hey all. so i've gotten some absolutely fantastic responses for the previously posted questionnaire thingy. i'm really grateful, and surprisingly [well, maybe not that surprisingly] a lot of the feedback i've gotten has lined up perfectly with what i've been investigating and the hunches i've had about guitar design. so thankful!
i just dropped $300 on parts. I . HOPE . THIS . WORKS . seriously haha it's getting down to crunch time now and things are picking up real fast! getting pretty stressed now. i bought a body blank, a bridge, a control plate, control cavity templates, strap locks, string retainers, a neck, and something else that i now can't remember. also expedited shipping so things should be here soonish. the reason i bought so many "real" guitar parts is because i would hope that people can experience my artifact in the most physical way. what better way to understand research on physical relationships than being in one? i also bought strap locks so that people can sit AND stand with the artifact and be able to see the difference between the standard and the modified. oh. right.
since i have ready access to one, and also since it is widely acknowledged as the first mass-produced electric solidbody, i'll be working on modifying a telecaster body. i have full blueprints for the original fender specs, and so i'll woodwork out the general shape and add on the things i've found. so far, definitely some good work and some sketching done on the potential knob and switch placements. results to the "timed" knob turning while placed at different areas experiment should be done in the next day or so.
stress. full.
5.13.2010
5.10.2010
the FB questionnaire
this is for my friends on FB that are electric guitarists...the intention is to fill out the research that i have already and bolster what is to come. hopefully i can pull quotes out of this to help strengthen my project's introductory section.
cheers!
Hey there! It’s been a while since I was on Facebook, but I’m back temporarily to ask all of you a few questions for my Design Thesis, which is coming up in a few weeks. If you’re receiving this and you’re 1: not a guitarist or 2: not an electric guitarist, go ahead and ignore it, sorry for the mistake! My project is based solely on electric guitar design.
That said, the project is specifically focused on the non-musical physical relationship between the guitar and the guitarist. In the context of the project, the “non-musical” relationship refers to the way that the player experiences the instrument, specifically the body shape and the control rig, especially while playing sitting down.
The issues I’ve been toying with for the past two quarters has been how the tradition of the electric guitar has been passed down from generation to generation alongside dusty vinyls and tapes with the axe-slinging legends of before, and how the electric has thus become a heritage that guitarists are fiercely defensive of. Because of this, electric guitar designs that were made in the 50’s and 60’s have changed little, even if they could benefit from design or technological improvements. Things like knocking the controls/switches out of position while strumming or having a hard time playing the instrument because of the way it fits against the human body are the main issues I’m addressing here.
The goal of the project is definitely not to throw away the legacy and heritage of electric guitars, but to suggest ways to help improve the design in such a way that the guitarist can express him or herself unhampered by some of the patchy design work that was done 50 some years ago.
If you have questions about the project or how this information will be used, go ahead and email me at a12@u.washington.edu. None of your personal information will be used, and if I use a quote from you I’ll be certain to check with you before putting it into my work.
Thanks again for doing this!
1: Electric guitar[s] you use most? Make and model please.
2: Style[s] of music you play?
3: Do you have any complaints about the way the body of the instrument sits or feels uncomfortable against you? Please identify the specific areas.
4: Do you have any complaints about the way your controls [knobs and switches] are laid out or placed on the body?
5: Any additional questions or comments?
Thanks again!
cheers!
Hey there! It’s been a while since I was on Facebook, but I’m back temporarily to ask all of you a few questions for my Design Thesis, which is coming up in a few weeks. If you’re receiving this and you’re 1: not a guitarist or 2: not an electric guitarist, go ahead and ignore it, sorry for the mistake! My project is based solely on electric guitar design.
That said, the project is specifically focused on the non-musical physical relationship between the guitar and the guitarist. In the context of the project, the “non-musical” relationship refers to the way that the player experiences the instrument, specifically the body shape and the control rig, especially while playing sitting down.
The issues I’ve been toying with for the past two quarters has been how the tradition of the electric guitar has been passed down from generation to generation alongside dusty vinyls and tapes with the axe-slinging legends of before, and how the electric has thus become a heritage that guitarists are fiercely defensive of. Because of this, electric guitar designs that were made in the 50’s and 60’s have changed little, even if they could benefit from design or technological improvements. Things like knocking the controls/switches out of position while strumming or having a hard time playing the instrument because of the way it fits against the human body are the main issues I’m addressing here.
The goal of the project is definitely not to throw away the legacy and heritage of electric guitars, but to suggest ways to help improve the design in such a way that the guitarist can express him or herself unhampered by some of the patchy design work that was done 50 some years ago.
If you have questions about the project or how this information will be used, go ahead and email me at a12@u.washington.edu. None of your personal information will be used, and if I use a quote from you I’ll be certain to check with you before putting it into my work.
Thanks again for doing this!
1: Electric guitar[s] you use most? Make and model please.
2: Style[s] of music you play?
3: Do you have any complaints about the way the body of the instrument sits or feels uncomfortable against you? Please identify the specific areas.
4: Do you have any complaints about the way your controls [knobs and switches] are laid out or placed on the body?
5: Any additional questions or comments?
Thanks again!
