TALK @ PhilMusic.com - The Online Home of the Pinoy Musician
The Musician Forums => Guitar Central => Topic started by: skunkyfunk on May 21, 2011, 10:18:19 PM
Title: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 21, 2011, 10:18:19 PM
Brace yourself, this is a LONG post.
If you have an idea of 'hiyaw', probably you have seen firemodel's early ramblings in this forum.
(NOTE: This thread is meant to focus on HIYAW, and its role in our quest for the ultimate guitar. The science and the myths need to be unveiled. NO FIGHTING, PLEASE!)
First off, in my own limited understanding, I can deduce what I think HIYAW is most mistaken as...
1) HIYAW is NOT sustain. A good guitar WITH hiyaw would most likely have good sustain. But the converse is not true. A guitar with good sustain is simply, a guitar that has good energy transfer from the strings to the whole guitar, that yields favorable ADSR (attack -decay - sustain -release) traits but not necessarily what 'hiyaw' is.
2. HIYAW is NOT compression. When a guitar 'compresses' well, I think this is best described as a guitar that makes your softer attacks louder, and makes your louder attacks less harsh. IMO, a good guitar that exhibits 'compression' is a guitar that has inherently good response, coupled with good electronics.
3. HIYAW is NOT resonance. Any guitar, has a resonant frequency, meaning, it will exhibit its loudest perceivable 'volume' when it puts out its resonant frequency. Pickups have a resonant peak, and the interplay of frequencies and harmonics of the guitar itself yield a resonant frequency for the guitar. Once you strike that note, the guitar would appear to have great sustain...
Now what is HIYAW to me...
'Hiyaw' in my understanding, is a trait of a guitar that exhibits GREAT SUSTAIN, that highlights the DYNAMICS of your playing, that seems to have the ability to RING OUT (or resonate) MAJORITY OR ALL THE NOTES on the guitar. When you do a bend on one fret, the same characteristic should be exhibited on all other frets. And what does that mean? IT RESONATES ALL ACROSS THE FRETBOARD. And because of that, you can hear that undeniable 'swirl' that most people call it. THAT swirl, IS 'hiyaw'.
I guess you remember this experiment back in grade school: Get two tuning forks of the same pitch, and hit one of them and place them a foot apart from each other; the result is, the other one will vibrate in resonance with the other! If you line up all tuning forks with the same harmonic traits (usually even-ordered), you can actually make a single note sustain in the whole room with an unspeakable richness to it when all the tuning forks resonate with each other. This is also similar to George Martin's approach to recording piano, where he stuffs 3 grand pianos in the studio and slams a single chord, so the 2 other pianos would resonate with the one being played.
Now what does this have to do with guitars? IMO, a guitar with 'hiyaw' is a guitar that can exhibit overtones in a way that creates very rich tones. And this has nothing to do with humbuckers or single coils... It is a trait from the PHYSICAL build of the guitar.
Hiyaw is a trait exhibited by VERY FEW guitars. IMO, it is not endemic to boutique or topodollar custom guitars. And also, take note that they can also NOT be inherent in expensive guitars. The science to hiyaw is not very much known to man. All I know is that, I can hear it when it's there. But it is hard to find. In my experience as a recording dude, I would say out of 100 guitars I've heard, maybe 1 or 2 had it. And they ain't necessarily the most expensive ones.
Hiyaw is best heard in an A/B test. Recording it is NOT simply possible. Why? Because even recording equipment cannot capture all the overtones; you may be able to record the timbre or voice of the guitar rig, but you cannot simply capture the swirly effect.
-----------------
And the question: Would you spend the extra thousands of $$$ with recommendation from tone gurus, to get hiyaw? Hey, maybe you can try 100 cheap guitars in a store and maybe be able to get one with hiyaw.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 21, 2011, 10:22:58 PM
from what i understand about hiyaw:
ito yung minumuwestra ni FM55 sa video niya... the first time i saw that gesture ay kay arie, kausap ko siya nung pinapa check up ko guitar ko, and he let me hear his tele.. same gesture..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 21, 2011, 10:25:27 PM
ito yung minumuwestra ni FM55 sa video niya... the first time i saw that gesture ay kay arie, kausap ko siya nung pinapa check up ko guitar ko, and he let me hear his tele.. same gesture..
Can you elaborate man? I am interested in how he explained it to you.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 21, 2011, 10:36:36 PM
Can you elaborate man? I am interested in how he explained it to you.
well, its like 2-3 years ago.. the only thing i remembered was this:
i complained about the buzz that can be heard unplugged (1 fret only) but plugged into his mesa boogie amp, hindi na rinig.
then he showed me his tele. he did let me hear the buzz, unplugged. its was a lot worse than my PRS SE. but damn, plugged it into his amp and it SCREAMS like crazy. and he said "para umiikot na tunog sa tenga mo" like FM55's gesture, parehong pareho.. although i dont hear it swirling (i dont know how a sound swirls) i agree that it screams.
all i can remember is that Arie told me that he was in search of a guitar that SUSTAINS WITHOUT TOO MUCH GAIN. and found it in his tele. he then told me a story about his friend that got inspired with his tele, who had a custom made guitar made from really good materials, mga 60k+ na ang nagastos, but doesnt have that scream.
he then complimented my guitar that i was lucky because it sounded well, and sustains well. he tested it and did bends with it, big bends if i may say, much like what FM55 was doing with the vid.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 21, 2011, 10:41:44 PM
well, its like 2-3 years ago.. the only thing i remembered was this:
i complained about the buzz that can be heard unplugged (1 fret only) but plugged into his mesa boogie amp, hindi na rinig.
then he showed me his tele. he did let me hear the buzz, unplugged. its was a lot worse than my PRS SE. but damn, plugged it into his amp and it SCREAMS like crazy. and he said "para umiikot na tunog sa tenga mo" like FM55's gesture, parehong pareho.. although i dont hear it swirling (i dont know how a sound swirls) i agree that it screams.
all i can remember is that Arie told me that he was in search of a guitar that SUSTAINS WITHOUT TOO MUCH GAIN. and found it in his tele. he then told me a story about his friend that got inspired with his tele, who had a custom made guitar made from really good materials, mga 60k+ na ang nagastos, but doesnt have that scream.
he then complimented my guitar that i was lucky because it sounded well, and sustains well. he tested it and did bends with it, big bends if i may say, much like what FM55 was doing with the vid.
The problem with the statement, 'umiikot sa tenga mo' is that, iba-iba rin tenga natin, physically, and by perception. But then, that 'scream' that sounds like you have a 'snowball effect' of overtones (hence sustain) is hiyaw.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: trem3 on May 21, 2011, 10:51:43 PM
Hiyaw? napanood ko na ito sir...
Dami pang naging sequel...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 21, 2011, 10:53:54 PM
The problem with the statement, 'umiikot sa tenga mo' is that, iba-iba rin tenga natin, physically, and by perception. But then, that 'scream' that sounds like you have a 'snowball effect' of overtones (hence sustain) is hiyaw.
well, i can describe that it really makes hiyaw, (screaming, literally speaking).. which for me is like a swelling sustain of some sort..
but.. i don't really find it special (if that's the real hiyaw as Arie described).. some might like that swelling sustain, or not.. _____________________________________
what i dont like about these topics is that if you don't have that characteristic in your guitar, somebody would say your guitars are crap.
next thing, if you don't hear what they are hearing (for example, swirl, hiyaw) about their $10,000 gear and not understand why there is a hype about it, they'd say your ears are noob..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: j-sonic on May 21, 2011, 11:19:07 PM
i agree that more expensive guitars sometimes do not exude hiyaw.i've got a homebuilt guitar that plays better than and has more tone than my more expensive original guitars.sometimes my original branded guitars exude more NGIYAW than HIYAW.hehe
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: posera!! on May 21, 2011, 11:19:24 PM
well, its like 2-3 years ago.. the only thing i remembered was this:
i complained about the buzz that can be heard unplugged (1 fret only) but plugged into his mesa boogie amp, hindi na rinig.
then he showed me his tele. he did let me hear the buzz, unplugged. its was a lot worse than my PRS SE. but damn, plugged it into his amp and it SCREAMS like crazy. and he said "para umiikot na tunog sa tenga mo" like FM55's gesture, parehong pareho.. although i dont hear it swirling (i dont know how a sound swirls) i agree that it screams.
all i can remember is that Arie told me that he was in search of a guitar that SUSTAINS WITHOUT TOO MUCH GAIN. and found it in his tele. he then told me a story about his friend that got inspired with his tele, who had a custom made guitar made from really good materials, mga 60k+ na ang nagastos, but doesnt have that scream.
he then complimented my guitar that i was lucky because it sounded well, and sustains well. he tested it and did bends with it, big bends if i may say, much like what FM55 was doing with the vid.
my strat also have buzz sa isang fret pag naka unplug pero pag naka plug na sa amp hinde mo na maririneg :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: prince22 on May 22, 2011, 01:13:12 AM
Naiimagine ko parang automatic na gradual bending of notes pag sustain? Hahaha.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: jeo on May 22, 2011, 02:05:34 AM
aside from guitar hospital, who are the authorities who can approve or 100% validate if a certain guitar has this "hiyaw"?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Saturn/Return on May 22, 2011, 04:26:46 AM
aside from guitar hospital, who are the authorities who can approve or 100% validate if a certain guitar has this "hiyaw"?
I noticed most luthiers could due to the nature of their work as they're exposed to a lot of guitars everyday; which they get to try and play. Besides Arie, Micsis (Mike) and Jun Castro can also tell. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 22, 2011, 06:06:01 AM
For me, hiyaw is overall balance on the fretboard. But if it is termed hiyaw here in our shores, what is the term they use in other countries?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: arkeetar on May 22, 2011, 06:13:25 AM
hiyaw ballsy! :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: orangeogre on May 22, 2011, 06:36:13 AM
I've met arie only once. That was when i went to his place to get something i bought from alex. When i was there. Arie demoed his tele to me. He didnt say anything about the "hiyaw" thing but he did mention a nice trait of a good sounding guitar. He said that if you bend a string, it should get louder, then he demoed it with his tele. Hindi ko alam kung ito ba yung hiyaw.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 22, 2011, 07:28:22 AM
He said that if you bend a string, it should get louder, then he demoed it with his tele.
I remember somebody mentioned this as a definition of hiyaw, pero I'd attribute it to the resonances of the room itself, more than anything. Also you'll probably notice that it doesn't happen everywhere on the fretboard; only on some choice notes. It means that the room resonates to that frequency.
To illustrate: My Tokai LP exhibiting this trait a few years ago in my old apartment. LP >> tubescreamer >> AC15 clone. The bent notes just bloomed at around the 12th to 15th fret, and even my wife could tell the difference.
Fast forward to today, in my new apartment. New room, same guitar, same setup. No bloom.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skrumian on May 22, 2011, 08:26:49 AM
kelangan mo ba talaga ng "hiyaw" para maging maganda ang tunog mo? :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 08:37:13 AM
I remember somebody mentioned this as a definition of hiyaw, pero I'd attribute it to the resonances of the room itself, more than anything. Also you'll probably notice that it doesn't happen everywhere on the fretboard; only on some choice notes. It means that the room resonates to that frequency.
To illustrate: My Tokai LP exhibiting this trait a few years ago in my old apartment. LP >> tubescreamer >> AC15 clone. The bent notes just bloomed at around the 12th to 15th fret, and even my wife could tell the difference.
Fast forward to today, in my new apartment. New room, same guitar, same setup. No bloom.
Just to clarify my experience with hiyaw -- it happens in all rooms if your guitar has it. It happens on all notes.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: brandey on May 22, 2011, 08:42:36 AM
Meron bang certain recorded song or guitar solo ng famous artist na maririnig natin ung example ng hiyaw ng isang guitar? Ilang taon na ko dito sa PM di ko parin ma gets tong HIYAW na to :?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 08:42:58 AM
If you have an idea of 'hiyaw', probably you have seen firemodel's early ramblings in this forum.
(NOTE: This thread is meant to focus on HIYAW, and its role in our quest for the ultimate guitar. The science and the myths need to be unveiled. NO FIGHTING, PLEASE!)
First off, in my own limited understanding, I can deduce what I think HIYAW is most mistaken as...
1) HIYAW is NOT sustain. A good guitar WITH hiyaw would most likely have good sustain. But the converse is not true. A guitar with good sustain is simply, a guitar that has good energy transfer from the strings to the whole guitar, that yields favorable ADSR (attack -decay - sustain -release) traits but not necessarily what 'hiyaw' is.
2. HIYAW is NOT compression. When a guitar 'compresses' well, I think this is best described as a guitar that makes your softer attacks louder, and makes your louder attacks less harsh. IMO, a good guitar that exhibits 'compression' is a guitar that has inherently good response, coupled with good electronics.
3. HIYAW is NOT resonance. Any guitar, has a resonant frequency, meaning, it will exhibit its loudest perceivable 'volume' when it puts out its resonant frequency. Pickups have a resonant peak, and the interplay of frequencies and harmonics of the guitar itself yield a resonant frequency for the guitar. Once you strike that note, the guitar would appear to have great sustain...
Now what is HIYAW to me...
'Hiyaw' in my understanding, is a trait of a guitar that exhibits GREAT SUSTAIN, that highlights the DYNAMICS of your playing, that seems to have the ability to RING OUT (or resonate) MAJORITY OR ALL THE NOTES on the guitar. When you do a bend on one fret, the same characteristic should be exhibited on all other frets. And what does that mean? IT RESONATES ALL ACROSS THE FRETBOARD. And because of that, you can hear that undeniable 'swirl' that most people call it. THAT swirl, IS 'hiyaw'.
I guess you remember this experiment back in grade school: Get two tuning forks of the same pitch, and hit one of them and place them a foot apart from each other; the result is, the other one will vibrate in resonance with the other! If you line up all tuning forks with the same harmonic traits (usually even-ordered), you can actually make a single note sustain in the whole room with an unspeakable richness to it when all the tuning forks resonate with each other. This is also similar to George Martin's approach to recording piano, where he stuffs 3 grand pianos in the studio and slams a single chord, so the 2 other pianos would resonate with the one being played.
Now what does this have to do with guitars? IMO, a guitar with 'hiyaw' is a guitar that can exhibit overtones in a way that creates very rich tones. And this has nothing to do with humbuckers or single coils... It is a trait from the PHYSICAL build of the guitar.
Hiyaw is a trait exhibited by VERY FEW guitars. IMO, it is not endemic to boutique or topodollar custom guitars. And also, take note that they can also NOT be inherent in expensive guitars. The science to hiyaw is not very much known to man. All I know is that, I can hear it when it's there. But it is hard to find. In my experience as a recording dude, I would say out of 100 guitars I've heard, maybe 1 or 2 had it. And they ain't necessarily the most expensive ones.
