# Acoustic vs. Electric Instruments



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Do you have a preference for one over the other?


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

It depends on the music, so I can't really say.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Do you have a preference for one over the other?


Yes: acoustic instruments.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Acoustic. I've had the thought many, many times that the world would be such a better place if amplification for guitars, voice and such had never happened. I even hate outdoor concerts being amplified.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

Acoustic.............


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I also prefer acoustic. It could be my natural proclivity towards classical music, but I've always found more beauty both in sound production and visual aesthetic to be far superior with acoustic instruments.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

I see, when it comes to classical music of course it is acoustics. I thought you meant to ask more generally.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

I like both. For guitars I have a preference electrics that have much more possibilities, more frets, tone and volume controls, effects, whammy bar, pickups etc. Basically I'm on the opposite side of Segovia who hated the electric guitar. Well not exactly opposite, since I like also the acoustic and classical guitar, but the electric guitar is definitely my favorite.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Acoustic for serious music.
Having worked in media I'm fully acquainted and totally bored with DAW's, their software, synths and sample sets when it comes to listening. Nothing compares to acoustic and the expressive content imparted imv, not even well programmed midi. As an ex-jazz guitarist, I am happy with electric guitars.

Having said that, I'm not against modernity in art music that utilises electronics because there is generally more creative invention and application and less cliche which, with the best imaginations, serves expression very well.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

mikeh375 said:


> Acoustic for serious music.


Do you think that Stockhausen's Hymnen or Bernard Parmegiani's De natura sonorum aren't serious? Or is it that you don't find that they impart "expressive content"?

Or are you just saying that you don't like them?


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

Mandryka said:


> Do you think that Stockhausen's Hymnen or Bernard Parmegiani's De natura sonorum aren't serious? Or is it that you don't find that they impart "expressive content"?
> 
> Or are you just saying that you don't like them?


Best inferred non sequitur of the day! And it's only 13.30!


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Mandryka said:


> Do you think that Stockhausen's Hymnen or Bernard Parmegiani's De natura sonorum aren't serious? Or is it that you don't find that they impart "expressive content"?
> 
> Or are you just saying that you don't like them?


Mandryka read my last paragraph.... My preference is for acoustic but I'm not averse to electronics so don't read too much into what I wrote, it was a only general overall comment. Having said that, Hymnen is not my favourite of his, probably because since then, a 'sound design' approach like that has become routine on a DAW. Perhaps its because I could easily make random sounds and manipulate synths all day long then record and mix in my DAW that I don't find much in Hymnen to move me beyond aural curiosity. I even have CD'S of effects used in post production for film that have 1000's of mechanical and natural sounds from my working days. In my time I have applied some heavy digital or analogue manipulation and processing on some of these fx, so I know how easy it can be to create soundscapes if required. I guess its tired and bored old know how that puts me off Hymnen at the end of the day because of the easy way it can now be achieved - that considerably lessens its impact for me.

I do like Jonathan Harvey's approach to electronic integration but that is perhaps less radical. Conversely I'm not that enamoured by some of the 'pads' that Adams uses in his music because the actual sound/timbre of them dates very quickly imv. Again that might be down to the fact that I've 'known' the sounds and even used them or very similar for many years.
Don't know the Parmegiani btw, but will look him up.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^ Now you're saying Hymnen is just bored tired fx?


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

....oh don't you start......


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

Not to get off track here, but since the use of electric instruments by such a composer as Stockhausen was brought up, I thought I would mention that Penderecki's _Partita for Harpsichord and Orchestra_ (1971) uses electric guitar and bass guitar.

That said, I don't like the use of them…but there they are!


----------



## Manxfeeder (Oct 19, 2010)

I prefer acoustic, but electric amplification and manipulation is so prevalent now, it's kind of unavoidable.


----------



## Skakner (Oct 8, 2020)

In Classical, acoustic probably.
In Jazz, only acoustic.
In Rock, electric.


----------



## HenryPenfold (Apr 29, 2018)

I have a mild preference for acoustic instruments, preferring the timbre, various textures and and also the look - but I also like electrical instruments and electrical music.


