Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 11.03.2011, 10:25
Three firsts: my first post in this forum, my first soviet guitar, and my first 12-string guitar
As far as I can interpret the guitar would be of type 391r, made in the Lunacharsky plucked intruments factory in Leningrad.
Would the 553-76 be indicative of the year of manufacture? 1976?
How about the original price of 98 rubles? What would that have been in today's terms?
All solid woods, spruce top made of six separate pieces, however.
The guitar is solidly built. "Feels solid in the hand", I would say.
There's a hairline crack from the bridge towards the end block, and the bridge is lifting just a bit. Something to fix, but nothing serious.
The neck joint is a Stauffer joint, but unlike in the typical German Stauffer joints the nut is not attached to the neck block, but is a loose nut.
Which, of course, poses no problem with a big sound hole.
The neck block is split (broken) just above the screw hole, again something to fix.
Rosertte decorations have been "saved" a bit under the fingerboard extension.
The fingerboard is painted, with a reasonable amount of play wear.
The frets are slightly worn, but badly seated, and a bit rough, so I think I'll just refret her right away.
So a couple of small things to do before the strings...
The same thing on Euro Guitars, btw.
http://www.euroguitars.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2032&sid=050c4a7970ca7472f91cd76b4e7c44a4
A bit of cross-referencing
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Я-Ха, 11.03.2011, 10:51
Knu, glad to see you on our forum.
This guitar in Soviet times was considered one of the best. It cost 98 rubles, while the average wage was 100-120 rubles, which meant that not everyone could afford the instrument. Many of our local Russian stars played these guitars.
At that time all factories were state-owned and planned economy subject to the general standards for the entire country. In these ministerial document the general requirements for the product were laid out. This guitar is made in accordance with the Republican standard number 553, established in 1976.
Perhaps, by modern standards, this guitar lacks some finesse, but it is made safely and soundly.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
vint, 11.03.2011, 11:01
welcome!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Zeddy, 11.03.2011, 11:07
Knu, i congratulate on acquisition! The tool isn't graceful, but is quite good.
Welcome to a sovietguitar madhouse!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 11.03.2011, 11:12
Thanks guys, my pleasure
What it lacks, is not needed anyway
But yes, it is solidly made, and the woodwork is fine.
If it was considered one of the best, that is even better reason to fix the couple of broken bits, and keep playing.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
shlepakoff, 11.03.2011, 16:30
Welcome to the the forum, Knu!
Excellent first post, and please keep us posted on the progress of the repairs.
Also, for the purpose of establishing the geographical spread of the soviet guitars, it would be interesting to find out how this instrument found its way to Finland, if you happen to have that information.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 21.03.2011, 10:31
I asked the guy from whom I bought this guitar. He had bought it from another Finn, but he had lost the details, so I cannot follow the track :-(
But on the other hand, I don't find it at all surprising that a guitar made in Leningrad ends up in Finland.
First of all, if you simply look at the geography, Leningrad/St. Petersburg is only some 100 km from the border.
Secondly, in Soviet times Leningrad would have been the second most visited Soviet city by the Finns (Tallinn being the first).
Thirdly, after the Soviet times the traffic between Finland and St. Petersburg has grown many, many-folded, in both directions. Easy to go by car, train or ship. The train trip Helsinki-St. Petersburg today only takes three and a half hours.
So it could have been a Finn buying the guitar in Leningrad/St. Petersburg, or it could have been a Russian taking the guitar to Finland and selling it here.
In fact I find it surprising that I don't see more Russian guitars in Finland.
But then, I don't see other European guitars either. Just Korean, Chinese... some Japanese, and every little guitarist thinks he would play better if he had a Gibson or Fender :-(
The top cracks are now repaired. On a closer inspection none of the cracks involved wood, they were just cracks in the varnish.
Unfortunately the varnish is not nitrocellulose-lacquer, but a more modern type, polyester maybe.