Hiyaw is best heard in an A/B test. Recording it is NOT simply possible. Why? Because even recording equipment cannot capture all the overtones; you may be able to record the timbre or voice of the guitar rig, but you cannot simply capture the swirly effect.
-----------------
And the question: Would you spend the extra thousands of $$$ with recommendation from tone gurus, to get hiyaw? Hey, maybe you can try 100 cheap guitars in a store and maybe be able to get one with hiyaw.
Nice attempt at a discussion. I just want to add that HIYAW more than anything for me is used as an indicator for other properties that I look for in a guitar -- increased sustain, richness in the notes, effortless playing, big sounding single note lines, ringing chords, pleasing EQ curve, clear ADSR properties, etc.
In terms of percentage of getting a guitar with hiyaw, there is a higher percentage of getting it on expensive guitars and a much lower percentage on cheaper guitars. And there is a minimum threshold to achieve it. I have not heard the property on a new (mint) guitar that costs less than P50k at full retail prices. Second hand is another case however where anything goes.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 08:53:18 AM
Meron bang certain recorded song or guitar solo ng famous artist na maririnig natin ung example ng hiyaw ng isang guitar? Ilang taon na ko dito sa PM di ko parin ma gets tong HIYAW na to :?
Have to hear it for yourself ... I believe its one of those aspects that differentiates live music from recorded music.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: teleclem on May 22, 2011, 08:53:35 AM
i agree that more expensive guitars sometimes do not exude hiyaw.i've got a homebuilt guitar that plays better than and has more tone than my more expensive original guitars.sometimes my original branded guitars exude more NGIYAW than HIYAW.hehe
Those expensive guitar THAT do have it, exude it more than cheapo guitars.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 08:58:00 AM
For me, hiyaw is overall balance on the fretboard. But if it is termed hiyaw here in our shores, what is the term they use in other countries?
Hiyaw is not just overall balance -- its more but overall balance is but one attribute that Hiyaw serves as indicator of. I think the Suhr guys call it MOJO, which brings me to the point that Hiyaw is the perfect one indicator to determine superior character in a guitar. Its one of those characteristics that will determine the best sounding and feeling electric guitars on earth. It helps you determine the top 1% of electric guitars.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 09:00:46 AM
Hiyaw is not just overall balance -- its more but overall balance is but one attribute that Hiyaw serves as indicator of. I think the Suhr guys call it MOJO, which brings me to the point that Hiyaw is the perfect one indicator to determine superior character in a guitar. Its one of those characteristics that will determine the best sounding and feeling electric guitars on earth. It helps you determine the top 1% of electric guitars.
I like that..... MOJO....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 22, 2011, 09:05:09 AM
Just to clarify my experience with hiyaw -- it happens in all rooms if your guitar has it. It happens on all notes.
so it's not bloom then. Hiyaw is different.
Guys can we try to look for another word for it? The word "Hiyaw" for me kasi connotes something else, more like a sound tied to a certain action:
1. akin to what Jeff Beck does when he bends a note and he flips his toggle switch quickly from neck to bridge position. 2. bending a note and toeing down on a wah pedal at the same time. 3. picking softly at a flurry of notes and then picking violently at one note then bending it.
Mojo for me is a better word.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 22, 2011, 09:21:55 AM
Guys can we try to look for another word for it? The word "Hiyaw" for me kasi connotes something else, more like a sound tied to a certain action:
1. akin to what Jeff Beck does when he bends a note and he flips his toggle switch quickly from neck to bridge position. 2. bending a note and toeing down on a wah pedal at the same time. 3. picking softly at a flurry of notes and then picking violently at one note then bending it.
Mojo for me is a better word.
Back in the 80's i've heard of the lingo hiyaw with guitar players. But it was more of pinch harmonics. If we define "hiyaw" in English it simply means "scream". And overall balance on the fretboard is not how you would describe a screaming guitar. Spanky is right, "MOJO" is a better term.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 22, 2011, 09:30:45 AM
well, i can describe that it really makes hiyaw, (screaming, literally speaking).. which for me is like a swelling sustain of some sort..
but.. i don't really find it special (if that's the real hiyaw as Arie described).. some might like that swelling sustain, or not.. _____________________________________
what i dont like about these topics is that if you don't have that characteristic in your guitar, somebody would say your guitars are crap.
next thing, if you don't hear what they are hearing (for example, swirl, hiyaw) about their $10,000 gear and not understand why there is a hype about it, they'd say your ears are noob..
My four guitars all have hiyaw to varying degrees but have a minimum hiyaw standard and are keepers. More than just having hiyaw, they are truly four guitars that defines what it is to be an electric guitar player -- genre defining. It also takes a lot of luck to find one these guitars and are truly appreciated on expensive amps and speaker cabinets. Cheapo stuff (amps, effects, etc.) from Perfect Pitch, Audiophile, Lazer, RJ, etc. do not do these guitars justice. In short, to hear the full the potential of these guitars, boutique equipment (as a minimum -- by the way, not all so-called boutique equipment sounds good) has to be bought abroad. No made in China or Asia stuff to muck up the signal chain.
A real recent anecdote. I usually torment Arie about his Tele because Arie knows I just find his tele above average. But we can't just find anything better that is affordable so we usually joke each other and insult each other's guitars. I did mention in previous posts that Arie has retired his Strat (actually he gave it to his son) because my Suhr Strat just beats it in all aspects as a magical instrument. We would usually reserve the Suhr Strat vs. Tokai Tele match to testing other equipment such as amps and effects. Recently however that all changed with the arrival of the Cornell Plexi 18/20 combo which in some way distinguishes and enhances guitars in their best character & sound. To make a long story short, the Tokai Tele just sounded inferior to the Suhr Strat. And Arie recognized it. But we were at a loss because we knew that there was NO way that any modification will ever make the Tokai Tele sound as good as the Suhr Strat into the Cornell which at this point in time is really a US$7,000 combination. In short, wala kaming mahanap no solusyon para makahabol ang Tokai Tele. Was the difference significant ... Yes it was significant enough para mawalan ng gana si Arie i-play ang Tokai Tele niya. But does it mean that the Tokai Tele should be junked? No, because I still believe it sounds better than 90% of the guitars out there and clearly Arie has used it before and has survived with it. So was Arie's experience on a superior guitar both with hiyaw but more exhibited in the Suhr Strat thru the Cornell life changing? Yes it was.
At the end of the day, only the most persistent and expensive tone quests will yield superior sounding equipment with character BUT at the end of the day, it might NOT be worth your effort because it plainly takes so much. Those instruments are there -- but only a few of them -- and will really make 99% of other equipment and guitars sound bad. Unless you invest the dedication needed, which I am willing to continue pursuing, life's too short to look for tone. I just consider myself lucky to get the opportunity to own such instruments which a majority will hear much less ever will ever own. In the end, seeing the disappointment in my best friend's face with his Tele, made me realize that superior tone and character is NOT for everyone and not worth discussing if everyone has different budgets (specially small ones) because no one really wants to admit that he is buying crap equipment. So, just enjoy whatever you have at any moment in time and if something you hear wants to make you look for tone ... JUST STOP because you really can't afford it.
Yes if you are not used to hear hiyaw regularly than you are really a noob to it... But its really hard to appreciate it if you only hear it once a year and your guitar does not have it.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: KASALANAN on May 22, 2011, 11:09:46 AM
great read. :-D atleast walang fighting an bashing dito sa thread na to. waiting for more insights :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 22, 2011, 11:45:53 AM
I'll say it again: No need to invoke mojo, magic, luck, price, buying capacity, etc. Read pp. 198--205 of Beauty of the Burst. Its all explained there in plain language and simple physics. in a nutshell, its a kind of sustained and very dynamic double tone created by the whole structure of the guitar with all components interacting and influencing each other. Obviously, other guitars, not just LPs, can and do have this property. Unfortunately, the technique of designing and building for this property is not common, public knowledge. Having said that, although not all guitars have this property, a guitar that does have it can come from anywhere (paraphrasing Anton Ego from Ratatouile).
Call it what you want. At the end of the day, if science can't explain it, it's all based on faith and we will never improve our knowledge base. Paulit ulit at paikot-ikot lang usapan.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: notlimhxcx on May 22, 2011, 12:07:23 PM
I'll say it again: No need to invoke mojo, magic, luck, price, buying capacity, etc. Read pp. 198--205 of Beauty of the Burst. Its all explained there in plain language and simple physics. in a nutshell, its a kind of sustained and very dynamic double tone created by the whole structure of the guitar with all components interacting and influencing each other. Obviously, other guitars, not just LPs, can and do have this property. Unfortunately, the technique of designing and building for this property is not common, public knowledge. Having said that, although not all guitars have this property, a guitar that does have it can come from anywhere (paraphrasing Anton Ego from Ratatouile).
Call it what you want. At the end of the day, if science can't explain it, it's all based on faith and we will never improve our knowledge base. Paulit ulit at paikot-ikot lang usapan.
i rarely, if at all, agree with anyone's point of view here in this forum because i find 90% of topics here rather childish or invoking. but this post, i give a +100.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: teleclem on May 22, 2011, 01:26:00 PM
I'll say it again: No need to invoke mojo, magic, luck, price, buying capacity, etc. Read pp. 198--205 of Beauty of the Burst. Its all explained there in plain language and simple physics. in a nutshell, its a kind of sustained and very dynamic double tone created by the whole structure of the guitar with all components interacting and influencing each other. Obviously, other guitars, not just LPs, can and do have this property. Unfortunately, the technique of designing and building for this property is not common, public knowledge. Having said that, although not all guitars have this property, a guitar that does have it can come from anywhere (paraphrasing Anton Ego from Ratatouile).
Call it what you want. At the end of the day, if science can't explain it, it's all based on faith and we will never improve our knowledge base. Paulit ulit at paikot-ikot lang usapan.
Thanks for that. Pretty informative. :-) it's something not commonly discussed in foreign forums, but at least we have an explanation there na hindi from here. I haven't really come across it in any foreign articles, forums (tgp, tdpri), or similar places.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: samuelfianza on May 22, 2011, 01:27:17 PM
aside from guitar hospital, who are the authorities who can approve or 100% validate if a certain guitar has this "hiyaw"?
Going to Arie is perhaps the only way to avoid guess work. Others will give you their own interpretation which may or may not be 100% accurate to Arie's definition and intent.
I'm not discounting the possibilty that others can demo hiyaw but if I want to be 100% sure, I'l go straight to the source.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: notlimhxcx on May 22, 2011, 02:10:17 PM
I'll say it again: No need to invoke mojo, magic, luck, price, buying capacity, etc. Read pp. 198--205 of Beauty of the Burst. Its all explained there in plain language and simple physics. in a nutshell, its a kind of sustained and very dynamic double tone created by the whole structure of the guitar with all components interacting and influencing each other. Obviously, other guitars, not just LPs, can and do have this property. Unfortunately, the technique of designing and building for this property is not common, public knowledge. Having said that, although not all guitars have this property, a guitar that does have it can come from anywhere (paraphrasing Anton Ego from Ratatouile).
Call it what you want. At the end of the day, if science can't explain it, it's all based on faith and we will never improve our knowledge base. Paulit ulit at paikot-ikot lang usapan.
So is Watanabe explaining why at least 80% of real bursts sound bad? How come the other 20% sound good then? Its luck and mojo. I think medyo paikot-ikot lang ang simple physics which conveniently forgets the other 80% that sound bad to explain the 20% that sound good.
There is also another contradiction in your statement... If you believe that Iwanade's claim is universal and a matter of SIMPLE PHYSICS, how can you claim that OTHER guitars can have it? Lahat ba ng OTHER guitars ay set neck na may tenon at maple top? Lahat ba ng OTHER guitars ay gawang mahogany lang? Etc. etc. Eh bakit ang Suhr Modern ko na naka floyd ay mas tunog les paul kaysa sa ibang mga Gibson USA na historic (inertia block theory ni Iwanade)?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 22, 2011, 04:58:35 PM
I did mention in previous posts that Arie has retired his Strat (actually he gave it to his son) because my Suhr Strat just beats it in all aspects as a magical instrument. In short, wala kaming mahanap no solusyon para makahabol ang Tokai Tele. Was the difference significant ... Yes it was significant enough para mawalan ng gana si Arie i-play ang Tokai Tele niya.
Yes if you are not used to hear hiyaw regularly than you are really a noob to it... But its really hard to appreciate it if you only hear it once a year and your guitar does not have it.
well hindi ako ganun, na mawawalang gana gamitin ang guitar dahil sa may mas maganda rito.. may nananaig parin sakin ang love for playing guitar and music. whatever i have is enough for me..
but still, ang stand ko, its all about preference..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: kopiako on May 22, 2011, 05:25:36 PM
Akala ko yung HIYAW ay pick squeals hindi pala.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pualux on May 22, 2011, 07:04:46 PM
sana may magparinig sakin kung ano ang hiyaw lol
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 22, 2011, 07:05:08 PM
So is Watanabe explaining why at least 80% of real bursts sound bad? How come the other 20% sound good then? Its luck and mojo. I think medyo paikot-ikot lang ang simple physics which conveniently forgets the other 80% that sound bad to explain the 20% that sound good.
There is also another contradiction in your statement... If you believe that Iwanade's claim is universal and a matter of SIMPLE PHYSICS, how can you claim that OTHER guitars can have it? Lahat ba ng OTHER guitars ay set neck na may tenon at maple top? Lahat ba ng OTHER guitars ay gawang mahogany lang? Etc. etc. Eh bakit ang Suhr Modern ko na naka floyd ay mas tunog les paul kaysa sa ibang mga Gibson USA na historic (inertia block theory ni Iwanade)?
I won't bother debating with you since (1) you did not read/understand my post, (2) you are trying to put words into my mouth, (3) you are making unverified assumptions, and (4) I can't understand the sense, logic, or point of what you are saying/claiming.
What books like BOTB and good guitar construction/engineering books do is simply describe and empirically verify what goes on physically in a guitar. Pretty hard to argue with science and facts.
Faith, on the other hand, is a personal thing and history has shown that religion and science don't mix well, so ...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: fusionenigma on May 22, 2011, 07:27:30 PM
may "hiyaw" din ba mga acoustic guitars / jazzboxes? :-(
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 22, 2011, 08:12:07 PM
I won't bother debating with you since (1) you did not read/understand my post, (2) you are trying to put words into my mouth, (3) you are making unverified assumptions, and (4) I can't understand the sense, logic, or point of what you are saying/claiming.
What books like BOTB and good guitar construction/engineering books do is simply describe and empirically verify what goes on physically in a guitar. Pretty hard to argue with science and facts.
Faith, on the other hand, is a personal thing and history has shown that religion and science don't mix well, so ...
I understood you perfectly:
On point#1, there is such a thing as luck in picking out a guitar thats why I cannot even fully endorse all the Fender guitars at Yamaha Buendia store in the same way I cannot endorse all the Fender Custom Shops at Ludlow New York.