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

I would love to have a Steinway Grand Piano in my living room. However, it would take up way too much of my limited space, require regular tuning and other maintenance, and disturb my neighbors in the townhouses next door.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

mikeh375 said:


> Acoustic for serious music.
> Having worked in media I'm fully acquainted and totally bored with DAW's, their software, synths and sample sets when it comes to listening. Nothing compares to acoustic and the expressive content imparted imv, not even well programmed midi.


I wonder what you think about expressive synths like the Haken Continuum just to mention one synth. Because that instrument is incredibly expressive, as much as the most expressive acoustic instruments and a lot more than some acoustic instruments. I love the instrument but the piano to me is basically a typewriter with dynamics.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

It depends on what instruments we are talking about. I prefer electric guitar over acoustic, but I presume we're talking about instruments to perform classic music, so I'll say acoustic definitevely! I was a violinist, I'm now a beginner cellist and I've played piano too. I absolutely hate the sound of electronic violins. They're simply horrible. They have no soul. They're good just if you want to play at night. Maybe that's because electronic violin/cellos etc are not as developed as electric guitar, in comparison they are new. We'll see in the next years if something changes, but for now, I say acoustic. For piano, well, it can be quite good depending on the brand. Never as a real piano, but average good. Electric keyboards are a good start, or they're good if you want to play organ or fortepiano or harpsichord but can't afford one, or if you need it for special effects in a non-classical repertoire. Example: for soundtracks, pop, rock, they're great. Keys are softer and lighter though, so if you can play a keyboard, it doesn't mean you can play a piano. If you want to be a pianist, you need a real piano.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Amadea said:


> For piano, well, it can be quite good depending on the brand. Never as a real piano, but average good.


with electric piano I guess you're considering digital pianos that are made to imitate the acoustic instrument, more than electric pianos like the fender rhodes, the wurlitzer, clavinet etc, am I right? There's a bit of confusion about it. Personally I absoluly love an instrument like the Fender Rhodes, but it's so different from an acoustic piano in terms of sound that I consider it basically a completely instrument.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

HenryPenfold said:


> Best inferred non sequitur of the day! And it's only 13.30!


I've suddenly seen what you mean!


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

What about organs? Many concert halls don't have a real built-in pipe organ. So they use Allen or Rogers digital organs with massive speaker systems. It's not acoustic, it is clearly amplified, and they can sound quite fine! And best of all, they're in tune.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

With prog, electric and acoustic.

Jazz, other than fusion, acoustic. Fusion, electric plays a large role.

Classical, only acoustic.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

norman bates said:


> I wonder what you think about expressive synths like the Haken Continuum just to mention one synth. Because that instrument is incredibly expressive, as much as the most expressive acoustic instruments and a lot more than some acoustic instruments. I love the instrument but the piano to me is basically a typewriter with dynamics.


 I certainly approve of the Haken , it certainly ups the musically expressive ante and is a remarkable piece of kit. The musical and creative reach with this instrument could be quite exciting. Norman do you know of any serious/art works that feature or have scored for this? I'd love to hear its internal synth manipulated and played in a way that isn't simply like a lead line playing one patch, no matter how expressive it is.
EDIT...I just found some vids, wow. The manipulation of sound is as fantastic as it is seemingly unlimited in what can be achieved. Who's going to write the first concerto for it I wonder?


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

mbhaub said:


> What about organs? Many concert halls don't have a real built-in pipe organ. So they use Allen or Rogers digital organs with massive speaker systems. It's not acoustic, it is clearly amplified, and they can sound quite fine! And best of all, they're in tune.


I read somewhere recently that players of real pipe organs have to deal with massive latency of sound, is it true? That alone is a very limiting thing rhythmically.


----------



## Dan Ante (May 4, 2016)

Any musician worth their sorts would go for acoustics, period. There was once a thread asking is a computer a musical instrument answered in few words by Mirror Image. I could post more about iPads being played in deserted factories but PC playing up again…


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Dan Ante said:


> Any musician worth their sorts would go for acoustics, period.


that's simply not true.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

norman bates said:


> that's simply not true.


It's really all opinion.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

Acoustic. It's illusory, of course, but my cello seems like a living, breathing thing when I draw a bow across the strings (or pluck them). My digital piano is more sterile and machine-like.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Captainnumber36 said:


> It's really all opinion.


I don't think so, unless we have a very different opinion of what a good musician is.


