Talk:Guitar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Guitar as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.
Guitar is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Guitar article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
This article is part of WikiProject Guitarists, a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to guitarists. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
This article is supported by the Guitar equipment task force.

Some old or resolved, and occasionally humorous discussions are archived here.

Please sign new comments with four tildes (~~~~) . Howdybob 11:51, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Where You Can Get These

I think telling people or future musicians where these instuments can be bought would help them get off on a better start. Don't you??? That is why I added the link to MusiciansFriend.

Any random music store will likely have dozens of guitars in stock. I believe it's one of the most common instruments in the western world. There is no need for a link to an online guitar store. And besides, it's still advertising. Phædrus 20:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed new article: Guitar Chops

I think it would be really useful to have an article about the idea of "chops" with guitar. It would, of course, have to include examples of good chops and questionable chops, which would make it really really tough to maintain NPOV in such an article. Even so, I think the article should be there. It could address the distinctions between traditional blues chops vs classical guitar chops, acoustic chops vs electric chops, pick chops vs fingerpicking chops, conventions of chops such as timing, bending, vibrato, etc...

Anyone else think wikipedia could use such an article?

It sounds frivolous to me. (Strictly speaking, by the way, the discussion would have to be limited to guitarists like Jimi Hendrix, who is reputed to have played occasionally with his teeth.) TheScotch 09:10, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External links

I attempted to organize the external links based on what sort of information they contained (general, tabs, etc.). A day later, someone edited the page and my organization was removed. This ended up leading me to two questions:

  1. What do people think about catergorizing the external links? I personally think it makes browsing much more efficient (which is our goal, right?)
  2. When I compared my edit to the subsequent one, the only difference was a bit of text in a completely different part of the page, and it showed the current version as containing my categorization (still in the comparison page). Anyone know why this would be the case? -- alberrosidus

[edit] Steel guitar?

What about steel guitar used in country music?

I assume you mean a resonator, which is in the list of types of guitar/

I'm pretty sure he/she means a slide guitar

[edit] Major manufacturers?

What about major guitar manufacturers?

[edit] Classical guitars

A note about classical guitars, before someone could add the article some "flameable" topics: since best instruments are usually personally made by single artisans (liutai), or by small firms, I would avoid mentioning japanese manufacturers, though market leaders (= majors?), whose products effectively have an average good quality but (usually) far from what you would need for an important concert (yes, I know, some are used, but still there are some players that can go on without sponsors' money). Classical guitarists usually show a religious devotion for their hand-made instruments and there still are some little... Stradivari of guitars. So, if someone has the patience to list all those single liutai he knows, we could also add japanese firms; in the opposite case it would only start an endless flame, so perhaps better to give up.
About other guitars, which production has different schemes, respective manufacturers could deserve their own articles (and in this case japanese would fairly be included).
Another note about classical guitars: ok, acoustic have a louder tone, but not necessarily a "brighter" one. Also, Flamenco guitars do not necessarily have a "sharper sound". Reading the article, it could seem as if classical guitar had no other quality than being a base for further developments (which it can also be, but not only).
The timbro of classical guitar (of a good one, at least) varies form the natural prosecution of higher Contrabbasso to the lowest Mandolino and consents sharp and bright tones as well as smooth harmonies, all together from the same cassa armonica. Chords (always less considered than deserved) and skill (no comment...) can help in extracting from the instrument what might seem (sharpness, brightness) as a principal quality at a first sight. Classical timbro has to cover a repertoire that comes from chamber music, is true, but don't stop here, just try toimagine Aranjuez played with another kind of guitar, and you'll have your answer.
Classical repertoire is less known, is quite limited (in comparison with other instruments) and mainly thanks to Segovia and Tarrega has been increased of several translations (pieces originally meant for piano or other instruments where adapted for guitar); there is now plenty of available samples of versatility of classical guitar in sharp and bright timbro too (but not only). I hope that this can be rendered in the article if someone has to add something more about technical differences.
Final: why bass guitar, apart from name, should be included in this family while it is the technical evolution of Contrabbasso in the handful shape of an electric guitar? We don't usually consider a horgan as just a variety of pianoforte, I suppose, even if it has a similar keyboard.
I don't understand your comment about japanese manufacturers at all -- if they are a major manufacturer, then lets mention -- if not then don't. There are quality japanese instruments as well and to suggest that everyone who uses one is doing so because of sponsorship is POV.