On point#2, that there is magic. My suhr modern was one serial apart from exactly the same suhr modern with the same materials and configuration. The only difference was the color, yet my suhr modern which only one serial higher, sounded rich and alive while the other one sounded dead.
On point#3, buying capacity is true for high end instruments that deliver the goods. I wish it were otherwise but it is just plain NOT so. I am not saying all high end instruments sounds great or good but the great ones are unfortunately expensive. I will say this -- No Ibanez Prestige will ever match my Grey Suhr Modern. Period. I tried very hard to look for an ibanez Prestige to match the Suhr and NO such luck. I also want to own a Prestige but sorry talaga palyado laban sa magandang suhr modern maski anong sulok ako ng mundo pumunta.
On point#4, ano nga ba inexplain ng Beauty of the Burst? If you read it again, its trying to get technical and yet does NOT review each individual Burst in its covers with regard to its so called simple explanation. I will assume its trying to explain a good sounding burst (lets give Yashuro the benefit of the doubt). Eh anong explanation niya sa panget na burst? Wala. Kaso mas maraming panget na burst so what is physically going on in a bad sounding burst? Its never explained and thus... its not science nor is it fact. Even Yashuro does not claim it to be science and fact anywhere in his book. Ikaw lang nag claim na science and fact and ang mismong author hindi nag claim niyon.
So if you think electric guitar is more of a science, its more religion than you think....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: trem3 on May 22, 2011, 09:47:14 PM
parinig nga... :roll: :roll: :roll:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: page8six.... on May 22, 2011, 10:00:48 PM
On point#1, there is such a thing as luck in picking out a guitar thats why I cannot even fully endorse all the Fender guitars at Yamaha Buendia store in the same way I cannot endorse all the Fender Custom Shops at Ludlow New York.
and suhr guitars
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 22, 2011, 10:32:13 PM
so if you guys settle for mojo as the word to describe it..wouldnt that be another personal thing? wouldnt that be more of a connection between the person and the instrument? such as matching the guitar that is in one's head?
there's no denying that there is that favorite guitar,but think big as well, how many guitars out there that will have more properties than the one you currently have..
just putting it out there..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 22, 2011, 10:53:00 PM
so if you guys settle for mojo as the word to describe it..wouldnt that be another personal thing? wouldnt that be more of a connection between the person and the instrument? such as matching the guitar that is in one's head?
preference..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: IncX on May 22, 2011, 11:53:02 PM
so you have a tonal characteristic that's so hard to find, expensive most of the time, nearly impossible to explain and impossible to record...
cool. sounds like god. lol
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: page8six.... on May 23, 2011, 12:51:08 AM
so you have a tonal characteristic that's so hard to find, expensive most of the time, nearly impossible to explain and impossible to record...
cool. sounds like god. lol
as much as I am against blasphemy, I found this totally hilarious :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: xaero on May 23, 2011, 01:44:32 AM
Is this a supernatural thing? Heck I can even hear the roaches talkin' to each other when I'm on drugs, How come I don't seem to hear the "hiyaw" that they speak of in here? If it's something that makes you feel good when ya hear it, Then I definitely hear that a lot with some guitars regardless of which brand.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 23, 2011, 05:21:29 AM
so if you guys settle for mojo as the word to describe it..wouldnt that be another personal thing? wouldnt that be more of a connection between the person and the instrument? such as matching the guitar that is in one's head?
there's no denying that there is that favorite guitar,but think big as well, how many guitars out there that will have more properties than the one you currently have..
just putting it out there..
The term "HIYAW" was coined by Alex in GC. It doesn't really describe anything. "Mojo" on the other hand can be more universal than what Alex describes it. It's a personal preference, one feels good in playing his six string. In a sense, "MOJO" applies to anyone may it be a cheapo or expensive gear. As long as his fingers bonded with the instrument. If you mention "HIYAW" in other foreign forums they might ask "What the [strawberry] are you talking about?".
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: arkeetar on May 23, 2011, 05:22:12 AM
sayang naman yung hiyaw :-D joke lang poh hehehe
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 23, 2011, 05:44:26 AM
The term "HIYAW" was coined by Alex in GC. It doesn't really describe anything. "Mojo" on the other hand can be more universal than what Alex describes it. It's a personal preference, one feels good in playing his six string. In a sense, "MOJO" applies to anyone may it be a cheapo or expensive gear. As long as his fingers bonded with the instrument. If you mention "HIYAW" in other foreign forums they might ask "What the [strawberry] are you talking about?".
so if we go by alex's description..he does hear it, one is supposed to hear it..so if it is mojo, usually some movies with that go "no man the mojo is in you all along.."
i like skunky's post but if its not that..then what is? the term hiyaw if i ask all the people that speak tagalog around me say its scream or to get louder..however during my college or hs years i think the term had to do something with a shampoo commercial..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: acidtest on May 23, 2011, 06:10:46 AM
...so hindi nare-record tong 'hiyaw'? mukhang di ko sya kailangan then...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 23, 2011, 07:52:58 AM
however during my college or hs years i think the term had to do something with a shampoo commercial..
hiyang, bro. :)
anyway I agree with your contention that it's more of a connection between a one and his instrument. Granted it IS easier to bond with a well made instrument, but it's not entirely on the guitar. The responsibility also falls on the player to carry a certain skill level to coax the tones out.
I'll stop now. My post is turning into a Tone-is-in-the-hands argument. Narinig niyo na yun. Would be nice to hear about the other aspects of the discussion.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 23, 2011, 07:56:01 AM
mojo just made more complicated.. i think note bloom is the closest translation.
note bloom is the closest translation to "hiyaw" itself because of the sound we often associate with it (higher order harmonics). but i prefer the term double tone since it implies not just the highest order harmonics.
i'm sure someone will say it's more than just note bloom or double tone... whatever it is, our goal should be to eventually know what produces it and how to reproduce it. but my point is that note bloom or double tone, along with other great properties of good tone, can explained in physical terms. we don't need to restort to metaphysics.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: riffscreamer on May 23, 2011, 11:22:45 AM
anyway I agree with your contention that it's more of a connection between a one and his instrument. Granted it IS easier to bond with a well made instrument, but it's not entirely on the guitar.
yes and no..confusing eh? but its true..its easy to bond to like its feel, playability and sound(tone)..but usually its the overall syncing to one's perceive sound(guitar in the head)..that matters alot..well to me in someway it does..to sum it, for me its easy to make a well playing, nice sounding guitar..but its so hard making/choosing a go-to guitar..
Quote
The responsibility also falls on the player to carry a certain skill level to coax the tones out.
lets put this is a testing out in choosing that right guitar..and yeah skill matters(both hearing, playing/feel) in determining if that is the guitar for you..even having someone pick a guitar for me is something that is still a risk, you may either like or dont like the sonic properties of that guitar..
Quote
I'll stop now.
dont stop :D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Bolt Thrower on May 23, 2011, 11:32:00 AM
the concept is just too esoteric and mystical to me. you can't measure it. there's no yardstick to prove it. doesn't mean anything.
alot of the guitarists who made their mark in history probably has their no.1 guitar without this Hiyaw thing.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 23, 2011, 11:33:31 AM
On point#1, there is such a thing as luck in picking out a guitar thats why I cannot even fully endorse all the Fender guitars at Yamaha Buendia store in the same way I cannot endorse all the Fender Custom Shops at Ludlow New York.
On point#2, that there is magic. My suhr modern was one serial apart from exactly the same suhr modern with the same materials and configuration. The only difference was the color, yet my suhr modern which only one serial higher, sounded rich and alive while the other one sounded dead.
On point#3, buying capacity is true for high end instruments that deliver the goods. I wish it were otherwise but it is just plain NOT so. I am not saying all high end instruments sounds great or good but the great ones are unfortunately expensive. I will say this -- No Ibanez Prestige will ever match my Grey Suhr Modern. Period. I tried very hard to look for an ibanez Prestige to match the Suhr and NO such luck. I also want to own a Prestige but sorry talaga palyado laban sa magandang suhr modern maski anong sulok ako ng mundo pumunta.
On point#4, ano nga ba inexplain ng Beauty of the Burst? If you read it again, its trying to get technical and yet does NOT review each individual Burst in its covers with regard to its so called simple explanation. I will assume its trying to explain a good sounding burst (lets give Yashuro the benefit of the doubt). Eh anong explanation niya sa panget na burst? Wala. Kaso mas maraming panget na burst so what is physically going on in a bad sounding burst? Its never explained and thus... its not science nor is it fact. Even Yashuro does not claim it to be science and fact anywhere in his book. Ikaw lang nag claim na science and fact and ang mismong author hindi nag claim niyon.
So if you think electric guitar is more of a science, its more religion than you think....
Like I said, I won't debate with you because you keep misquoting/misunderstanding me and I don't understand your point/logic.
---
I do encourage others to pursue more serious study of guitar engineering and psychoacoustics. It won't hurt to learn the science behind your passion; in fact it can only help. If you know more about the instrument and how it works, the more you'll improve in selecting good instruments and using them to their fullest potential.
Here's some research links for your initial reading list: http://www.guitarengineer.com/index_files/Page2240.htm
Websites pa lang yan, madami pa sa print books. The journals will be harder to find. I only cited the BOTB book because it's more popular and less academic in tone.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 23, 2011, 11:39:28 AM
...so hindi nare-record tong 'hiyaw'? mukhang di ko sya kailangan then...
hehe. onga naman. pero kung di kaya irecord, ibig sabihin ba di rin kaya ma-pick up ng mic/mixer/PA setup? so pag live kailangan within earshot ka talaga dapat ng amp. hehe. ayos to ah. how convenient.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 23, 2011, 11:40:41 AM
hehe. onga naman. pero kung di kaya irecord, ibig sabihin ba di rin kaya ma-pick up ng mic/mixer/PA setup? so pag live kailangan within earshot ka talaga dapat ng amp. hehe. ayos to ah. how convenient.
hi sir, i believe LOTS of modern recording equipments could "hear" what our ears cannot perceive.. ano pa kaya ang sound from a guitar that's plugged in an amp..
for example: whale's "sonar" speaks etc..
i personally think its not the ear.. its the BRAIN.. thinking you are hearing this and that.. interpreting it a certain manner.. and OVERTHINKING IT, and OVERINTERPRETING IT..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Bolt Thrower on May 23, 2011, 11:50:46 AM
in the end, all we are talking about is both resonance and overtones. not this magical mystical hiyaw unicorn.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: rolexm on May 23, 2011, 11:52:29 AM
Yes... When it comes to making equipment sound better.... it is more important than your own hands.
Please elaborate and demonstrate if possible.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: masarapangtaho on May 23, 2011, 11:59:14 AM
IMVHO "HIYAW" is different from "pig squeal"... Common misconception to ng hiyaw. As skunyfunk said, it's how a note/notes in you guitar sound with that "swirling effect" that can be attributed to a lot of factors. I think this will all boil down to the old "tone is in the fingers vs. equipment" discussion. :wink:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 23, 2011, 12:05:40 PM
This discussion really intrigues me. Aside from the fact that the HIYAW issue had been threaded countless times. Honestly, without any prejudice to guitar playing skills, I want to HEAR from the forumers here their audio sample/s of HIYAW from their guitars and fingers and wherever. There are millions of words that we can use to describe it but at the end of the day, HIYAW is all about sound. Or guitar tone. Or whatever.
I WANNA HEAR THE HIYAW!
But since someone said it can't be recorded, I'll just FAP then. :P
Seriously, I wanna hear it.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: nitroaurora on May 23, 2011, 12:39:42 PM
the concept is just too esoteric and mystical to me. you can't measure it. there's no yardstick to prove it. doesn't mean anything.
alot of the guitarists who made their mark in history probably has their no.1 guitar without this Hiyaw thing.
i agree with you here bro. i was with a fellow forumite kagabe, we were talking about this thread. pero correct me if im wrong, maririnig mo pa ba yung hiyaw/mojo na yan in a band setting? just my thoughts :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Boosted on May 23, 2011, 03:47:50 PM
i agree with you here bro. i was with a fellow forumite kagabe, we were talking about this thread. pero correct me if im wrong, maririnig mo pa ba yung hiyaw/mojo na yan in a band setting? just my thoughts :-D
yessir :)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 23, 2011, 04:04:04 PM
hi sir, i believe LOTS of modern recording equipments could "hear" what our ears cannot perceive.. ano pa kaya ang sound from a guitar that's plugged in an amp..
for example: whale's "sonar" speaks etc..
i personally think its not the ear.. its the BRAIN.. thinking you are hearing this and that.. interpreting it a certain manner.. and OVERTHINKING IT, and OVERINTERPRETING IT..
it can't be recorded with any existing technology........ hmmm, I'll go ahead and say it then. Hiyaw doesn't exist. I personally believe that Hiyaw is something your brain tells you to hear after deciding to part with $$$$$ to ease your conscience over a lavish purchase. Sorry, thats just my opinion. Not provoking a fight.
Therefore, it can still be achieve by purchasing a guitar that's (estimatedly) around 5-10x more than what you what you can afford.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 23, 2011, 04:36:29 PM
i agree with you here bro. i was with a fellow forumite kagabe, we were talking about this thread. pero correct me if im wrong, maririnig mo pa ba yung hiyaw/mojo na yan in a band setting? just my thoughts :-D
Yes, if you have a good amp/speaker and band mix where the guitar can be clearly heard. Lots of good examples on LIVE recordings so, yes, it can definitely be heard in a band setting as well as be captured on record.
That is assuming, of course, that we're talking about the same thing. Hahaha.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: page8six.... on May 23, 2011, 04:42:00 PM
quote author=firemodel55 link=topic=234773.msg3237695#msg3237695 date=1306026046] Yes... When it comes to making equipment sound better.... it is more important than your own hands. [/quote]
Yes, if you have a good amp/speaker and band mix where the guitar can be clearly heard. Lots of good examples on LIVE recordings so, yes, it can definitely be heard in a band setting as well as be captured on record.
That is assuming, of course, that we're talking about the same thing. Hahaha.
but it can just be down to how good the guitar resonates relative to its build quality right? including sustain and overtones? that is the hiyaw we are talking about here. i think.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 23, 2011, 05:19:58 PM
"Hiyaw" is Alex's own way of measuring how good a guitar is. Maybe Alex is gifted............... well, Ron Jeremy is gifted too.......... he can make a lady scream!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 23, 2011, 05:36:28 PM
Yes, if you have a good amp/speaker and band mix where the guitar can be clearly heard. Lots of good examples on LIVE recordings so, yes, it can definitely be heard in a band setting as well as be captured on record.
