I also sometimes think of the difference between acoustic and electric guitar as the difference between a piano and an electric or pipe organ
Excellent analogy.
"A cheerful heart is good medicine."
The way I think of it is that an electric has a 'thicker' sound; a fuller sound to begin with. If you play one note on an electric, it has more forcefulness and presence (and volume) than an acoustic. Plus, a note on an electric will sustain longer. Considering it this way, there are lots of times where you'd want to play less notes and sometimes let the chords ring shorter amounts of time than on an acoustic. That's why electric guys will break up their strumming patterns into shorter bits, using palm muting as was mentioned, or lots of times, fret hand muting.
I also sometimes think of the difference between acoustic and electric guitar as the difference between a piano and an electric or pipe organ - the one will have its notes decay and fade away even if you keep your fingers down on the keys, but with the organ, the notes will sound as long as you keepy your fingers down. They're both keyboards, both have the same musical values, but it's just that one sustains more than the other and that requires different technique to get similar effects.
I followed most of that, but if an electric has more sustain, why would you want to shorten the length of chords on an electric rather than an acoustic?
The way I think of it is that an electric has a 'thicker' sound; a fuller sound to begin with. If you play one note on an electric, it has more forcefulness and presence (and volume) than an acoustic. Plus, a note on an electric will sustain longer. Considering it this way, there are lots of times where you'd want to play less notes and sometimes let the chords ring shorter amounts of time than on an acoustic. That's why electric guys will break up their strumming patterns into shorter bits, using palm muting as was mentioned, or lots of times, fret hand muting.
I also sometimes think of the difference between acoustic and electric guitar as the difference between a piano and an electric or pipe organ - the one will have its notes decay and fade away even if you keep your fingers down on the keys, but with the organ, the notes will sound as long as you keepy your fingers down. They're both keyboards, both have the same musical values, but it's just that one sustains more than the other and that requires different technique to get similar effects.
I followed most of that, but if an electric has more sustain, why would you want to shorten the length of chords on an electric rather than an acoustic?
To be a little clearer, you wouldn't want to break the rhythm up in every song or style - for instance, big, full, long sustaining chords played on an electric would (or could) sound great if it's in keeping with the rhythm of the song. But generally, with an electric guitar being able to sustain so long, the chords would flow one into the next if just left to sustain all the way. The notes of the chords would stop obviously when you changed chords, but sometimes, especially with songs that have quicker, more intricate rhythm, an electric player has to focus not only on hitting the chords at the correct time, but also to stop the chords at the proper time, so there are musical 'gaps' between different chords, or strums of the same chord. It's similar to a drummer playing the different parts of the kit; he doesn't play all quarter notes on each drum but instead breaks up the rhythm between the different parts of the kit - hi-hat hitting eights for instance, while the snare hits on the one and the three beat, with the kick drum maybe hitting on the downbeat. It's varied. And as a rhythm guitarist (acoustic or electric) the role is to go along with some part of the overall rhythm - either keeping up with the hi-hat (or taking the place of the hats if there's no drummer) - or emphasizing the hits of the snare, etc.
And though you could play (for instance) eighth beats on the guitar, sometimes the rhythmic pattern you're doing will sound better and will sound more 'choppy' if there's spaces between each strum. Sometimes, depending on the song and the 'feel' of the song, it sounds better to let all the strums blend one to the other, but what I'm saying is that on electric, with its greater sustain, there are times when you have to purposefully 'shut off' the chord before playing it again, or playing the next chord.
With an acoustic, which has less sustain it's less of a problem because the nature of the instrument, with its notes fading quicker, almost requires you to strum more often to keep the notes going.
The sustain issue came to my attention listening to Feel Like Making Love by Bad Company - There's certain parts of the main rhythm guitar riff where the chords are damped by the guitarist. With the settings he has and the volume he's playing at, the chords could very easily have sustained all the way through from chord to chord, but to make the riff more interesting, he plays a big sustaining chord, shuts it off (mutes it), plays the next, mutes it, etc. And he's not doing it randomly: the points of silence he puts in are on particular beats and he's very careful to mute at exactly the right time.
It's just something I became aware of - that the rests (the silences) are just as important as the playing of the chords, and have to be put in at the correct time - especially when the guitar is setup (with amp and volume and effects) to sustain past the point where you want it to.
Hope this helps.
I'm sure someone else can give a shorter more concise answer though ;)
No, I followed that explanation. Thank you for answering my question. That really explained it well.