[edit] Resonator Guitars

I did not edit or remove any material. I ADDED material about 1) The number of resonators found on these guitars (one or three) and the type of bridge used (biscuit or spider) Ned 08:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adolf Rickenbacker

I believe Adolf Rickenbacker should get some credit in inventing the electric guitar - His 'frying pan' lap steel predated either fender's or Les Paul's.


Actually, neither Fender nor Les Paul invented the electric guitar. They both developed solid-body guitars that led to the popularization of such guitars.

[edit] Alleged descendance from lute

The assertion that the guitar is descended from the lute is contradicted by the French version of this subject, which says they're of distinct families of different descent. Anybody have more on this? And where does the oud fit in to the guitar's development?

I am an amateur lutenist and I have always heard from my teachers that the relation between the lute and guitar, if any, is unknown. B.Bryant 23:30, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Then why are guitar builders called "luthiers"? They also build and repair banjos, mandolins, violins, dulcimers, etc etc..., any one of which can be traced back to the lute. It boils down to a box with strings and a neck for selecting notes. Different than a piano or a wind powered instrument. They are similar enough in concept and execution. It wouldn't take much to teach an old lute maker (transported via time travel) how to make an acoustic guitar.--Xj14y 20:44, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The french version is correct.Richard 01:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: "Then why are guitar builders called 'luthiers'?" Because a lot of people seem to think the term sounds impressive. TheScotch 09:12, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tres guitar used in Salsa (music)

Does anyone know something to write about this type of Guitar?

[edit] Slang

from "Guitar culture":

The guitar has come to be called many different colloquial names over time such as: box, axe, shredder, teeth flosser, and box-o-strings.

I have played guitar for over 40 years and know many guitarists and have never heard a guit-fiddle called teeth flosser or box-o-strings. Is this regional, original research, patent nonsense, or stealth vandalism? -- WCFrancis 14:40, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

All Google hits are from Wiki, some mirrors, some GNU uses of article. -- WCFrancis 14:55, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
No response; I am removing the questionable terms. -- WCFrancis 01:06, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There are more doubtful terms right now. Bread-winner just means anything that makes money and doesn't belong here. I don't know if that section is a running joke or what. I'm going to remove some and I'd like to see citations for any new ones that are posted. --Howdybob 11:59, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guitar parts

Guitar article surely came to a really large size. One of its major components is "Guitar parts" listing with a description of each one. I'd like to pull each such guitar part into separate article - it deserves it. There are much more to say about each guitar component. It would be nice to have an image of every guitar part. It would enrich Wikipedia a lot and ease up the burden of large guitar article.

What do you think? -- GreyCat 12:56, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

I think not: it presumes the world comprised entirely of guitar buffs (I could choose a less innocuous term). It might be helpful, however, to put the nylon-string guitar, the steel-string "acoustic" guitar, and the electric guitar in separate articles. TheScotch 09:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bridge

I made a small but significant deletion in this section.

(start delete) The bridge is commonly adjusted after replacing strings since small discrepancies in the diameters of the strings can greatly affect the intonation of the guitar. (end delete)

I removed this material because it is not true. The bridge is NOT commonly readjusted after string changes. Small "discrepancies" in string diameter do NOT greatly affect intonation. Changing the GAUGE or thickness of a set of strings (going from a lighter set to a heavier set, or vice versa) CAN affect intonation, but it is not common or usual, and would only occur if a significant change was made. Ned 08:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] neck joint

I added a phrase here to indicate that dovetail joints are (also) used on acoustic guitars, exemplified by CF Martin's D28 model and similar Martins. Ned 08:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Neck

I made a significant deletion in this section. The text said that bending the neck forcefully, to change the pitch of a note, was a fairly common technique -- especially in Blues and Rock and Roll music. This is not true.

Bending a note to change pitch is very common, but this is done by pressing the fretting finger sideways against the string as the string is pressed against the fret -- while plucking the string with the other hand. This raises the pitch of the string incrementally. Another pitch technique is vibrato, accomplished by skillfully "wagging" the fretting hand as a string is being fretted -- again while also plucking the string with the other hand.

