Plastic Guitar From 1953 Maccaferri

[Rudi]

Plastic Guitar from 1953 Maccaferri:

 

I have always wondered why we still make guitars out of wood (especially electrics).

I did a quick web search using ‘plastic guitar’ and found this gem. The first link is a demo of the Maccaferri being played. It sounds wonderful.

 

Plastic was not taken any more seriously in 1953 than it would be now. This is a shame.

It certainly does not have the moisture problems with atmospheric changes that wood does.

 

 

 

PLAYED

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuB2hprvfdc

 

INFO

http://orgs.usd.edu/nmm/PluckedStrings/Guitars/Maccaferri/10458/G40Guitar.html

 

 

These days we have carbon fibre guitars (RainSongs) of course. Because carbon fibre is regarded as modern with hi-tech applications it has gained more acceptance. But even carbon fibre is substantially plastic anyway.

 

I'd love a Maccaferri or a Rainsong.

[McnaughtonPark]

The Maccaferri looks like the guitar Jeff Beck is playing in the video on the other thread.

 

I have a cheap mexican made Martin 3/4 that sounds fairly good for a kick around.  It still has some wood, the neck and head stock, but the top and sides seem plastic.  It still varies in tune from the basement (humid) to upstairs (dryer) but not like my Seagull does.  I do see in guitar shops where they place a humidifier directly under a guitar....I can't accept that.  To me that seems so strange, even if I don't know squat about the proper humidity level a guitar should be kept at, exposing it to forced humid air seems wrong, or at least fake because while it may change the tune of the guitar while a potential buyer is playing it, chances are it wont live it's life like that.  Unless I'm completely out of kilter with how others store the instruments.  I keep mine in the basement (it's finished) where I do all the recording.  They are placed on regular stands, in the open air, but the air is not dry air and it's cooler than the rest of the house. 

 

But, lol, the plastic guitar would solve some issues. 

[Rudi]

We have a small 3d printer where I work. Impressive stuff. As for the guitar...

 

 

 

Its looks like the printers could be cheaper than the guitars.

 

Also, he's still using wood in the construction for 'tone'. Mahogany for Gibson sound & maple for Fender sound. This is contentious stuff. The whole premis of tonewoods is challenged now with sceptics claiming it all to be entirely mythical.

[TapperMike]

Umm yeah, no, maybe.

 

 

Exactly the same guitar aside from the tonewoods. I can here the difference.

 

Everything affects tone. neck thickness, body style, wood, pickups, tone pots, wiring.

 

I've got three tele's Swamp Ash, Alder, Pine. though if equally equipped the alder and the swamp ash would sound near the same. I find the pine to be the most "woody warm" (enjoyable to hear)

 

There was a company (forget the name now) making a parker fly copy all carbon fiber with a roland gk pre installed. I played it for an hour wanting to fall in love with it but I didn't.  

[Rudi]

I can hear a difference too. The problem is that the difference could well be down to the difference in the players (Lee & Rob).

 

Mike you posted this before on 'Gibson & Unpotted Pick Ups'. Here was my response:

 

yes Ive seen that vid, and several more too.

 

 willseasyguiter has been the most scientifically convincing but he then lets his credibility down by giving into anger & making personal attacks in a later one.

https://youtu.be/svmOQuNC1Uw

 

    In my link, Will claims 100% empirical proof. I’ve watched this twice (it’s about an hour long). It’s hard to follow and even harder to concentrate for that long.

 

I actually think that wood may affect tone despite Will’s proof. I can’t explain why because I’m speaking of a personal perception which is subjective (hearing).  If I am right I think wood makes a very small difference. But I also find Will’s point about compression waves beyond challenge. So there is a dichotomy in my understanding between subjective perception and empirical evidence.

 

 

There is a guitar, the Peavey AT200, which can be entirely out of tune, but play with perfect (e-signal) intonation. At what point does the string become useless? Presumably when it loses tension entirely and stops vibrating. But the wood body will vibrate acoustically in response to the plucked string. You will be able to feel this, but what you hear will be an entirely different tone wave.

The signal from the vibrating string is altered after it has been struck to produce a note in perfect tuning.  Though this doesn’t prove anything, but it helped me to understand one of the key points made in the link I provided, that the pickup cannot respond to the vibration in the wood unless it is partially microphonic, as in an unpotted pickup.

http://www.guitarplayer.com/miscellaneous/1139/review-peavey-at-200-powered-by-antares-auto-tune-for-guitar/24004

Edited May 8, 2015 by Rudi

[TapperMike]

I played a plastic guitar when I was 8 (though I couldn't play back then ) and again when I was 22 which was a gift from an estate sale.

To be honest I never liked the sound of them even when D'jango was playing them.  I also don't like the sound of those large soundhole manouche guitars regardless of what they are made from.  I think they are rattle boxes.

 

 

While I do like the tone that springs forth from Ransongs and Roundback ovation type guitars with solid tops. I've yet to enjoy the tone from most of the carbon fiber type guitars.  I'm not saying that one can't carve great expression out of them. I just don't like the tone.

 

FYI you can have microphonic pickups that are still potted however potted or unpotted the more microphonic they are the less they produce lows and the less mids sustain they have.