Master Joric, can you post links? Thanks. I'd appreciate it. :)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 23, 2011, 05:42:32 PM
but it can just be down to how good the guitar resonates relative to its build quality right? including sustain and overtones? that is the hiyaw we are talking about here. i think.
overtones, yes, or harmonics on top of the fundamental. that's why i (and a lot of others more knowledgeable than i) call it "double tone". as long as it's the same concept, it's all good.
btw, the reason people often call it "bloom" is because it's "heard" as the fundamental starts to die down. actually, a note contains a lot of overtones/harmonics the moment it's created and bloom is just part of the double tone. but a guitar is a dynamic entity, the various tone filters (neck, bridge, etc.) work together to create various permutations of the harmonic/overtones in the lifetime of one note! what most people call "hiyaw" (like a screaming meow of a cat) is just one type of a double tone.
engineers and even regular guys like us have tried to empirically verify it. see here: http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11964 http://www.lespaulforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=154644
and, yes, it is down to the holistic interaction of materials and construction of the guitar, not magic.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 23, 2011, 05:52:11 PM
Just listen to live Greenie, Page, Clapton, Allman, Moore, Gibbons, Derek Trucks. Most links would usually point to compressed or low quality sources.
Thanks so much! :)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: redballs17 on May 23, 2011, 05:58:03 PM
I have once seen a video explaining the factors of selecting a guitar. They have stated that a huge factor is a persons bone structure in his/her fingers. Maybe it has something to do with the way your fingers/skin reacts once you press the strings (I'm not pertaining to skill, just the finger itself). Every person sounds different even if they use the same guitar and pluck the same note.
I always believe this theory mainly because every time a friend of mine borrows my guitar, effects and amp he never sounded like me even if we play the same kind of stuff note per note.
Is this the “HIYAW” factor in testing or searching for a good guitar? :-P
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: nathanmanansala on May 23, 2011, 06:33:39 PM
i add the hiyaw myself. i try to scream over the guitar. having a mic in front of me helps. sometimes it comes out of my ass too.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 23, 2011, 06:36:14 PM
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallaci
Post by: micr0chimp on May 24, 2011, 06:14:57 AM
...is the character of an instrument that helps a musician make one note mean more than a thousand internet posts. Back to work, people. Live and let live.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: scHism on May 24, 2011, 07:00:45 AM
On that note, I would like to know if indeed there is hiyaw, perceivable, recordable, w/c is more important, the "hiyaw" of the note or the combination of notes, playing dynamics, effects, etc. that makes a song?
I would understand the big deal about hiyaw if the song is composed of one note/measure sustained notes but otherwise, i would just want to hear it for novelties sake or home noodling.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallaci
Post by: micr0chimp on May 24, 2011, 07:15:32 AM
Off the bat?
That held note in Hendrix's Machine Gun. The one the Univibe latched on to.
The first bent note in Eric Johnson's Cliffs Of Dover.
Every note Jeff Beck plays. =D
I'm sure the others can chime in because I think you are right. Musical examples will be the most helpful.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 24, 2011, 09:18:41 AM
question - can hiyaw be heard in pure clean tone?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 24, 2011, 09:32:53 AM
If by hiyaw you mean the double tone I refer to, and by pure clean tone you mean like a nice Fender blackface clean tone and not a sterile solid state tone, well, yeah sure you can.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Filippo on May 24, 2011, 09:35:31 AM
based on what I have experienced, yes you can get a double tone even on clean tone.
+1 on that Joric, I was using a 65 deluxe reverb...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 24, 2011, 09:46:05 AM
If by hiyaw you mean the double tone I refer to, and by pure clean tone you mean like a nice Fender blackface clean tone and not a sterile solid state tone, well, yeah sure you can.
Now what does this have to do with guitars? IMO, a guitar with 'hiyaw' is a guitar that can exhibit overtones in a way that creates very rich tones. And this has nothing to do with humbuckers or single coils... It is a trait from the PHYSICAL build of the guitar.
if it's really from the physical build of the guitar, then why need a nice tube amp to exhibit hiyaw? why not in solid state? if it has hiyaw, then it has hiyaw. i may go as far as saying that it should be apparent just by mic'ing the unplugged electric guitar by itself. if it's purely on the physical build, then amps, pickups and effects should not be in the equation to get hiyaw.
or is my mind just going wild with nonsense? :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: masterchoxter on May 24, 2011, 10:13:33 AM
if it's really from the physical build of the guitar, then why need a nice tube amp to exhibit hiyaw? why not in solid state? if it has hiyaw, then it has hiyaw. i may go as far as saying that it should be apparent just by mic'ing the unplugged electric guitar by itself. if it's purely on the physical build, then amps, pickups and effects should not be in the equation to get hiyaw.
or is my mind just going wild with nonsense? :lol:
ditto.. same query... please clarify...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: notlimhxcx on May 24, 2011, 11:00:28 AM
if it's really from the physical build of the guitar, then why need a nice tube amp to exhibit hiyaw? why not in solid state? if it has hiyaw, then it has hiyaw. i may go as far as saying that it should be apparent just by mic'ing the unplugged electric guitar by itself. if it's purely on the physical build, then amps, pickups and effects should not be in the equation to get hiyaw.
or is my mind just going wild with nonsense? :lol:
What that means is simply that a pickup, and therefore an amp, cannot pick up and amplify frequencies that are not physically produced by the guitar itself. Certain pickups, amps, speakers, and mics, however, due to their resonant frequencies, can amplify certain frequencies better or stronger than others. In a way, you might say certain frequencies are almost "boosted" while others are "attenuated". Remember, everything in the system is a tone filter.
Many PAF and boutique pus are good at it. Fender blackface amps seem to have this quality, as do other amps. But many pickups and amps don't: they are the ones we call one-dimensional, lifeless, dull because they don't "pick up" everything that a good guitar puts out. It's like hearing a note's fundamental and not much else.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: johnbrown on May 24, 2011, 12:44:42 PM
Nice thread and a lot of info.....
Just contributing my thoughts on this... I guess hiyaw for me is a technique, dynamic and personal taste of a player. Yes gear THE GUITAR $$$ plays a major role, but getting two different person playing it with different levels will surely show the sound difference.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 24, 2011, 01:32:42 PM
What that means is simply that a pickup, and therefore an amp, cannot pick up and amplify frequencies that are not physically produced by the guitar itself. Certain pickups, amps, speakers, and mics, however, due to their resonant frequencies, can amplify certain frequencies better or stronger than others. In a way, you might say certain frequencies are almost "boosted" while others are "attenuated". Remember, everything in the system is a tone filter.
Many PAF and boutique pus are good at it. Fender blackface amps seem to have this quality, as do other amps. But many pickups and amps don't: they are the ones we call one-dimensional, lifeless, dull because they don't "pick up" everything that a good guitar puts out. It's like hearing a note's fundamental and not much else.
what i take away from this is that hiyaw is really not JUST in the physical build of the guitar but also in the pickups and amp used. so there is really no way of knowing if a guitar has hiyaw in itself; it has to be complemented by good pickups and a good amp that will help pick-up everything a good guitar puts out. did i get it right?
to sum it up:
great guitar + great pickups + great amp = HIYAW great guitar + crappy pickups + great amp = possibly no hiyaw great guitar + great pickups + crappy amp = possibly no hiyaw
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: masterchoxter on May 24, 2011, 01:37:09 PM
what i take away from this is that hiyaw is really not JUST in the physical build of the guitar but also in the pickups and amp used. so there is really no way of knowing if a guitar has hiyaw in itself; it has to be complemented by good pickups and a good amp that will help pick-up everything a good guitar puts out. did i get it right?
to sum it up:
great guitar + great pickups + great amp = HIYAW great guitar + crappy pickups + great amp = possibly no hiyaw great guitar + great pickups + crappy amp = possibly no hiyaw
+100
add cables there too...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Alchemist0725 on May 24, 2011, 01:48:23 PM
I'll go with these equations:
great guitar + great pickups + great amp + great technique = HIYAW great guitar + great pickups + great amp + poor technique = HILAW
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 24, 2011, 02:06:10 PM
what i take away from this is that hiyaw is really not JUST in the physical build of the guitar but also in the pickups and amp used. so there is really no way of knowing if a guitar has hiyaw in itself; it has to be complemented by good pickups and a good amp that will help pick-up everything a good guitar puts out. did i get it right?
to sum it up:
great guitar + great pickups + great amp = HIYAW great guitar + crappy pickups + great amp = possibly no hiyaw great guitar + great pickups + crappy amp = possibly no hiyaw
I think it's more accurate to say that the guitar can have it acoustically (eg, in an anechoic chamber) but it might be hard to hear w/o good pickups and amps. The pickups and amp just convert, amplify, and possibly enhance what the guitar is producing physically. If it's not produced by the guitar itself, the best pickups and amps in the world won't re-produce it. It might help to note that acoustic guitars can have double tone/hiyaw properties too, which just proves the point that the root of that characteristic is the physical/construction properties of the guitar.
However, the moment string vibration is converted to electromagnetic energy by the pickup and amplified by the amp/speaker, i believe the pickup and amps start to play a very big role in the final tone. That's when pickup materials, construction, location, height, position, and a myriad of amp properties, changes the basic acoustic tone into something more. So, again, in that sense, pickups, amps, and speakers, play a part in how that double tone (or hiyaw or whatever you wanna call it) will be heard by human ears post-amplification. It's still the sum of all parts, even though the physical guitar is the only part that you cannot do without.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 24, 2011, 02:45:37 PM
I think it's more accurate to say that the guitar can have it acoustically (eg, in an anechoic chamber) but it might be hard to hear w/o good pickups and amps. The pickups and amp just convert, amplify, and possibly enhance what the guitar is producing physically. If it's not produced by the guitar itself, the best pickups and amps in the world won't re-produce it.
is there a way to possibly mic an electric guitar that allegedly has "hiyaw", and make the hiyaw come out? this is to take the amps and pickups out of the picture and focus on the guitar itself, since that's what this thread is pointing out from the get go. no need to enhance/cut any frequencies since it defeats the purpose of the hiyaw being inherent in the guitar.
as you said, some pickups and amps enhance some frequencies of the guitar. so if a guitar is inherently warm sounding, just slap on some pickups with treble-leaning EQ + a bright amp = the sound that will come out will be what the pickups and amp reproduce. on the flipside, if a guitar is too trebly the slap on some pickups that are more on the low/mid frequencies + a dark amp = warm tone comes out. effects isn't even in the equation here.
the magic of an electric guitar. if it were an acoustic guitar, it would be a lot different. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 24, 2011, 03:36:54 PM
is there a way to possibly mic an electric guitar that allegedly has "hiyaw", and make the hiyaw come out? this is to take the amps and pickups out of the picture and focus on the guitar itself, since that's what this thread is pointing out from the get go. no need to enhance/cut any frequencies since it defeats the purpose of the hiyaw being inherent in the guitar.
as you said, some pickups and amps enhance some frequencies of the guitar. so if a guitar is inherently warm sounding, just slap on some pickups with treble-leaning EQ + a bright amp = the sound that will come out will be what the pickups and amp reproduce. on the flipside, if a guitar is too trebly the slap on some pickups that are more on the low/mid frequencies + a dark amp = warm tone comes out. effects isn't even in the equation here.
the magic of an electric guitar. if it were an acoustic guitar, it would be a lot different. :-)
That's why we like acoustics, they're up-front and honest. Less mumbo-jumbo but not less in tone. Hehe...
Why the need to mic an unplugged electric guitar? Just listen for it and if it's there, it's there. If other people don't hear it then, they won't believe you even if you mic it, plug into an amp, or record it. In any case, kaya nga maganda sa acoustic muna siguro itry pakinggan (the original unplugged guitar). Everyone knows how old/"dead" strings make an acoustic sound dull. That's because the overtones/harmonics have disappeared. You can bet that guitar will not "hiyaw". Other factors can kill overtones in an acoustic (construction, structural issues, etc).
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Bolt Thrower on May 24, 2011, 03:40:37 PM
kung ganoon pala, gawa na tayo hiyaw pedal o hiyaw modeler. :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 24, 2011, 03:45:31 PM
kung ganoon pala, gawa na tayo hiyaw pedal o hiyaw modeler. :lol:
gumagawa na si plugzzzz electronics ng hiyaw pedal. lahat ng note,chords, pick attack lage humihiyaw. bebenta namin na mas mahal pa sa tunay na gibson lespaul 1959.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 24, 2011, 04:27:09 PM
I just want to commend deltaslim's efforts in trying to explain 'hiyaw'. Its is very difficult to convey via the written medium but joric is doing a great job at it.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 24, 2011, 07:39:19 PM
I think it's more accurate to say that the guitar can have it acoustically (eg, in an anechoic chamber) but it might be hard to hear w/o good pickups and amps. The pickups and amp just convert, amplify, and possibly enhance what the guitar is producing physically. If it's not produced by the guitar itself, the best pickups and amps in the world won't re-produce it. It might help to note that acoustic guitars can have double tone/hiyaw properties too, which just proves the point that the root of that characteristic is the physical/construction properties of the guitar.
However, the moment string vibration is converted to electromagnetic energy by the pickup and amplified by the amp/speaker, i believe the pickup and amps start to play a very big role in the final tone. That's when pickup materials, construction, location, height, position, and a myriad of amp properties, changes the basic acoustic tone into something more. So, again, in that sense, pickups, amps, and speakers, play a part in how that double tone (or hiyaw or whatever you wanna call it) will be heard by human ears post-amplification. It's still the sum of all parts, even though the physical guitar is the only part that you cannot do without.
ok.. now my nose is bleeding. i'm getting this. slowly. :D
I just want to commend deltaslim's efforts in trying to explain 'hiyaw'. Its is very difficult to convey via the written medium but joric is doing a great job at it.
kudos to you, too, Alex, for the humility. *bro-fist.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: free2rock on May 24, 2011, 08:25:11 PM
I just want to commend deltaslim's efforts in trying to explain 'hiyaw'. Its is very difficult to convey via the written medium but joric is doing a great job at it.
how about describing it in a way that makes you feel such as if you went to Filipo's house and bring your baker with you, test the two and in a way describe which one gives you more of the mojo that you are looking for..
that is between the two
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: chicken08 on May 25, 2011, 01:11:39 AM
Yung hiyaw ba, yun ba yung tunog kapag nagpluck ka ng string, tapos unti unting madodoble yung tunog na parang octave, na parang mejo naka wah pedal?
Hiyaw ba yun or Ngiyaw? :D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: toybitz on May 25, 2011, 01:45:20 AM
Going to Arie is perhaps the only way to avoid guess work. Others will give you their own interpretation which may or may not be 100% accurate to Arie's definition and intent.
I'm not discounting the possibilty that others can demo hiyaw but if I want to be 100% sure, I'l go straight to the source.
The luthier should own a sample of 'mojo' and since Arie can show that...yes...
I agree, Kuya Arie's place is the place to go.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: toybitz on May 25, 2011, 02:24:49 AM
I heard "hiyaw", but heard it in the wrong hands Thurs, two weeks ago sa Freedom bar..a guy with a white bolt on Les Paul, subbing for the band's on vacation guitarist.....