Forcefully bending the neck CAN change the pitch of the string. However it is very rare for a guitarist to do this intentionally, as the results are difficult to achieve and there is real danger that the neck will break or be damaged. Ned 08:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


This actually is a relatively common technique. Many modern acoustic players bend the neck to achieve that whammy bar-trem sound. It is not used for serious bending though, just slight, wavering tones. I agree that it is horrible in the long run for the instrument, but it still is common. If the instrument is properly taken care of, this techinique can pose little to no threat to the life of the instrument. Mouthofacowboy 22:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fretboard

I made a small deletion and addition. The previous text said that some fretboards are made of graphite. (Graphite would not be an acceptable material) This is not true. I changed the text to say that some fretboards are made of manufactured or composite materials such as HPL or resin. materials incorporating carbon fiber or graphite may be used, but these materials are composites containing limited amounts of fiber or graphite. Ned 08:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nut

I made a small edit and addition. I REMOVED a phrase that said that some nuts are made of graphite, because that is untrue. Some nuts are made with a material that is impregnated with graphite. (Graphtech brand) Pure graphite would not be a suitable nut material. I added a line saying that some nuts are made with material impregnated with graphite. Ned 08:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Electric Guitar Pickups

In the article, lectric guitar pickups are called "transducers." Transducers are found in microphones, and speaker coils are also technically transducers. But I've always thought of transducers as devices that transmit sound vibrations to electrical impulses, as a microphone does.

Now, it may seem that this is what an electric guitar pickup does, but MOST electric guitar pickups are MAGNETIC. The pickup senses (or picks up) the vibrations of the guitar string DIRECTLY, because the string is ferrous and the magnet creates a field in which the string's vibrations are translated into electrical energy. But the pickup does not sense the SOUND vibrations of the string but, rather, the actual movement of the string.

I always understood that a transducer sensed vibrations of SOUND, in the air or in a sound-conducting material, and translated (or transduced) the vibration to electrical energy.

Perhaps I'm wrong. Or perhaps this is not a difference that makes a difference. I'm raising the question, hoping that a more technically trained person can adjust the text if needed. Ned 07:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Transducer is a scientific term for a thing that changes one form of energy to another, in this sense a pick up is a transducer. However, whether guitar pickups are referred to in this way by those skilled in the art, i'm not sure.

It's true that the mechanical vibration of an electric guitar string is said to be transduced into a fluctuating voltage by a pick-up, whether or not the pick-up is said to be a transducer. TheScotch 09:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] tuning

I made a small deletion in this section. Here is the original sentence, showing my deletion:

(start paste) Many guitarists use a long established (centuries old) tuning variation where the lowest string is 'dropped' two semi-tones down. Known as Drop-D tuning it is, from low to high, DAdgbe'. (end paste)

The statement that drop D tuning is long established and centuries old is not true. Ned 09:06, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the drop D tuning is quite old. Both Fernando Sor and Matteo Carcassi wrote pieces using this tuning. I don't know exactly when these pieces were published but considering the composers' life spans, it would be in the late 18th or early 19th centuries. There may be earlier pieces using this tuning as well that I'm not familiar with, but even if these were the earliest, the statement you removed seems reasonable to include. If someone could find more detailed information (like when the first piece using this tuning was published) then we could have a more useful statement than the previous one. --Amazzing5 20:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject/Wikiportal Guitar

Anyone have any thoughts about creating a WikiProject or Wikiportal for the guitar? The guitar article itself is very long and has a multitude of information- this seems like it would be better suited in a project and/or portal rather than just linked off of the article. This would also give us more flexibility in how we organize the information (say rather than removing "Guitar Culture" perhaps we could find a better way to make it fit in Wikipedia). I would like to hear if that sounds reasonable. --Chevan 11:48, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

---

--Greyclair 01:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Body

In the Parts of the guitar section, should Body (acoustic guitar) be merged with Body (electric guitar). I don't mean an actual merge but have it so that in the TOC it is

2.9 Body
2.9.1 Body (acoustic guitar)
2.9.2 Body (electric guitar)

instead of

2.9 Body (acoustic guitar)
2.10 Body (electric guitar)

What do you all think? Thelb4 11:19, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-acoustic guitars

If somebody can elaborate about Semi-acoustic Guitar , it would be interesting and appreciated... thanks in advance ! Rama 10:38, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] about sources

My guess is that this article was written by musicians. Finding references would be nice, but many parts of this article are "common" knowledge among musicians (the request for sources, looks like a request for verifiability to me, and I had to leave the above comment). +MATIA ☎ 13:43, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bad top image

The first image of the article is not iconic, representative, ... Cigsandalcohol 02:58, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree, a simple classical (i.e. wooden, nylon string, eight shape) guitar would be more appropriate. -Green Gecko


[edit] guitar strings

Is there a specific article (apart from String instrument and Vibrating string) about guitar strings? Should we add something more about these in the tuning section? +MATIA ☎ 18:12, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Tuning is wrong, middle A is 442 Hz and Middle C used here is actually c2, one octave above it. So, guitar strings are tuned higher than written there. B-string is one full step higher than middle A.