So the touch-up varnish does not melt together with the original varnish.
Although the surface is now level and shiny (as can be seen in the reflection on the second picture), the cracks can be seen if viewed from a suitable angle.
Well, nothing can be done about that.
I'll replace the original frets with Göldo WS012 (same size as Dunlop 6105 but cheaper).
The original frets measure 2,3 mm wide, 1,3 mm tall, just the same as the Göldos.
A light sanding of the fretboard did not reveal any noticeable high spots.
The fretboard is actually very flat.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 22.03.2011, 06:35
I only now realised, that this guitar is the Lunacharsky 12-string dreadnought referred to in the Cheesyguitars site http://www.cheesyguitars.com/ussr_history.html
"The factory was also famous for their acoustic guitars, with the most famous being the dreadnought 12-string, the best sounding acoustic guitar made in USSR."
But I cannot argee with their statement:
"Please note - that guitar was awfull and unplayable"
The guitar is really not "awful". Quite on the contrary. Work quality and all the woods are good.
The original frets were badly seated, that is true, but with new frets I think this guitar will be a good player.
But we'll see and hear...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 22.03.2011, 10:40
Just nice to know...
Some history of the Lunacharsky factory:
http://www.ceo.spb.ru/eng/business/antesov.z.g/about.shtml
http://www.encspb.ru/en/article.php?kod=2804001301
The name "Schreder" or "Schroeder" should actually read "Schröder".
The roots. The original Schröder piano factory:
http://schroder.h1.ru/
http://www.oldpiano.ru/index.php/history-eng.html
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 23.03.2011, 06:23
New frets + water soluble black wood dye + raw linseed oil.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Я-Ха, 23.03.2011, 06:39
Nice!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Nik, 23.03.2011, 08:50
I can tell from the pictures that you know what needs to be done and you have the hands for it, good job! And you obviously have respect for our instruments.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 23.03.2011, 09:24
Päällikkö
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
GeorgeM, 23.03.2011, 10:16
good work, Knu!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 24.03.2011, 07:05
Thanks guys, I'll try my best
Let's take a look inside the guitar before I put strings on it.
Внутри гитары.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INvaz2wDeA4
The guitar is ladder braced.
Three cross braces on the back.
Five cross braces on the top. Three of them in the big bout, two in the small bout.
One thing to note about the braces: the back braces are all thinned to an edge, the top braces are left square and full thickness.
Was it on purpose to leave more mass to the top?
Or was it two different luthiers with a different "handwriting"?
The linings are continuous, non kerfed.
All the braces and the bridge block are all of rather heavy construction.
Reminds me of what Snap writes here
http://www.euroguitars.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=424&sid=1d678b3d0c386037215872a1d8a4b358&start=5
of Melodija Menges:
"made quite heavy with thick plates and heavily braced (ladder bracing)".
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 07:46
The guitar is now ready and playable.
First some facts:
Total length: 106,5 cm
The body length: 49,5 cm
Big bout width: 39,5 cm
Waist width: 29 cm
Small bout width: 30 cm
Body thickness: 10 cm
The scale length: 650 mm
Neck width at zero fret: 52 mm
Neck thickness near zero fret: 25 mm
Neck width at 12th fret: 62 mm
Neck thickness near 12th fret: 30 mm.
The guitar body is not really very big, but the guitar feels big.
Partly because of the 10 cm thickness of the body, partly because of the big neck.
The scale is full 650 mm, and the neck is wide like a classical guitar neck.
The neck profile is close to a semi circle.
All this makes the neck feel big, but still very proportional.
I would say that this guitar is not for people with small hands.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:06
The neck turned out fine.
The neck is straight, and frets are now level, so playability is very good.
The pictures look like the frets are not seated properly.
But they actually are seated all the way to the fingerboard. It must be the way light reflects.
The Stauffer adjustment has a broad adjustment range: with the screw tightened all the way the strings lie on the fretboard for all their length.