4.30.2010
a few updates..and the concept of balance.
so i haven't had a chance to set up the projector yet, but tomorrow i have probably 10+ hrs to work on capstone stuff. i'm pretty excited, i just ran into an old friend from one day's wages [to see what they're all about www.onedayswages.org !] and her boyfriend was presenting his senior thesis and we got to talking about guitars [naturally] since we're both big on buying parts and guitar assembly. i'll see him at the undergraduate research symposium, so that'll be fun.
it's just dawning on me that this project is reaching a close in about 4 weeks. it terrifies and excites me.
anyways. i recently got an email from an old DS friend about her husband's connection to the industry [if you're reading this...thanks! i'll be emailing him later on tonight hopefully!] and so i think it'll be cool to pick his brain a bit.
one major thing that i feel i've overlooked [or at least not expressed enough of] is balance though. many musicians i've talked to complain of unbalanced instruments..what i mean by this is that the body or neck are either too heavy or too light. i've heard often of this happening for gibson style instruments, say, for custom les pauls that are oversized, or maybe for SGs whose thin and lightweight body structure aren't heavy enough to offset the weight of the neck and headstock, resulting in an instrument that leans to one side when standing or sitting with a strap. it may not necessarily be a HUGE deal, but i think it's still important. an instrument safely nestled into your body will likely be more comfortable and playable than one that leans away from you. i hope that's clear enough an understanding.
next monday is the 2nd stepping stone presentation. i feel like i've come quite a way from the 1st stepping stone presentation this quarter, but it's still not enough yet. if i have time i'm going to go to a church friend's house and use his equipment to hack out a basic body shape out of some affordable wood to help drive home my points on monday....hopefully it'll work out! yup.
cheers team.
anthony
it's just dawning on me that this project is reaching a close in about 4 weeks. it terrifies and excites me.
anyways. i recently got an email from an old DS friend about her husband's connection to the industry [if you're reading this...thanks! i'll be emailing him later on tonight hopefully!] and so i think it'll be cool to pick his brain a bit.
one major thing that i feel i've overlooked [or at least not expressed enough of] is balance though. many musicians i've talked to complain of unbalanced instruments..what i mean by this is that the body or neck are either too heavy or too light. i've heard often of this happening for gibson style instruments, say, for custom les pauls that are oversized, or maybe for SGs whose thin and lightweight body structure aren't heavy enough to offset the weight of the neck and headstock, resulting in an instrument that leans to one side when standing or sitting with a strap. it may not necessarily be a HUGE deal, but i think it's still important. an instrument safely nestled into your body will likely be more comfortable and playable than one that leans away from you. i hope that's clear enough an understanding.
next monday is the 2nd stepping stone presentation. i feel like i've come quite a way from the 1st stepping stone presentation this quarter, but it's still not enough yet. if i have time i'm going to go to a church friend's house and use his equipment to hack out a basic body shape out of some affordable wood to help drive home my points on monday....hopefully it'll work out! yup.
cheers team.
anthony
4.25.2010
just a hello
hey folks. so here is a fun product i saw.
// anyways, as of today i have now 8 clips of 4 people playing their electrics, ranging from teles to strats to hollowbodies. the quest for hopefully an SG or les paul continues, though i have maybe 1 friend willing to help out who owns a les paul.
regardless, the plan as of now is to rent or borrow a projector from CSS and outline kind of how each player strums along. initially i was kinda worried about how it might turn out but surprisingly everyone has pretty noticeable differences in strumming styles. well, i guess it's not that surprising, but it's interesting to note nonetheless, since normally one wouldn't notice. cool stuff, methinks. thanks to tim, kevin, andreas, and stefan who have helped out so far. i have at least 2 more people lined up, my hope is for about 10 people to get the really solid info i would like. we'll see how it plays out.
cheers
anthony
4.24.2010
video logs
hey all. just a quick check in. hope people's weeks have been good. tomorrow i have lined up a pair of guitarist friends that i grew up with to record them playing and interacting with their instruments, whether that be sitting down or standing up. they play different models [that is, like, different body shapes] which is fantastic as well-that way i get a better understanding of multiple body shapes instead of being confined to the 2 or 3 that i own. i'll let you all know how the recording process goes,
but the idea for the recording at all is that i can observe on my own time the way that each of their arms move in arcs while playing guitar, whether it be for fast songs, slow songs, jazz, rock, metal, blues, or what have you [they are both fantastically multitalented, so i suspect it should be good]
cheers team
anthony
but the idea for the recording at all is that i can observe on my own time the way that each of their arms move in arcs while playing guitar, whether it be for fast songs, slow songs, jazz, rock, metal, blues, or what have you [they are both fantastically multitalented, so i suspect it should be good]
cheers team
anthony
4.19.2010
today in DS...what is DS?!
from a discussion in class today...this is what our working definition of Design Studies is, for the senior DSers at least.
skills:
adaptable process
write/communicate with or for diverse audiences
gather and synthesize disparate information
goals:
find new relevant problems,
connect design to outside fields
change behavior or ways of thinking
products:
understanding for how designs fit into larger systems.
novel frameworks for understanding information
these products may be more traditional graphic or physical designs or a design for a system.
skills:
adaptable process
write/communicate with or for diverse audiences
gather and synthesize disparate information
goals:
find new relevant problems,
connect design to outside fields
change behavior or ways of thinking
products:
understanding for how designs fit into larger systems.
novel frameworks for understanding information
these products may be more traditional graphic or physical designs or a design for a system.
4.17.2010
real - world idears.
it's been a long time...so i have this strat body [squier 80's ish] coupled with a late 80's squier 2 neck. no pickups, no pickguard, just a bridge, a trem arm, and an output jack and jack plate. nothing else.
what i intend to do is to use the holes that are built into the body, i'll "nail" a sheet of paper or some sort of related material [probably uhh that cereal boxy material. chipboard!] and use a marker or some such to mark down different picking/strumming patterns for a song or songs with fast, slow, and solo-ing passages. i'll ask a few friends to help as well, people i know who have really comprehensive, well - versed understandings and experiences with multiple styles, say, rock, blues, jazz, whatever else, and use different colors for each clip or style. hopefully that'll give me a good idea of what areas i've already suspected fall under the "danger zone" of strumming and knocking controls out of wack.