Correct, the guitar is a transposing instrument it sounds one octave lower than written. Richard 02:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There really needs to be more information about guitar strings. I'm trying to find out the exact tension in foot-pounds of 0.10 gauge strings in standard tuning and on top of Wikipedia's lacking this pretty important piece of information I can't find it anywhere else on the internet either. Anybody? 26 September 2006

The comment above that middle A = 442 Hz must be from a continental European user. While ISO concert pitch is in fact A=440 (which is the most common standard in the US and UK), manyh European orchestras use 442 or higher, presumably to acheive a brighter sound. See Pitch (music)Wschart 19:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


I wasn't sure where I should add this comment, but this seemed to be the most appropriate section. In the Electric Guitar section of this article, it lists guitarist who play 8 string guitarists saying that they add two lower strings. I don't know about the other guitarists, but Rusty Cooley's Conklin guitars have one string lower and one string higher. I just thought somebody should know about that. Mouthofacowboy 22:39, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Highly regarded reference for development of the guitar if interested

"The Guitar from the Renaissance to the Present Day" by Harvey Turnbull (ISBN 0 7134 3251 9) has been recommended to me personally time over by my teacher as one of the most well researched and reliable sources for the subject ever. It was written in 1974 and has had excellent praise from John Williams (the player), The Musical Times, The Economist and the Music Journal to quote just the blurb.

If anyone can get hold of it then it has some valuable info if they're up for beefing up the instrument's very unclear history according to most sources and institutions. I have observed that much information I have picked up from this book is not present in the article (although the book is very comprehensive, perhaps unnecessarily so). I would do so myself but to be honest I am intimidated by condensing the vast amount of information and pleasing the existing quality of the article.

Nonetheless worth the read for guitar lovers and for educational research.

-Green Gecko

[edit] History

The history section is full of omissions. How can you write on the history of the guitar without mentioning de Torez, Martin, Gibson, Fender, or Paul? I'll try to update this section once I get some sources together.

[edit] real history

The earliest extant six string guitar was built in 1779 by Gaetano Vinaccia (1759 - after 1831) [1] [2] in Naples, Italy. The Vinaccia family of luthiers is known for developing the mandolin. This guitar has been examined and does not show tell-tale signs of modifications from a double-course guitar. [3]

What does the author of above mean by "double-course" guitar? That it has only two (double) strings? I suspect the writer doesn't realise the term course refers to twin strings. Please clarify Richard 12:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Capatosto or capodastra?

THat is the question. What is the answer? 8-?--Light current 17:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Well ... according to the wikipedia article on capos it is capotasto. According to Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians it is two words capo tasto comming from the Italian for head (capo) and tie (tasto). Webster, under capo, also mentions that it comes from the Italian capotasto (one word this time). So it would appear that capodastra is bunk. --Amazzing5 19:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Aha! Thats very interesting. I always thought that 'capodastra' was the word. Looks like Im wrong again! 8-)--Light current 00:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Since I didn't actually answer your question, it would be neither (neither capatosto or capodastra that is). Rather, it would be capotasto. Although now I'm starting to question myself. Looking around with Google, it looks like every reference to capodastra is from a UK site. Possibly this is considered standard for British spelling, but I can't find any use of this word except for a few isolated online stores. Every other place I look uses capotasto. --Amazzing5 16:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh. Curioser and curioser!--Light current 23:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

or Capodastro

--Greyclair 01:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Where do you get capodastro from?--Light current 23:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Volume Nylon vs Steel