I want to coin the awful outcome of his sound, "ngiwi".
Can some members start using the word "ngiwi"? gusto ko din makapag-contribute sa "Makabagong Diksyonaryo".
If some of you were there, like 3 other members were...several times we looked at each other as the guy continued to finish the set...and we swear his guitar + skills oozed with "ngiwi".
good guitar + bad intonation + bad hearing + good amp + great facial expressions = NGIWI
I am half-glad the band didn't finish "Cause We've Ended As Lovers" for their sound check.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: juan_portnoy on May 25, 2011, 04:35:44 AM
I'd like to quote Slipperman here from this collection of articles:
Most(not all, with the advent of CMI's) musical instruments, and the poor bastards cursed with playing them, are integrated human controlled sound pressure transduction systems. That is, some guy stands in a room, straps on a guitar, picks up a plectrum, strikes a string(or 2 or 6), the string resonates in response to the applied mechanical energy at a frequency determined by a combination of it's tension, it's length, and it's diameter(which partially facilitates it's range of frequency vs. total tension)a pickup converts that mechanical energy into electrical current containing both frequency and amplitude, it passes down a guitar cable, into a pre-amplifier/Eq, onto an amplifier(these two are often an integrated system, as we know), and out to a speaker(or often a number of speakers in an enclosure) which excurse and create sound pressure changes at the same frequency(s) in the acoustic environ that those speakers are located in.
Those sound pressure changes contract and expand(the actual terms are compression and rarefaction) the air in the room, this energy zips into our eardrums, our eardrums resonate in sympathy and in turn convert these pulses into human electrical energy that gets loaded onto the 'hellbound express' and shipped right into the brain.
That's when we go.... "Dude......YOU ROCK!!".
Or maybe. "Doooooode.... YOU SUCK!"
Anyways.
These HUMAN CONTROLLED SYSTEMS of SPL generation are an INTEGRATED system that stretches all the way from the skill/intentions of the player to the movement of the speaker cone in the room.
1 (hopefully) harmonious system that is inter-dependant(to varying degrees and often in a bewilderingly complicated series of relationships) ON EVERY SINGLE COMPONENT IN THE SYSTEM.
Again.
1 INTEGRATED SYSTEM, DEPENDANT TO VARYING DEGREES ON EVERY COMPONENT IN THE F****** SYSTEM.
Again.
1 INTEGRATED SYSTEM, DEPENDANT TO VARYING DEGREES ON EVERY COMPONENT IN THE F****** SYSTEM.
One more time because it's going to become a f****** mantra here in this thread........
EVERY SINGLE COMPONENT IN THE WHOLE F****** SYSTEM MATTERS TO SOME F****** DEGREE, IN SOME F****** RESPECT.
The f****** pick matters.
Dude.
The F****** PICK MATTERS.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 25, 2011, 07:44:27 AM
Yes Joric, around the first few seconds of the tune. Pretty amazing, the guy has jazz chops. And more amazing to thing he used Chinese pickups on that guitar.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 25, 2011, 09:24:15 AM
Yes Joric, around the first few seconds of the tune. Pretty amazing, the guy has jazz chops. And more amazing to thing he used Chinese pickups on that guitar.
By "Chinese" did you mean "cheap, mass-produced"? :roll: joke Zhangbuckers are boutique pickups. The guy is based in LA:
Ah ganun ba? Kasi nakalagay Zhangliqun or something like that sa description niya and the first thing that comes to mind is a pinyin translation of a CHinese brand.
I STAND CORRECTED SIR.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spankyrigor on May 25, 2011, 09:29:55 AM
^^
:lol: peace tayo chief.. Zhangliqun is the builder's forum username.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Mocho on May 25, 2011, 09:49:21 AM
Ah yun ba yun? Kasi pag nagbebend ako dun sa 2nd hand cheap Epi ko parang nagkakaroon ng wah effect na parang pusang naglalampong :-)
Same case in two of my guitars, akala mo may sustaining wah sound pag nag bend ka on a very good tube amp. Kahit Fender Twin Reverb on slightly dirty mode, may lumalabas na ganun.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 25, 2011, 12:29:19 PM
how about describing it in a way that makes you feel such as if you went to Filipo's house and bring your baker with you, test the two and in a way describe which one gives you more of the mojo that you are looking for..
that is between the two
Of all the guitars I have tested on Earth at this point in time, the Baker Firemodel 55 has the most hiyaw. For those who don't believe you can ask my close friend Arie Hipolito. Period. Pending the Gil Yaron I ordered, Baker Firemodel 55's HIYAW ABILITY is its specific strength aside from the fact that the guitar itself has MOJO. I don't feel comfortable comparing it to anyone's other guitar because it might make them feel bad. I mean ... walang solution. How can I even duplicate the 55 or even transfer its properties to the other guitar?
By the way, I have two bakers but Firemodel 55's strength is both the thick top of the bend sustain along with the double note when its bent.
In the case of the Firemodel 55, its like the double note is always ON. Its not some kind of distorted raspy electronic effect but its as if the guitar had a built in slight chorus. As a consequence, you really need to back off on the gain and the volume on a good amp because the guitar is so richly harmonically that it can cut thru all the instruments in the band and that includes beating the bass, keyboards, drums and cymbals.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: shodawmoon on May 25, 2011, 09:43:08 PM
Same case in two of my guitars, akala mo may sustaining wah sound pag nag bend ka on a very good tube amp. Kahit Fender Twin Reverb on slightly dirty mode, may lumalabas na ganun.
I've experienced the same thing on that amp.
using a cheapo plywood guitar in fact. no kidding.
bear in mind i was using a Seymour Duncan hot rails on the bridge with a boston HM100 (this was around 2007) just before i joined this forum.
what would that mean then? could it be that it was just the pedal and the pickup?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Filippo on May 25, 2011, 10:40:09 PM
Of all the guitars I have tested on Earth at this point in time, the Baker Firemodel 55 has the most hiyaw. For those who don't believe you can ask my close friend Arie Hipolito. Period. Pending the Gil Yaron I ordered, Baker Firemodel 55's HIYAW ABILITY is its specific strength aside from the fact that the guitar itself has MOJO. I don't feel comfortable comparing it to anyone's other guitar because it might make them feel bad. I mean ... walang solution. How can I even duplicate the 55 or even transfer its properties to the other guitar?
By the way, I have two bakers but Firemodel 55's strength is both the thick top of the bend sustain along with the double note when its bent.
In the case of the Firemodel 55, its like the double note is always ON. Its not some kind of distorted raspy electronic effect but its as if the guitar had a built in slight chorus. As a consequence, you really need to back off on the gain and the volume on a good amp because the guitar is so richly harmonically that it can cut thru all the instruments in the band and that includes beating the bass, keyboards, drums and cymbals.
Alex's guitar may have more double tone than the conversion. Then again maybe not. As of this point, I don't think it really matters, with that being a distinct attribute of the guitar. What's more important if you ask me is what you do with the double tone and how you actually make use of that beautiful character and make it shine with the way you play the instrument. You really don't need double tone if you're just going to pound power chord after power chord on your guitar.
I've played that guitar. It sounds as darn good as it looks. Is it an all around guitar because of its hiyaw? Probably not. I think it will be killer for a particular type of musical application but not all. I guess my point is, nobody needs to feel bad if his guitar doesn't hiyaw as much as his neighbor's guitar. At the end of the day, pick the intrument that best suits what you want based on your application.
Alex, if you do decide to want to compare though, I don't mind at all. You're welcome to visit! We're all grown men, I can handle it no matter which way it goes :wink:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 25, 2011, 11:02:26 PM
In the case of the Firemodel 55, its like the double note is always ON. Its not some kind of distorted raspy electronic effect but its as if the guitar had a built in slight chorus. As a consequence, you really need to back off on the gain and the volume on a good amp because the guitar is so richly harmonically that it can cut thru all the instruments in the band and that includes beating the bass, keyboards, drums and cymbals.
how about those people who doesn't prefer that? do all people want that double note? how about that slight chorus?
how about if theres someone who doesnt prefer it and buys a guitar without those characteristics, does it mean his guitar sucks?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: acidtest on May 25, 2011, 11:46:25 PM
using a cheapo plywood guitar in fact. no kidding.
seems my beat up N2 can do this to a certain extent. so much for expensive guitars.....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: lolwat on May 25, 2011, 11:59:48 PM
Pardon for butting in, but it's starting to feel like "kayang mag-demolish ng bahay ang beyblade ko" with the seemingly grandiose claims coming from sir Alex.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: gradual nothing on May 26, 2011, 12:00:40 AM
Alex's guitar may have more double tone than the conversion. Then again maybe not. As of this point, I don't think it really matters, with that being a distinct attribute of the guitar. What's more important if you ask me is what you do with the double tone and how you actually make use of that beautiful character and make it shine with the way you play the instrument. You really don't need double tone if you're just going to pound power chord after power chord on your guitar.
I've played that guitar. It sounds as darn good as it looks. Is it an all around guitar because of its hiyaw? Probably not. I think it will be killer for a particular type of musical application but not all. I guess my point is, nobody needs to feel bad if his guitar doesn't hiyaw as much as his neighbor's guitar. At the end of the day, pick the intrument that best suits what you want based on your application.
Alex, if you do decide to want to compare though, I don't mind at all. You're welcome to visit! We're all grown men, I can handle it no matter which way it goes :wink:
darn..this is the best thing i've ever read.. most of the guitarist doesn't know this almost all.. it's not really about the guitar or his rig.. it's the player.. for me every guitar is good, well not just good but really better, it's just a matter of how you're using it ang how you make people hear and feel you when you play the instrument. :-) though we all know that those things has really a big factor.. but still its in the player pa rin!! :wink:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 26, 2011, 12:36:15 AM
Alex's guitar may have more double tone than the conversion. Then again maybe not. As of this point, I don't think it really matters, with that being a distinct attribute of the guitar. What's more important if you ask me is what you do with the double tone and how you actually make use of that beautiful character and make it shine with the way you play the instrument. You really don't need double tone if you're just going to pound power chord after power chord on your guitar.
I've played that guitar. It sounds as darn good as it looks. Is it an all around guitar because of its hiyaw? Probably not. I think it will be killer for a particular type of musical application but not all. I guess my point is, nobody needs to feel bad if his guitar doesn't hiyaw as much as his neighbor's guitar. At the end of the day, pick the intrument that best suits what you want based on your application.
True. I've heard of people who complained about that hiyaw effect and ask how to remove it fron their guitar. Some are metal/hard rock guys and some are jazz cats, IIRC. For the sound they are after, I can imagine why.
Indeed, kanya-kanyang preference yan. They're just tools, and we try to use the right tool for the job... Although how well we handle those tools also dictate how well we can do our job. ;-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 26, 2011, 12:56:00 AM
whew. +1 to flippo and deltaslim. exactly what ive been thinking, what ive been pointing out
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: lolwat on May 26, 2011, 01:07:36 AM
Let me again add to this worthy discussion with a quote from Henry Van Dyke:
"Use the talents you possess, for the woods would be very silent if no birds sang except the best."
I guess it also applies to guitars then :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 26, 2011, 02:34:31 AM
Of all the guitars I have tested on Earth at this point in time, the Baker Firemodel 55 has the most hiyaw. For those who don't believe you can ask my close friend Arie Hipolito. Period. Pending the Gil Yaron I ordered, Baker Firemodel 55's HIYAW ABILITY is its specific strength aside from the fact that the guitar itself has MOJO. I don't feel comfortable comparing it to anyone's other guitar because it might make them feel bad. I mean ... walang solution.
alex i have nothing against the guitar itself, im just saying at this point in time it would be cool if you could share with filippo or guitarfox the unique properties of that guitar. period..its not a competition just guys enjoying/sharing their guitars..hey i would if i could
Quote
How can I even duplicate the 55 or even transfer its properties to the other guitar?
you cant, no one can, talking about sound(tone) no one can predict the outcome of a guitar, playability and setup yeah of course
Quote
By the way, I have two bakers
cool, pics please!
Quote
but Firemodel 55's strength is both the thick top of the bend sustain along with the double note when its bent.
would that mean the other one will have a discounted price :D
Quote
As a consequence, you really need to back off on the gain and the volume on a good amp because the guitar is so richly harmonically that it can cut thru all the instruments in the band and that includes beating the bass, keyboards, drums and cymbals.
i'd like to see and hear that in action sometime in 2011/2012 ok?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: itchybrain on May 26, 2011, 11:36:38 AM
True. I've heard of people who complained about that hiyaw effect and ask how to remove it fron their guitar. Some are metal/hard rock guys and some are jazz cats, IIRC. For the sound they are after, I can imagine why.
Indeed, kanya-kanyang preference yan. They're just tools, and we try to use the right tool for the job... Although how well we handle those tools also dictate how well we can do our job. ;-)
net net, it still boils down to the player-guitar relationship. not too much on one guitar being superior to the other. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: jmreyes on May 26, 2011, 02:14:40 PM
If a guitar has hiyaw, can it be heard through any amp? Or does one need a hiyaw-specific amp for the purpose?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 26, 2011, 02:31:06 PM
I wonder what guitar the guys was using in the clip. Would you know what it is? it says 55 les paul? Is it a 55 conversion?
Since he's using HBs, it's definitely a conversion (assuming it's a reall 55, prolly a goldtop or custom).
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Filippo on May 26, 2011, 03:19:14 PM
yeah that's what I thought too... no humucker 55s...
I don't think this alludes to hiyaw coming only from old wood though. Though I must say it is a character that I have observed more of in old wood. Maybe the air pockets in the wood coupled with the tighter growth rings?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: markv on May 26, 2011, 03:28:15 PM
True. I've heard of people who complained about that hiyaw effect and ask how to remove it fron their guitar. Some are metal/hard rock guys and some are jazz cats, IIRC. For the sound they are after, I can imagine why.
Indeed, kanya-kanyang preference yan. They're just tools, and we try to use the right tool for the job... Although how well we handle those tools also dictate how well we can do our job. ;-)
I don't want nuttin' to get in duh way of mah C7b10b13 chord! :mrgreen:
I agree with the kanyang-kanyang preference. It also boils down to the application as well. Too much of the "hiyaw" factor may not play in favor of or serve a purpose for folks who enjoy density and polyphony in their music. But I am appreciative of that quality in the jazz-rock-blues realm.
It's a nifty quality to have. I just feel that it can't be the sole measurement of what would qualify a guitar to be good.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: free2rock on May 26, 2011, 07:01:00 PM
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: markv on May 26, 2011, 11:55:58 PM
major 3rd! :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on May 27, 2011, 01:29:25 AM
does "hiyaw" really matters? <<< good thread topic IMO :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: inigo on May 27, 2011, 01:30:57 AM
I tried out an unplugged Hamer explorer at JB ATC yesterday, held the body to my ear, and heard each chord and note I struck evolve into a whistling sound, like feedback. I took another unit from the hanger (and a couple more afterwards) and it didn't do the same. Yun ba yung hiyaw?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: EST2TELE on May 27, 2011, 01:37:34 AM
As long as you are making beautiful music, your guitar is your preference. Be it a Yarron or a Lazer.