i experienced that the past few days [which are really the reason i haven't been posting...all week i've either been stressing over school or playing for the worship team at 30 hr famine]. we played 2 gigs back to back, and with that number of knobs and controls on my guitar, on my pedals, on my amp, and on the soundboard it can quickly become overwhelming. i see why for many guitarists the simpler, the better.
tim and i were recently talking about wah pedals [for those of you don't know, the wah pedal does what it sounds like. wah-wah type noises, really rich swept distortion sort of thing. it's kinda hard to explain but i am positive all of you have heard it somewhere]. anyways, he has this fancy model and i have the most, most, most basic one and i was just telling him that as much as i like having control over how i sound, if i can't figure out how to get a sound i like within a minute or two i get worried and kind of tired. i understand why now that more useable and understandable controls can be accepted as better than instruments [or anything, even!] with massive control over tiny details.
i don't want to put words in other people's mouths, but for technology as vintage, revered, and spartan as guitar innards i see why it's true. too much is too much. if you look at the moog guitar, it is often hailed as a groundbreaking instrument with fascinating levels of complexity and built in-midi control [it can make noises other than guitar noises...pretty much anything you can think of] but it's just too many controls. as i'm looking now it has 3 gold knobs [?] 2 black knobs, 2 gold switches and 1 black switch, and 2 different output jacks. madness. i have a few ideas for control layout but don't want to say much yet for fear of putting the cart in front of the horse. yup
what i intend to do is to use the holes that are built into the body, i'll "nail" a sheet of paper or some sort of related material [probably uhh that cereal boxy material. chipboard!] and use a marker or some such to mark down different picking/strumming patterns for a song or songs with fast, slow, and solo-ing passages. i'll ask a few friends to help as well, people i know who have really comprehensive, well - versed understandings and experiences with multiple styles, say, rock, blues, jazz, whatever else, and use different colors for each clip or style. hopefully that'll give me a good idea of what areas i've already suspected fall under the "danger zone" of strumming and knocking controls out of wack.
i experienced that the past few days [which are really the reason i haven't been posting...all week i've either been stressing over school or playing for the worship team at 30 hr famine]. we played 2 gigs back to back, and with that number of knobs and controls on my guitar, on my pedals, on my amp, and on the soundboard it can quickly become overwhelming. i see why for many guitarists the simpler, the better.
tim and i were recently talking about wah pedals [for those of you don't know, the wah pedal does what it sounds like. wah-wah type noises, really rich swept distortion sort of thing. it's kinda hard to explain but i am positive all of you have heard it somewhere]. anyways, he has this fancy model and i have the most, most, most basic one and i was just telling him that as much as i like having control over how i sound, if i can't figure out how to get a sound i like within a minute or two i get worried and kind of tired. i understand why now that more useable and understandable controls can be accepted as better than instruments [or anything, even!] with massive control over tiny details.
i don't want to put words in other people's mouths, but for technology as vintage, revered, and spartan as guitar innards i see why it's true. too much is too much. if you look at the moog guitar, it is often hailed as a groundbreaking instrument with fascinating levels of complexity and built in-midi control [it can make noises other than guitar noises...pretty much anything you can think of] but it's just too many controls. as i'm looking now it has 3 gold knobs [?] 2 black knobs, 2 gold switches and 1 black switch, and 2 different output jacks. madness. i have a few ideas for control layout but don't want to say much yet for fear of putting the cart in front of the horse. yup
4.05.2010
uh..
for those of you following along....enough said. bo diddley's awesome and all, but imagine playing this sitting >.>
well actually don't imagine....found one! interesting.... hm haha
4.04.2010
the worst article...EVER.
i hate to be mean but i seriously just read one of the most useless reference articles in the history of history. i won't blog about where it was or who wrote it, since that would be cruel...but it was just...terrible.
it jumped from topic to topic with little connection, random and unproven facts interwoven awkwardly with opinion, and actually repeated the same sentence [or almost the same sentence] a few times in the post. ouch.
i kinda then realized that that was a little what i was doing...tailspinning a lot. i think i'll talk to dominic again. i know these things take a lot of time and effort to push through, but the more i struggle with it now [and not 5 weeks from now..] the better my product will be, i just know it. taking linda's class last quarter and pushing out 6ish iterations of just my final paper before finally striking compost-research-paper gold definitely reminded me of that. it's been a long time since i've been motivated to really work for something, and last quarter i've started to pick up the pieces. the past few years have been a bit tough for my family and i, but i'm tired of that being my excuse to create garbage designs. all my design profs and TAs, and even my friends at ODW have seen truly subpar work. part of it is yea, i'm just not that great a designer, but a lot of that is also just because i can't find the motivation to do anything anymore. people joke about not being motivated but literally. i cannot get out of bed. i cannot clear the fog in my head. i cannot focus for more than 5 minutes...all these things i can't do and i'm tired of it. gonna go to sleep early. fresh start. fresh week.
uh. anyways. here's to an effortful quarter.
this week i'm gonna make a trip out to EMP hopefully, find some more articles, and narrow down some more. i wanna talk to dominic tomorrow about my focus and goals, since the directions i felt like i was headed towards last week were directions that i'm really..not that interested in. maybe i should go more theoretical than physical. hrm.
it jumped from topic to topic with little connection, random and unproven facts interwoven awkwardly with opinion, and actually repeated the same sentence [or almost the same sentence] a few times in the post. ouch.
i kinda then realized that that was a little what i was doing...tailspinning a lot. i think i'll talk to dominic again. i know these things take a lot of time and effort to push through, but the more i struggle with it now [and not 5 weeks from now..] the better my product will be, i just know it. taking linda's class last quarter and pushing out 6ish iterations of just my final paper before finally striking compost-research-paper gold definitely reminded me of that. it's been a long time since i've been motivated to really work for something, and last quarter i've started to pick up the pieces. the past few years have been a bit tough for my family and i, but i'm tired of that being my excuse to create garbage designs. all my design profs and TAs, and even my friends at ODW have seen truly subpar work. part of it is yea, i'm just not that great a designer, but a lot of that is also just because i can't find the motivation to do anything anymore. people joke about not being motivated but literally. i cannot get out of bed. i cannot clear the fog in my head. i cannot focus for more than 5 minutes...all these things i can't do and i'm tired of it. gonna go to sleep early. fresh start. fresh week.
uh. anyways. here's to an effortful quarter.
this week i'm gonna make a trip out to EMP hopefully, find some more articles, and narrow down some more. i wanna talk to dominic tomorrow about my focus and goals, since the directions i felt like i was headed towards last week were directions that i'm really..not that interested in. maybe i should go more theoretical than physical. hrm.
