Great stuff guys, some really interesting thoughts.
 
What made me think of asking was that I was perusing the latest Gibson catalogue earlier and wondering:

1. If there were reasons for why the vast majority of electric guitars are shaped like acoustic guitars, if they don't need to be for any specific 'tonal' reason?
2. If the 'traditional' shape is used so often because it's comfy/ergonomic, was the reason for the introduction of Flying V and Explorer style guitars simply aesthetic, with no design consideration given to tonal properties of the shape?
3. Was the transition from the earliest 'frying pan' electrics to more traditional styles aesthetic, or merely to get more mass into the construction to improve tone?

I definitely agree that tone varies between instruments that for all intents and purposes are identical. I was more saying that despite that I've found I can generally know that certain characteristics will likely be present in certain body types. Like if I wanted a really bright and light tone I wouldn't pick up a big meaty Explorer. I'd reach for the SG.
 
But anecdotal evidence is obviously no replacement for hard science which is why I'd be curious to see an experiment done that took ALL parameters into account. Perhaps a good way would be to start with a large piece of wood that could be widdled down to various body styles somehow. Start with the largest body, do your tests, widdle it down to a medium sized body, do more tests then get down to the smallest. That way you are using the same piece of wood throughout. Unfortunately it would be very restricted as to which models could be tested on the same piece of wood because it would obviously be impossible to widdle a V or explorer into a Paul or an SG. lol

One could argue though stick style guitars and basses have their own unique tonal qualities specifically because of their shape. Perhaps the near total absence of the body's resonance allows the electronics to be the focal point of the tone unimpeded.
 
;-p

Beepster
 
But anecdotal evidence is obviously no replacement for hard science which is why I'd be curious to see an experiment done that took ALL parameters into account.

 
Unlike classical/acoustic instruments, for the most part there's not a lot of proper academic research with solid body instruments.
 
I have seen some things like a university student's paper formally testing different body woods in an electric guitar.
 
 
But it really doesn't matter, because in any audio related subject any science where the findings conflict with someone's belief systems is just rejected outright or ignored, so there's nothing to be gained by doing it.

SteveStrummerUK
 
Surely, if all you wanted was to transfer as close to 100% of the string vibration into the pick-up then the 'best' electric guitars would be made of materials that resonate as little as possible. Like stone, or concrete. Or whatever sort of stuff doesn't tend to vibrate sympathetically with the strings attached to it.

 
So, suitable for hard rock then? 
 

drewfx1

SteveStrummerUK
 
Surely, if all you wanted was to transfer as close to 100% of the string vibration into the pick-up then the 'best' electric guitars would be made of materials that resonate as little as possible. Like stone, or concrete. Or whatever sort of stuff doesn't tend to vibrate sympathetically with the strings attached to it.
 
 

Actually you insulate the strings from the body by choosing materials. Materials have an acoustic impedance and the amount of transmitted vs. reflected energy is dependent on the differing acoustic impedances of the materials.
 
For this reason, some of the energy from the bridge is reflected back and some of the energy coming back from the body is also reflected back to the body. For maximum energy transfer you want the acoustic impedances to be similar. Here's an illustration:
 

 
Theoretically if you can use a bridge material to create a greater difference, you will lose less vibration to the body.
 
You can also get better transmission by putting a material with intermediate AI between two dissimilar materials, so I'm thinking it might be possible to do the opposite and put something between the bridge and the body which would reflect more energy back to the bridge.

I don't have this thing anymore , it was pretty much all metal  
( the only thing wood on it was the neck and the part of the bridge the strings rested on ….the nut was probably plastic .)  
I remember that it sure weighed a lot .
imho , it sounded pretty good ..

 
Kenny
 
 

Get your woody before wood is all outlawed to use.

http://www.gaskellguitars...ownloads/77-woods.html

Wood tones are not the most important factor in deciding tone, but they do play a large role. The same two high quality pickups in the same guitar shape would sound entirely different if one guitar were made out of plywood and the other out of maple. So, in the end, don't limit yourself to thinking that a plywood guitar will sound the same as a mahogany guitar, but don't think you need a 10-top mahogany guitar to sound great. Don't make compromises on quality, but don't spend all your money to get the right wood.

http://www.ultimate-guita...woods.html?no_takeover


Also, body shapes can affect tone - an arched top guitar will sound different than a flat top guitar. Variety is the key to finding out, first hand, the subtle nuances between wood tones.
 

RobertB
However, collective experience seems to suggest otherwise.
Are we back where we started?

Collective experience has long ago been proven (via collective experience!) to be unreliable. 

RobertB
Are we back where we started?

 
 
Well.....when it started there were a few statements and a question.
 
