Talk:Guitar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Guitar article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Guitar is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
December 21, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Archive
Archives
1


This talk page is automatically archived. Old sectipons are automatically archived to Talk:Guitar/Archives/2008. Sections without timestamps are not archived.


Contents

[edit] Vandalism

There's pretty blatant vandalism in the introduction. As an unregistered reader, I can do nothing about it. I hope someone will; I noticed some mention of it in the page history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.195.147.144 (talk) 01:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Http://ISellGuitars.Com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.209.39.5 (talk) 21:00, 28 May 2008 (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

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] Wrong guitar description in the top-level image?

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

[edit] Playing range

The picture at the beginning that shows the playing range of regularly tuned guitars isn't correct. Guitar can reach much higher notes even if it is regularly tuned. For example, even fret 12 out of 19 in classical guitars in the bottom string is a higher note than the one the picture shows.

Geez Sorry, a little more knowledge and I understand what it is showing so beat it you asses.--AresAndEnyo (talk) 08:38, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[Personal attack by Bluestribute removed]

[edit] Small Typo

I noticed a small typo:

"In an acoustic instrument, the body of th guitar is a major determinant of the overall sound quality. The guitar top, or soundboard, is a finely crafted and engineered element made of tonewoods such as spruce and red cedar. This thin piece of wood, often only 2 or 3mm thick, is strengthened by differing types of internal bracing. The top is considered by many luthiers to be the dominant factor in determining the sound quality. The majority of the instrument's sound is heard through the vibration of the guitar top as the energy of the vibrating strings is transferred to it."

Just thought I'd point that out.

Also, in the tuning section: "One exponent of the straight fourth tuning (EADGCF) is Stanley Jordan." The word should be "proponent" not "exponent." Nygenxer (talk) 07:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)nygenxer

[edit] Disco guitars

Does anyone know anything about the unique guitar sounds in disco music?

Why is there an 8 below the clef on some guitar music? 24.250.2.248 (talk) 04:47, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

There is an 8 underneath the Clef of guitar music, because the guitar is an Transposing instrument. Middle C sound an octave lower. Barnadine (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Error in the History Section

Indian sitar is mentioned in the article as the ancestor of the modern guitar. This is wrong as the sitar itself is a derivative of the tar, an ancient instrument from central Asia. The word تار tar itself means "string" in Persian. This is the root of the name of the guitar, as well as the Indian sitar. The waisted shape of the tar is clearly visible in the classical guitar. The article also mentions a 3300 year old Indian carving as the oldest pictographic representation of similar instruments, while the ancient carvings and statues recovered from Susa, depicted in the article, are some 4000 years old. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.169.241.31 (talk) 07:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

The mention of Danelectro is out of place - Epiphone, Gibson and others were producing archtop electric guitars which were widely available and played in the jazz and blues scenes from the 1930s onward, and Fender began producing popular solid body electrics from the early 1950s onward (e.g. Esquire, Telecaster, Stratocaster). Danelectro are deserving of a place in a more detailed article on solid body electrics perhaps, but they hardly constitute a key part of the design history of the guitar or even the electric guitar in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.212.164.27 (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Error in strings section

I noticed that when it says "Traditionally guitars have usually been constructed of combinations of various woods and strung with animal gut, or more recently, with either nylon or steel strings." It should say Or more recently with either nylon, steel, brass, or nickel wound strings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawicki5 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Too much spam

{{editprotected}}

There is way too much spam in this article!! can someone fix it please??

Please be more specific. feydey (talk) 13:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
N Not done - please provide specific examples of what should be removed, and establish a consensus that the removal is appropriate. Happy‑melon 09:26, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Guitarists of the Past And Present

http://www.duhhguitar.blogspot.com

I have seen this site. Looks cool. It's all about your favorite guitarists of the past and present. Includes how to play guitar, guitar solos, licks, guitar gears, techniques and more of your favorite guitarists. Tabs & lessons section too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.8.247.42 (talk) 09:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

i dont like it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.153.118.48 (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not enough coverage under "Types of guitar"

Under "Types of guitar" the categories are broken down into two categories: acoustic and electric.