----------



## Amadea (Apr 15, 2021)

consuono said:


> Acoustic. It's illusory, of course, but my cello seems like a living, breathing thing when I draw a bow across the strings (or pluck them). My digital piano is more sterile and machine-like.


As a beginner cellist and ex-violinist/pianist I get you. I do like electric guitar more than acoustic though, so I thought: are electric classical string instruments as developed and explored as electric guitars? I think not, they're new compared to electric guitars. Maybe in the next 20 years we'll see an "hendrix violinist" and we'll like him ahah.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

Amadea said:


> As a beginner cellist and ex-violinist/pianist I get you. I do like electric guitar more than acoustic though, so I thought: are electric classical string instruments as developed and explored as electric guitars? I think not, they're new compared to electric guitars. Maybe in the next 20 years we'll see an "hendrix violinist" and we'll like him ahah.


I'm not a violinist but I don't know if there's really that difference at least from the point of view of technology. The electric guitar uses pickups and amplifiers, and I guess it's true for electric violins too. And the technique of violin has seen centuries of refinement, that unlike the electric guitar that has a certain amount of differences compared to the acoustic and classical instruments (a narrower and longer neck and strings closer to each other, a whammy bar and a lot of possibilities that the acoustic guitar doesn't have) I suspect translate very well on the electric instrument (feel free to correct me about this).
Also what makes the expressivity of the instrument (dynamics, vibrato, slight pitch changes) I guess are still there. So it's hard to me to get why the electric violin should be considered underdeveloped compared to the electric guitar.


----------



## Sabrina Ross (May 10, 2021)

In terms of convenience and tradition, I would vote on Acoustic. For example, with guitar, picking, tapping, strumming, and using the whole body to create seems to create more of the raw style prefer. Electric instruments are always fun to listen to.


----------



## progmatist (Apr 3, 2021)

Sabrina Ross said:


> In terms of convenience and tradition, I would vote on Acoustic. For example, with guitar, picking, tapping, strumming, and using the whole body to create seems to create more of the raw style prefer. Electric instruments are always fun to listen to.


The mark of a truly great guitarist is one who can sound just as good on an acoustic as an electric.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

progmatist said:


> The mark of a truly great guitarist is one who can sound just as good on an acoustic as an electric.


I'm not sure I agree about it, because then someone like Julian Bream (just to make one of probably hundreds names) should not be considered a great guitarist.


----------



## consuono (Mar 27, 2020)

norman bates said:


> I'm not sure I agree about it, because then someone like Julian Bream (just to make one of probably hundreds names) should not be considered a great guitarist.


Yeah, and there's the question of "just as good as". Hendrix and Clapton could play some great acoustic blues. I don't know how they'd fare with BWV 997 though. Maybe Hendrix would have and Clapton could play it very well, I don't know. That's not to diss rock guitar technique...I've tried it and know how demanding it is and how much skill it takes. But they're different genres.

Bream did play jazz, though, so there's that.


----------



## norman bates (Aug 18, 2010)

consuono said:


> Yeah, and there's the question of "just as good as". Hendrix and Clapton could play some great acoustic blues. I don't know how they'd fare with BWV 997 though. Maybe Hendrix would have and Clapton could play it very well, I don't know. That's not to diss rock guitar technique...I've tried it and know how demanding it is and how much skill it takes. But they're different genres.
> 
> Bream did play jazz, though, so there's that.


oh I forgot about that, I remember I saw a video of Bream playing some jazz (I kind of remember that he wasn't that good though, if I'm not wrong). But to me it doesn't matter. I mean, if a guitarist is able to play classical and acoustic and electric... great, but if not, that doesn't mean that one can't be a truly great guitarist just because he's not proficient on what at the end of the day are quite different instruments in many ways.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

norman bates said:


> oh I forgot about that, I remember I saw a video of Bream playing some jazz (I kind of remember that he wasn't that good though, if I'm not wrong). But to me it doesn't matter. I mean, if a guitarist is able to play classical and acoustic and electric... great, but if not, that doesn't mean that one can't be a truly great guitarist just because he's not proficient on what at the end of the day are quite different instruments in many ways.


Bream did a pretty good performance of Django Reinhardt's "Nuages."

But I agree being excellent in one style is more important than being passable in several.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

SanAntone said:


> But I agree being excellent in one style is more important than being passable in several.


I definitely agree with this.


----------

