What is this "cougar pee" you speak of, and where would one acquire it?
| Official Luthiers Forum! http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/ |
|
| What about the ’Accepted’ Scale Lengths? http://w-ww.luthiersforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10102&t=10901 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | LarryH [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Sure hope this isn't considered too simple a question but what gives with 25.4" or what is really 25.38" or 24.9"? Why not 25"? Or 26" Or what ever else? |
|
| Author: | Howard Klepper [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
These numbers arise out of medieval numerology and alchemy. Certain scales will resonate to the music of the spheres, and be heard in the higher dimensions. The beings that inhabit those dimensions are pleased and send back positive vibrations in return. This can be heard when you play an old Martin in a really, really quiet space, but you have to prepare yourself and listen very carefully, since the resonances are subtle. There are some chemicals that can make them easier to hear. |
|
| Author: | Bill Greene [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
What is this "cougar pee" you speak of, and where would one acquire it?
|
|
| Author: | peterm [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 1:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cougar pee is very common around these parts of the country... it comes in bottles labeled "Tequilla"! I think as long as proper spacing is used you can use ANY scale you'd like. Sure it will sound different but so do all the different commonly scales do... |
|
| Author: | LarryH [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 2:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Couldn't help it could you Howard. I was wondering if those beings of which you speak inhabit the dimensions of the mysterious two tone woods and illicit demonic dreams of the dovetail - even without the chemical aids? |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
take a look at froggy bottom guitars, a small vermont factory that produces exquisite guitars of their own design using scale lengths that are not "accepted"! |
|
| Author: | Howard Klepper [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 6:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Hesh1956] I heard that drinking cougar pee will enhance the realization of the tone too. Isn't it just a hold over from what the pioneers like Martin, Gibson, did? [/QUOTE] I had no idea that drinking cougar pee went back as far as Martin and Gibson. There's really nothing new, is there? |
|
| Author: | Billy T [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 8:09 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[quote]What is this "cougar pee" you speak of, and where would one acquire it? [/quote] Try this link - http://www.stewmac/shop/cougar_peepee/silly_BS.html 
|
|
| Author: | Serge Poirier [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
|
|
| Author: | Dennis E. [ Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Good points all, Howard. But I think you missed the synchronicity of the moon phases factor, though some people tell me that's a stretch. Larry does raise in interesting point. When someone says "25.4 inches," the decimal point leads us to think it's a precise number, but in practice, luthiery being what it is, it often means "25.4 inches or thereabouts, depending upon the strings you select and the tweaks you make to compensate for their stiffness and stretch, or lack thereof." |
|
| Author: | crazymanmichael [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
no! no! abslutely, positively no. scale length is precise and exact, and does not have anything to do with strings, etc. the use of 25.4" as a convenient round off referring to the martin's 25.38", which is i believe a roundoff of 25 3/8" anyway, has nothing to do with strings or anything else. it's just convenience. for working purposes, the scale length is an exact measurement and is the basis for the calculation of fret location. intonation does have a lot to do with string gauge, action height, player style, etc., but getting it confused will cause you no end of grief. |
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Billy I excitedly clicked your link hoping for a new source ( the scratches and bites tend to hurt when using a hand plane) but alas they must have moved it to a secret location for master builders only or something. I hope they do not get mad at you for revealing secrets. While reading this I thought, each piece of wood being unique will resonate slightly differently than the next. To me this poses the possibility of a magical combination of the just right scale length/sting gage for that top. Then again the tone faerie might be messin with me once again because I am out of cougar pee. I really want to say thanks guys I was in a bit of a bad mood this morning because yesterday the mechanical trolls decided it was time for the carb on my truck to start dumping fuel, I had to spend my hobby budget on a rebuild kit. So I started today just a touch grouchy, till I read this that is. I now have a huge grin on my face, thanks for putting up with me guys (& gals). |
|
| Author: | John Lewis [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 12:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=Hesh1956] I heard that drinking cougar pee will enhance the realization of the tone too.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but I think you have to drink it straight from a live cougar to have any real effect though.