Please provide solid evidence for claiming steel strings are louder than nylon. Any classical player will attest that performing finger-style on a steel string guitar results in a significantly quieter volume compared to that produced by a nylon classical guitar. Given the same level of excitation steel-string guitars are (in my professional experience) much quieter than nylon. The reason a steel string guitar can sometimes sound louder is that it is very robust, allowing it be played with far greater force if required. A subtle difference I know, but I would prefer the ref be ammended to stating the constuction allows the steel string to be played much harder.Richard 02:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Dont steel strings have a greater harmonic content, thus making them sound louder?. Also are not steel strings at higher tension than nylon strings, thus giving them more energy for the same initial displacement?--Light current 23:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The first point is certainly new to me, have you a citation? The second is valid and is consistent with my argument, excepting I'm talking excitation energy and you are talking displacement. For the same amount of effort the nylon string is louder, but if you play with significantly more force you can get the steel to speak louder. The question is - does that make the steel string a louder instrument or, to put another way, a more efficient mechanical system? I can see valid arguments both ways. Richard 09:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I dont have a citation. If I had, I would have put this info on the page -- its just obvious to me (and most people) that steel strings sound brighter than nylon.
As to your second point, you dont make sense. Is not force proportional to displacement?. see vibrating string 8-)--Light current 11:30, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

First point: brighter = a proportionally higher amount of upper harmonics, I've never read that higher harmonics (frequencies) effects SPL as much as the lower harmonics (think about which carries further, bass guitar or sound of a cymbal) It could be argued that one should expect the instrument with more lower-order harmonics to be the loudest. Point 2: That's right! except that I'd prefer it written as energy released is dependant on force req to displace the string which is determined by the string tension, now read what I wrote carefully <smile> . Richard 09:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Look up Fletcher-Munson_curves to see why higher harms are going to appear louder--Light current 09:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

the article on equal loudness curves is better but neither clarify the issue greatly for me. Before your last response I was about to venture that the differing uses made of the two instruments may be of more relevance. Steel strings are designed to be used in combination with other instruments and it may be that their different harmonic spectrum allows them to be differentiated more easily within the mix. This compared with the nylon which developed as primarily as solo instrument. The ability of steel string to be heard against others in such group contexts (and its 'brighter' sound) has been confused with volume. To me as a musician there is no question that as a solo instrument the nylon sting is louder and carries further than the steel string. However I'm prepared to admit that perhaps I've subjective ears if a reader has citable figures that prove otherwise. Richard 10:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Two articles:
  • [1] What is a decibel?
  • [2] Loudness and spectra
But it doesn’t mean that a steel string guitar is always perceived louder than a nylon sting guitar, it also depends with the body. A Smallman type nylon guitar is I think perceived louder than a Martin type steel string guitar witch is maybe perceived louder than a Torres type nylon sting guitar. (I write “perceived louder”, it doesn’t mean that it’s louder in db.)
“Are not steel strings at higher tension than nylon strings, thus giving them more energy for the same initial displacement?” / “Is not force proportional to displacement?”
The thing is that guitars with higher tension strings also have more rigid soundboard. At the end I am not sure that the displacement of the soundbord is larger, but anyway with higher tension strings and more rigid soundboard the sustain is longer.
The attack transient is also important in the perceived loudness.
We could say that, at the same distance, the three factor of the perceived loudness are the db, the attack transient, and the spectrum.
Sorry for my English… --Greyclair 16:56, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
The (limited) discussion to date would indicate that the claim "louder" is subjective and subjective judgments shouldn't be presesnted as fact in Wiki. Richard 11:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
We could put in the fact that steel strings are subejectively louder than nylon if they are. Of course a lot depends on the guitar to which they are attached doesnt it?--Light current 17:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

The steel-string guitar's entire raison d'etre has to do with its greater loudness. Classical guitars simply couldn't be heard in the dance bands of the twenties. TheScotch 09:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

In that case, it sounds brighter, but loudness is a different matter, especially in a mix of instruments. Ariedartin JECJY Talk 15:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal: Break out Guitar-dedicated articles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Distortion#Proposed_Article_Titles_and_Changes

The refactoring is in-progress. It will have negligible effect on the present article. MichaelSHoffman 03:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

The refactoring is done. MichaelSHoffman 08:45, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Guitar Intonation

I was hoping to find some information of the problem of designing a guitar that intonates correctly up and down the neck. This subject was brought to mind by reading about both the Buzz Feiten (http://www.buzzfeiten.com) and Fretwave (http://www.fretwave.com) systems. Is there anyone capable of writing about this problem? Hi There 00:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Why shouldnt they intonate correctly if the frets nut and bridge are in the right places?--Light current See just intonation.--Light current 16:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Warning: a can of worms lurks. Equal temperament is a compromise yet performers still try to 'beat' or tweak the tempered system (e.g. by tuning such that thirds are sweetened in certain positions when playing works in chosen keys that utilise certain fingerings/positions). The guitar isn't tuned to just intonation; if it was it wouldn't work across the strings. RichardJ Christie 09:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Materials: woods used

