14 fret oval hole compared to d hole

Buco

Just remembered Joscho has a recent video about that question

https://youtu.be/ywupE97bIRk

Twang

Thanks Buco. It’s funny, I can barely here a difference between the two! He talks a little bit about the versatility of the D hole which kinda backs up the idea that it has some of the characteristics of an arch top. This isn’t something I’d be interested in particularly although it just sounds like a great gypsy guitar to me.

I like my gypsy guitars like I like my women. Loud, punchy and with a small mouth! 😁🤭

(only joking please don’t bar me Mr Moderator)

Stringswinger

I have owned many oval holes and quite a few D holes as well. At present, both of my Gypsy guitars are oval holes and they are quite different. They should be as they are made by different builders and out of different woods,

My 1993 Dupont MD-20 is solid European maple with a Maple neck and a European spruce top. My 2000 Shelley Park Encore is solid Indian rosewood with a mahogany neck and a Sitka spruce top. The Dupont , while not overly bright has a sharp, cutting tone. The Park is darker, more of a hybrid between Django's Selmer sound and Eddie Lang's acoustic L-5 sound.

At a couple of times, I had both an oval hole and a D hole, both made by Dupont. One time the D hole was a 12 fret model, the other was a 14 fret model. Both D-holes were laminated rosewood with a walnut neck while my oval hole was the maple MD-20, so wood differences come into play. But The 12 fret D hole was far more "bass heavy" than the 14 fret D hole which had way more bass response than the oval hole. IMO, the 12 fret D hole is not the best for lead playing. The 14 fret D hole does a fine job as an all around Gypsy guitar. I also think that it is easier for the player to hear himself/herself in an unamplified situation with a D hole. I also think that an oval hole, being more mid-range in tone is a better guitar for an archtop enthusiast while a D hole with it's bass heavy tone is a better guitar for a flattop enthusiast,

There is no doubt that every piece of wood is different and every luthier has a different approach so each guitar must be evaluated on it's own merits. I once had a Dell Arte Jimmy Rosenberg model that was as dark and bass heavy as any D hole I have ever played (as a lead player, I struggled with that guitar and was happy the day I sold it).

At the end of the day, while I prefer the looks of a D hole, I prefer the midrange dominant sound of the oval hole. While I prefer the short scale of a 12 fret D hole for ease of playing, I prefer the cut and power for leads of a long scale oval hole.

Hope that helps and choose with care!

vanmalmsteen

Good point Stringswinger....D hole just looks so dang Cool

Russell Letson

If I had to generalize, I'd agree with what Marc is implying--that neck/scale length accounts for much of the grande/petite-bouche difference. The build options allow for long and short scales in both 12- and 14-fret necks, with their implications for string tension (with string gauge adding another variable), and for bridge placement. You can observe this in the flat-top world, where some 12-fret designs place the bridge closer to the middle of the lower bout, which affects the voice. (A friend of mine settled on a 12-fret neck with a mid-body bridge as part of his favored design formula precisely to get the fingerstyle voice and volume he wanted--but there were other crucial factors, especially in top material, bracing, body size, and string gauge. And every guitar was still an individual creature.)

I currently have a Dunn Daphne and a Park Elan--both D-holes with 640mm scales, the Dunn a 14- and the Park a 12-fret. They have quite similar voices--not surprising, despite the differences in material (cedar/purpleheart vs spruce/rosewood).

All that said, what I've noticed in builders is how they work with whatever geometric/material factors they face to get the sound they want, which accounts for the family resemblances across models in their offerings--and also for resemblances among builders' lines. (Shelley Park, Michael Dunn, and Bernie Lehmann all produce instruments that are especially pleasing to my ear in ways that, say, the new Eastman petite-bouches are not. Though I really like Eastman archtops. Similarly, Epis over Gibsons. And so on.)

pdg

Ultimately, despite all the generalizations, if you sit in a somewhat-but-not-overly-lively room, with five different guitars, with a friend who you can jam with, and you play lots of songs with the different instruments, maybe close your eyes, you'll probably find one that you're most drawn to, that you just feel like (and can hear yourself) playing.

It may partially have to do with neck shape, action, guitar weight (another tone factor), etc., as well as soundhole shape.

Also, I think it's better just to take each guitar as it currently plays. You can't reliably assume things like, "if I just raise the action on this guitar, it will sound better than the other one, even though I like better that one better as it is currently set up ...."

Twang

So lets see where we are at:

stringswinger has just expounded the merits of the better bass response of the D hole. He also makes it clear that the Oval hole is mid range dominant.

PDG says the Oval hole has a better bottom end and the D hole has more mid range.

Bones says more bottom end from the D hole.

passacaglia says more bass and mid range from D hole.

I could have added the opinions of others but I think all of these opinions are born out of real experience from pretty much experts in this musical backwater we reside in. But the evidence does show that starting this thread was a hopeless pursuit if I wanted a clear and emphatic answer.

I’m ok with that.

(for those who need to know I’m going for the oval hole)