Acoustic Guitars - The Best Tuners

Tuning your acoustic guitar is the first step in your guitar playing career. Whether by skill, talent or technology, you must be able to get your guitar into tune. One common obstacle to learning to tune a guitar is a certain natural resistance to aquiring new knowledge. This reluctance is present in everybody to some degree. The prospect of learning to tune a guitar by ear can fill some people with a sense of dread. Before we start to tackle the job of tuning, we need to get straight which string is which. The first string is the narrow string nearest your knee as you sit with the guitar in playing position. The sixth string is the widest string, and it is closest to your chin. And the tuning goes like this: 1st string is "E" 2nd string is "B" 3rd string is "G" 4th string is "D" 5th string is "A" 6th string is "E" The guitar pitch pipe plays the notes when you blow into it so you can compare the sounds with your guitar. A tuning fork, when you bang it on your knee and hold it on the body of your guitar, sounds the note you get when you play the harmonic at the fifth fret of the fifth string. Once you get this note right, you tune the rest of the strings to the fifth string. If you have tried the methods of tuning guitars using a pitch pipe or tuning fork, and still feel less than confident in your guitar tuning abilities, then you could think about acquiring a guitar tuner that has a visual aid to tuning. You can always test your skill from time to time by tuning your guitar without the tuner, and seeing how accurate you have become. You can also use a keyboard instrument to tune your guitar to. Start by finding on the keyboard the E note below Middle C. Then GO DOWN ANOTHER OCTAVE to tune the sixth string on the guitar. This is because the guitar's music is written an octave higher than it actually sounds compared to a piano! The electronic guitar tuner is the simplest way of tuning your acoustic guitar. You pluck your guitar string and watch the indicator on the tuner to see how close you are to the correct note. There are also guitar tuners you can get for free on the internet that work the same way. Online Guitar Tuners often play the notes to you, and you use your ear to see if your guitar is in tune.

Acoustic Guitar under $918-$999

Four instruments reside in our Shootout’s top-dollar category: A Gibson Gospel ($999, including case), a Martin D-l ($995, including case), a Sigma SDR-41 ($939), and a Taylor 410 ($918).

Let’s start with the meticulously built Taylor. in our Mar. ‘93 acoustic-electric Shootout, a preamp-equipped 410 didn’t fare too well. This time around, it’s a different story-. Our lat est 410 was deemed “sensual” and “balanced” and, after much deliberation, turned out to be many testers’ overall law.

The American-made 410 scores points for its solid African mahogany back and sides. The Guild D6-S, competing in division 2, is the only other contestant with non-laminated body parts. Bob Taylor had some intriguing comments on the subject: “Typically, when you use a lot of plywood in guitars it gives them a generic tone. You don’t get the nuances of an individual piece of wood. However, many builders feel—and I agree—that a guitar’s sides should be stiff and strong, and the possibility exists for veneered sides to be every bit as good as solid ones. In fact, Ramirez [ guitars feature two-ply rosewood sides. Some of the finest classical builders make their own plywood for this purpose.”

The 410 boasts the best frets of the Shootout. They’re completely even on either side of the ebony fretboard, perfectly seated and crowned, with nary a file mark to be found. Folks, frets don’t get any better, but they sure get a lot worse, as we’ll see. In a break with Taylor tradition and conventional luthiery the 4 10’s frets are pressed into the fretboard before it’s affixed to the neck, not hammered in after the fact.

The Taylor’s pinless ebony bridge has some pros and cons. (These comments also apply to two other guitars that feature pinless bridges—the Takamine N- and Ovation Balladeerj On the up side, there are no pins to lose. (Ever misplaced a bridge pin while changing strings before a show? Yikes.) Nor do you have the problem of ball ends puffing up while you’re tuning or getting stuck in the bridgeplate. On the down side, we had to put a right- angle bend in the end of the treble strings to get them over the saddle after they’d poked through the bridge hole. Also, the ball end in evitably scrapes across the top as you pull a string through; we wonder about long-term wear and tear. Though classical guitars use pinless bridges, they’re a source of controversy among steel-string luthiery. On the 410, however, we were unable to attribute specific sonic drawbacks to this bridge design.

The Taylor’s interior is pristine, a model of workmanship. No glue globs, splintered braces, or broken kerfing. One tester found it hard to get comfortable with the 410’s very large, squarish body. Like many Shootout guitars, the 410 has matte finish. Says Taylor, “A matte finish reduces labor. Applying and buffing a gloss finish, takes a good deal of time.” The 410’s finish feels smooth, but looks drab in comparison to the Martin D-1, whose semi gloss finish glows seductively like a Rembrandt paintings.

