Calling out BS?

[guitarflinger]

Interesting recent study on ancient (expensive) violins.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/07/old-violins-versus-new/7383707/

 

[Unemploid]

 

[Hopkins]

That's a valid string test, not some mystical nonsense about breaking in the tone wood for maximum vibration.

 

[danosix]

On a solid body electric bass with a bolt-on neck, that's not going to do much besides put some wear on the strings.

Some acoustic instruments, on the other hand, change dramatically in feel and sound after break-in. But those are much thinner pieces of wood that are glued together, not big solid pieces that are bolted together.

Again - I think this is a joke - but such uninformed guys as Rick Turner (started Alembic) and Seymour Duncan believe that because the minimal vibrations have to be multiplied so much, that even the subtlest differences will be great on an electric instrument. By that logic this is MORE essential on a bass than on an acoustic violin.
But to be sure this is an idiotic technology, if you believe an instrument will sound best after resonating, it should follow that breaking it in with music (a variety of notes) will make it sound much better than just plucking the strings repeatedly. This can be achieved by the new an revolutionary process of PLAYING THE GUITAR. But as others have said, someone will buy in.

 

[danosix]

This technology is the for the musician who is too busy playing to have time to break-in their instruments... waaaait a minute there's something wrong here...

 

[mellowinman]

A better way:

Prop your bass against a concrete wall. It must be concrete. Brick will not do. Cork will not do. Plaster will not do.
Shout dirty limericks at it, until it busts out laughing. This should take a very long time. In fact, I'm still working on it with my Affinity V.

Do this every Thursday and Saturday for 116 years.

 

[fenderhutz]

I bet this affects the tone as much as the $200 power cable Victor Wooton endorses.

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

 

[hover]

I gotta say...dumbest thing I've seen all day.
And probably for tomorrow.
I'd go ahead and pencil this in for the rest of my life, but I'm sure a Hilton or Kardashian are soon to be up to some hijinx.

I mean, aside from the off the shelf aluminum extrusion erector set and name kobbled from the worst of the IKEA catalog...I can imagine the ad-speak for this bullstuff is just the darling of the buttwiping media community.

 

[lz4005]

But to be sure this is an idiotic technology, if you believe an instrument will sound best after resonating, it should follow that breaking it in with music (a variety of notes) will make it sound much better than just plucking the strings repeatedly. This can be achieved by the new an revolutionary process of PLAYING THE GUITAR. But as others have said, someone will buy in.

Breaking in by playing would of course be better. For a retailer, though, it is more cost effective to use a mechanical device to break in new acoustics than to pay people to sit around playing guitars.

I didn't believe it myself either, until I played an acoustic before/after being broken in using a different device than this. It was more like an e-bow that went across all the strings.
After the instrument sat being vibrated over a weekend it sounded louder and better.

It all depends on how the instrument is built. Some acoustic instruments are "stiff" from the factory and need to loosen up as they're used for a while. Just like some speakers are "stiff" from the factory and need to break in.

Others sound more or less the same regardless of how much they're played.
The models that are built "stiff" sound better and sell better after break in.

All that being said, I still think doing it on a solid body, bolt on instrument won't do a damn thing.

 

[RustyAxe]

I've tried the ToneRite for acoustic guitars, and noticed no real difference. If someone shells out $200 for some snake oil, they are very likely to rationalize the expense by perceiving a difference that does not exist. TonerRite was all the rage in the acoustic guitar forums ... for about six months. The machine in the OP is probably just a jig for testing the durability of strings ... my brother used to build such one-off test equipment for IBM, pressing keypad keys hundreds of thousands of times to check durability and expected mean time between failures.

Obviously, others will disagree with me ... hey, it's their money ...

 

[HolmeBass]

I have to agree that it seems this would have a minimal effect on a solid body instrument, as opposed to an acoustic instrument, and that playing a greater diversity of notes would be important. Just the 4 open strings would be ok, but more different low notes would be better. Of course, given that the effect is *probably* minimal, then it doesn't make a difference.

 

[danosix]

Breaking in by playing would of course be better. For a retailer, though, it is more cost effective to use a mechanical device to break in new acoustics than to pay people to sit around playing guitars.

I didn't believe it myself either, until I played an acoustic before/after being broken in using a different device than this. It was more like an e-bow that went across all the strings.
After the instrument sat being vibrated over a weekend it sounded louder and better.

It all depends on how the instrument is built. Some acoustic instruments are "stiff" from the factory and need to loosen up as they're used for a while. Just like some speakers are "stiff" from the factory and need to break in.

Others sound more or less the same regardless of how much they're played.
The models that are built "stiff" sound better and sell better after break in.

All that being said, I still think doing it on a solid body, bolt on instrument won't do a damn thing.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant that I do think it would work - I KNOW instruments (esp. acoustic ones) sound better when broken in. I just think it has no value as the player does that naturally by playing. Yes, for the retailer it would help to shine the best light on high-end instruments (which will also benefit the most from this) but I personally want to be the one who breaks in my new instrument - and that costs me nothing or I'll buy a "broken-in" one which I'll tell the retailer is just "used" and save money instead of paying extra. Also, at the top end it will tend to be more informed buyers who will know that the instrument is going to get better, and those who don't probably won't hear the difference as they probably haven't developed their ears yet either and they'll buy whatever brand they've been told is "best" with little regard to what it actually sounds like.

 

[pacojas]

on a molecular level, all sorts of possiblities arise when a vibration is constant upon organic matter. noticing any difference is always the culprit, as in this case.

 

[wideload]

Now we need a device to vibrate and break in our fingers, them we'll REALLY sound good!

 

[Feral Feline]

...
So what pitch should the kiln be tuned to for metal?

Drop F# below bass clef.


I was really disappointed with the vid. I thought "At last! A machine to play my parts for me while I sit at the bar and drink."

 

[Geekydad]

Never underestimate the power of the placebo effect.

 

[Spinal Tapper]

Ah, everyone's always looking for that "quick fix" to get their instruments sounding awesome.

I've noticed actually playing the instrument as much as possible helps bring out the true tone.

 

[Rich Terry]

Check this out. Never throw anything away until you try to sell it on ebay. People will buy anything.

I have had this old golf club for 30 years in a corner and just sold it for $811.00!!! Paid for my new Gibson bass.

 

[GrumpiusMaximus]

Isn't that how we torture terrorists?

No Rob, that's waterboarding.

 

[Weberman]

These things always remind me of the old trick of leaving your guitar leaned up against your amp. I remember it being a big deal some twenty years ago. Just leave your guitar in front of the amp, with the amp turned on, either feeding back, or while playing recorded music through it. The vibrations "aged" your guitar.

As with others, I am somewhat skeptical about the magnitude of difference claimed. Is there some effect? I'm sure there is. Mechanical forces will alter things that they impinge upon. Is it discernible, or even beneficial? That really remains to be seen, as I don't think there has been a comprehensive, controlled study. If tone is positively effected by age, how much of that is due to fluctuations in temperature and moisture content, as well as curing? Obviously, the effect is present in acoustic guitars, and speaker cones. They function a little bit differently, though (although not entirely).