Design?

Pepe Vergara.....Hello! ... And any other Luthiers reading this.

As you are a Luthier.....I have a question for you. .... I seem to have
heard or read from time to time, .... that the upper bout of a standard
guitar design contributes nothing to the amplification of sound. ......
It is all in the lower bout. .... Is this really true?

Because if it is....then that would suggest to me that the center sound
hole design we have come to know so well, ..... is well .... not a very good
design after all. Any thoughts on this?

[Pepe Vergara]

....that the upper bout of a standard
guitar design contributes nothing to the amplification of sound. ......
It is all in the lower bout. .... Is this really true?

Because if it is....then that would suggest to me that the center sound
hole design we have come to know so well, ..... is well .... not a very good
design after all. Any thoughts on this?


This is the first time I hear that the upper bout of a standard (classical?) guitar contributes nothing to the amplification of sound. I am thinking that if I build a guitar without the upper bout, it would look like a lute? or banjo? So, I do not think it would be the same. From that, I infer that inded the upper bout contributes (just like every part of the guitar) to the quality of sound. In term of amplification, if I compare the banjo or lute with a regular guitar, they may sound different. Maybe the gutiar would sound louder.

The classical guitar follows the guidelines set by Torres, that is the soundhole is tangent to a horizontal line drawn at the waist. It has worked out so far. However, I have seen steel string guitars, including classical guitars, with an oval soundhole, or even located at the top, or even without soundhole. I must recognize that the s-s guitar I heard without a sound hole, sounded really good. Again, no special amplification noticed.

It would be nice to hear other luthiers with experience in building with odd soundholes.

[Pepe Vergara]

http://www.tejagerken.com/Article_Folder/soundholes.html

[fernsemer]

Thanks Pepe!....Interesting articule!

[jeremy]

The upper bout of the classical guitar contributes a great deal to the sound of the guitar. Try to think of a good cutaway classical. If you can think of one, just imagine how much better it would be if it was not a cutaway. :D

Seriously though the upper bout is important, as are all the parts. They all contribute in some manner and degree.

The soundhole size and placement is very important. If you think of the body as a type of air pump, which it is at some resonances, then this pump will not function at all well at these frequencies if the soundhole is either not there, in a different place, or a different size.

Soundhole placement and size variations have come and gone throughout history, and this will continue to happen again and again. The basic design is pretty much decided and while some variations may seem to work, they generally do not last in the market place. This is more to do with the people buying the instruments, not the makers. Supply will always follow demand.
________
roll blunts (http://howtorollablunt.net/)

[fernsemer]

jeremy .... Hello!

I was not suggesting that the center sound hole design doesn't contribute
to that special sound that we know as ' the guitar ' .... But I was thinking
in terms of amplifying the sound.

I say that because it would seem to me that.....if you have more sound
board directly under the strings,...even in the upper bout,...without that big
hole directly under the strings, then you will have more string vibration
directly hitting the soundboard,....and since the soundboard is the
amplifying device,.... then you're going to have more amplification, then
er'ye go, you're going to have a louder guitar. Right? .... Well, I would
think so.

Okay! What am I missing? Why am I wrong? Or am I? Has anybody ever
proven any of this?

[Section_10]

Ah yes, you are absolutely correct the more vibrating the more volume/sound can come out, but where? Simplicio thought of this in the early 20th century. You may have seen a few designs copying this, Paul Fischer for one, will have some of his Taut models with the sound holes one on each side of the fretboad. But from what I hear the difference in more vibrating area isn't tremendous, hence many makers not being concerned about it.

[Tomas-Lobos]

if you have more sound
board directly under the strings,...even in the upper bout,...without that big
hole directly under the strings, then you will have more string vibration
directly hitting the soundboard,....and since the soundboard is the
amplifying device,.... then you're going to have more amplification, then
er'ye go, you're going to have a louder guitar.

Imho, string vibration is transmitted to the sound board via the bridge, smack in the middle of the largest area of the sound board. The sound hole is then by necessity going to be as close to the fret board as possible. That's why the fret board mates to the edge of the sound hole. 'F' holes might achieve greater sound board area for vibration but what of those beautiful rosettes then, eh? Maybe some composite material many times more dense than rosewood, if used for the back of the guitar, wood transmit more of the sound waves through the sound hole thus projecting more sound and greater volume. Maybe a Torres/Rainsong guitar using a graphite back. Hmmm............... 8)

[fernsemer]

Tomas-Lobos.....Hello!

Imho, string vibration is transmitted to the sound board via the bridge, smack in the middle of the largest area of the sound board. The sound hole is then by necessity going to be as close to the fret board as possible. That's why the fret board mates to the edge of the sound hole. 'F' holes might achieve greater sound board area for vibration but what of those beautiful rosettes then, eh? Maybe some composite material many times more dense than rosewood, if used for the back of the guitar, wood transmit more of the sound waves through the sound hole thus projecting more sound and greater volume. Maybe a Torres/Rainsong guitar using a graphite back. Hmmm...............

If most of the vibrating string is transmitted through the bridge....and I'm
not so sure it is....then the makers of steel string guitars are aiming poorly.
They seem to be missing the middle of the lower bout! The best place.

As far as Rosettes and f holes go.....I wouldn't worry. Artistic luthiers can
always figure out a way to make beautiful f holes.

I'm not so sure that the soundhole has to be that close to the fretboard.
As there are other soundhole designs out there that mght dispute that.
Still....it is traditional.

[J]

I think I have a very simple reason for the placement of soundholes and the upperbout being the way they are.

Tradition.

Basically the sound of guitar is the way it is because of the guitars construction. Change that and the traditional sound of a guitar that we all know and love changes. Small changes can have a large impact on sound. Think of all the different guitars that look pretty much the same but sound totally different. Start making drastic changes and the sound will start to waiver from the traditional sound. True, if you take the soundhole off the soundboard you will have a larger and more effecient vibrating surface. This can produce more precise notes, more volume,....., but with a variation on the traditional guitar sound. Do guitar players really want this? I think the answer is generally "no" in that your guitar will not simply be a louder more precise sounding version of your Hauser or Rodrigues style guitar but have a different sound quality all together. It will not necessarily be a bad sounding instrument, but it will not be what you're used to playing.

I played Kurt Rodarmer's Kasha which is a phenomenal instrument made by Richard Schneider. Different bracing system with the soundhole on the upperbout. Just take a listen to Kurt's Goldberg variations and you will hear the difference in sound from a traditional classical. To me it has a more piano-like sound quality. Kurt acutally plays the Goldberg variations on two different guitars. One a baritone the other a regular guitar. I have to say I would love to own that guitar and it was one of the nicest instruments I've played to date, but I wouldn't want it as my main instrument. It simply does not have the sound quality I prefer.