4.03.2010
progress?
so i can't say honestly that i've made big progress as of late.
after meeting with dominic he encouraged me to push more towards controls and such, which is fine, i guess, but the more i think about it the less i'm actually really into the controls aspect. okay. i need to say it's not that i'm no longer interested, i just don't know what i am actually interested in anymore. anyone else??! ay.
regardless, i actually went into the UW libraries to try and find some cool related articles, which were surprisingly abundant [and relevant!]. the first was about the Garrison bracing system for acoustics. which is kind of old news now, but basically Garrison acoustics use some form of composite material to create a shell bracing for the entire instrument, which replaces every brace and bit of wood within, leaving only the top, sides, back, and neck that need to be fitted to the body. while there are claims that they don't sound as good or are unnatural [again with the resistance to change, especially changes afforded by technology!], but the fact of the matter is that from a strictly business or efficiency point of view this system is awesome. it cuts build time from weeks to probably less than a week, allowing the Garrison manufacturers to produce...multiples of what it used to be able to, and since much of it is automated now [in order to create wood pieces that will fit such exact, unerring bracing systems, machinery is used to cut the wood as well] it saves costs and increases consistency in product quality, tone, and build. interesting tradeoff, i think. i've played a Garrison before. they make gorgeous instruments, but i've heard personally some complaints about the automated system and worries about the composite brace stretching or shrinking in a way that might adversely affect the wood.
the second was about Fender [also a pretty old article] using 3d modelers to design and "test" different modifications for a new line of electric basses. again, while this is old news, it was right along with my CNC DIY idea for guitarists to be able to modify instruments to their exacting needs. but after talking with dominic and coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely that i'd be able to pull off this sort of "digital DIY" type thing [especially since there will most certainly be legal issues and things at stake] so i think i'll stick to something else.
just don't know what yet. ARGHHHH!
after meeting with dominic he encouraged me to push more towards controls and such, which is fine, i guess, but the more i think about it the less i'm actually really into the controls aspect. okay. i need to say it's not that i'm no longer interested, i just don't know what i am actually interested in anymore. anyone else??! ay.
regardless, i actually went into the UW libraries to try and find some cool related articles, which were surprisingly abundant [and relevant!]. the first was about the Garrison bracing system for acoustics. which is kind of old news now, but basically Garrison acoustics use some form of composite material to create a shell bracing for the entire instrument, which replaces every brace and bit of wood within, leaving only the top, sides, back, and neck that need to be fitted to the body. while there are claims that they don't sound as good or are unnatural [again with the resistance to change, especially changes afforded by technology!], but the fact of the matter is that from a strictly business or efficiency point of view this system is awesome. it cuts build time from weeks to probably less than a week, allowing the Garrison manufacturers to produce...multiples of what it used to be able to, and since much of it is automated now [in order to create wood pieces that will fit such exact, unerring bracing systems, machinery is used to cut the wood as well] it saves costs and increases consistency in product quality, tone, and build. interesting tradeoff, i think. i've played a Garrison before. they make gorgeous instruments, but i've heard personally some complaints about the automated system and worries about the composite brace stretching or shrinking in a way that might adversely affect the wood.
the second was about Fender [also a pretty old article] using 3d modelers to design and "test" different modifications for a new line of electric basses. again, while this is old news, it was right along with my CNC DIY idea for guitarists to be able to modify instruments to their exacting needs. but after talking with dominic and coming to the conclusion that it's unlikely that i'd be able to pull off this sort of "digital DIY" type thing [especially since there will most certainly be legal issues and things at stake] so i think i'll stick to something else.
just don't know what yet. ARGHHHH!
3.29.2010
a fresh quarter
my last quarter in actual design school [i still need an art history somewhere next year, but that's not a big deal]
anyways, i'm having some trouble figuring out how to pick up the pieces, so to speak, in regards to my culminating project. there are a lot of things that i want to do [this includes the writing of a brief book to introduce new folks to the guitar/luthier industries, which i started last summer...yup!]
i feel like this last quarter is so unreal..but enough with the sappiness.
i had two major directions to head towards at the end of last term, the first of which was the reworking of a classic design, with subtle changes that could improve the ergonomics and useability, which might result first and foremost in a sort of design package that might reveal to, say, local luthiers, the body of work that i've done and a few key physical areas on conventional guitar designs that might help their process without throwing out tradition.
the second was a little more unconventional, the creation of some form of program or the use of an existing 3d modeler to import bodies from existing guitars [haha uhh copyright alerts..] but allowing tweaks so that users can really push for truly custom guitars through c+c machines [with final hand sanding] without having to pay multiple arms and legs.
for now, to do list:
visit EMP..glean what i can.
start talking to the local luthiers. hank at effectsbay [http://www.effectsbay.com/] and tim from our class have both suggested some local folks to chat up.
eventually get back on FB and conduct an erin-style survey regarding key features that electric guitarists look for, as well as problem areas for those who own common body shapes [this includes strat, tele, LP, SG, and most of their copies]. my focus is specifically on solid bodies, by the way, because semi hollow and hollowbody electrics have their own quirks and needs, whereas solidbodies are less confined by shape for resonance [i said less! not none! haha]
okay. i think that's where i am. about to talk to dominic.............don't have much to talk about yet. : / yikes.