How about some information on the various woods used for guitar making, and their various acoustic properties? That's a must for a guitar article. Alexnye 06:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notation of tuning

I noticed that someone changed the standard tuning from (EADGBe) to (EADGBE). Does anyone have an opinion on what format should be used? (EADGBe) is fairly common, but it should technically be (EAdgbe1) or (E2 A2 D3 G3 B3 E4) depending on what naming standard you ascribe to for pitches. --Amazzing5 13:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


I think the best notation for tunning would be as you stated: E2,A2,D3,G3,B3,E4. I think this because all instruments can related and understand to this, meaning it has more information, and is more 'universal' if I might say :)

--Lethaljellybean 03:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed External Link

Removed http://learn-how-to-play-acoustic-guitar.blogspot.com for two reasons. One is because it is a blog and any Wikipedia article has to adhere to WP:V and WP:RS, it also has to meet the various aspects of WP:NPOV. The main reason it was removed is because it does not offer any lessons as of right now, it only looks as if someone was trying to promote and advertize their site, which is also not allowed. silic0nsilence 23:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

wheres the section on guitars that shoot lightning? Hellionzod 04:03, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Health Issues

Maybe you can discuss about allergies that Nickel strings cause, and as it is a better idea to buy stainless steel strings to encounter this. (Just an idea, discuss at will)
Some Further Research: I was doing some research in the internet, and within wikipedia, and I've found some more facts about allergies that stringed instruments may cause because of the presence of nickel. Some people are aware about their allergies of nickel because they wear cheap jewellery (like a necklace which the metallic part is in contact with the skin, and causes irritations ect...), and get little bumps, which some fluid inside, that may be popped under pressure, but this is not recomended, as many doctors will say, and as we know that when there is holes in skin tissue, it is easier to catch bacteria within, and get an infection... From my research, I found out that this allergy is called Allergic Contact Dermatitis (thanks to Wikipedia), and it really matches the condition I am currently going through, so maybe some more stuff can be added from some research on the interaction of the skin, and nickel...

I've done some more research, and I'll be coming up with a list of different strings which are made out of Stainless Steel (with no traces of nickel). Maybe this will help!

Anyway, I hope I can help out here!

--Lethaljellybean 18:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Well I bought these strings of pure stainless steel, and my allergies seem to have disapeared, my hands are feeling better too, but there is still a hint on them. This though is probably because of the frets of the guitar which may have traces of nickel. I'm going to probably refret my guitar when I have the chance and money, and I'll let you all know if this makes if better!--Lethaljellybean 00:45, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Why not wear latex gloves?--Light current 02:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Haha, That's what I'm currently doing with cutting the fingers off, of the glove (as my palms seem to be affected more with palm muting. mmmm I still think it be good to rid the guitar from all that nickel if possible, but I don't know how feasible it is... Thank you though :) --Lethaljellybean 23:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Specialized Guitar Types

I have heard about some specialized guitar types.

  • Twisted fretboards -- These are intended to reduce the stresses on the wrist by allowing you to hold the fretboard in an ergonomically correct manner and avoid Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.
  • Left-Handed versions -- These allow a left-handed person to play the guitar and pick or strum with their left hand.

Not sure if you can get both in one guitar. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Synthesizer that you hold like a guitar?

I have a DeGarmo & Key album where in a photo one of them is holding something in the same manner as a guitar, but it has a keyboard. It does appear to have something resemabling a fretboard. What is it? Will (Talk - contribs) 04:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a keytar-Crunchy Numbers 18:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] FA?

I think that this article looks really good, maybe even Featured article class good. What do you guys think?--18:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] saddle

There appears to be a mistake on the diagram of the parts of the guitar. It shows the saddle as being the bridge and vice-versa. The saddle on a steel string acoustic is the hard piece of bone or plastic that sits in a slot in the bridge. On some electrics there are multiple saddles that are seperatly adjustable.-Crunchy Numbers 18:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and fixed it.-Crunchy Numbers 18:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to semi-protect this article

Many anomymous users are vandalizing this article. As such, I think it should be semi-protected. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:14, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dealing with vandalism (Newbie Editor)

I came across this article recently and saw that someone had inserted sentences and words that were obviously vandalism (referencing toilets and sex toys among other things). I removed them, and today a link is popping up for me directed to this page http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:71.146.169.85&redirect=no regarding "peurile edits you made". Huh!?!? I don't edited articles normally I realize that I'm a newbie in this arena, but I understand that all edits are logged and I should think it'd be pretty darn obvious that I was REMOVING vandalism. Did I do something wrong?

