Acoustic Guitars - Is Bigger Better?

Acoustic Guitars - Is Bigger Better? Back in the late 70 s, when I started to learn how to play lead bluegrass and fiddle tunes on an acoustic guitar, every bluegrass player I knew would settle for nothing less than a Dreadnought. The Dreadnought is a style of guitar created in 1916 in a collaboration between the guitar manufacturer, the C.F. Martin Co. and the Oliver Ditson Co., a retailer. The body of the Dreadnought was larger and deeper than most guitars. The name was coined from the huge British battleship, "HMS Dreadnought." Dreadnoughts were known for their bass response and projection. They produced greater volume than the smaller guitars of the day and appealed to singers who wanted the accompaniment of a guitar. Though poorly received at first, this style of guitar became Martin s best seller in the 1930 s. Of course the rest of the industry followed, and today the Dreadnought is one of the most popular styles of acoustic guitar on the market and is produced by many manufacturers. So, as I was saying, among the bluegrass guitar players (and the would-be bluegrass guitar players) I knew, everybody had to have a Dreadnought. Or, if not a Dreadnought, one of those big, gaudy Gibson J-220 s that were just too "cowboyish" for my taste (yes, I guess I care how a guitar looks as well as how it sounds). What I wound up playing was a 1955 Gibson J-45, Gibson s version of the Dreadnought. I bought it in 1978. It was a wonderful instrument, had a really sweet sound, excellent bass response--but sometimes it seemed to me that some of the notes I picked kind of got lost in the body of the guitar. If I wanted my notes to be crisp and punchy, I would have to pick way too hard, and that was just too much work for me. About 10 years ago I played some smaller bodied guitars and was amazed at their projection and the clarity of each individual note. I was also impressed by the perfect balance between the high end notes and the bass notes. I decided to take the plunge: I sold my J-45 and purchased a Gibson-made depression era Kalamazoo KG-11 (much smaller than Dreadnought). I had to have a lot of repair work done to make the guitar playable, but still wound up with a lot of change left over from my J-45 sale. Eventually I sold the Kalamazoo (I got into buying and selling on eBay), and bought a pristine Carson J. Robison (also by Gibson--same era) which is identical to the Kalamazoo KG-11, the only difference being the name on the headstock. I also bought a Gibson LC "Century," a small-bodied (00 size) guitar that Gibson designed for the 1933 Chicago exposition. This is my favorite guitar. It has all the volume and punch I need--even with silk and steel strings! Today I don t own a guitar today larger than a 000 size. What I have discovered is that there are ways to get volume and bass response out of a small guitar, and small guitars have some benefits that are quite appealing: specifically, they are easier to handle than larger guitars, and you don t have to work so hard to make them bark. Norman Blake, in an article on http://www.acousticguitar.com, tells why he has changed from Dreadnoughts to smaller guitars: "I m not the world s largest person in stature, and I sit down to play, so a dreadnought got to seeming like overkill. Plus I got tired of the lack of snap. It s kind of like stringing up the kitchen table and playing that. I got tired of reaching a little further for everything--having to punch it real hard to get anything out of it." I have discovered that a smaller guitar is much more responsive and sensitive to the flatpick than a Dreadnought is, so you can make your licks ring out with a much wider range of dynamics. I also prefer a shorter scale, specifically the Gibson 24.75" scale as opposed to Martin s 25.25" scale. The shorter scale means a little less distance from fret to fret, so the fingers don t have to reach quite as far. It also allows the strings to be a tad more flexible, inviting a greater dynamics. Another preference of mine is a guitar that has 12 frets from the nut to the body instead of 14. This means you don t have to reach as far, plus, it causes the bridge to be a little further from the soundhole, down in the middle of the widest area of the lower bout, so there is a bigger sound and more bass. I also think that there is something about the body meeting the neck at the 12th fret (the octave) that actually makes the guitar sound better. I love something that is found on many of the 12-frets-to-the-body guitars: a slotted headstock. Guitars with slotted headstocks stay in tune better, and I think the over all sound is enhanced. So, when it comes to acoustic guitars, is bigger better? I don t think so, but that s just me. Go to your local guitar shop, experiment with different sizes of guitars, and see what YOU think! Copyright © 2007 Lee Griffith. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Lee Griffith is an avid acoustic guitar player and a vintage instrument enthusiast. He invites you to receive a FREE REPORT on a revolutionary acoustic guitar lesson kit, along with his weekly newsletter via email. just click on http://optin.flatpickpost.com Check out Lee s blog, "The Flatpick Post" at http://flatpickpost.com