Great looking instrument (harp guitar) on the flea

[catmandu2]

Great looking instrument on the flea (nfi)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/CATHEDRAL-GU...item3f4f86522b

[Petrus]

Nice ten-string classical guitar, but not a harp guitar. On a harp guitar, a separate set of strings with its own neck ("column/pillar," technically), headstock and tuners (usually) runs free of the body and these strings are designed to be strummed like a harp rather than fretted.

It derives from the old Renaissance theorbo (basically a lute with an absurdly long neck and a separate set of strings running almost parallel but free from the body, again to be strummed for the ostinado or drone effect; they have their own head and a totally separate set of tuning pegs.)

[catmandu2]

The "harp"-guitar (such as the one you pictured) is a misnomer - it's not actually a harp at all (it's more a zither with "drone" strings...harp strings insert into the soundboard *perpendicularly*, while zithers/lutes have a parallel perspective).

The nylon-strung guitar can be deployed in exactly the same manner as the Gibson or other "harp" type guitars (the strings don't have to be stopped on the fingerboard). Functionally it can be deployed exactly as any other "harp" guitar, but with the added capacity to be fretted as well (why it's such a great instrument). Nomenclature regarding instruments is often spurious and quite inaccurate..

[Eddie Sheehy]

This one is in Orange County, CA...

http://orangecounty.craigslist.org/msg/5099952088.html

[catmandu2]

Here, for example - (while aided by the use of electricity, of course)



I love to mess with this kind of thing - ergo http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/sh...-project-(NMC) ... electronics greatly facilitate this kind of thing - there're no limits to sustain, effects, timbres, etc. While I've the greatest admiration for heroes like Michael Hedges who deconstructed and reconceived the conventional six-string acoustic. It was in following those like Michael - that likely encouraged me to pursue trad instruments...rather than an electric approach -

[journeybear]

The "harp"-guitar (such as the one you pictured) is a misnomer - it's not actually a harp at all (it's more a zither with "drone" strings...

Not so. Don't be misled by all those strings running parallel. It's a guitar with a separate "harp" arrangement, and definitely not a zither. A harp guitar is a guitar with at least one freestanding string in a separate course. Here is more (much more) info, including:

For the layperson looking for the short answer of "What is a Harp Guitar?," here it is in a nutshell (from Definition 14 below):

A guitar, in any of its accepted forms, with any number of additional "floating" unstopped strings that can accommodate individual plucking.

The modern harp guitar must have at least one unfretted string lying off the main fretboard; these unfretted strings are played as an open string.

The word "harp" is a specific reference to the unstopped open strings, and is not specifically a reference to the tone, pitch range, volume, silhouette similarity, construction, floor-standing ability, nor any other alleged "harp-like" properties.

This recent thread goes into more detail and also provides some video examples of old-style and more modern versions being played. I wouldn't call the harp strings drones - I usually think of a drone as being played continuously with the other strings rather than alternatingly - but someone else might. That said, I do not recall seeing anyone play the harp course chiefly like a harp - that is, with a picking motion on that course to produce the main melody - though the capability is there, at least theoretically, and Muriel Anderson does throw in a few passes of that sort into her performance. The guitar course seems to be the main part of the instrument. Perhaps it would be more accurate to call it a "guitar-harp."





At any rate, the item for sale is a ten-string guitar, no harping about it. How it's tuned is anyone's guess. But you'll be the only one in town with one, so you can do whatever you want with it, and no one will be able to tell you otherwise.

[catmandu2]

The string/bridge aspect is where the actual (functional) differences are. Whether or not a string is "free-standing, floating, offset," etc - while distinctive in appearance - is less signi ficant in the sonic/functional sense. This is often if not typically not understood (including in the cited reference).

The cited "harp"-guitar characteristics may satisfy criteria for guitars (and mandolins for that matter) - but this is criteria through the eyes of lute-family instruments; as I said you can call anything, anything you want, and based on any criteria deemed useful - but this isn't criteria used in the harp (actual) world; here the (my) aforementioned characteristics are what distinguish harps and zithers - some say (incorrectly) a zither must have a fingerboard, but this derives rather from the occurrence that most zithers DO have some type of fingerboard - however the essence (in sound difference) emanates from the bridge/string aspect - which I use for my definitive nomenclature. Albeit, I don't concur with the reference above. The chorded zither ("autoharp"), for example, illustrates this well - its sound is more like a zither rather than a harp .. guitars are a bit different - and occupy their own special sound characteristics as they are of a lute-family - but, as well, their "harp" courses have the zither-type sound (due to the bridge/string aspect). All guitars (incl "harp" guitar) are more zither than harp - in this case both structurally and sonically. The pedal steel guitar is essentially (functionally) an electric "harp" too (even though it's more a zither too)

So - nomenclature derived from this or that - contradictions and inconsistencies abound: piano-violin (or whatever that contraption hanging on the wall is called), autoharp, harp-guitar, dulcimers of all kinds, and myriad instruments yet to come.. - I base mine largely on function /sound moreso than architecture - as a player of the instruments, I guess this is what's most important to me.