But of course that only goes to a certain extent.
Kalokohan naman if we say that a P3,000 Raon electric guitar can outclass a Yarron...
But i bet there's a whole lot of HIYAW and more that can be coaxed out of the P3000 raon electric in the hands of masters sushi and slim than the Yaron in lesser hands such as mine :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 27, 2011, 07:33:02 AM
But i bet there's a whole lot of HIYAW and more that can be coaxed out of the P3000 raon electric in the hands of masters sushi and slim than the Yaron in lesser hands such as mine :-D
Thanks for the compliment but no way I can be mentioned in the same sentence as sushi. :-)
The player is always a factor but in order to NOT go in circles and start arguments, we should always think from an "all things being equal" perspective.
Seriously, if everyone can afford a Gilyaron, would anyone still prefer to buy the Gilraon?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 27, 2011, 08:05:24 AM
the same ol topic having the same contents...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 27, 2011, 09:48:14 AM
But i bet there's a whole lot of HIYAW and more that can be coaxed out of the P3000 raon electric in the hands of masters sushi and slim than the Yaron in lesser hands such as mine :-D
Uhmmm... player aside... that is the point of this thread. Guthrie Govan can make an RJ Shark sound good but I won't bother buying an RJ Shark.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 27, 2011, 09:55:45 AM
With the right amp, YES. Some amps can be stiff while others have blooming notes.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 27, 2011, 10:02:58 AM
Next question... When Gene Baker waits for a certain 'harvest time' for a certain type of wood, does that have anything to do with the need to make 'hiyaw' in their guitars? How much of their wood inventory do they reject?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 27, 2011, 10:39:03 AM
harvest? or buy wood..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 27, 2011, 10:42:08 AM
does "hiyaw" really matters? <<< good thread topic IMO :-D
is really the question begged to be answered. :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on May 27, 2011, 11:26:16 AM
I have always seen "hiyaw" being dsicussed here in philmusic but I never read or heard it being discussed in guitarworld, guitar player and other magazines alike (or maybe I just missed reading it), can anyone please cite any top guitar player going gaga over hiyaw property of a guitar? Thanks.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: farseer on May 27, 2011, 12:20:30 PM
I have always seen "hiyaw" being dsicussed here in philmusic but I never read or heard it being discussed in guitarworld, guitar player and other magazines alike (or maybe I just missed reading it), can anyone please cite any top guitar player going gaga over hiyaw property of a guitar? Thanks.
It is not endemic to our Pinoy culture, only that they do not call it HIYAW. Some call it a wailing sound, some say mojo. And it is not sustain per se. And the funny thing is that you have to go to corksniffer territory to see discussions like this in other forums.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on May 27, 2011, 01:04:58 PM
all I can think of "hiyaw" is billy gibbons sound, am i on the right track?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: farseer on May 27, 2011, 01:13:39 PM
HARVEST, as in they find the wood AND/ORthey buy a stash of wood harvested from a certain area at a certain time.
Dipende sa lunar cycle... and season.... the reason behind it, is that during the calculated period mas dry ang wood... the sap travels to the roots... well, parang ganyan
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: farseer on May 27, 2011, 01:26:22 PM
I have always seen "hiyaw" being dsicussed here in philmusic but I never read or heard it being discussed in guitarworld, guitar player and other magazines alike (or maybe I just missed reading it), can anyone please cite any top guitar player going gaga over hiyaw property of a guitar? Thanks.
I think its just overtones or double tone... alot of ovetones maybe... kaya no wonder, FM55 almost bought a Goodall acoustic w/c are known for overtones... I personally like it... nakakaWow kasi, it gives a very good 1st impression... but some dont like it, mas type nila fundamental tone... clarity instead of lushness....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: farseer on May 27, 2011, 01:29:10 PM
I have always seen "hiyaw" being dsicussed here in philmusic but I never read or heard it being discussed in guitarworld, guitar player and other magazines alike (or maybe I just missed reading it), can anyone please cite any top guitar player going gaga over hiyaw property of a guitar? Thanks.
I think its just overtones or double tone... alot of ovetones maybe... kaya no wonder, FM55 almost bought a Goodall acoustic w/c are known for overtones... I personally like it... nakakaWow kasi, it gives a very good 1st impression... but some dont like it, mas type nila fundamental tone... clarity instead of lushness....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 27, 2011, 02:24:37 PM
I think its just overtones or double tone... alot of ovetones maybe... kaya no wonder, FM55 almost bought a Goodall acoustic w/c are known for overtones... I personally like it... nakakaWow kasi, it gives a very good 1st impression... but some dont like it, mas type nila fundamental tone... clarity instead of lushness....
Yeah, for most Delta blues, especially bottleneck/slide, it's not always a desired quality. The overtones/harmonics can make slide guitar too glassy/piercing/noisy. But for some Piedmont or old-timey fingerpicking, I like it.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: paengkee on May 27, 2011, 03:42:57 PM
is the last part of this clip i made "hiyaw" ?
http://soundcloud.com/into-entropy/is-this-hiyaw
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: psychic_sushi on May 27, 2011, 05:05:00 PM
But i bet there's a whole lot of HIYAW and more that can be coaxed out of the P3000 raon electric in the hands of masters sushi and slim than the Yaron in lesser hands such as mine :-D
Yipes! Thank you, but I'm still chasing the 'slim's tail...
To be honest, I've played a couple of those Raon electrics in the past, and...
Thanks for the compliment but no way I can be mentioned in the same sentence as sushi. :-)
The player is always a factor but in order to NOT go in circles and start arguments, we should always think from an "all things being equal" perspective.
Seriously, if everyone can afford a Gilyaron, would anyone still prefer to buy the Gilraon?
Preeb's a new member here. He'll probably crack up if he understood what you meant by that :P
Now THOSE two names feel weird in a sentence...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 27, 2011, 05:19:34 PM
Yeah, for most Delta blues, especially bottleneck/slide, it's not always a desired quality. The overtones/harmonics can make slide guitar too glassy/piercing/noisy. But for some Piedmont or old-timey fingerpicking, I like it.
that's what i thought so too re acoustic blues guitar. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: acidtest on May 28, 2011, 08:27:58 AM
I like using 'overtones' when talking to a tipsy, sexy chinita or tisay. might go to 'harmonies' or 'hiyaw' after the gig.... :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 28, 2011, 09:18:16 AM
I doubt he harvests... he has to go to South America etc for that.... Most luthiers have their own supplier...
lol true and other places for koa, maybe what skunky meant was just body wood..and it would be still no from what i was told..they have a woodstash(supplier) that they go to..
the only few guys i know who harvest is these(http://bunker-guitars.com/store/tone-wood.html), but thats just for things they can source in their area..for rosewood and its non native cousins, they go to a supplier for that..but even this idea when i ask didnt fly to well..since the return time was really long..and it the mid point of it was better to get wood for the build that was precut and they just did the selection..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 29, 2011, 09:54:51 AM
I don't want nuttin' to get in duh way of mah C7b10b13 chord! :mrgreen:
I agree with the kanyang-kanyang preference. It also boils down to the application as well. Too much of the "hiyaw" factor may not play in favor of or serve a purpose for folks who enjoy density and polyphony in their music. But I am appreciative of that quality in the jazz-rock-blues realm.
It's a nifty quality to have. I just feel that it can't be the sole measurement of what would qualify a guitar to be good.
Anton, with much respect, its not kanya kanyang preference. "Hiyaw" is the one EASIEST measure (however unmeasurable but noticeable to the human ear and brain) to determine whether an electric guitar has mojo. Now a guitar with MOJO has all the other desirable traits that makes a SPECIFIC electric guitar superior to ALL others. And in my experience which is very broad, it is present in ALL electric guitars with MOJO. It is quite obvious that you have not encountered an electric guitar with MOJO and HIYAW which is OK because it is really very hard to find such guitars. Remember that HIYAW and MOJO need to be experienced first before it can be discussed and further discussion even after experiencing can be as imperfect.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 29, 2011, 10:03:47 AM
I have always seen "hiyaw" being dsicussed here in philmusic but I never read or heard it being discussed in guitarworld, guitar player and other magazines alike (or maybe I just missed reading it), can anyone please cite any top guitar player going gaga over hiyaw property of a guitar? Thanks.
Tonequest Report discusses it quite often... Its quite simple really. Guitarworld, Guitar player and other magazines alike if forced to rate sponsor guitars submitted for review based on HIYAW, 95% would fail miserably.
Tonequest Report has NO paid ads or sponsors...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 29, 2011, 10:14:35 AM
how about those people who doesn't prefer that? do all people want that double note? how about that slight chorus?
(People who hear and EXPERIENCE it, prefer it. It beats having to always use the following: overdrive, compression, distortion, delay, chorus, reverb, phasing. And overall, the guitar is just more expressive. The difference is like playing a real electric guitar made of wood versus the old Casio plastic and rubber synth guitar.)
how about if theres someone who doesnt prefer it and buys a guitar without those characteristics, does it mean his guitar sucks?
(Yes. Relatively, his non-hiyaw guitar SUCKS versus a guitar with MOJO and HIYAW. But it might suck less compared to other cheaper guitars like those made in santa mesa or those being sold in RJ without HIYAW. Depends really.)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Tasty on May 29, 2011, 10:30:19 AM
So, hiyaw is something so rare that even if you manage to get a guitar with it, you will be unable to record it or let your audience hear it without super expensive amazingly high-end non-Asian boutique amps?
Now, say I won the lottery and managed to get my hands on a magical guitar with hiyaw and an equally magical amp to capture it for live playing. Will my audience--who, for the purposes of discussion, has untrained ears--hear anything special at all?
Because I sure as hell can't hear any significant differences between high-end guitars and my cheap S Series Ibanez.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 29, 2011, 11:14:19 AM
So, hiyaw is something so rare that even if you manage to get a guitar with it, you will be unable to record it or let your audience hear it without super expensive amazingly high-end non-Asian boutique amps?
(Its rare. It can be heard by the audience with above average amps. But it really shines on AMAZINGLY HIGH END NON ASIAN BOUTIQUE AMPS.)
Now, say I won the lottery and managed to get my hands on a magical guitar with hiyaw and an equally magical amp to capture it for live playing. Will my audience--who, for the purposes of discussion, has untrained ears--hear anything special at all?
(The audience will hear it better than guitarists who are biased for their guitars that don't have HIYAW. Surprisingly quite a number of the audience hear better than guitarists.)
Because I sure as hell can't hear any significant differences between high-end guitars and my cheap S Series Ibanez.
(Yeah... The S series really sucks. My first electric guitar was an Ibanez S back in 1989 and until now the 2011 models still suck. Therefore, I AM AS SURE AS HELL that either: a) you have still NOT heard HIYAW -- even some of the so called high end guitars don't have it -- or b) you are deaf. No offense, I prefer to think of its as the former because its really hard to find guitars with HIYAW. But is the difference and effort worth it? Yup... definitely.)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: rye715 on May 29, 2011, 11:40:51 AM
Uhmm...before I comment on this, can anyone of you guys post a video or a soundclip which demonstrates (or should demonstrate) this concept called "hiyaw"? Just include the section of that particular piece (i.e. around 0:56-1:05 is where the "hiyaw" comes through).
Thanks!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on May 29, 2011, 07:45:24 PM
I've seen a video before demonstrating hiyaw with the baker guitar, it's still in youtube I think :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 29, 2011, 08:25:31 PM
Uhmm...before I comment on this, can anyone of you guys post a video or a soundclip which demonstrates (or should demonstrate) this concept called "hiyaw"? Just include the section of that particular piece (i.e. around 0:56-1:05 is where the "hiyaw" comes through).
Thanks!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 30, 2011, 12:36:07 AM
What was that Bamboo song that particular hiyaw guitar was used on? Was that recording able to utilize the hiyaw? Can we hear the hiyaw on in there? I wonder what Ira's opinion of the hiyaw guitar was, and why after trying the guitar has he not set forth on a hiyaw guitar quest?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: Letour on May 30, 2011, 06:08:20 AM
If you have an idea of 'hiyaw', probably you have seen firemodel's early ramblings in this forum.
(NOTE: This thread is meant to focus on HIYAW, and its role in our quest for the ultimate guitar. The science and the myths need to be unveiled. NO FIGHTING, PLEASE!)
(Yeah... The S series really sucks. My first electric guitar was an Ibanez S back in 1989 and until now the 2011 models still suck. Therefore, I AM AS SURE AS HELL that either: a) you have still NOT heard HIYAW -- even some of the so called high end guitars don't have it -- or b) you are deaf. No offense, I prefer to think of its as the former because its really hard to find guitars with HIYAW. But is the difference and effort worth it? Yup... definitely.)
Didn’t our HIYAW expert just disobeyed the no fighting rule by throwing nasty punches?
I don't know, but where I am from they are almost fighting words to me
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 30, 2011, 09:05:00 AM
found it! here you go.... a legit recording of the hiyaw guitar
do you think it captured the guitar's mojo?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 30, 2011, 09:30:29 AM
At this point, I hope everybody takes a big grain of salt with what Alex said in those last few posts so as to avoid fighting. May I share this moderator ruling on TDPRI forum (which I already posted on the "Survival Guide to Guitar Central" thread):
"A note to remind some posters in this thread that all you know is your opinion on this subject. And, if you want to quote other builders and such as proof then I'll say that all they have is their opinions, too. This is a subjective subject and there are not absolutes. Your opinion on the subject is not a FACT.
So, state YOUR opinions but don't try to belittle others for having a differing opinion. OK?"
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: firemodel55 on May 30, 2011, 11:03:08 AM
At this point, I hope everybody takes a big grain of salt with what Alex said in those last few posts so as to avoid fighting. May I share this moderator ruling on TDPRI forum (which I already posted on the "Survival Guide to Guitar Central" thread):
"A note to remind some posters in this thread that all you know is your opinion on this subject. And, if you want to quote other builders and such as proof then I'll say that all they have is their opinions, too. This is a subjective subject and there are not absolutes. Your opinion on the subject is not a FACT.
So, state YOUR opinions but don't try to belittle others for having a differing opinion. OK?"
Some opinions are BETTER than others... That's why there are EXPERTS in the world right? Such as consultants, creative agencies, litigation lawyers, masterchefs, tax avoidance lawyers, profilers, etc.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 30, 2011, 11:15:55 AM
I wonder what the experts' opinion/s on the sound of the guitar on this video....
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 30, 2011, 11:24:01 AM
Some opinions are BETTER than others... That's why there are EXPERTS in the world right? Such as consultants, creative agencies, litigation lawyers, masterchefs, tax avoidance lawyers, profilers, etc.
