Simple And Terrible Machines | Hacker News Reader

Simple And Terrible Machines

noncombatant.org

49 pointsdaddy_drank12 comments

If you're interested in how simple they can get, "Tested: Where Does The Tone Come From In An Electric Guitar?" is a fun and technically-interesting video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n02tImce3AE

That vid blew me away.

The author thinks the Telecaster is very hard to improve on. But the bridge design is ergonomically and technically really bad. There are small screws pointing out towards the strumming hand, just waiting to draw blood. And the intonation is only adjustable on string pairs.

I came here to type this! As a former (sads) guitarist the big three(Strat, Tele, Les Paul) electric designs are all flawed and compromised designs IMO. Don't get me wrong I love the sound and feel of the better examples but many guitars are far better designed now. It's quite a bit like C vs C++ vs Rust. C is still usable and for the right player (programmer) it's a powerful instrument. Much like a tele was called a truth machine for a long time, meaning the limited design doesn't forgive mistakes very well much like C.

In your opinion, what are the best electric designs available today (that aren't crazy expensive)? Would also be interested in acoustic options!

Depends on the type of music you play, Overall, I find PRS designs among the better but some find them sterile. Also the crazy flame top designs can be super expensive and many find them over the top. That said, the bridge, pickups, and tuners are all examples of better designs than the big three. Wrap around bridges for example, hold tune better, are easier to setup and intonate, and are easier on the strings than the traditional stop tail style. Locking tuners are a big advance also.

Instead of brands because those are often tied up with the look of an instrument, I'd recommend you look at the individual components. Locking tuners, wrap around bridge or floyd rose (not a cheap knock version), coil splitting or active pickups or other pickup advancements.

I'm a couple years removed from playing so this might be out of date but I really liked the PRS SE line, the mid-pro level Jackson line, and some of the mid-priced G&L line (Leo Fender's second company and set of designs). I tended to play blues and metal so my selections really fit that style.

Oh for acoustic, I really like the Blueridge guitars and Seagull guitars. Seagull are made in Canada with pretty great materials and designs but much cheaper than most American made instruments.

I'm more of a high end custom guy for acoustics, in my experience you get what you pay for MUCH more on acoustics. If an electric plays well, you can make up a lot of sound from the amp (tube or modeling if you need variety), good pedals, and aftermarket pickups. Acoustics sound great when you play them or not. I always tell people to spend on the Acoustic and balance it out with electric.

I would be interested in what you include in a group of better designed guitars than those three. More to the point, I’m really interested in what features of the proposed better designs you are finding and why they make such a difference.

As an aside, I just can not imagine comparing any three electric guitars and finding so much separation as to warrant a C/C++/Rust analogy. To my mind, the design of the electric guitar is so similar in pertinent detail between Leo’s Broadcaster and a 2022 custom luthier made electric that I wouldn’t even know which language to use in the analogy.

The components are the main upgrades, pickups are easy to change after the fact. Pickups, bridge, and tuners are the main things on electrics in my experience. PRS wrap around bridges or good quality floyd rose bridges for example. Locking tuners and a roller nut is another example. Depending on the sound you want active pickups or coil taps or stacked single coils.

Main three things I want to be better designed is better/easier tuning and tuning stability, quality and versatility of sound, and playability. Neck profile and construction is a another example. Set neck (Les Paul and PRS), bolt on (Tele and Strat), or Neck Through (Jackson, ibanez) all have different advantages.

To me the C/C++/Rust example fits pretty well, Leo's Broadcaster is completely different sounding and playing than a custom built strat or high end PRS. Humbucking pickups as just an example. The Broadcaster had terrible feedback issues at high volume for example and a modern guitar should never have that issue unless you intend for it to feedback. Broadcaster is rough design, few features, and easy to make mistakes on alot like C. Les Pauls and Strats add a ton of features from the Tele/Broadcaster and can be easier to play but can also are more complex in there setup/design like C++. Modern designs are even more complex (active eq/pickups, locking tuners and roller nuts, floyd rose bridges etc...) but just as powerful but setting them up is a steep learning curve at times just like Rust.

I think your example, i.e. the bridge construction, is actually addressed when the author discusses changes or update of the ‘implementation’ of a Tele vs the design of the Tele. He addresses the inclusion of noiseless pickups as an example of an implementation detail. I don’t think it is a stretch to include a modern construction six saddle bridge (although I think a term would veer towards changing design and not be an implementation detail).

My Tele has a six saddle bridge, so the intonation is fine but now there's twice as many screws to cut yourself on. I like to think the guitar demands a tribute in blood before it'll sound good, certainly I've bled into it a lot over the years.

I feel like zig is aiming for this space. Might he just a hair too complex, but time will tell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com