A suitable action is found with the Stauffer screw loosened about two turns.
I colored the Stauffer screw hole the same color as the rest of the neck, the original light wood color seemed a bit "unfinished" to me.
A sensible action feels to be about 2 mm on the treble side, 2,5 mm on the bass side.
On the treble side one could go lower, but on the bass side strings start rattling at actions lower than this.
(This of course depends on the playing style and strings. I play rather softly, and the strings are Martin Darco D2000 extra light gauge:
http://www.thomann.de/gb/martin_guitars_darco_d2000.htm)
The action measurement does not tell the whole story.
The neck is traight between the zero fret and the 11th fret.
From then on the fingerboard surface sinks progressively, so that the 12th fret is below the 0-11 frets plane, the 13th fret is still a bit lower, and the 14th fret even lower.
Then again the frets 14 to 19 are in the same plane.
So the fretboard plane makes a soft turn from the 11th fret to the 14th fret.
The turn is exaggerated in this picture. In real life the 19th fret is some 4 mm below the 0-11 frets plane.
This kind of a turn eliminates the problems that are common in old guitars having a separate glued neck extension: neck extension sticking up, or neck extension swelling to a "bump" around the 12th-14th frets.
Playability is good over the whole neck.
From the 12th fret on the body is on the way, of course, so the practical limit is somewhere around the 14th or 15th fret on treble strings.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:20
Would I change something?
Nothing needs to be changed for my playing, everything works fine for a non-professional player.
But for professional work the tuners would need to be changed.
The tuners are rather bad, they are not in balance with the quality of the rest of the guitar.
There is quite a lot of hysteresis in the tuners, that is, the sprocket teeth and the screw are slack against each other.
One of course always tunes up.
Even when tuning down, one first goes a little down below, and then up.
But with some of these tuners one has to turn a full turn to get even a bit down.
But I will not change the tuners, good enough for me.
And I like to keep the guitar original.
Here one could do some fine tuning as well.
The original string spacer leaves quite a lot of unused fretboard outside the outer strings.
The outer string pairs could be moved a bit out, and the rest of the strings re-spaced accordingly.
And the strings within pairs could perhaps be moved a bit closer to each other?
Or is there a "known" optimum distance between the strings within a pair?
Maybe I'll experiment with this one day...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:36
And finally the most important:
How does she sound?
The first striking feature is the sustain. Playing this guitar sounds like playing a piano with the sustain pedal down all the time.
The sustain is really amazing, the sound just keeps on ringing...
The tone is very lively and ringing, sounds like lots of higher harmonics.
The frquency range sounds rather balanced, although the basses are not very strong, and the notes separation is not good.
I suppose this is actually the basic idea of a 12-string guitar, to mix the notes a lot, and to have emphasis on the higher frequency range.
The dynamic range is narrow.
The guitar's volume seems to be the same whether you pick lightly or whether you pick hard.
I would compare the dynamics to a cembalo.
I suppose the narrow dynamic range is a result of the thick and heavily braced top plate?
The volume is quite high.
The narrow dynamic range and the high volume seem to make the guitar very forgiving.
Even light picking produces a strong sound.
And erratic too strong or too light picks don't "jump out".
I'll try to record a sound sample one of these days.
I don't have a separate microphone, but maybe some camera or PC microphone would work...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Linas, 25.03.2011, 09:50
Nice description of the sound.It seems they had some secret acoustic compressor technology at Lunacharsky factory.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 10:32
The wooden top cannot be a very linear transformer.
Wouldn't you think that the relation between the picking strength and the corresponding playing volume is something like this (the blue curve)?
If a narrow dynamic range is wanted, the top plate parameters must be selected to get close to the red curve.
If you come to think of it...
If the transfer curve of the guitar top is something like the red curve...
Then at higher picking strengths the sound probably contains a lot of distorsion.
That is, higher harmonics.
Which would be very well in line with what I've written above about the perceived sound frequency distribution.