[catmandu2]

That's a lot of examples - hope it was somewhat clear...I'm often not very clear typing with my phone. To be succinct: the "harp"-guitar is a misnomer - as many such names are. The affair resembles a harp-like instrument (with free-standing strings, etc), but this - appearance - is the only similarity; it is a "harp" in name only. Guitars/lutes are more in common with the zither - structurally and functionally. Anyone with knowledge wouldn't call an "autoharp" a harp instrument - as it is a zither. Etc. Anyway, I'm really not into organology .. can be fun, but usually isn't -

BTW, we've been through all this before: http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/gr...943&do=discuss

[foldedpath]

I'm with Petrus, that ain't a harp guitar. It's a theorbo variant.

I have to uphold the legacy of my current home town here, where Chris Knutsen built some of these things. I sometimes walk by the house where he lived, and where he had one of his early workshops (1895-1898). He didn't invent it, but the instrument he's associated with doesn't deserve to be watered down into some generic definition:

http://www.harpguitars.net/history/history.htm

BTW, we've been through all this before: http://www.mandolincafe.com/forum/gr...943&do=discuss

Yeah, I'm still not buying it.

Ask any guitar player what a "harp guitar" is, and if they're at all familiar with the term, the Knutsen/Dyer-style instrument is what they're talking about.

[catmandu2]

I'm with Petrus, that ain't a harp guitar. It's a theorbo variant.

I have to uphold the legacy of my current home town here, where Chris Knutsen built some of these things. I sometimes walk by the house where he lived, and where he had one of his early workshops (1895-1898). He didn't invent it, but the instrument he's associated with doesn't deserve to be watered down into some generic definition:

http://www.harpguitars.net/history/history.htm



Yeah, I'm still not buying it.

Ask any guitar player what a "harp guitar" is, and if they're at all familiar with the term, the Knutsen/Dyer-style instrument is what they're talking about.

Well it's something we've discussed before - theorbo/lute is in that class like lyre - that is, what? Most people will, I concede, think of the harp-guitar as a "harp" guitar. I don't mind swimming upstream..

But what aren't you buying, exactly?

Anyway, when I first saw this - I want it. I would play this as a harp-guitar. And then I know I would soon strat to use the frets (on the bass strings)- first conventionally, then right-hand hammering/pulling a la Hedges. I still want it .. !

[foldedpath]

But what aren't you buying, exactly?

The frets. At least if we're still talking about the original post and that instrument. Fretted strings are just not any part of a definition of "harp guitar" I'm familiar with.

The essential characteristic of a harp guitar (IMO) is a combination of fretted and non-fretted strings, which that Ebay guitar is lacking.

[catmandu2]

I'm having difficulty understanding. What do the frets, or fingerboard, have to do with it? Let's take the frets out - now we have a plain, fretless board beneath.. ?

[foldedpath]

Just to clarify something in that last post which I didn't touch on...

The essential nature of a harp guitar is that it's not a chromatic instrument. With strings that don't lay over frets, you must select a key, or range of keys, and play within that narrow range, using the "harp" strings as drones or counterpoint bass lines.

With a fully fretted instrument and a whole bunch of strings, you're in jazz guitar territory. You can do anything, and aren't drawn to playing music that the drones naturally support. That's the big difference between a harp guitar and a fully-fretted guitar with more than the usual number of strings.

[catmandu2]

No no - it can be tuned microtonally if you desire - tuning is a more distal factor. YOu can tune any way you wish -

Let's take a 85-string harp guitar - six standard (fretted) and 79 free-standing "drones" - it would be as chromatic as you or I would need/want/etc (up to 79 [+ 6,+] would allow - discrete pitches). Etc.

[foldedpath]

No no - it can be tuned microtonally if you desire - tuning is a more distal factor. YOu can tune any way you wish -

Let's take a 85-string harp guitar - six standard (fretted) and 79 free-standing "drones" - it would be as chromatic as you or I would need/want/etc (up to 79 [+ 6,+] would allow - discrete pitches). Etc.

C'mon, you know that's not how the classic Knutsen/Dyer harp guitars were made to be played. There were only a few unfretted harp strings, because that's all the mechanical structure of the instrument could support. And they were tuned to the key of the song being played.

If you're playing an 85-string instrument, then you're playing a harp, not a harp guitar.

[catmandu2]

Hmm..I am having difficulty. I'm not getting what you're getting at - what does the tuning have to do with it? You can tune it any way want? ?? I guess there are relative conventions and examples of application. But so what?

Anywwy, enough organologicalismly for me today - thanks

[Petrus]

I'm having difficulty understanding. What do the frets, or fingerboard, have to do with it? Let's take the frets out - now we have a plain, fretless board beneath.. ?

Then it would be a fretless 10-string guitar. (If that's what you're referring to.) Like a fretless bass.

But I think in the case of quasi-"harp" instruments, we're talking about strings that literally have nothing beneath them -- just stretched between two anchor points (a head and a body.) In some cases they may have actual pegs at the head for tuning; if there are a lot of strings, this becomes impractical and there are only tuning pins that require a tool to tune them.

