LUVA® hard Unterarmauflage für Gitarristen
Die beste Lösung für das Problem der Gitarrenkante! Die Luva® mit steifer Auflage bietet Ihnen Komfort und Schutz beim Gitarrenspiel. Sie bewirkt u.a.:
Der Gebrauch der Luva® Armauflage begünstigt eine verbesserte Leistung der rechten Hand des Gitarristen, indem sie eine unbehinderte Muskeltätigkeit ermöglicht, wobei bedeutend mehr Geläufigkeit und Sicherheit, sowie auch Leichtigkeit beim Versetzen der Hand und des Arms, erreicht wird.
Wie funktioniert es?
Die Luva® mit steifer Auflage ist mit einem eingelegten, halbsteifen Teil ausgestattet, den wir als Druckverteiler bezeichnen. Der Druckverteiler bildet das Herzstück der Luva® mit steifer Auflage und hat die Funktion, den Druck der Gitarrenkante auf die ganze Innenfläche des Unterarms zu verteilen.
Die Luva®Soft dagegen benutzt, anstelle des halbsteifen Innenteiles, eine Gummischicht, die eine sanftere Verteilung des Druckes der Gitarrenkante auf den Unterarm erlaubt. In diesem Fall wird der lokale Druck nicht völlig ausgeschaltet, jedoch stark vermindert. Gitarristen, die einen stärkeren Druck mit dem Arm auf die Gitarrenkante ausüben, wird empfohlen, vorzugsweise die Luva® mit steifer Auflage zu verwenden.
In medizinischer Hinsicht ist der Gebrauch der LUVA höchst empfehlenswert, denn sie:
Alle Bewertungen:
LUVA .
.
Review of the Luva Arm Pad model Hard Easy to observe, and clearly explained, is the fact that this arm pad reduces the compression of the soft tissue of the forearm to a far higher degree than any other today available device – which, ergonomically, of course degrades all the other alternatives to second-rate substitutes. Easy to hear, but not mentioned, is the fact that this arm-pad is a unique sound-improver as well. – Not because it slightly increases the distance between the soundboard and the forearm (which in reality has a quite small if at all audible influence on the sound), not because its rigid pressure distributor reduces the area of contact with the side of the guitar, but because the soft tissue of the forearm constitutes a springy and floating cushion: The less tissue compression, the better spring-effect – and without this arm-pad (or another pressure distributing layer), the pressure of the edge of the guitar highly reduces the spring-effect. This arm-pad generates a nearly optimal spring-effect – which, and particularly on guitars of traditional construction and weight, considerably reduces the indirect damping of the soundboard vibration caused by the direct damping of the top of the guitars side, and which creates a sound that is strikingly more vivid, more open and less muffled in a solely favourable way. So even regarding this aspect of sound improvement, this arm-pad degrades all the other today available alternatives to second-rate substitutes. This arm-pad and this knowledge undermines, needless to say, much of the relevance of the nowadays increasingly popular armrests that are permanently or removably fixed to the side of the guitar. But there are two aspects concerning change of sound that do not fall more or less apart, and both of them are induced by the weight that such armrests add to the side of the guitar: Firstly, it lowers the resonance frequency of the soundboard (potentially up to about 40 cents with an armrest of 100 grams and a guitar of relatively low weight) – which may impair the resonance balance and even create a wolf-note on a guitar with a well-tuned soundboard, and in the opposite case improve the balance and even remove a wolf-note (which, by the way, can be achieved more controllably by other means). Secondly, and with emphasis on primarily lower and partly some high frequencies, it increases the loudness of first and foremost the attack – which is a debatable gain as it entails a more percussive sound character with a more compact and sharp timbre. By comparison: The Luva hard arm-pad is not only free from these side-effects, but also puts less strain on the upper back and shoulder by positioning the arm closer to the torso. Being a revolutionarily valuable invention, there is still room for at least one improvement: A thin and smooth fabric of polyamide covering the foam area provides less friction resistance when moving the arm, less friction noise, plus far better wear resistance on the most exposed area – and since the foam area has no skin contact, I would suggest this addition as standard on the future Luva arm-pads. Moreover, and regarding the material of the pressure distributor: The lower weight, the less counteraction of the wonderful spring-effect – and the higher material hardness, the thinner construction to achieve the necessary rigidity (and thereby less of the mentioned strain). As these factors may suggest a reappraisal of the weight-to-stiffness ratio, I would kindly ask the Luva development team to take even this into consideration. Matepis, the producer of Luva arm-pads, was the first recipient of this review.
Easy to observe, and clearly explained, is the fact that this arm pad reduces the compression of the soft tissue of the forearm to a far higher degree than any other today available device – which, ergonomically, of course degrades all the other alternatives to second-rate substitutes. Easy to hear, but not mentioned, is the fact that this arm-pad is a unique sound-improver as well. – Not because it slightly increases the distance between the soundboard and the forearm (which in reality has a quite small if at all audible influence on the sound), not because its rigid pressure distributor reduces the area of contact with the side of the guitar, but because the soft tissue of the forearm constitutes a springy and floating cushion: The less tissue compression, the better spring-effect – and without this arm-pad (or another pressure distributing layer), the pressure of the edge of the guitar highly reduces the spring-effect. This arm-pad generates a nearly optimal spring-effect – which, and particularly on guitars of traditional construction and weight, considerably reduces the indirect damping of the soundboard vibration caused by the direct damping of the top of the guitars side, and which creates a sound that is strikingly more vivid, more open and less muffled in a solely favourable way. So even regarding this aspect of sound improvement, this arm-pad degrades all the other today available alternatives to second-rate substitutes. This arm-pad and this knowledge undermines, needless to say, much of the relevance of the nowadays increasingly popular armrests that are permanently or removably fixed to the side of the guitar. But there are two aspects concerning change of sound that do not fall more or less apart, and both of them are induced by the weight that such armrests add to the side of the guitar: Firstly, it lowers the resonance frequency of the soundboard (potentially up to about 40 cents with an armrest of 100 grams and a guitar of relatively low weight) – which may impair the resonance balance and even create a wolf-note on a guitar with a well-tuned soundboard, and in the opposite case improve the balance and even remove a wolf-note (which, by the way, can be achieved more controllably by other means). Secondly, and with emphasis on primarily lower and partly some high frequencies, it increases the loudness of first and foremost the attack – which is a debatable gain as it entails a more percussive sound character with a more compact and sharp timbre. By comparison: The Luva hard arm-pad is not only free from these side-effects, but also puts less strain on the upper back and shoulder by positioning the arm closer to the torso. Being a revolutionarily valuable invention, there is still room for at least one improvement: A thin and smooth fabric of polyamide covering the foam area provides less friction resistance when moving the arm, less friction noise, plus far better wear resistance on the most exposed area – and since the foam area has no skin contact, I would suggest this addition as standard on the future Luva arm-pads. Moreover, and regarding the material of the pressure distributor: The lower weight, the less counteraction of the wonderful spring-effect – and the higher material hardness, the thinner construction to achieve the necessary rigidity (and thereby less of the mentioned strain). As these factors may suggest a reappraisal of the weight-to-stiffness ratio, I would kindly ask the Luva development team to take even this into consideration. Matepis, the producer of Luva arm-pads, was the first recipient of this review.