And, of course, the long sustain can also be predicted from the red curve.
After a strong pick, the string excitation force "slides down" the red curve from right to left.
Although the excitation force by the string diminishes with time, the output volume remains about the same.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Linas, 26.03.2011, 00:52
It's getting interesting.The red curve would be liked by the beginners,learning hammer-ons and pull-offs.But if more advanced player makes some soft subtle nuanses,and nobody can hear him,he would be happy with the red curve to.Question is how to achieve the red curve,if there's demand for it.Or vice versa.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 28.03.2011, 07:03
Yes, I only started thinking about the transfer curve when you mentioned the compressor.
The red curve might also be good for accompanying a singer.
And all in all, like I said the dynamics remind me of a cembalo.
A cembalo sounds nice in its own way, whatever music is played on it.
A cembalo's sound is peaceful and relaxing, nothing agressive like a grand piano.
I'm sure it is not impossible, if a mathematical / mechanical engineering approach is taken to the guitar design.
Loudspeaker elements have been modelled and designed for ages.
A guitar top cannot be that different from a loudspeaker element.
I would think that the main difference from the modelling point of view would be the stiffer edges.
In a loudspeaker the edges are thin paper or rubber, and a simple spring-mass model can be used.
In a guitar top the edges are stiff, so a spring analogy as such would not work, but it cannot be impossible to take the non-linearity into consideration.
, 11.03.2011, 10:25
Three firsts: my first post in this forum, my first soviet guitar, and my first 12-string guitar
As far as I can interpret the guitar would be of type 391r, made in the Lunacharsky plucked intruments factory in Leningrad.
Would the 553-76 be indicative of the year of manufacture? 1976?
How about the original price of 98 rubles? What would that have been in today's terms?
All solid woods, spruce top made of six separate pieces, however.
The guitar is solidly built. "Feels solid in the hand", I would say.
There's a hairline crack from the bridge towards the end block, and the bridge is lifting just a bit. Something to fix, but nothing serious.
The neck joint is a Stauffer joint, but unlike in the typical German Stauffer joints the nut is not attached to the neck block, but is a loose nut.
Which, of course, poses no problem with a big sound hole.
The neck block is split (broken) just above the screw hole, again something to fix.
Rosertte decorations have been "saved" a bit under the fingerboard extension.
The fingerboard is painted, with a reasonable amount of play wear.
The frets are slightly worn, but badly seated, and a bit rough, so I think I'll just refret her right away.
So a couple of small things to do before the strings...
The same thing on Euro Guitars, btw.
http://www.euroguitars.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2032&sid=050c4a7970ca7472f91cd76b4e7c44a4
A bit of cross-referencing
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Я-Ха, 11.03.2011, 10:51
Knu, glad to see you on our forum.
This guitar in Soviet times was considered one of the best. It cost 98 rubles, while the average wage was 100-120 rubles, which meant that not everyone could afford the instrument. Many of our local Russian stars played these guitars.
At that time all factories were state-owned and planned economy subject to the general standards for the entire country. In these ministerial document the general requirements for the product were laid out. This guitar is made in accordance with the Republican standard number 553, established in 1976.
Perhaps, by modern standards, this guitar lacks some finesse, but it is made safely and soundly.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
vint, 11.03.2011, 11:01
welcome!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Zeddy, 11.03.2011, 11:07
Knu, i congratulate on acquisition! The tool isn't graceful, but is quite good.
Welcome to a sovietguitar madhouse!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 11.03.2011, 11:12
Я-Ха Цитата ...
Knu, glad to see you on our forum.
Knu, glad to see you on our forum.
vint Цитата ...
welcome!
welcome!
Thanks guys, my pleasure
Я-Ха Цитата ...
This guitar is in Soviet times was considered one of the best...
Perhaps, by modern standards, this guitar lacks some finesse, but it is made safely and soundly.
This guitar is in Soviet times was considered one of the best...