There are also instruments that have sympathetic drone strings that aren't meant to be touched at all, as on the Hardanger fiddle or many Indian instruments.

BTW, the guitar looks pretty cool, though I can't imagine trying to do barre chords on that thing unless you had fingers like Plastic Man.

[Petrus]

Just for fun here's a theorbo-lute. 14 fretted strings (or courses? hard to tell) that run over a short fretboard, and an additional 12 strings (or courses?) that are free-running and obviously fretless by default, with a separate peghead. Most harp guitars are simplified variations of this, with a shorter neck and an additional outboard arm that curves around the bass side, to provide better support for the free strings and maybe some protection as well.

[Petrus]

And to really confuse things, the Big Red, a 38-string harp-sympitar with 6 main strings on a fretted neck, 5 unfretted sub-bass harp strings, 15 supertreble harp strings parallel to the main strings (treble side) and 12 sympathetic strings on the inside of the neck and body!

[catmandu2]

If you're playing an 85-string instrument, then you're playing a harp, not a harp guitar.

The idea of 79 (85) strings is just a theoretical exercise - based on a 79-tone temperament model - to illustrate a point. (Or was it 72- or 76-tone? ... I don't recall offhand)

But, then, how about a 42 or 52 string instrument? - such as Linda Manzer's ... harp then?

[catmandu2]

Then it would be a fretless 10-string guitar. (If that's what you're referring to.) Like a fretless bass.
:

If we then take the fretless and "scoop" the length of the board - so that we don't actually "stop" any strings upon it - not effecting a significant change in sound ... still a guitar?

[foldedpath]

The idea of 79 (85) strings is just a theoretical exercise - based on a 79-tone temperament model - to illustrate a point. (Or was it 72- or 76-tone? ... I don't recall offhand)

But, then, how about a 42 or 52 string instrument? - such as Linda Manzer's ... harp then?

What about it? The Manzer Pikasso fits the definition of what most of us would call a harp guitar, because it combines a fretted neck with unfretted strings designed to be played at a fixed pitch. There are just more harp strings than on a vintage Knutsen/Dyer design, which allows more harmonic options.

The problem I have in calling the Ebay guitar in the OP a "harp guitar" is that like any fretted guitar, it can be played with a mix of open and fretted strings. But every string can be fretted. There are no strings which are specifically designed to be played at just a single pitch only. Which makes it a not-harp guitar, in my book.


If we're going to start calling the option of playing open strings "harp" playing, then every guitar is a harp guitar. It dilutes the concept, in other words.

[catmandu2]

It seems that you and Petrus are basing the distinction upon what basically amounts to appearances (and of course what it has been called historically) – which is fine, I’m just using a different set of criteria. I have no particular investment in what folks call things. It’s why I’m not really into organology of instruments beyond a certain point...it is and will become increasingly ambiguous ..



Note that the playing here (and that the vast majority of examples I’ve seen of this nature) employ the “bass” strings as harp/drone/etc. Even though it could be fretted, it typically is not – given many factors. Let’s scoop or even cut out the fingerboard under the “harp”-bass portion – this will not produce much difference in the sound of this instrument (nearly not so much as the bridge/string aspect): fundamentally it sounds the same - but looks much different...still a non-"harp" guitar?



For me, this is not a harp at all - has no characteristics of a harp in any respect - not in sound, structure, playing style, etc. My point, most of all, is in the sound of these instruments. There is a distinct zither-type sound, and also a distinct harp-type sound – effected most fundamentally by the bridge/string aspect.

Yes, essentially every guitar IS a “harp” (or lyre) … except that it’s a lute more in common with a zither .. Yes, further diluting the "name" given ... but perhaps in pursuit of greater accuracy. We'll be seeing many more examples of permutations - some called harp- and some called whachya-callit ... "you" say autoharp - I say chorded zither...but oh!

[foldedpath]

Well, sure it's about appearance. Form follows function, and all that.

To me, that Ebay guitar is just a 10 string guitar, with nothing in the design that says "harp" to me. All the strings have frets, and the neck is just wider to accommodate them. If that's a harp guitar, then so is my Santa Cruz six-string, where I sometimes use the bass strings as a drone.

If instead, the luthier's intent is to have some strings used *only* as fixed pitch, non-fretted drones alongside a standard-width guitar neck, then the design parameters widen up considerably. You then get these freaky designs like the Knutsen/Dyer and their derivatives, with big arches, extra internal volume, and so on. You can take one look at one of these beasts, and know it's not meant to be played like a normal guitar. Which is why we call them harp guitars.

[catmandu2]

Well, sure it's about appearance. Form follows function, and all that.

... You can take one look at one of these beasts, and know it's not meant to be played like a normal guitar. Which is why we call them harp guitars.

form and function often have little correlation (f style mandolin?)

There's great blurring of distinctive lines. What if the 10-string guitar is deployed in exactly the same manner as the other "harp"-guitars? (As in this/these cases?) - which, btw, has much more to do with zither technique than it does harp technique (or theorbo/lute, more accurately), much less the SOUND of these ..