Sonically, the Taylor has a full-bodied, well- balanced sound. Its highs project well for fingerpicking. Intonation is sweet. Big chords ring with presence and authority On several occasions, however, different testers made the same comment: When thrashed, the 410 sounds compressed. At high volumes, the soundwaves seem to swim within the 410’s body, more so than with the Martin or Gibson.

The D-1, made in Martin’s Pennsylvania factory, has a spruce top, a two-piece solid mahogany back, and laminated mahogany sides. The blonde Gospel, built-in Gibson’s Montana plant, has a sitka spruce top, solid mahogany sides, and an arched, laminated “tone back” The latter eliminates the need for a back center strip or crossbraces, which results in a delightfully light-weight instrument.

The Martin has a luminescent cross-link, environmentally friendly semi-gloss finish and beautiful tortoise-shell binding. Even the bridge pins have tortoise inlays. (“They’ve really succeeded in making it look like a more expensive Martin.”) The Gospel’s super-gloss finish looks stylish. (“Shiny, bright, and proud.”) Visually, both instruments upstage the decidedly plain-Jane 410. When it comes to workmanship, however, neither matches the Taylor. The fretwork on the D-1 is particularly disappointing; its fret edges are trimmed unevenly. (“Who chewed the frets on this?”) We spotted some glue leaking out from under a fret—not what we associate with Martin workmanship. The Gospel’s fretwork is better, but not immaculate like the 4 10’s. (Martin’s Dick Boak comments, “Your Shootout suggests that the D-l’s fret ends need attention and as a direct result, we have already begun to address this issue.”)

Both the D4 and Gospel have clean, trim interiors. (The D-1 smells great too.) The D-1 has generic imported die-cast tuners, the Gospel offers Deluxe Klusons, and the Taylor sports our favorite—good ol’ Grovers. (Says Boak, “Grovers have been manufactured in Taiwan for over ten years. Though they are regarded with some nostalgia in the market place, many makers do not hold these tuners in high regard. Our research indicates that the D-1’s Reliance tuners have considerably smoother action and better gear wear than either old American Grovers or the newer im ported ones.”) The Martin’s tuners are not uniformly aligned; one side is angled more steeply than the other. This is visible from across the room. Hmm.

The Martin has a glued neck joint. An internal bolt functions as a clamp to keep things aligned during the gluing process. After the fact, the bolt/clamp remains as a part of the instrument. The Taylor sports a bolt-on neck (don’t confuse this with a typical Fender solid-body bolt-on system—the Taylor’s apparatus is not visible), while the Gospel has a traditional glued dovetail neck joint. We could devote an entire article to the pros and cons of each system (the debate would center around such issues as stability and ease of removal for neck resetting). We’ve checked with luthiers and repairmen; while there’s no clear right or wrong, there’s certainly no dearth of opinions. Using an internal clamp is a new approach for Martin. Every mod el Taylorbuilds features a bolt-on neck.

Setup is first-rate on all three guitars. Time and again, however, the Gospel drew positive comments about its wider string spacing which I facilitates fingerpicking and just plain feels good.

Sonically, the D-1, 410, and Gospel acquit themselves superbly. The Gospel, with its strong, almost brash sound, turned heads each time it was played. The ax (which boasts a lifetime warranty) delivers a very satisfying tschank when you punch an open E chord When you caress a single note, the over tones sustain and sing. The comments were impassioned: “An old J-45, it’s in there.” “This is what everyone wants Gibsons to sound like.” “A vintage Gibson waiting to happen.” “Early James Taylor, man, ‘Fire And Rain—just listen.” After days and days of playing, we concluded that despite its name, the Gospel is a quintessential rock acoustic. If your tastes run toward the Beatles, Byrds, Stones, Crowes, or hey, even Jane’s Addiction, this Gospel is for you. It has an explosive tone: big, bright, packed with character, chock full of lower mids.