Perhaps, by modern standards, this guitar lacks some finesse, but it is made safely and soundly.
What it lacks, is not needed anyway
But yes, it is solidly made, and the woodwork is fine.
If it was considered one of the best, that is even better reason to fix the couple of broken bits, and keep playing.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
shlepakoff, 11.03.2011, 16:30
Welcome to the the forum, Knu!
Excellent first post, and please keep us posted on the progress of the repairs.
Also, for the purpose of establishing the geographical spread of the soviet guitars, it would be interesting to find out how this instrument found its way to Finland, if you happen to have that information.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 21.03.2011, 10:31
shlepakoff Цитата ...
it would be interesting to find out how this instrument found its way to Finland, if you happen to have that information.
it would be interesting to find out how this instrument found its way to Finland, if you happen to have that information.
I asked the guy from whom I bought this guitar. He had bought it from another Finn, but he had lost the details, so I cannot follow the track :-(
But on the other hand, I don't find it at all surprising that a guitar made in Leningrad ends up in Finland.
First of all, if you simply look at the geography, Leningrad/St. Petersburg is only some 100 km from the border.
Secondly, in Soviet times Leningrad would have been the second most visited Soviet city by the Finns (Tallinn being the first).
Thirdly, after the Soviet times the traffic between Finland and St. Petersburg has grown many, many-folded, in both directions. Easy to go by car, train or ship. The train trip Helsinki-St. Petersburg today only takes three and a half hours.
So it could have been a Finn buying the guitar in Leningrad/St. Petersburg, or it could have been a Russian taking the guitar to Finland and selling it here.
In fact I find it surprising that I don't see more Russian guitars in Finland.
But then, I don't see other European guitars either. Just Korean, Chinese... some Japanese, and every little guitarist thinks he would play better if he had a Gibson or Fender :-(
The top cracks are now repaired. On a closer inspection none of the cracks involved wood, they were just cracks in the varnish.
Unfortunately the varnish is not nitrocellulose-lacquer, but a more modern type, polyester maybe.
So the touch-up varnish does not melt together with the original varnish.
Although the surface is now level and shiny (as can be seen in the reflection on the second picture), the cracks can be seen if viewed from a suitable angle.
Well, nothing can be done about that.
I'll replace the original frets with Göldo WS012 (same size as Dunlop 6105 but cheaper).
The original frets measure 2,3 mm wide, 1,3 mm tall, just the same as the Göldos.
A light sanding of the fretboard did not reveal any noticeable high spots.
The fretboard is actually very flat.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 22.03.2011, 06:35
I only now realised, that this guitar is the Lunacharsky 12-string dreadnought referred to in the Cheesyguitars site http://www.cheesyguitars.com/ussr_history.html
"The factory was also famous for their acoustic guitars, with the most famous being the dreadnought 12-string, the best sounding acoustic guitar made in USSR."
But I cannot argee with their statement:
"Please note - that guitar was awfull and unplayable"
The guitar is really not "awful". Quite on the contrary. Work quality and all the woods are good.
The original frets were badly seated, that is true, but with new frets I think this guitar will be a good player.
But we'll see and hear...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 22.03.2011, 10:40
Just nice to know...
Some history of the Lunacharsky factory:
http://www.ceo.spb.ru/eng/business/antesov.z.g/about.shtml
http://www.encspb.ru/en/article.php?kod=2804001301
The name "Schreder" or "Schroeder" should actually read "Schröder".
The roots. The original Schröder piano factory:
http://schroder.h1.ru/
http://www.oldpiano.ru/index.php/history-eng.html
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 23.03.2011, 06:23
New frets + water soluble black wood dye + raw linseed oil.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Я-Ха, 23.03.2011, 06:39
Nice!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Nik, 23.03.2011, 08:50
I can tell from the pictures that you know what needs to be done and you have the hands for it, good job! And you obviously have respect for our instruments.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 23.03.2011, 09:24
Päällikkö
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
GeorgeM, 23.03.2011, 10:16
good work, Knu!