happy spring quarter.
anyways, i'm having some trouble figuring out how to pick up the pieces, so to speak, in regards to my culminating project. there are a lot of things that i want to do [this includes the writing of a brief book to introduce new folks to the guitar/luthier industries, which i started last summer...yup!]
i feel like this last quarter is so unreal..but enough with the sappiness.
i had two major directions to head towards at the end of last term, the first of which was the reworking of a classic design, with subtle changes that could improve the ergonomics and useability, which might result first and foremost in a sort of design package that might reveal to, say, local luthiers, the body of work that i've done and a few key physical areas on conventional guitar designs that might help their process without throwing out tradition.
the second was a little more unconventional, the creation of some form of program or the use of an existing 3d modeler to import bodies from existing guitars [haha uhh copyright alerts..] but allowing tweaks so that users can really push for truly custom guitars through c+c machines [with final hand sanding] without having to pay multiple arms and legs.
for now, to do list:
visit EMP..glean what i can.
start talking to the local luthiers. hank at effectsbay [http://www.effectsbay.com/] and tim from our class have both suggested some local folks to chat up.
eventually get back on FB and conduct an erin-style survey regarding key features that electric guitarists look for, as well as problem areas for those who own common body shapes [this includes strat, tele, LP, SG, and most of their copies]. my focus is specifically on solid bodies, by the way, because semi hollow and hollowbody electrics have their own quirks and needs, whereas solidbodies are less confined by shape for resonance [i said less! not none! haha]
okay. i think that's where i am. about to talk to dominic.............don't have much to talk about yet. : / yikes.
happy spring quarter.
3.20.2010
'ello der
sorry this has been pretty delayed. it's taken a while to recover from finals..the past 2 days have been just as full as when i still had school to deal with. anyways, it's my understanding that i need to have a follow-up blog. again i apologize for not posting the week before..i just wasn't ready to say anything yet since i spent a lot of time thinking about what needed to be on my poster [which turned out alright i think] as well as on my slides, which i was really concerned about for a while. regardless, i think the class as a whole went alright and everyone's presentations were excellent. mhm!
a rundown on the presentation i gave, roughly. there are some facts here and there that i included that i thought about saying but opted out of. i figure the more my train of thought here is fleshed out, the easier it'll be to pick up again on the second leg of the trip. yup!
introduce the focus: my concentration is on the physical relationship between guitar and guitarist.
I: history...starting with les paul's "log" guitar and transition from there to the mass-production of solid body instruments once luthiers realize that electric guitars don't need all the resonance and space that acoustics do in order to make noise good sounding noise when amplified..
1950: fender esquire hits production lines..
1951ish: the guitar that bears les paul's name, the les paul [henceforth "LP"] is introduced in reaction to the esquire's success.
1954: the strat is introduced...boom. musicians like buddy holly help the success of the electric guitar industry skyrocket.
1961: the SG is produced after a sinking year for gibson, as a response to the strat. the sg was marketed as a new les paul body, but Les himself apparently wasn't big on it, and his name was officially removed soon afterwards.
the electric guitar becomes a runaway hit for its ease of use and transport, but perhaps most importantly, how easy it was to amplify. for years acoustics had been suffering severely from feedbacking, or the hum, buzz, crackle, pops, and squeals that are sometimes heard at live shows. electrics were more resistant to feedback [but not immune!]..regardless, the music industry was, is, and will continue to have been undeniably changed.
"the but": through generations of passing instruments and vinyls down, the appreciation for old tone and vintage instruments created a backward looking industry that clutches the old way of doing things while reluctant to adapt or accept what technology can offer the art...ie, telecasters [show the series of tele's]
"the what": the problem spaces that i am examining. again, with some clever wordplay they become one problem space..which is the non-musical physical relationships between the guitarist and his or her instrument. bad design or too much clinging to the past? either way, i want to do something about how the instrument interacts with the human body, especially while sitting down. the way the form fits to us, the way the controls are placed, primarily.
what the project is NOT: a rejection of the past, a focus on pure function*, or a hope to CHANGE the guitar industry or how people view or value guitars [especially vintage ones!] it's not a throwing away of tradition!
what the project IS: an encouragement of story. if the beautiful story that is written by the player and instrument interaction can be less hampered by poor design, then self-expression will be at least less hindered by physical barriers.
next steps: either a more well-researched, familiar body with perhaps an action packet for guitar companies to consider the research i've done AND/OR a way to digitally edit bodies with some form of software, basically a more DIY type of guitar construction, tailored to the individual.
YEAP. thanks for a great quarter everyone! cheers. :]
anthony
a rundown on the presentation i gave, roughly. there are some facts here and there that i included that i thought about saying but opted out of. i figure the more my train of thought here is fleshed out, the easier it'll be to pick up again on the second leg of the trip. yup!
introduce the focus: my concentration is on the physical relationship between guitar and guitarist.
I: history...starting with les paul's "log" guitar and transition from there to the mass-production of solid body instruments once luthiers realize that electric guitars don't need all the resonance and space that acoustics do in order to make noise good sounding noise when amplified..
1950: fender esquire hits production lines..
1951ish: the guitar that bears les paul's name, the les paul [henceforth "LP"] is introduced in reaction to the esquire's success.
1954: the strat is introduced...boom. musicians like buddy holly help the success of the electric guitar industry skyrocket.