Flat tops Acoustic Guitar Guide

They are the most common type of acoustic guitar and the category that encompasses more subtypes. They are called "flat tops" or "flat tops" because the covers, both front and rear, are flat. Precisely in this kind of quality guitars caps is critical, as those made with covers best sound compared to those caps plywood. The material is used for the covers often but mostly spruce wood is different, cedar, mahogany, koa, palorosa ... The masts are mahogany, the fingerboard of palorosa or ebony. The pitch, unlike the classical guitar which is flat, is curved with some radio. The scales are usually of 24.5 "to 25.5" and variable number of dishes, usually 20. The framework consists of a structure called the "x-bracing," invented by Martin in the 1850s, that unlike the classical guitar. Since the 30s of the twentieth century both the internal structure and the mast is reinforced to allow use of metal strings, unlike the classical guitars using the first three strings of nylon. Adjustable presented trussrod or soul inside the mast, invented by Gibson in the 1920s, helping to hold the tension of the strings and allows you to adjust the curvature of the neck. The bridges are usually set in a piece of wood, which includes a channel for inserting the bridge itself and some holes where the strings are inserted entangle with plastic pins shaped pin.

Rating solid-top acoustic guitars under $999 USD

Over the years, it conforms physically to its task of transmitting and amplifying string vibration. As a top’s efficiency increases, its voice matures. Assuming the guitar is well designed, the highs get silkier, the mids sweeter, the bass more articulated. Plywood, on the other hand, is heavy and less responsive. It’s a Dagwood sandwich of mystery wood and glue; these multiple layers prevent a top from vibrating as freely. A “solid” top is actually a two-piece affair.

On the best guitars, the builder finds a nice, resonant tonewood board, cuts it in half like you’d fillet a trout, opens the halves to expose a symmetrical, mirrored grain pattern, and glues the pieces side by side. This process is called bookmatch lug. A solid top adds significantly to the instrument’s cost. If you’re serious about tone, how ever, it’s the only way to go.

The criteria. We invited dozens of manufacturers to participate in our Shootout; each was allowed to submit one instrument per brand name. (Only two companies submitted instruments with different marques: St. Louis Music sent us an Alvarez and a Yairi, Martin entered a Martin and a Sigma.) Our contest rules were simple: The entrant must be a 6- string, steel-string acoustic with a solid-wood top and retail price of under $1,000, sans case.

Ellen Sorstokke of Saga, one of our contestants, gave us food for thought. “There’s a huge difference,:’ she reminded us, “between a $300, $600, and $1,000 guitar. Even a $100 difference can be meaningful.” To avoid any “apples to oranges” accusations and ensure a level playing field, we divided our contestants in to five groups based on list price. (If you shop aggressively, you’ll pay less than list.) The price spreads within these divisions range from $77 to as little as $30.50. Each guitar competes against class members, but we don’t hesitate to laud a lower-priced instrument when it outperforms a higher-priced one in a given category.

Testing. Five GP editors participated in the evaluations. All have considerable experience playing and recording acoustics; some have focused principally on acoustic music for years at a stretch. Contrary to what one manufacturer implied at the outset of our Shootout, none of us are “electric guitar weenies with a serious attitude problem regarding acoustic instruments.” (Actually, “weenies with attitudes” has a rather nice ring, don’t you think? Perhaps this warrants a T-shirt.)

To provide essential counterpoint to our views, we asked Martin Simpson (interviewed Aug. ‘93) and Lyle Workman (Bourgeois Tagg, Jellyfish, Todd Rundgren)—two world-class players with extensive performing and recording credits—to give us their unvarnished opinions. Other visiting pickers were pressed into service on a less official basis.

Armed with a Steelman gooseneck inspection mirror (amateur proctologists unite!), a Seiko 5T1200 chromatic tuner, a steel ruler, feeler gauges, sets of Martin phosphor bronze lights and Dean Markley bronze mediums, and a fistful of assorted picks, we held numerous testing sessions. As few as four and as many as seven players and listeners attended these events. You’ll find their comments sprinkles throughout the Shootout. As you’d expect, we didn’t always reach a consensus. At times, you’ll have to draw your own conclusions from conflicting opinions.

Regarding playability: We first evaluated each instrument’s factory setup (virtually all instruments arrived with light-gauge strings). If there was a problem, we tweaked the truss rod and changed strings, noting how well a guitar responded to our efforts to reduce buzz or increase sustain, In the write up, we include physical details that pertain to our observations. For a complete lowdown on nut width, scale length, bridge material, and the like, refer to the chart above.

The fine print Ibanez and Epiphone are conspicuously absent from the fray. Both companies were in the middle of redesigning their line and didn’t have production instrument ready.

Because wood is organic, it’s impossible to guarantee consistency within a model line. Sonic variations—sometimes startling ones— are inevitable. We stand behind our conclusions 100%, but remember, they’re based on the specific instruments we cradled, picked, strummed, and lived with. Augment our re search with your own testing. (See “Flat-Top Shopping Tips.”)

ok that's it let see who is worth buying....uder $999 USD