[edit] Idea for new article (unsure if it's suitable)

I love this article and wish I had something to contribute to it. One thing I'd like to approach (which would really need a seperate article) is some sort of information regarding the process of actually teaching and learning guitar. Of course I know this is an encyclopedia and "some sort of information" just doesn't cut it. Has anyone considered (and does anyone have the requisite knowledge to start) an article on "guitar teaching methods" or something of the sort? Or is that not a specific enough subject?

FretBored 07:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The word "guitar"

In the History secttion, there seem to be two paragraphs, back to back, the directly contradict one another. They read as follows:

The modern word, guitar, was adopted into English from Spanish guitarra, derived from earlier Greek word kithara. Prospective sources for various names of musical instruments that guitar could be derived from appear to be a combination of two Indo-European roots: guit-, similar to Sanskrit sangeet meaning "music", and -tar a widely attested root meaning "chord" or "string".
The word guitar is a Persian loanword to Iberian Arabic. The word qitara is an Arabic name for various members of the lute family that preceded the Western guitar. The name guitarra was introduced into Spanish when such instruments were brought into Iberia by the Moors after the 10th century.

Surely, they can't both be right? – ClockworkSoul 20:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but if you ever wanna put the greek word here, I'll write it for you: Κιθάρα Sorry not mutch of help, but there's the greek word if you want to put it in the definition! --Lethaljellybean 23:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

That's very cool, but most people can't read Greek, so any examples of the language are probably best left in Latin characters. It's not "pure", I know, but it's more useful that way. That's another discussion all together, however. – ClockworkSoul 13:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] edits by Will Pittenger

user:Will Pittenger in his last two edits ( 05:44, 17 November 2006 ) and ( 03:05, 17 November 2006 ) has reverted without explanation to vandalized versions. Both were edits by 141.150.109.100. Does this qualify as vandalism? If so which template do I put on his user page?-Crunchy Numbers 17:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I looked at the diffs and the edit (Revision as of 03:05, 17 November 2006) was actually blatant vandalism where multiple numbers and things were changed. The edit summary says that he was reverting but he was actually adding more vandalism. Unfortunately I didn't look at the diffs when I reverted subsequent vandalism and reverted back to Will's version. This is getting really complicated to keep up with this kind of tricky vandalism.
From here it looks like the easiest way to get rid of the damage he did is to revert back a ways. This will wipe out two small good edits, sorry folks.-Crunchy Numbers 17:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
I was wrong again. I was looking at the wrong dif. He reverted to a vandalized version by 141.150.109.100. I already put a warning on his user page but I think reverting to vandalism counts as vandalism.

Another thing I've noticed is that sometimes someone will blank this page after vandalism so AntivandalBot will revert back to the vandalized version. Then people seem to trust AntivandalBot and don't check the diffs.-Crunchy Numbers 18:05, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I did not vandalize pages and am tired of seeing unfounded accusations for that. If there is a revert problem, it is with WP:POPUPS. That is how I always revert. If it got the wrong version, please don't blame me just for the heck of it. Will (Talk - contribs) 05:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

Hello all I would need an help would be nice if you could help me. I do have a guitar at home and I need to practise some leads and scales. Can some of you reffer me those links to me other than that in the external links. I am really sorry that I could not log in but you can always leave the link on my talk page. Thanks. Rencin.Rencin Matthew

[edit] Do the external links belong?

Please examine the external links and see if they belong. I figure commercial sites don't. Unfortunately, I don't play the guitar and can't help evaluate the sites. Sorry. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Should we revert this edit?

I think that the 2006-11-28 18:25:58 edit by 74.224.43.141 (talk -- contrib) is a step backwords in readability. However, since I don't know much about guitars, I didn't want to revert the changes myself. Please check those changes out and tell me what you think. Will (Talk - contribs) 04:43, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Citing Sources

Shouldn't the little whatchamagig about the article not citing it's sources be moved to the top, where more people (and possibly editors) can see it? Nineteenninetyfour 02:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox Requested

For the decent treatment of one of the most important instruments in music and musical history (yes, I'm being a bigot :D), I request an infobox similar to other instruments' ones; cf. the pages on a lot of the brass instruments, and especially the harp. Something like this: (Note: The guitar, as of yet, does not have a musical range image. (Check Image:Range_harp.png).