Yes, some opinions are better than others, especially if they are based on factual reality and not driven by hidden, selfish agendas. The best opinions are more logical and less emotional, and therefore more persuasive.
But when it comes to opinions, tolerance is an important virtue too: it means accepting that other people have a right to their opinion and express it, and that even though we may disagree with their opinions, that we can tolerate their world view, leave them in peace and allow ourselves to live in peace, with the understanding that we are all just honestly working towards what is true and just.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 30, 2011, 01:07:18 PM
Some opinions are BETTER than others... That's why there are EXPERTS in the world right? Such as consultants, creative agencies, litigation lawyers, masterchefs, tax avoidance lawyers, profilers, etc.
lol..especially profilers..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 30, 2011, 02:33:20 PM
but a simple yes or no will do. If its "yes" then we would now have a solid example of this hiyaw in his head. or if its somewhat captured a little then we now have a little picture of what the hiyaw in his head is and from there find out what it properties it didnt capture. if its totally not captured by this recording, then my useless opinion about this hiyaw will remain that hiyaw is plain and simple BS....
its the tone in his head we're trying to understand, he calls it hiyaw, and claims 95% of the world's guitars dont have it. Maybe it really is just in his head.
the overtones and double tones that were given as examples have not been acknowledged as what hiyaw really is... fm55 has yet to say "yes joric, that's the one I've been trying to say all along"
that swirly effect that sounds (pardon me) absolutely ridiculous is yet to be heard by everyone trying to explain what this hiyaw is. Apparently skunky has heard it and says it simply can't be captured, I don't know why though. I know if you can hear it, it can be captured. If it vibrates the air then a microphone (probably an expensive one) can capture it.
The only way we will be able to settle what this hiyaw really is, is for FM55 to put a finger on something we can all share. A clip, a recording, any reference at all. May not even be that particular guitar, just any one of the remaining 5%. Then we would know what he is really talking about and then all dissing of this and that can be justified or nullified. A step toward enlightenment and peace.
What all these strong arguments have been doing for years is make us run around in circles.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: farseer on May 30, 2011, 02:51:03 PM
To add... do we have to do string bends to demonstrate... or a simple pluck will do???
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 30, 2011, 03:32:55 PM
i think hiyaw can be captured.. even the bat's supersonic "talk" can be captured.. oh, even the japan's earthquake sound was captured..
ano pa kaya ang gitara > amp.. which is just within the normal hearing frequency..
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 30, 2011, 03:41:47 PM
well apparently, according to skunky, hindi daw e.
hiyaw>bat gossip and nature's fury
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: xaero on May 30, 2011, 04:55:24 PM
Wag na mag-abala. Kung sakaling marinig mo man yan eh masisiraan ka naman ng ulo.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 30, 2011, 07:20:43 PM
Some opinions are BETTER than others... That's why there are EXPERTS in the world right? Such as consultants, creative agencies, litigation lawyers, masterchefs, tax avoidance lawyers, profilers, etc.
Do you consider yourself an expert on tone and guitars?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: psychic_sushi on May 30, 2011, 07:35:23 PM
Anton, with much respect, its not kanya kanyang preference. "Hiyaw" is the one EASIEST measure (however unmeasurable but noticeable to the human ear and brain) to determine whether an electric guitar has mojo. Now a guitar with MOJO has all the other desirable traits that makes a SPECIFIC electric guitar superior to ALL others. And in my experience which is very broad, it is present in ALL electric guitars with MOJO. It is quite obvious that you have not encountered an electric guitar with MOJO and HIYAW which is OK because it is really very hard to find such guitars. Remember that HIYAW and MOJO need to be experienced first before it can be discussed and further discussion even after experiencing can be as imperfect.
Alex, with all due respect, I've taken a couple of my own guitars in the past to Arie when i used to avail of his services. He confirmed the "hiyaw" presence in them. In a clinic of mine I demonstrated an Elegee custom that had that quality. And during the mega pedal shoot-out that i volunteered myself as a demo-boy, alot of the participants noticed that my Greco Strat had that factor too. Additionally, Joey Puyat and i have had discussions about it, his white strat's got the mojo too.
I wouldn't be dipping my finger in this topic if i "didn't know sh%T" about what I was talking about or "playing". I'm just sayin'...
You're making us look like idiots man :-D take it easy...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on May 30, 2011, 07:48:04 PM
Mojo (African American culture), a magical charm bag used in voodoo, sometimes called a mojo hand <<< from wikipedia
Mojo originated as a term with a specific meaning, but in the late 20th century became a very fluid term with many different meanings. It originated as a reference to a type of magic charm. The word traces its origins to Africa and entered English in the late 19th century or early 20th century through use by African-Americans. It reflects the belief, common in many cultures, that some people have the ability to influence others to their own advantage, by casting spells or hexes. In African-American folk beliefs, especially in the rural U.S. South early in the 20th century, a mojo was a small bag worn by a person under the clothes (also known as a mojo hand). Such bags were thought to have supernatural powers, such as protecting from evil, bringing good luck, etc. The mojo bag usually contained a mix of herbs, powders, sometimes a coin, and other objects thought to promote supernatural action or protection.
Other names for mojos, or specific types of mojos, include conjure bag, toby, and nation sack.
References to mojos are common in early & mid 20th century rural blues songs. Some of these were blues tunes covered by white rock & roll bands in the 1960s. The tunes thus reached audiences unfamiliar with the rural African-American folk beliefs referred to in the lyrics of the songs. The exposure to uninformed audiences led to misunderstanding and additional uses of the word. One example of many is the 1999 film Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me which apparently used mojo to mean libido. Some other slang meanings of mojo in common use include: charm, charisma, karma, cocaine and thing (as in "Gimme that mojo!"). Source(s): knowledgerush.com
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: randymarsh on May 30, 2011, 07:52:41 PM
I've probably heard HIYAW twice in my entire life. The first time I probably heard it was during a Zappa Plays Zappa concert. Steve Vai and Dweezil having a guitar duel on stage. Steve with his beloved Evo and the usual Carvin Legacy stack vs Dweezil's SG through a Cornford. I'd say Evo sounded thin and lack luster compare to Dweezil's SG. I may say that the SG had the HIYAW factor.
The second time I probably heard it was on a Primus concert. Les Claypool’s famous Carl Thompson 6 sting bass sounded dull and life less compared to his latest Dan Maloney 4 string bass. Same great bass player, same rig but sounded like day and night with different basses. The Dan Maloney bass sounded more pleasing and probably had the HIYAW factor.
I would really like to hear FM55's baker guitar in person. I don't want to play it, just hear it side by side a gold top Les Paul or any high end guitar (on the same rig) played by a better guitar player forumite. I don't want a recording of it. A recording wont do justice kahit Royer R-121 + SM57 on a 12inch tape ang gamitin niyan . I want to hear the Baker breath on a closed cab 4x12.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on May 30, 2011, 07:58:06 PM
but a simple yes or no will do. If its "yes" then we would now have a solid example of this hiyaw in his head. or if its somewhat captured a little then we now have a little picture of what the hiyaw in his head is and from there find out what it properties it didnt capture. if its totally not captured by this recording, then my useless opinion about this hiyaw will remain that hiyaw is plain and simple BS....
its the tone in his head we're trying to understand, he calls it hiyaw, and claims 95% of the world's guitars dont have it. Maybe it really is just in his head.
the overtones and double tones that were given as examples have not been acknowledged as what hiyaw really is... fm55 has yet to say "yes joric, that's the one I've been trying to say all along"
that swirly effect that sounds (pardon me) absolutely ridiculous is yet to be heard by everyone trying to explain what this hiyaw is. Apparently skunky has heard it and says it simply can't be captured, I don't know why though. I know if you can hear it, it can be captured. If it vibrates the air then a microphone (probably an expensive one) can capture it.
The only way we will be able to settle what this hiyaw really is, is for FM55 to put a finger on something we can all share. A clip, a recording, any reference at all. May not even be that particular guitar, just any one of the remaining 5%. Then we would know what he is really talking about and then all dissing of this and that can be justified or nullified. A step toward enlightenment and peace.
What all these strong arguments have been doing for years is make us run around in circles.
In simple laymans terms...... "Feeling lang niya" :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 30, 2011, 08:21:58 PM
Alex, with all due respect, I've taken a couple of my own guitars in the past to Arie when i used to avail of his services. He confirmed the "hiyaw" presence in them. In a clinic of mine I demonstrated an Elegee custom that had that quality. And during the mega pedal shoot-out that i volunteered myself as a demo-boy, alot of the participants noticed that my Greco Strat had that factor too. Additionally, Joey Puyat and i have had discussions about it, his white strat's got the mojo too.
I wouldn't be dipping my finger in this topic if i "didn't know sh%T" about what I was talking about or "playing". I'm just sayin'...
You're making us look like idiots man :-D take it easy...
Don't worry, Anton, I don't think its you who's looking like an idiot here... ;-)
... plus many will agree that you are one of the very few people who can coax hiyaw out of a seemingly ordinary guitar. The better the player, the easier and nicer the hiyaw. Those who can't play will not be able to coax the same sounds as the better player. That's the sad part.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: burnsbhm on May 30, 2011, 08:38:27 PM
Don't worry, Anton, I don't think its you who's looking like an idiot here... ;-)
... plus many will agree that you are one of the very few people who can coax hiyaw out of a seemingly ordinary guitar. The better the player, the easier and nicer the hiyaw. Those who can't play will not be able to coax the same sounds as the better player. That's the sad part.
Joric, if ever God made our paths cross.....paiinumin kita! Ngayon lang ako sobrang nag-agree sa isang post!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: psychic_sushi on May 30, 2011, 11:04:25 PM
Don't worry, Anton, I don't think its you who's looking like an idiot here... ;-)
... plus many will agree that you are one of the very few people who can coax hiyaw out of a seemingly ordinary guitar. The better the player, the easier and nicer the hiyaw. Those who can't play will not be able to coax the same sounds as the better player. That's the sad part.
I owe you a drink buddy, cheers! :-D 8-) if we are talking solely about on the "harmonic bloom" aspect of a note, there are techniques to achieve that. IMHO, it's just a bonus to chance upon an instrument with that quality. If folks feel that it's an "end all, be all" factor for a guitar to be great then so be it. We're all entitled to our own dementia. :-P
Besides, it's not like I'm going to be HIYAWING my ass at every opportunity during every solo... :-P
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: EST2TELE on May 30, 2011, 11:12:19 PM
Don't worry, Anton, I don't think its you who's looking like an idiot here... ;-)
... plus many will agree that you are one of the very few people who can coax hiyaw out of a seemingly ordinary guitar. The better the player, the easier and nicer the hiyaw. Those who can't play will not be able to coax the same sounds as the better player. That's the sad part.
AMEN!!!!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: EST2TELE on May 30, 2011, 11:22:32 PM
could it be that HIYAW is not only heard but also 'felt' by both player and audience hence making it hard to describe or capture? just a thought. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 30, 2011, 11:49:46 PM
i almost got sad when i played my strat and i didn't hear any HIYAW but then i read this...
Don't worry, Anton, I don't think its you who's looking like an idiot here... ;-)
... plus many will agree that you are one of the very few people who can coax hiyaw out of a seemingly ordinary guitar. The better the player, the easier and nicer the hiyaw. Those who can't play will not be able to coax the same sounds as the better player. That's the sad part.
...and it revived me! :lol:
guitar playing skill. is and always has been. :-)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: trem3 on May 30, 2011, 11:55:50 PM
i almost got sad when i played my strat and i didn't hear any HIYAW but then i read this...
...and it revived me! :lol:
guitar playing skill. is and always has been. :-)
Wag kasi magpapaniwala... As I said nakita ko na ang video, FM55 and his Baker. NO HIYAW WHATSOEVER! Kahit itanong mo pa yata kay Elegee kung may narinig sya, sasabihin nya WALA.
Kung whale bends, MERON, pati gitara ko merong whale bend.
HIYAW? F it!
(sorry ka-badtrip na kasi)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 31, 2011, 02:18:28 AM
Wag kasi magpapaniwala... As I said nakita ko na ang video, FM55 and his Baker. NO HIYAW WHATSOEVER! Kahit itanong mo pa yata kay Elegee kung may narinig sya, sasabihin nya WALA.
Kung whale bends, MERON, pati gitara ko merong whale bend.
HIYAW? F it!
(sorry ka-badtrip na kasi)
this may start something...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bugoy on May 31, 2011, 02:24:25 AM
LMFAO :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 31, 2011, 02:30:44 AM
with much respect....
I'd like to believe that this hiyaw is not just a hallucination born from an excessive expense which led to a particular level of guilt that FM55 can't justify on his own, therefore imposed on everyone else to be required on a great guitar, to justify that the purchase was worth it because of a magical characteristic found nowhere else or only in 5% of the world's guitars. But I just can't help but think otherwise, because:
a. He refuses to specify tones he likes or accepts. On one occasion he brought about links to a Plexi replica-maker's sound clips of a Gil Yaron LP, when asked of his opinion on the tone in the recording or if the tone was acceptable to him, his bottom-line answer was "ask the guy who made the clip and that would be my opinion". Again, I make another question on this thread and is yet unanswered "Did the recording on the Bamboo record, that used the particular hiyaw-guitar, capture the hiyaw HE keeps on talking about?" I don't see any other plausible reason why FM55 avoids putting a reference (be it not the exact tone) or a more solid idea of the tone in his head for us apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
b. The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD (lets call it that because after 10 pages he has not truly acknowledged if any of the definitions from Skunky to Slim and everything in between were correct nor accurate, and for all we know we could still be discussing different HIYAW's)... to continue... The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD remains in his head. Until he says "Yes! That is the Hiyaw I am talking about" to one of the definitions given, the HIYAW IN HIS HEAD can still be different from the ones in each of ours. Again, I don't see any other plausible reason why he has not acknowledge a definition to be true apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
that's just me and the thoughts I can't help but think... and I say this with all due respect.
and notice... the absence of low-blows in my posts in this thread. that's respect for TS appeal for no fighting
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: juan_portnoy on May 31, 2011, 02:54:19 AM
I'd like to believe that this hiyaw is not just a hallucination born from an excessive expense which led to a particular level of guilt that FM55 can't justify on his own, therefore imposed on everyone else to be required on a great guitar, to justify that the purchase was worth it because of a magical characteristic found nowhere else or only in 5% of the world's guitars. But I just can't help but think otherwise, because:
a. He refuses to specify tones he likes or accepts. On one occasion he brought about links to a Plexi replica-maker's sound clips of a Gil Yaron LP, when asked of his opinion on the tone in the recording or if the tone was acceptable to him, his bottom-line answer was "ask the guy who made the clip and that would be my opinion". Again, I make another question on this thread and is yet unanswered "Did the recording on the Bamboo record, that used the particular hiyaw-guitar, capture the hiyaw HE keeps on talking about?" I don't see any other plausible reason why FM55 avoids putting a reference (be it not the exact tone) or a more solid idea of the tone in his head for us apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
b. The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD (lets call it that because after 10 pages he has not truly acknowledged if any of the definitions from Skunky to Slim and everything in between were correct nor accurate, and for all we know we could still be discussing different HIYAW's)... to continue... The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD remains in his head. Until he says "Yes! That is the Hiyaw I am talking about" to one of the definitions given, the HIYAW IN HIS HEAD can still be different from the ones in each of ours. Again, I don't see any other plausible reason why he has not acknowledge a definition to be true apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
that's just me and the thoughts I can't help but think... and I say this with all due respect.
and notice... the absence of low-blows in my posts in this thread. that's respect for TS appeal for no fighting
Very well said.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bryanarzaga on May 31, 2011, 06:27:47 AM
I would really like to hear FM55's baker guitar in person. I don't want to play it, just hear it side by side a gold top Les Paul or any high end guitar (on the same rig) played by a better guitar player forumite. I don't want a recording of it. A recording wont do justice kahit Royer R-121 + SM57 on a 12inch tape ang gamitin niyan . I want to hear the Baker breath on a closed cab 4x12.
the goldtop might as well be a yaron..anything else alex considers not worth his time..