1961: the SG is produced after a sinking year for gibson, as a response to the strat. the sg was marketed as a new les paul body, but Les himself apparently wasn't big on it, and his name was officially removed soon afterwards.
the electric guitar becomes a runaway hit for its ease of use and transport, but perhaps most importantly, how easy it was to amplify. for years acoustics had been suffering severely from feedbacking, or the hum, buzz, crackle, pops, and squeals that are sometimes heard at live shows. electrics were more resistant to feedback [but not immune!]..regardless, the music industry was, is, and will continue to have been undeniably changed.
"the but": through generations of passing instruments and vinyls down, the appreciation for old tone and vintage instruments created a backward looking industry that clutches the old way of doing things while reluctant to adapt or accept what technology can offer the art...ie, telecasters [show the series of tele's]
"the what": the problem spaces that i am examining. again, with some clever wordplay they become one problem space..which is the non-musical physical relationships between the guitarist and his or her instrument. bad design or too much clinging to the past? either way, i want to do something about how the instrument interacts with the human body, especially while sitting down. the way the form fits to us, the way the controls are placed, primarily.
what the project is NOT: a rejection of the past, a focus on pure function*, or a hope to CHANGE the guitar industry or how people view or value guitars [especially vintage ones!] it's not a throwing away of tradition!
what the project IS: an encouragement of story. if the beautiful story that is written by the player and instrument interaction can be less hampered by poor design, then self-expression will be at least less hindered by physical barriers.
next steps: either a more well-researched, familiar body with perhaps an action packet for guitar companies to consider the research i've done AND/OR a way to digitally edit bodies with some form of software, basically a more DIY type of guitar construction, tailored to the individual.
YEAP. thanks for a great quarter everyone! cheers. :]
anthony
3.08.2010
3.06.2010
rundown for the final presentation..i hope
based loosely on the notes i took when we talked about this in class...i feel a little like the final presentation will essentially be a lively explanation of the abstract, with sort of a more strictly defined "next steps" section.
FINAL presentation [wednesday during finals week] outline
-overview: guests probably won't know much about our general topic, so be as
specific and succinct as possible, the 5-7 minute policy will be more strictly
enforced.
basically, go through the history again, the traditions and customs that have built the current electric guitar industry; outlining how it is backwards-looking and very against change, and underlining that while my project will likely involve proposing a change to the way the industry works i do not intend to just throw away the rich legacy that is electric guitars.
-problem: be specific about the problem space we are defining. this will likely
be 2/3 of the whole presentation.
reiteration of the concerns on how the stress on vintage styles and traditions in the industry have caused instruments to change little and spawning wave after wave of knockoffs and similar instruments that have not necessarily had good design research performed as far as ergonomics and ease of use. obviously i don't mean the previous sentence as an all-inclusive end all be all [or however the phrase goes] statement, just a thought.
i want to make clear that certain physical interactions between the stakeholders are not really the most comfortable or healthy without needing to go too far technical.
-suggest a course of action: what next? be specific here as well so that we can
get good feedback on our chosen course of action's feasibility, mention artifact
suggestions [what to make?] and goals to achieve.
uhh....let me come back to this...yup
FINAL presentation [wednesday during finals week] outline
-overview: guests probably won't know much about our general topic, so be as
specific and succinct as possible, the 5-7 minute policy will be more strictly
enforced.
basically, go through the history again, the traditions and customs that have built the current electric guitar industry; outlining how it is backwards-looking and very against change, and underlining that while my project will likely involve proposing a change to the way the industry works i do not intend to just throw away the rich legacy that is electric guitars.
-problem: be specific about the problem space we are defining. this will likely
be 2/3 of the whole presentation.
reiteration of the concerns on how the stress on vintage styles and traditions in the industry have caused instruments to change little and spawning wave after wave of knockoffs and similar instruments that have not necessarily had good design research performed as far as ergonomics and ease of use. obviously i don't mean the previous sentence as an all-inclusive end all be all [or however the phrase goes] statement, just a thought.
i want to make clear that certain physical interactions between the stakeholders are not really the most comfortable or healthy without needing to go too far technical.
-suggest a course of action: what next? be specific here as well so that we can
get good feedback on our chosen course of action's feasibility, mention artifact
suggestions [what to make?] and goals to achieve.
uhh....let me come back to this...yup
3.03.2010
the continued pursuit of story.
hello.
so unfortunately i really think for some reason i just pushed the wrong point today at PK. what's frustrating is that i knew all the information that would've made this PK tied perfectly into my previous presentations, but i just didn't...stress it enough. ugh!
anyways, this is more of what i meant to say.
in the past i've been focused sheerly on function. how guitars work and how the player physically interacts with the instrument, presented as mostly mechanical. in hope to find the most strained/heavily touched areas of an instrument i wanted to show some of the relic or road worn instruments. since these are all brand new guitars that are aged to LOOK and feel like they've been played for years, it's safe to say that the strained and worn parts of these guitars are really where the most contacted areas of the instrument are.
when occurring naturally these worn patches, scratches, and dings represent a beautiful story between the player and the instrument [what i said today] BUT they also represent the key points of a well-built physical relationship.
i wish i had made that clearer...and now as i read the above paragraph i wish i made that paragraph clearer too! ay.
the fact of the matter is that my focus is still on the physical aspects, specifically, the controls and the body contours themselves. looking at worn instruments was a way to understand the extremes of the physical relationship, but in examining this i didn't want to ignore the narrative that is formed when a person and his or her guitar exist together.
the key to guitar design, i think, is to create an instrument that bolsters the player's personality and is made not only to look and sound good, but also to feel right when played... however, it MUST also provide a transparent enough guitar playing experience for a faithful story to be written between the stakeholders, this being me and my guitar.
tell me if that makes sense...the final presentation suddenly seems a lot more intimidating than before. . .
so unfortunately i really think for some reason i just pushed the wrong point today at PK. what's frustrating is that i knew all the information that would've made this PK tied perfectly into my previous presentations, but i just didn't...stress it enough. ugh!