|
|
| Author: | Michael Lloyd [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Just a thought.. When you pluck an "A" note on different scale lengths does it have a different sound? Maybe 25.4" is the organic version. Got a love the cougar pee...
|
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
A while ago I used String calc to check differences in string tension needed for E.B. regular Slinky's if right there was about a half pound difference in tension needed at a2(110) between a 25.5 scale and a 24.9 scale and about the same again when going to 24.5 scale. Combined tension for all six was close to 110 at 25.5, 105 at 24.9, and about 101 for 24.5. that is about a 5% and 10% drop in tension. I think the effect was slightly more pronounced with heavier strings. My conclusion right or wrong was that while the fundamental note is the same there would be slight differences in overtones and maybe sustain for single strings and a comparatively large difference in the overall needs in constructing the top. If I am in error please break it to me gently its embarrassing to reach to wrong conclusions publicly. Ignore the last sentence. How could it be worse than publicly advocating drinking mountain dew and listening to tone faerie. |
|
| Author: | SniderMike [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Dang, Hesh. You really made me laugh out loud! Anyway, K.O., you're right. A longer scale length will provide more sustain because the strings are under greater tension. A shorter scale is easier to play for some though, and the less amount of sustain can be made up for with heavier gauge strings (as they have to be tensioned more to give the same note as lighter strings.) Now I'm off to find my cougar. |
|
| Author: | Howard Klepper [ Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why do you think greater tension causes longer sustain? |
|
| Author: | SniderMike [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 2:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, I suppose i've not actually tested that, but that's what I've learned from several sources, and it seems to make sense. If you string up a string at a low tension and pluck it, it's not going to vibrate very long. Increase the tension and it will vibrate longer. Surely at some point the sustain fails to increase (and eventually the string breaks), and I don't know what point that is, but it seems like it would be outside the realm of standard tunings. Please correct me if this is incorrect. I don't want to be passing around false information! 
|
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have 3 reason for my conclusion two extrapolated one observed. Observed In the early 80's for a short time I did cable construction which included erecting poles some with down-guys(the tensioning cable that goes down to the ground). I tapped on the cable with a rod to make sure they where sufficiently tensioned. They seemed to vibrate longer the more they where tensioned. I me ed An increase in length of 1/2 an inch or so represents about a 2% increase in mass. Basic physics says an object at rest wants to stay at rest and an object in motion wants to stay in motion with a force equal to its mass/density. Double for a one inch difference in scale length. Significant? A 2% to 7% increase in tesion depending on which string to me would create a more efficient couple between the string and the saddle thus the top as a whole. Once again double for an inch difference in scale length. Correct or significant?? "Eh", all the above is b.s. truth is the tone faerie told me it was so. |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 4:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Howard, An interesting one!! Maybe that should be "audible sustain". I just did a very quick and dirty experiment with a 0.052" string tuned to E. Plucked and listened and watched the string and counted. Then did the same with the string slackened considerably. The string seemed to continue vibrating for about the same amount of time (sustain?) but I couldn't hear it for as long. Tuning up from E to F was harder to discern differences. |
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
One other thought in me otherwise empty ed. Being under slightly more tension it takes slightly more energy to get the string moving. The question then becomes does it take longer for that energy to bleed off? |
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 5:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Not being an engineer I am not really very sure of myself, does the stored energy of the string under tension work to return the string to a resting state or is it a more complicated relationship? |
|
| Author: | Dave White [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QUOTE=ToddStock] The experiment should be same string, same note, and different scale lengths- preferably using a pickup so that the waveform may be recorded and analyzed. Seems like greater sustain is good for some styles and not at all what others call for. Don't think I'd want massive sustain on a figerstyle blues guitar. [/QUOTE] That doesn't sound like any fun at all
|
|
| Author: | K.O. [ Wed Feb 14, 2007 6:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
My gut says there is a direct linear relationship but my background/research is such that I can neither define the relationship or prove to myself right or not. Then of course there is how we perceive sound? This is one area in which I am not satisfied with my understanding I also think when building, it is a matter of being able to feel these relationships. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|