 
 

SteveStrummerUK 
I notice that most electric guitars follow roughly the same design as acoustic and classical guitars.
 
Now I understand that the orthodox shape and the capacity of an acoustic's body has traditionally been chosen to maximise the volume of the strings and to create the 'tone' of the instrument. I also understand that the choice of wood and other materials in an acoustic guitar (as well as the type of strings used), as well as how the strings are played are also crucial to the tone.
 
I also realise that the type of wood and method of construction (e.g. bolt-on or neck-through), as well as variables like pick-up and string choice affect the tone of an electric guitar.
 
But my question is, naïve as it may be, does the shape of an electric guitar body make and real difference to sound of an instrument? 

 
I don't see electric guitars following the same design as acoustic and classical guitars but "roughly" makes it all so questionable.
 
Simple answer to the question: Well, again there are to many undefined terms that make it all so questionable:
"electric guitar", "real difference"
 
The only question, as I choose to understand it: Does the shape of a solid body electric guitar make a difference to the sound of the instrument?
 
My answer is no. The shape of a solid body electric guitar doesn't make a noticeable difference to the sound for people to recognize by only hearing it...sight unseen.
If the answer was "yes" then people would be able to tell the shape of three of the most popular solid body guitar shapes by listening- sight unseen....and they can't.
 
In fact there are factors about a solid body electric guitar that have a much larger impact on tonal characteristics and I'm not sure most people can hear the difference "sight unseen" by only listening.
For example;
Scale length is a major factor- can you tell what the scale length is on solid body electric guitars by listening?
Pickups are a major factor- can you tell what brand and type that may be on a solid body electric guitar by listening? ( I included "brand" only because I have read people to make claim that they can hear the difference between brands.)
 
IMO the only factors that matter about the shape of a solid body guitar to the player are "feel" and "looks".
"Ugly" and "doesn't feel right" will send a buyer walking and not every body feels and sees things the same. Good thing too. That keeps it fun.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

But my question is, naïve as it may be, does the shape of an electric guitar body make and real difference to sound of an instrument?
 
I don't think so. I think it is more the type of wood and other factors. For instance the Les Paul Classic vs the Les Paul Studio. I've had both and have used different pickups in the Studio. The Classic has the maple cap like the Standard, the Studio is all mahogany. The Studio is darker and some pickups that sound good in an LP with a maple cap are muddy sounding in the all mahogany body, at least in this small study only using two guitars.
Then I guess you have to consider the Stratocaster and the Telecaster, they sound different but they have different pickups. I wonder if a Tele with Strat pickups would sound like a Strat? I don't know.
I have an all mahogany with a burl maple cap and two P-90s, it has a 25.5" scale neck and it sounds nothing like a Tele.
Personally, I think the body shape of a guitars is what it is because it is similar to what we are used to a guitar looking like and is what people want to see, more marketing than anything. Plus, it needs to sit on your leg so you don't have to play standing up all the time. People have prejudices and may balk at something that does not look like "a guitar".
 
It is a good question. I don't think that the shape matters very much. For some players even the wood or pickups don't seem to matter much. Billy Gibbons sounds like himself no matter what he plays, he uses 8s for strings but has a thick tone. Buzz Feiten will not use or design a guitar with body contours like a Stratocaster because he says they cause some skeletal problems, I don't remember what right now but he says guitars should be like the LP or Tele. Personally, I can only play a LP for a short while because the edge begins to hurt my inner arm and my abdomen (I mostly play sitting down).
My favorite acoustic guitar to just pick up and play is a Taylor "Big Baby". It is an OK guitar but nothing approaching a great guitar BUT it is a 15/16th scale guitar and cheap enough that I don't worry much about bumping it or leaning it against the wall on the porch... and IT IS COMFORTABLE for me to play. I have a dreadnaught that sounds better and I can actually play it a little better, as far as picking, pull offs, etc and if I record guitar I prefer it but not for just enjoyment. I tend to go to a Stratocaster for casual play but may use an LP or other guitar if I'm doing something beyond playing for my own enjoyment, they DO sound different but (with and electric) I really don't think it is the body shape that makes a difference. I'm not really sure how much the body shape matters with an acoustic guitar. The bracing, the top and sides, the nut, the age of the wood, I think, make more difference than the shape of an acoustic too. I want a 000 guitar and I want an Epiphone ES-339 PRO. I want both because of their smaller body size, I expect either to sound as good as a comparable bigger guitar, but they will fit me better and at the end of the day I will sound like me no matter what I play.
 
J

spacey
? What was the question?
 
 
 
not that I don't think the answer was known when it was asked
 

BECAN, can I have yours?
 
 
I mean.... guitars, can I have yours?