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 24.03.2011, 07:05
Thanks guys, I'll try my best
Let's take a look inside the guitar before I put strings on it.
Внутри гитары.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INvaz2wDeA4
The guitar is ladder braced.
Three cross braces on the back.
Five cross braces on the top. Three of them in the big bout, two in the small bout.
One thing to note about the braces: the back braces are all thinned to an edge, the top braces are left square and full thickness.
Was it on purpose to leave more mass to the top?
Or was it two different luthiers with a different "handwriting"?
The linings are continuous, non kerfed.
All the braces and the bridge block are all of rather heavy construction.
Reminds me of what Snap writes here
http://www.euroguitars.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=424&sid=1d678b3d0c386037215872a1d8a4b358&start=5
of Melodija Menges:
"made quite heavy with thick plates and heavily braced (ladder bracing)".
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 07:46
The guitar is now ready and playable.
First some facts:
Total length: 106,5 cm
The body length: 49,5 cm
Big bout width: 39,5 cm
Waist width: 29 cm
Small bout width: 30 cm
Body thickness: 10 cm
The scale length: 650 mm
Neck width at zero fret: 52 mm
Neck thickness near zero fret: 25 mm
Neck width at 12th fret: 62 mm
Neck thickness near 12th fret: 30 mm.
The guitar body is not really very big, but the guitar feels big.
Partly because of the 10 cm thickness of the body, partly because of the big neck.
The scale is full 650 mm, and the neck is wide like a classical guitar neck.
The neck profile is close to a semi circle.
All this makes the neck feel big, but still very proportional.
I would say that this guitar is not for people with small hands.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:06
The neck turned out fine.
The neck is straight, and frets are now level, so playability is very good.
The pictures look like the frets are not seated properly.
But they actually are seated all the way to the fingerboard. It must be the way light reflects.
The Stauffer adjustment has a broad adjustment range: with the screw tightened all the way the strings lie on the fretboard for all their length.
A suitable action is found with the Stauffer screw loosened about two turns.
I colored the Stauffer screw hole the same color as the rest of the neck, the original light wood color seemed a bit "unfinished" to me.
A sensible action feels to be about 2 mm on the treble side, 2,5 mm on the bass side.
On the treble side one could go lower, but on the bass side strings start rattling at actions lower than this.
(This of course depends on the playing style and strings. I play rather softly, and the strings are Martin Darco D2000 extra light gauge:
http://www.thomann.de/gb/martin_guitars_darco_d2000.htm)
The action measurement does not tell the whole story.
The neck is traight between the zero fret and the 11th fret.
From then on the fingerboard surface sinks progressively, so that the 12th fret is below the 0-11 frets plane, the 13th fret is still a bit lower, and the 14th fret even lower.
Then again the frets 14 to 19 are in the same plane.
So the fretboard plane makes a soft turn from the 11th fret to the 14th fret.
The turn is exaggerated in this picture. In real life the 19th fret is some 4 mm below the 0-11 frets plane.
This kind of a turn eliminates the problems that are common in old guitars having a separate glued neck extension: neck extension sticking up, or neck extension swelling to a "bump" around the 12th-14th frets.
Playability is good over the whole neck.
From the 12th fret on the body is on the way, of course, so the practical limit is somewhere around the 14th or 15th fret on treble strings.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:20
Would I change something?
Nothing needs to be changed for my playing, everything works fine for a non-professional player.
But for professional work the tuners would need to be changed.
The tuners are rather bad, they are not in balance with the quality of the rest of the guitar.
There is quite a lot of hysteresis in the tuners, that is, the sprocket teeth and the screw are slack against each other.
One of course always tunes up.
Even when tuning down, one first goes a little down below, and then up.
But with some of these tuners one has to turn a full turn to get even a bit down.
