Talk:Electric guitar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Types of guitars[edit]

I suggest that the types of guitars section be reorganised and the bit about types of guitars at the top be added

Yuri Landman[edit]

How much of this text did Yuri Landman write? His name comes up twice on the page, despite his marginal, at best, significance in the history of the electric guitar. I'm just sayin'...

Wikipedia Critique Project[edit]

This article covers a variety of different areas of the history of the guitar and it very well-written. It supplies details of its historical significance to society as well as the questionable original source of the electric guitar. Since the original creator is unknown, they give a couple variables that could have been involved. The sources seem a bit short but I am sure with further research, one will find that the information is very accurate.

The illustrations are as expected; an abundance of electric guitars and their different parts. It does cover the subject thoroughly by giving the reader a guide of the guitar to look over while reading the article. Although the sources seem to be slim, I do not believe it has been marred by various contributors. Because of my personal background with the electric guitar, it seems as though information is not random slander or junk. Furthermore, comparing this article to a conventional encyclopedia, the information seems appropriate and significant to the potential readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HIST406-10Sbyrne (talkcontribs) 16:09, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

still needs work[edit]

Plenty of room remains for improvement here. For instance, under "Bridge and tailpiece systems," saying There are four basic types is an overreach, and fails to distinguish between a stoptail and a hardtail, much less the former's bartail variant. Anyone who owns a guitar with a trapeze tailpiece might consider that yet another "system."

The opening "History" section is at least mistitled. Half of it is about Gibson guitars. And the section stops dead at 1952, suggesting that's where innovation ceased -- Gibson, 1952, period. Leo Fender's design work gets no mention at all until discussion of bridge designs. (Leo's name comes up exactly once.)

All kudos to Les Paul, but the LP is still just a shrunk-down "Electric Spanish" guitar carved from solid wood, with all the shape and hardware you'd expect from a 1930s jazz guitar. For all his faults, Fender re-thought the fundamental purpose of the guitar at every step. There is no "history" without Fender; while it/he has a separate article, the same could be said about Les Paul/Gibson.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 09:49, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

While I'm at it... let's remove most of the "Guitar amplifiers" section, seeing as it's highly redundant with the UNCITED Guitar amplifiers article. Race ya there.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 09:53, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
I've started retrospectively putting some sources in .... I wish Kiefer.Wolfowitz was still around as he could do lots of good work on this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:19, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Lots of nonsense: …Eddie Van Halen's use of a variac, power resistor, post-power-tube effects, and a final solid-state amp driving the guitar speakers. A variac is one approach to power-supply based power attenuation, to make the sound of power-tube distortion more practically available. EVH used the Variac to ensure consistent AC power to his amps despite local variance of mains electricity. Voltage alone can vary +/- 5% from the nominal standard of 120 VAC. EVH felt it necessary to keep the amps fed at as close to 120 as possible, wherever he happened to be playing. Therefore, I've cut the (unsourced) claim.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 18:40, 6 August 2017 (UTC)