"Acoustic" seems covered pretty well but there wasn't much under "electric." The various acoustic types were covered with much detail but electric was quickly run through. There is also no mention of double guitars (not to be confused with double neck guitars). There is a comparison to a 12 string but no mention that there are actual 12 string electrics, which there are. There is no mention of the 5 string bass or 6 string bass. The multiple necks (double neck, etc.) are mentioned after electric bass only. This may confuse some readers because there are multiple neck guitars other than basses.

I mentioned earlier that acoustic was covered well but the double necks are not mentioned in that section even though there are double necked acoustics and steel guitars.

There is a mention of hybrids of the acoustic and electric. Maybe this should be another section because you have electric acoustics, electric acoustic basses (which can be further broken down to 5 strings and 6 strings), electric acoustic double necks, electric acoustic 12 string, etc.

There are probably more kinds of guitars not mentioned. If putting all this in the section is too much, an idea would be to list all the other types with a link to read more on them. Feral Mind (talk) 13:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

There should be some coverage on the sizes of guitar too. Also most common sizes for kids and adults. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.200.30.4 (talk) 15:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tuning- scordatura

to imitate lute tuning the 3rd string is tuned to F-sharp, not the 2nd string to B-flat as stated in the article. There are many sources for this including various editions of Dowland lute music transcribed for guitar. 193.113.37.9 (talk) 11:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Possible vandalism

it appears that to users who have not logged in that the first sentence of the article contains a sentence which is offensive and irrelevant DrNeutrophil (talk) 01:22, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese t-shirt

Today, I went into my office in Tokyo, feeling somewhat grumpy and crappy because I've been off sick for the last couple of days with the flu (or something flu-like). Being Casual Friday, one of my Canadian co-workers was wearing a typical decorative Japanese t-shirt, the type with the chunk of English text on it 'cause it looks cool. This t-shirt, however, unlike pretty much every other one I've seen before, had its English text not in "Engrish", but in perfectly coherent, understandable, and even informative English. Pretty unusual for a Japanese t-shirt maker to pay attention to such details, I thought -- and then I had a hunch.

I'm sure you see where this is going: I went to the computer, looked up this article on Wikipedia, lo, right there in this section was essentially the text in question. Proof:

Front of the shirt

Back of the shirt

When I pointed this out to my co-worker, he lamented that Wikipedia may mean the death of "Engrish". Hey, Wikipedia IS doing some good. It made my day. --Calton | Talk 14:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inaccuracy in the Neck Joint section

The section "Neck Joint or 'Heel'" states that "Almost all acoustic guitars, with the primary exception of Taylors, have glued (otherwise known as set) necks". This is hardly true, as several well known brands including Bourgeois, Collings and Guild's "Contemporary Series" also have bolt-on necks.

[edit] Inaccuracy in the Pickguard section

The "Pickguard" section states that "Vigorous performance styles such as flamenco, which can involve the use the guitar as a percussion instrument, call for a scratchplate to be fitted to nylon-string instruments." The plate usually attached to a flamenco guitar is actually called a "tap plate" or "golpeador", is usually made of clear plastic, and typically has a different shape than a pickguard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnossen (talk • contribs) 16:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Changes needed to classical guitar definition

This is a statement in the Acoustic Guitar section:

"The classical guitar is designed to allow for the execution of solo polyphonic arrangements of music in much the same manner as the pianoforte can. This is the major point of difference in design intent between the classical instrument and other designs of guitar."

The first sentence, althoug misleading, is technically correct. The second sentence is just plain wrong. All guitars (bass guitars excluded) are inherently designed to play "solo polyphonic arrangements." The major "point of difference in design intent" between the various styles of guitar has everything to do with the musical setting in which they are to be used (jazz, fingerstyle, rock, flamenco, classical, etc), and nothing to do with the inherent capabilities of the instrument itself.

Since the edit requires more than just a minor spelling or grammar change, I'll give the author a few days to work on it before jumping in and making the edit myself.

Dualdraco (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)da