Guitar
Image:Guitar.png
Classification

String instrument (plucked)
Playing range
(A guitar)
Related instruments

DÉSOLÉ, SORRY! you know what i'll make it myself; please ignore this comment.

[edit] Wrong guitar description in the top-level image?

It says Classic guitar and Bass guitar when both seems to be classic guitars and tehre is no Bass guitar.

[edit] Merge from Gallotone guitar

This stub Gallotone guitar doesn't have much content, it's basically a record of a cheap guitar. I propose we include it hear. Alan.ca 10:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Number of Strings

Should the introduction be changed to mention that that guitar has six strings, but many variations exists? The way it is now looks silly, I mean, should we add the Picasso guitar too?Nj78 01:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Strap locks

Strap locks redirects to this page, yet there's nothing on here about them 203.206.92.154 07:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too many external links

I noticed the list of external links in this article's EL section has grown. Someone attempted to solve the bulk problem with that long list by dividing the section up into subsections. However, I have to question that we need all those links. Please look into dropping a few.

If a link is clearly commercial in nature, I think that link should be dropped ASAP. If the link is non-commercial, but the site is operated by the same person that added the link, please consider moving the link to the talk page so we can discuss whether it should be kept or not. Will (Talk - contribs) 02:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Silent guitar / nylon electric

I think this article needs to be expanded on these subjects, they're the most beautiful guitars in the world yet they are not discussed here. 201.23.32.2 21:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations?

I don't see any factual errors, and find it interesting that there are absolutely no sources for the French "featured" article.DMCer (talk • contribs) 19:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC).


[edit] =six strings

"...sources for various names of musical instruments that guitar could be derived from appear to be a combination of two Indo-European roots: guit-, similar to Sanskrit sangeet meaning "music", and -tar a widely attested root meaning "chord" or "string"...."

--gui-tara- comes froms sah or sas (6) + tara (string). See also: centaur (santur or santar): 100 strings: ektar: 1 string dotar: 2 strings, etc.

[edit] Lets get the ball rolling

Let's make this a featured article, guys! Remember, be bold when updating. The guitar components/parts section needs way less bloated-ness (the summations are overkill, why don't we have a Definition List with links and a quick few lines of summary?). I've created a guitar components page where the full summaries can go. I think this is a good way to start building this page into a prime example of Wikipedia cleanliness. Zachblume 20:58, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ergo and left-handed guitars

I have heard of guitars with ergonomic features (the fretboard is twisted to allow a more natural position for the wrist) and left-handed guitars (the entire guitar is reversed). I think if more information and photos can be found, this should be added to the article. Will (Talk - contribs) 06:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge proposal

I'm not the one who proposed the merge, but in my opinion, this article is just too long. I'd suggest that rather than merging "Parts of the Guitar" here, that the stuff here mostly be merged into "Parts of the Guitar".

I'd suggest keeping the diagrams with part listings, and a link to Parts of the guitar.

-- TimNelson 11:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The content of both the parts of the guitar article and the parts of the guitar section seems to be identical. I suggest leaving the parts of the guitar article alone, and merely deleting the duplicated content from the main guitar article, which is far too long. SGGH 21:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Panormo

The maker Louis Panormo is named here as Louise!. The Panormo family and their guitars are discussed in "The Guitar in England 1800-1924" by Stewart Button, Garland Publishing, Inc., New York & London 1989. While Louis was almost certainly the prime mover in the family's guitar production, the enhancements to the Spanish style of guitar design probably derive from the work of his brother Joeseph, who worked with the guitarist Fernando Sor. While the Panormos were makers of good quality guitars, I doubt that Louis belongs alongside Torres in importance in improvements to the concert classical guitar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.255.28.254 (talk) 11:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC).


[edit] The 'Jem'

I happened to come across the section where it said Steve Vai worked with Ibanez to develop the seven-string electric guitar the 'Jem'. Well, it is infact not the Jem, but is the 'Universe' model. The Jem is Steve Vai's 6 string, and the Universe is the 7 string. 138.130.173.138 11:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/u/i/Talk%7EGuitar_e78b.html"