But I will not change the tuners, good enough for me.
And I like to keep the guitar original.
Here one could do some fine tuning as well.
The original string spacer leaves quite a lot of unused fretboard outside the outer strings.
The outer string pairs could be moved a bit out, and the rest of the strings re-spaced accordingly.
And the strings within pairs could perhaps be moved a bit closer to each other?
Or is there a "known" optimum distance between the strings within a pair?
Maybe I'll experiment with this one day...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 08:36
And finally the most important:
How does she sound?
The first striking feature is the sustain. Playing this guitar sounds like playing a piano with the sustain pedal down all the time.
The sustain is really amazing, the sound just keeps on ringing...
The tone is very lively and ringing, sounds like lots of higher harmonics.
The frquency range sounds rather balanced, although the basses are not very strong, and the notes separation is not good.
I suppose this is actually the basic idea of a 12-string guitar, to mix the notes a lot, and to have emphasis on the higher frequency range.
The dynamic range is narrow.
The guitar's volume seems to be the same whether you pick lightly or whether you pick hard.
I would compare the dynamics to a cembalo.
I suppose the narrow dynamic range is a result of the thick and heavily braced top plate?
The volume is quite high.
The narrow dynamic range and the high volume seem to make the guitar very forgiving.
Even light picking produces a strong sound.
And erratic too strong or too light picks don't "jump out".
I'll try to record a sound sample one of these days.
I don't have a separate microphone, but maybe some camera or PC microphone would work...
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Linas, 25.03.2011, 09:50
Nice description of the sound.It seems they had some secret acoustic compressor technology at Lunacharsky factory.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 25.03.2011, 10:32
Linas Цитата ...
they had some secret acoustic compressor technology at Lunacharsky factory
they had some secret acoustic compressor technology at Lunacharsky factory
The wooden top cannot be a very linear transformer.
Wouldn't you think that the relation between the picking strength and the corresponding playing volume is something like this (the blue curve)?
If a narrow dynamic range is wanted, the top plate parameters must be selected to get close to the red curve.
If you come to think of it...
If the transfer curve of the guitar top is something like the red curve...
Then at higher picking strengths the sound probably contains a lot of distorsion.
That is, higher harmonics.
Which would be very well in line with what I've written above about the perceived sound frequency distribution.
And, of course, the long sustain can also be predicted from the red curve.
After a strong pick, the string excitation force "slides down" the red curve from right to left.
Although the excitation force by the string diminishes with time, the output volume remains about the same.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
Linas, 26.03.2011, 00:52
It's getting interesting.The red curve would be liked by the beginners,learning hammer-ons and pull-offs.But if more advanced player makes some soft subtle nuanses,and nobody can hear him,he would be happy with the red curve to.Question is how to achieve the red curve,if there's demand for it.Or vice versa.
Re: Lunacharsky 391r 12-string dreadnought
, 28.03.2011, 07:03
Linas Цитата ...
It's getting interesting.
It's getting interesting.
Yes, I only started thinking about the transfer curve when you mentioned the compressor.
The red curve might also be good for accompanying a singer.
And all in all, like I said the dynamics remind me of a cembalo.
A cembalo sounds nice in its own way, whatever music is played on it.
A cembalo's sound is peaceful and relaxing, nothing agressive like a grand piano.
Linas Цитата ...
Question is how to achieve the red curve,if there's demand for it.
Question is how to achieve the red curve,if there's demand for it.
I'm sure it is not impossible, if a mathematical / mechanical engineering approach is taken to the guitar design.
Loudspeaker elements have been modelled and designed for ages.
A guitar top cannot be that different from a loudspeaker element.
I would think that the main difference from the modelling point of view would be the stiffer edges.
In a loudspeaker the edges are thin paper or rubber, and a simple spring-mass model can be used.
In a guitar top the edges are stiff, so a spring analogy as such would not work, but it cannot be impossible to take the non-linearity into consideration.