anyways, this is more of what i meant to say.
in the past i've been focused sheerly on function. how guitars work and how the player physically interacts with the instrument, presented as mostly mechanical. in hope to find the most strained/heavily touched areas of an instrument i wanted to show some of the relic or road worn instruments. since these are all brand new guitars that are aged to LOOK and feel like they've been played for years, it's safe to say that the strained and worn parts of these guitars are really where the most contacted areas of the instrument are.
when occurring naturally these worn patches, scratches, and dings represent a beautiful story between the player and the instrument [what i said today] BUT they also represent the key points of a well-built physical relationship.
i wish i had made that clearer...and now as i read the above paragraph i wish i made that paragraph clearer too! ay.
the fact of the matter is that my focus is still on the physical aspects, specifically, the controls and the body contours themselves. looking at worn instruments was a way to understand the extremes of the physical relationship, but in examining this i didn't want to ignore the narrative that is formed when a person and his or her guitar exist together.
the key to guitar design, i think, is to create an instrument that bolsters the player's personality and is made not only to look and sound good, but also to feel right when played... however, it MUST also provide a transparent enough guitar playing experience for a faithful story to be written between the stakeholders, this being me and my guitar.
tell me if that makes sense...the final presentation suddenly seems a lot more intimidating than before. . .
3.01.2010
"what can this made guitar add to the canon of made guitars?"
a quote from dominic today that i'm gonna have to mull over a bit more for the pecha kucha on wednesday. i want to include more theoretical mulls-over for my capstone since i don't want to be caught making a guitar for the sake of making one, i want to make one because i am genuinely committed to the field and care about properly founded capstone body of research.
anyways, time for some fun.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhlDsuOEBdY&feature=player_embedded
this is fantastically childish looking to me, but fun nonetheless...yup
anyways, time for some fun.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhlDsuOEBdY&feature=player_embedded
this is fantastically childish looking to me, but fun nonetheless...yup
2.27.2010
acoustasonic tele
this is the coolest thing i've seen in a while.
oh by the way, thanks kelsey and nat for the comments! i'll respond tomorrow [i'll tell you why later]
anyways, this isn't really THAT related but it's still interesting. fender recently rolled out the "acoustasonic tele,"
which is basically a freaky hybrid between an acoustic and an electric; however, it is NOT an acoustic-electric. i'll define those now: [hi august! haha]
an acoustic generates sound by the reverberations that occur within the instrument, and the tone and volume of the instrument are fixed by the material, shape, craftsmanship, condition, weather, etc. very susceptible to environmental change.
an electric generates sound by the pickups "picking up" the vibrations of the strings and translating that into something the amp or sound system will understand.
an acoustic-electric is USUALLY an acoustic guitar that has an output jack that allows it to be amplified, but not used like an electric. essentially, an acoustic that is plugged in.
the acoustasonic, as i understand it, is none of those. there are very few hybrid funky guitars out there, and this counts as one of them. as far as i can tell, it has the shape, approximate weight [ish], playing "feel", and appearance of a normal telecaster. however, if you'll note the bridge [where the strings meet the body] it is made of rosewood, and this bridge has some sort of acoustic pickup system with piezo crystals...and yet it has an electric pickup in there too. essentially, this guitar can be used as an acoustic, as an electric, or kind of a funky blend of both. interestinggg...and very budget friendly! 900$ is something i'd be willing to pay to play with this guy here.
the reason is this: my dream guitar is a taylor t5 custom. absolutely, ABSOLUTELY stunning instrument. this won awards for best acoustic AND electric guitar of the year a little while back...in the same year. crazy. the concept is similar as the above, but i suspect that taylor just does it better: better materials, better research, and to a point, better craftsmanship. except....this guy is riding on about 3000, or more than three times the above guitar...yup. still. lOOK AT IT. :]
cheers. essay due in 1.5 hrs...should probably get cracking.
oh by the way, thanks kelsey and nat for the comments! i'll respond tomorrow [i'll tell you why later]
anyways, this isn't really THAT related but it's still interesting. fender recently rolled out the "acoustasonic tele,"
which is basically a freaky hybrid between an acoustic and an electric; however, it is NOT an acoustic-electric. i'll define those now: [hi august! haha]
an acoustic generates sound by the reverberations that occur within the instrument, and the tone and volume of the instrument are fixed by the material, shape, craftsmanship, condition, weather, etc. very susceptible to environmental change.
an electric generates sound by the pickups "picking up" the vibrations of the strings and translating that into something the amp or sound system will understand.
an acoustic-electric is USUALLY an acoustic guitar that has an output jack that allows it to be amplified, but not used like an electric. essentially, an acoustic that is plugged in.
the acoustasonic, as i understand it, is none of those. there are very few hybrid funky guitars out there, and this counts as one of them. as far as i can tell, it has the shape, approximate weight [ish], playing "feel", and appearance of a normal telecaster. however, if you'll note the bridge [where the strings meet the body] it is made of rosewood, and this bridge has some sort of acoustic pickup system with piezo crystals...and yet it has an electric pickup in there too. essentially, this guitar can be used as an acoustic, as an electric, or kind of a funky blend of both. interestinggg...and very budget friendly! 900$ is something i'd be willing to pay to play with this guy here.
the reason is this: my dream guitar is a taylor t5 custom. absolutely, ABSOLUTELY stunning instrument. this won awards for best acoustic AND electric guitar of the year a little while back...in the same year. crazy. the concept is similar as the above, but i suspect that taylor just does it better: better materials, better research, and to a point, better craftsmanship. except....this guy is riding on about 3000, or more than three times the above guitar...yup. still. lOOK AT IT. :]
cheers. essay due in 1.5 hrs...should probably get cracking.