I owe you a drink buddy, cheers! :-D 8-) if we are talking solely about on the "harmonic bloom" aspect of a note, there are techniques to achieve that. IMHO, it's just a bonus to chance upon an instrument with that quality. If folks feel that it's an "end all, be all" factor for a guitar to be great then so be it. We're all entitled to our own dementia. :-P
Besides, it's not like I'm going to be HIYAWING my ass at every opportunity during every solo... :-P
Well said.
Honestly, I think that (harmonic bloom) is only what what Alex is referring to. It's plain logic: hiyaw is an onomatopoeia. It refers to a high pitched sound. If it's a sound higher pitched than that produced by the fundamental, then it's a harmonic. Plain and simple.
Despite all the smokes and mirrors, I think that's all Alex's concept of hiyaw is limited to. Very early in this thread I already mentioned my theory that hiyaw is only one byproduct of double tones/overtones present in good guitars that dynamically produces sounds with just one pluck. The best acoustic/guitar engineers define tone in those dynamic but empirical terms. That's a larger and more fundamental concept than just harmonic bloom aka hiyaw.
And as I and many others have said before, hiyaw is not necessarily a desired quality in all genres of music. And even if a guitar has it, it takes playing ability to coax it out. A guitar doesn't produce hiyaw by itself!!!
Wag kasi magpapaniwala... As I said nakita ko na ang video, FM55 and his Baker. NO HIYAW WHATSOEVER! Kahit itanong mo pa yata kay Elegee kung may narinig sya, sasabihin nya WALA.
In addition, I've heard that guitar in the hands of a real player in a live band setting: no hiyaw either. If the player didn't purposefully make it hiyaw, that only backs up the contention about the player's role in hiyaw production and his musical intention.
I'd like to believe that this hiyaw is not just a hallucination born from an excessive expense which led to a particular level of guilt that FM55 can't justify on his own, therefore imposed on everyone else to be required on a great guitar, to justify that the purchase was worth it because of a magical characteristic found nowhere else or only in 5% of the world's guitars. But I just can't help but think otherwise, because:
a. He refuses to specify tones he likes or accepts. On one occasion he brought about links to a Plexi replica-maker's sound clips of a Gil Yaron LP, when asked of his opinion on the tone in the recording or if the tone was acceptable to him, his bottom-line answer was "ask the guy who made the clip and that would be my opinion". Again, I make another question on this thread and is yet unanswered "Did the recording on the Bamboo record, that used the particular hiyaw-guitar, capture the hiyaw HE keeps on talking about?" I don't see any other plausible reason why FM55 avoids putting a reference (be it not the exact tone) or a more solid idea of the tone in his head for us apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
b. The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD (lets call it that because after 10 pages he has not truly acknowledged if any of the definitions from Skunky to Slim and everything in between were correct nor accurate, and for all we know we could still be discussing different HIYAW's)... to continue... The HIYAW IN HIS HEAD remains in his head. Until he says "Yes! That is the Hiyaw I am talking about" to one of the definitions given, the HIYAW IN HIS HEAD can still be different from the ones in each of ours. Again, I don't see any other plausible reason why he has not acknowledge a definition to be true apart from the fact that when he does so we will be able to determine FOR OURSELVES if the tone is good or not and he would no longer be able to argue that his tone is better than everyone elses subsequently de-justifying his $$$ purchase.
that's just me and the thoughts I can't help but think... and I say this with all due respect.
and notice... the absence of low-blows in my posts in this thread. that's respect for TS appeal for no fighting
Don't hold your breath... Giving an example will destroy the illusion of exclusivity, mojo, magic, unobtainium... hence he won't do it.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallaci
Post by: micr0chimp on May 31, 2011, 09:35:08 AM
Aysus...ang lumalabas e wala nanaman tayong mga alam? Serves us right. We should've seen that coming. :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: guitarman8294 on May 31, 2011, 10:28:56 AM
I'd like to believe that this hiyaw is not just a hallucination born from an excessive expense which led to a particular level of guilt that FM55 can't justify on his own, therefore imposed on everyone else to be required on a great guitar, to justify that the purchase was worth it because of a magical characteristic found nowhere else or only in 5% of the world's guitars. But I just can't help but think otherwise, because:
i think this is exactly it. right on the button. it's like eating in an overly expensive Japanese resto and saying that their salmon sashimi has something magical that is missing in Teriyaki Boy or something.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 31, 2011, 10:44:06 AM
therfore, the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies of hiyaw have been answered.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: skunkyfunk on May 31, 2011, 10:52:11 AM
@challengeofthegobots
I have been recording for 12 years now, 8 years of which professionally. It is my job and chosen career and I can tell you with a straight face that RECORDING, no matter how high end the equipment and topnotch the acoustics of the venue is, will always have a less-than-perfect representation of the source. Yes, even with your $2,000 Neumann mics and $3,000 mic preamps. Because in itself, digital media (even at 96KHz) is DISCRETE DATA. Everything you hear in the real world is continuous over the time domain and no matter how advanced our recording technology is, you can never ever replicate the source 100%.
Put it this way... Have you heard a DW Neil Peart signature snare? A lot claim that it is the holy grail of DW snares. But do the present Rush recordings capture that? I don't think so. Now if you focus on capturing the snare drum alone, there will be other factors that you may not be able to capture perfectly, such as, how much attack does the snare produce? Timbre can easily be captured, but those transients of different degrees are pretty hard to replicate. That is why recordings just serve as a GUIDE to buying gear.
Back to hiyaw, Hiyaw can be recorded partially but it is not very appreciable. In fact, I can get an average-sounding guitar and cheat the recording process (maybe slap in a little compression and do some artificial chorusing and time delays) and claim it has hiyaw. And then, everyone will start buying into it. Bottomline is, the special properties of hiyaw can only be appreciable if you PLAY the guitar as opposed to being part of the audience.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bugoy on May 31, 2011, 12:14:02 PM
LMFAO last night.. still LMFAO :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 31, 2011, 12:35:13 PM
@skunky
i mean no disrespect, throwing in your resume does give you credibility on the matter although common sense trumps credentials at this point. I agree that you can never replicate any sound 100%. But who's asking for a 100%? A silhouette of the sound may even be enough to point us out at a direction to understanding this myth (until this is defined, I can't think of a better word for it).
How about 50% of it? Was it captured in the Bamboo recording? You can recognize color even at 50% in the dark. You can still appreciate a good movie even if its not HD. You can tell a Benz form a Toyota by just its shadows. How in the world can we not appreciate spectacular bended notes with uber sweet overtones oozing with mojo even in the crappiest of recording scenarios like an P850 Xenon Mic thru a P1255 Acesonic Karaoke Mixer you can easily purchase in Hypermart.
I have been recording for 12 years now, 8 years of which professionally. It is my job and chosen career and I can tell you with a straight face that RECORDING, no matter how high end the equipment and topnotch the acoustics of the venue is, will always have a less-than-perfect representation of the source. Yes, even with your $2,000 Neumann mics and $3,000 mic preamps. Because in itself, digital media (even at 96KHz) is DISCRETE DATA. Everything you hear in the real world is continuous over the time domain and no matter how advanced our recording technology is, you can never ever replicate the source 100%.
Put it this way... Have you heard a DW Neil Peart signature snare? A lot claim that it is the holy grail of DW snares. But do the present Rush recordings capture that? I don't think so. Now if you focus on capturing the snare drum alone, there will be other factors that you may not be able to capture perfectly, such as, how much attack does the snare produce? Timbre can easily be captured, but those transients of different degrees are pretty hard to replicate. That is why recordings just serve as a GUIDE to buying gear.
Back to hiyaw, Hiyaw can be recorded partially but it is not very appreciable. In fact, I can get an average-sounding guitar and cheat the recording process (maybe slap in a little compression and do some artificial chorusing and time delays) and claim it has hiyaw. And then, everyone will start buying into it. Bottomline is, the special properties of hiyaw can only be appreciable if you PLAY the guitar as opposed to being part of the audience.
Please do, so we can all have an idea of the hiyaw in YOUR head and I hope FM55 agrees that it sounds like the hiyaw in his. Also I hope you be generous enough to share the process on how you achieved the hiyaw-cheat, so the rest of us cant-afford's can arrive nearer to it with our humble pedalboards. (thats if we even like hiyaw in the first place)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bugoy on May 31, 2011, 01:16:06 PM
eto hupaw
:lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: challengeofthegobots on May 31, 2011, 02:11:35 PM
crappy cam recording din, pero alam mo na may "pwede" yung guitar... wala syang "mismo" pero may "pwede" mapapa "yun o!" ka dun.
in addition to hiyaw I'd like to invent my own set of terms as well and add this to the GC glossary of guitar characteristics that cannot be recorded. and it can hardly be found on any of the expensive boutique gears, but more inherent in brands like Ibanez PRS and Stagg.
i may start a new thread.... or not medyo OT pero since we're on coining terms for tones in our heads... eto akin
pwede = A resonant Low characteristic more obvious in the low E5 power chord that can instantly draw skid marks to baconized briefs. It brings instant aggression if played in triplet chugga chugga riffs. It also brings spirits to Power 5ths across the neck even in the 14th fret/4th string high E mismo = the sweet sustain of bends with a bit of compression and scooped mids that can make panties wet instantly.... yun o = clarity of each note played throughout the fretboard and instantaneous sustain even in fast runs ...that make you squint your eyes in disbelief that such a tone existed
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: deltaslim on May 31, 2011, 02:48:38 PM
I'd like to believe that this hiyaw is not just a hallucination born from an excessive expense which led to a particular level of guilt that FM55 can't justify on his own, therefore imposed on everyone else to be required on a great guitar, to justify that the purchase was worth it because of a magical characteristic found nowhere else or only in 5% of the world's guitars. But I just can't help but think otherwise...
I don't think it's guilt. More of an attempt to build an artificial island of exclusivity in order to feed an oversized ego or fill a deep-seated insecurity.
pwede = A resonant Low characteristic more obvious in the low E5 power chord that can instantly draw skid marks to baconized briefs. It brings instant aggression if played in triplet chugga chugga riffs. It also brings spirits to Power 5ths across the neck even in the 14th fret/4th string high E mismo = the sweet sustain of bends with a bit of compression and scooped mids that can make panties wet instantly.... yun o = clarity of each note played throughout the fretboard and instantaneous sustain even in fast runs ...that make you squint your eyes in disbelief that such a tone existed
LOL. Fight fire with fire! Might as well, di naman nakikinig sa logic, reason, at proper argumentation yung kausap eh.
Dami pa pwede: angas, astig, bastos, malandi, kabit, malibog, matamis, etc.
Lahat yan di pwede marecord... pero pramis, totoo yan... madidinig lang in person... kung ikaw ako... na may golden ears... na pwede mo lang makuha kung mayaman, magaling, experienced, experto, eksklusibo...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: pitongjerome on May 31, 2011, 03:26:54 PM
if we could just record our brainwaves and put it in a vid and watch/hear it...
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: maxi_musikero on May 31, 2011, 03:37:01 PM
I don't think it's guilt. More of an attempt to build an artificial island of exclusivity in order to feed an oversized ego or fill a deep-seated insecurity.
Sounds like some psychotic behavior... matindi na ba tama nung mama?
LOL. Fight fire with fire! Might as well, di naman nakikinig sa logic, reason, at proper argumentation yung kausap eh.
Dami pa pwede: angas, astig, bastos, malandi, kabit, malibog, matamis, etc.
Lahat yan di pwede marecord... pero pramis, totoo yan... madidinig lang in person... kung ikaw ako... na may golden ears... na pwede mo lang makuha kung mayaman, magaling, experienced, experto, eksklusibo...
bossing, gusto ko marinig yan... pwedeng pangalan yan ng isang bagong boutique pedal line
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: juan_alderete on May 31, 2011, 10:46:55 PM
my gf told me, sa concert ni Piolo Pascual at ni Sam Milby mo maririnig ang Hiyaw.
Hiyaw ng mga shok-la.
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: bugoy on May 31, 2011, 11:46:11 PM
and LMAO tomorrow too? cool... so the bottomline will be "its in the player, not by his axe na naman ba?"
LMFAO kasi ang tatanda na ng mga tao dito pero para parin mga bata mag talo. still LMFAO pag pasok ko ulit sa thread na to ngayon habang nag ta trabaho ako :lol:
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: officebiker on June 01, 2011, 12:01:08 AM
may gitara ba na binubuksan pa lang yung case e humihiyaw na?
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: spetsnaz1123 on June 01, 2011, 12:23:40 AM
^ nice signature sir, kaya ayaw kong makipagtalo eh :-D
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on June 01, 2011, 12:29:30 AM
Baka pwede mag public appearance si FM55 sa GC people. Kahit tugtugin lang niya Top Gun anthem para di rin siya ma stress. Puro sustained notes pa yun! For sure lalabas "HIYAW" ng gitara niya dun!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: free2rock on June 01, 2011, 12:53:25 AM
Baka pwede mag public appearance si FM55 sa GC people. Kahit tugtugin lang niya Top Gun anthem para di rin siya ma stress. Puro sustained notes pa yun! For sure lalabas "HIYAW" ng gitara niya dun!
Cool song choice!
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: jellogz on June 01, 2011, 08:41:17 AM
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: stringman on June 01, 2011, 10:57:59 AM
Everyone needs to buy this if your guitar does not have that MOJO. It's not cheap though................. (http://www2.picturepush.com/photo/a/5771115/img/5771115.jpg)
Title: Re: Dissecting HIYAW... the science, the psycho-acoustic nature, and the fallacies
Post by: toybitz on June 01, 2011, 02:39:01 PM
I was saying...
this thread has run its course...and its course is always in circles.