2.26.2010
the concept of curatorship
i lost my drafting pencil.
anyways, this past week's PK was on the concept of curatorship. i feel like i somewhat unsuccessfully tried to explain it, or at least i just muddled it some. alas.
the idea basically was the presence of a "curator", if you will, in a guitar research or manufacturing company. just as a museum curator will collect, maintain, and organize works of art in the museum, a guitar curator will collect and organize lists of reviews and artists. in both cases the intention is to influence the target audience of each collection and show the values of the company or museum as a whole..in this way, it takes time to adopt or accept these ideas or perceptions. the most famous museums and guitar companies have time under their belts, but also loving "curators" who were willing to go all out and push against the status quo until they hit the "tipping point". [thanks mal] after that, people are automatically drawn to the product and to the facility or entity that hosts the product, and perceptions are much more solidified even when a person hasn't actually experienced it.
in this case, say, i've never been to the smithsonian or to moma but i know i'll have amazing experiences there, and if i wanted a rock solid instrument i know i could pick up any ernie ball music man or whatever other brand you choose.
regardless, the point of this week's PK for me was to understand more on what it takes for the collective guitar society to accept change...it takes a lot. what exactly, i haven't much idea yet but i know that the product must be able to consistently back up its hype, especially the hype generated and maintained on the product webpage.
cheers.
anyways, this past week's PK was on the concept of curatorship. i feel like i somewhat unsuccessfully tried to explain it, or at least i just muddled it some. alas.
the idea basically was the presence of a "curator", if you will, in a guitar research or manufacturing company. just as a museum curator will collect, maintain, and organize works of art in the museum, a guitar curator will collect and organize lists of reviews and artists. in both cases the intention is to influence the target audience of each collection and show the values of the company or museum as a whole..in this way, it takes time to adopt or accept these ideas or perceptions. the most famous museums and guitar companies have time under their belts, but also loving "curators" who were willing to go all out and push against the status quo until they hit the "tipping point". [thanks mal] after that, people are automatically drawn to the product and to the facility or entity that hosts the product, and perceptions are much more solidified even when a person hasn't actually experienced it.
in this case, say, i've never been to the smithsonian or to moma but i know i'll have amazing experiences there, and if i wanted a rock solid instrument i know i could pick up any ernie ball music man or whatever other brand you choose.
regardless, the point of this week's PK for me was to understand more on what it takes for the collective guitar society to accept change...it takes a lot. what exactly, i haven't much idea yet but i know that the product must be able to consistently back up its hype, especially the hype generated and maintained on the product webpage.
cheers.
2.21.2010
abstract: retitled "The Artist and the Axe: Redesigning the Relationship Between the Guitar and the Guitarist"
hello all...this is what i have for my abstract so far...if you have thoughts i'd be happy to hear them. it's been quite a few years since i've needed to write an abstract ! ay.
In the history of music, few instruments have had as dramatic an impact on popular music and culture as the electric guitar. Now a staple of musicians performing and recording worldwide, the electric guitar has proved its worth as an instrument flexible enough to span dozens of genres and influential enough to inspire waves of young musicians to follow in the footsteps of their axe-slinging heroes. This cult following of musicians pursuing the sounds and instrumentation of the legends, however, has built a backwards-looking industry of guitar technology desperately pursuing the past while fiercely resisting change. As a result, many of the most famous guitars have remained largely unchanged from their introduction to market down to the exact specifications of each instrument. Unfortunately, these older styles are often uncomfortable or physically taxing to play, especially while sitting down. Due to design flaws and poorly configured control rigs, controls knobs and switches are difficult to reach or too easy to accidentally adjust while playing, and body shapes do not conform to bodies comfortably. In this research, thorough consideration will be put into the ergonomics of current instruments in respect to the non-musical physical relationships, which are here defined specifically as the player’s interaction with the guitar controls and the body itself. While the intention of the research is not to completely reject the rich history of electric guitars and move towards a more ergonomic solution, the research is meant to develop ideas to improve player comfort and control accessibility without sacrificing aesthetics or tone.
cheers team ! gonna go comment on some friends blogs now. mm. happy sunday evening.
In the history of music, few instruments have had as dramatic an impact on popular music and culture as the electric guitar. Now a staple of musicians performing and recording worldwide, the electric guitar has proved its worth as an instrument flexible enough to span dozens of genres and influential enough to inspire waves of young musicians to follow in the footsteps of their axe-slinging heroes. This cult following of musicians pursuing the sounds and instrumentation of the legends, however, has built a backwards-looking industry of guitar technology desperately pursuing the past while fiercely resisting change. As a result, many of the most famous guitars have remained largely unchanged from their introduction to market down to the exact specifications of each instrument. Unfortunately, these older styles are often uncomfortable or physically taxing to play, especially while sitting down. Due to design flaws and poorly configured control rigs, controls knobs and switches are difficult to reach or too easy to accidentally adjust while playing, and body shapes do not conform to bodies comfortably. In this research, thorough consideration will be put into the ergonomics of current instruments in respect to the non-musical physical relationships, which are here defined specifically as the player’s interaction with the guitar controls and the body itself. While the intention of the research is not to completely reject the rich history of electric guitars and move towards a more ergonomic solution, the research is meant to develop ideas to improve player comfort and control accessibility without sacrificing aesthetics or tone.
cheers team ! gonna go comment on some friends blogs now. mm. happy sunday evening.
another page share
so i found this other guy who made a custom instrument, just to show how complicated controls of instruments can really be. this guitar is pretty slick, but it'd confuse me too much at this point, since he made it to exacting standards and ordered controls and such for his own taste.
to share the site: http://www.tsuken.co.nz/my-new-custom-guitar/
his youtube video for him playing a santana song [win!]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9sFThqR1-Q&feature=player_embedded
this is a fantastic instrument and definitely a good glimpse at what controls really can do...almost anything.
cheers..more later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
